CODING PROJECT: Card Discarder

[Korugar]

Hmm....it might be better to randomize only half of the discards, or something, as losing cards that one had to spend a large amount of time and money on getting would be quite frustrating. I certainly see how you want to make it possible to lose them, but if a loss almost definitely means you're going to lose at least one rare card(I'm just going off of approximate odds) later in the game, that could be a problem. Unless you want it to be easier to permanently kill someone whose element is being destroyed, which is not a bad idea, to make there be more of an endgame.

[Scaredgirl]

Hmm....it might be better to randomize only half of the discards, or something, as losing cards that one had to spend a large amount of time and money on getting would be quite frustrating. I certainly see how you want to make it possible to lose them, but if a loss almost definitely means you're going to lose at least one rare card(I'm just going off of approximate odds) later in the game, that could be a problem. Unless you want it to be easier to permanently kill someone whose element is being destroyed, which is not a bad idea, to make there be more of an endgame.

Hm.. that is a good point. The basic philosophy should definitely be less about losing stuff like cards, and more about losing only time. It's much better to design a game/event so that losing a battle only makes you stay where you are, instead of taking steps back.

I wonder if there was a simple way of making some cards less likely to be included in the discard? Sounds like it would be pretty complex/time-consuming to code though. How about adding a list of codes (cards) that won't be added in the final code? That sounds a bit easier imo.

[Jocko]

Why don't making salvage random and discard at player's choice?

[bored_ninja777]

Why don't making salvage random and discard at player's choice?

so one big if statement saying.. if the card code selected at random = this.. this.. this.. X however many cards.... dont use it.. find a new one? could be more time consuming as far as runtime.. and also would have to have list of every single card code just to put those in.. and who decides which cards can and cant be lost?

[Gocubbies1212]

when do we start using this?  next round?

[Captain Scibra]

Looks awesome.

[Jocko]

Why don't making salvage random and discard at player's choice?

so one big if statement saying.. if the card code selected at random = this.. this.. this.. X however many cards.... dont use it.. find a new one? could be more time consuming as far as runtime.. and also would have to have list of every single card code just to put those in.. and who decides which cards can and cant be lost?

Have you even read what i said?
Randomize the salvaging process, which can already be done with the current software, and leave discard mechanism unchanged, each player manually discarding at their own choice.

[bored_ninja777]

i misquoted.. meant to quote SG ... ur idea wont work.. they already said that if players choose they will never lose anything important..

[YoungSot]

I already posted about this in the general feedback thread, but looks like we're discussing it here. I agree with the sentiment that it is better if losing a battle doesn't set you back too far. I think random discards are good, but I think that they should be MUCH smaller than the 12 discards required now. Personally, I think something in the area of 3 to 6 random discards would be good. Enough that you have a chance of losing a rare, and you'll still need to take some time to repair your deck, but not so much that you hesitate to engage in battle for fear of losing multiple weeks worth of cards.

Combat is fun. We don't want to discourage it with too heavy consequences for loss.

[Jocko]

Maybe the extrem of never losing anything important is bad, but working your way out to multiple rares, nymphs maybe, and geting them randomly discarded is not fun.

[pulli23]

Hmm....it might be better to randomize only half of the discards, or something, as losing cards that one had to spend a large amount of time and money on getting would be quite frustrating. I certainly see how you want to make it possible to lose them, but if a loss almost definitely means you're going to lose at least one rare card(I'm just going off of approximate odds) later in the game, that could be a problem. Unless you want it to be easier to permanently kill someone whose element is being destroyed, which is not a bad idea, to make there be more of an endgame.

Hm.. that is a good point. The basic philosophy should definitely be less about losing stuff like cards, and more about losing only time. It's much better to design a game/event so that losing a battle only makes you stay where you are, instead of taking steps back.

I wonder if there was a simple way of making some cards less likely to be included in the discard? Sounds like it would be pretty complex/time-consuming to code though. How about adding a list of codes (cards) that won't be added in the final code? That sounds a bit easier imo.

Shouldn't be difficult, if I had a host I'd post a simple program too.
Though without the original poster can update it to have a weighted card record, it basiccally boils down  to giving each card a "number/weight". Say card 1 weight 1, card 2 weight 2 and card 3 "1". (This would mean card 2 is 2 times as likely to pop up).. Then you sum the weights of all cards: 1+2+1 = 4. Take a random number between [0 , 4) (0 and sum of weights).
Now you "walk" through the cards again, full "code":

Code: [Select]

//pseudo code
total_weight = 0;
for all cards i
    total_weight += i.weight

random_number = random(total_weight);
val = 0;
current_card = 1;
for all cards i
    if (random is between val & i.weight)
        return i; //i is the one to remove
    val += i.weight;


Though maybe I may suggest another thing: the randomizer picks 3 cards, and then the user may select which one of those 3. This wouldn't put so much stress on the weight system.

[Essence]

This should be simple enough to code.  Every time you discard/salvage, have the program multiply the incidence of each Epic card by zero (you cannot lose Epic cards), the Rare cards by 1, the Uncommon cards by 2, and the Common cards by 4.

That gives you a significantly smaller chance of losing a card you've put time and effort into obtaining, but still makes it possible. It also gives a mechanical reason to stick at least a couple of Common cards in a deck that might otherwise be loaded with Rares.