Post by Norbert339 in Bug reports

Viewing post in Bug reports

Thanks for detailed report, as always.

You’re welcome. Thanks for the continued and high-quality updates.

but since it is already hopelessly busted, maybe it is ok

Oh, right, wool thread isn’t the only one. Well, it would make having an item for a combo even more likely, which is the one balancing factor… But I guess there’s already a good chance that you get a good combo.

what do you think of adding counter to it, say 1 per turn? Would it be enough nerf to make it somewhat “fair”

A nerf like that would be reasonable, it would still be really strong.

I’d suggest giving it a more thematic downside instead, like giving 1 confusion every time it successfully triggers. And if that’s still OP, you can up the confusion gain.

or is it better to leave it to player’s self-imposed limitation to pick or avoid that item?

Well, for me, I guess it’s better if it’s already balanced for my purposes and I don’t need to come up with the limitation. In the long run I end up picking limitations, anyway, but if it’s more balanced, these limitations can have more variation.

The downside of a change like this would be that paradoxical figure would become slightly more complex than it already is.

The issue is that some upgrade limitations are absolute (e.g. imposed by ascension), but some are relative (e.g. cost reduction only works while cost is >0, but if you increase card cost for some reason, upgrade will be available again).

I don’t think that’s what I mean.

For carnival trick and some other cards, the cost reduction upgrade seems to only work while that cost is 2 or more. Yet, when un-upgraded, the max displays as if it could also be upgraded at 1.

Un-upgraded carnival trick reads like you can upgrade the stamina cost to 0. After you upgrade it, suddenly it has minimum stamina cost of 1.

So do you think it is a better fix to always show “max total upgrades” (but that number would in very rare cases grow after modifying the card by other means), or to show “upgrades remaining for this instance of card”

I’m for showing the maximum N that you can currently get in the title of “card name +N” via upgrading that instance of the card. As I understand it, that’s the expected behaviour right now.

That bug was devious. …

I see, so it was the porcelain dove, I’ve been wondering why it was only save files from that run causing this bug. Yeah, I didn’t notice the other bug. Glad you could fix it.

did you manage to win that battle?

Yeah, took me a few tries. I think I won by having all existing enemies be bound, only killing sanguine orphans.

What are your opinions on the final quests overall and their individual level of difficulty?

It’s a great addition. I think turmoil, failure, oppression, and blaze are the more generally difficult ones.

The conduct I arrived at is to pick one or two at the start of the run, so that I can build around it if needed. Currently I’m usually doing failure or turmoil, whichever shows up first. Haven’t tried blaze or oppression yet, these seem more hit or miss when using all ascensions.

AlSoKnown17 hours ago

… giving it a more thematic downside instead, like giving 1 confusion every time it successfully triggers.

I also would like more interesting downside for Paradoxical Figure, but adding confusion, while indeed thematic, still feels not quite right. I will try to think of more ideas.

Un-upgraded carnival trick reads like you can upgrade the stamina cost to 0. After you upgrade it, suddenly it has minimum stamina cost of 1.

Yes, this is the problem I described / fixed. It worked like this: normally “max upgrades” is a fixed number either intrinsic to the card or from ascension. However, cost reduction upgrade tried to estimate the maximum number of upgrades by looking at the current card cost, so in fact it displayed “upgrades remaining” instead of “maximum”.

Now, the UI will display something like “upgrades: (2 left)” instead of “upgrades: (max 2)”, and both the absolute maximums and cost upgrades will (I hope) be correctly taken into account during calculation.

I think turmoil, failure, oppression, and blaze are the more generally difficult ones.

I usually play with larger deck, so ‘blaze’ is not so punishing for my style (BTW, I hope to some day pick it while having Pendant of Amnesia, thus vindicating that otherwise rarely useful item).

I agree that ‘hailstorm’ is often the easiest, except for very “flimsy” builds. I am thinking of buffing hailstorm to Shoot 3.

I often pick turmoil/failure to add “spice” to my final battle when I feel that my deck is truly broken the barrier and the fight would be boring otherwise.

Norbert3399 hours ago

Yes, this is the problem I described / fixed.

I see, so I guess it shows either the intrinsic max or the circumstantial remaining upgrades plus the current amount of upgrades.

And “the issue” I’m talking about is that, in the case of these un-upgraded (and otherwise unchanged) cards, it shows the intrinsic max even though the circumstantial max is lower.

Showing the remaining upgrades left is a fine alternative way of displaying it. To me that sounds kinda tangential to “a fix”, but I guess rewriting that functionality included a fix.

Maybe this is pedantic, but I just want to make sure I’m not causing a misunderstanding.

‘blaze’ is not so punishing for my style

Yeah, I should add that I mostly make small decks, and I’m playing mage more often than not.

Blaze can also be easy with a small deck, it just needs to be busted enough. But runs where you don’t become that busted are interesting, so I wouldn’t want to commit to blaze when starting a run. So maybe blaze isn’t actually that generally difficult.

I had a run with Pendant of Amnesia, it also was useful for the Pea Pod I found later. It did blaze with it mostly to test it, it does trivialize the quest.

I am thinking of buffing hailstorm to Shoot 3.

I think withering is similarly easy, so buffing hailstorm is probably fine.

itch.io

Viewing post in Bug reports