The proposal to adjust Nidhoggr, a Rebellion airdrop card in Splinterlands, is driven by the desire to address community dissatisfaction and enhance the card's utility. While this initiative seeks to improve player satisfaction and maintain trust in future airdrop events, it also presents several risks that could have long-term implications for the game and its community in my opinion. This essay will explore these potential risks, emphasizing the need for careful consideration before implementing changes like these.
Setting a Precedent for Future Card Adjustments
One of the most significant risks of adjusting Nidhoggr is setting a precedent where the community expects similar changes for other cards they find underwhelming or imbalanced. I can imagine some players thinking that by adding thorns to a summoner like TOFU, the card is now OP and therefore should be nerfed or the need to revamp the summoner NOMOS' stats. If players perceive that card modifications are readily available upon request, it could lead to an influx of demands for adjustments to other cards. Which I think is not good over all. In my opinion the game is about "STRATEGY" with the resources at hand. If some players are not winning with a card, it doesn't render that card useless in the game as some players will be winning with it in some situations
Disruption of Game Balance
Balancing a card game like Splinterlands is a complex task that involves ensuring that each card has a defined role within the game's ecosystem. Adjusting a single card can have ripple effects on overall game balance. For example, reducing Nidhoggr's mana cost or altering its abilities might make it more competitive, but it could also lead to unintended dominance in certain gameplay scenarios. Such dominance could reduce diversity in player strategies, leading to a less dynamic and engaging game experience.
Strain on Development Resources
Adjusting cards after their release requires time and resources that could otherwise be allocated to developing new features, content, or improvements. Frequent revisions to existing cards could strain the development team, slowing down the game's overall progress and innovation. This resource strain might lead to delays in updates or the introduction of new elements, affecting the game's growth and the community's satisfaction.
Conclusion
While the proposal to adjust Nidhoggr seeks to address legitimate concerns and enhance player satisfaction, it carries several potential risks. Setting a precedent for card adjustments, disrupting game balance and straining development resources are all factors that must be carefully weighed by the team before accepting this proposal.
I agree, we shouldn't be changing cards after release, especially because the players are voting so. That is very dangerous. Let's not forget that the highest SPS holders can pass or block a proposal by themselves. If this passes, what's stopping them from buying many copies of a weak card (Nomos is a good example), submit a proposal to buff it, pass it, and sell for big profit? I'm not saying they will do that but we also don't know who might show up, buy a lot of SPS, and do that.
That's the worst part but every card game has bad cards. Why are people so focused on one specific weak card? I could imagine people wanting to change a very OP card. Tofu is OP but it's not the most OP card in the game. We allowed Kitty to run rampant for so long without a nerf. A very OP card is much more disruptive to the game than a weak card.
What if they nerf Tofu next? I own a max copy. If they nerf it, it will lose value. Why should I ever invest again just to risk the cards I invest into getting nerfed?
Which was my view when I wrote this post. The fact of the matter is the card is not actually weak in my view. Just the discontent players are expecting to play the card more often of which the card was not designed to fit everywhere
Remember that Nidhoggr design rights was the no. 1 price for buying the most presale Rebellion packs. The group that won that price got really screwed by the current Nidhoggr design. If they allow Nidhoggr to remain as underwhelming as he is, then it can really diminishes the desire to win the design rights of upcoming sets.
It doesn't diminish anything. There have been plenty of underwhelming cards. Are all CL airdrops great? Immortalis is probably better than Lily. I don't remember if Riftwatchers' airdrops were designed by players. If they are, some of them are not very good and Inevitable is way better than the others. It happens. It was released like this. It's not good but changing it now is much worse. What we need is better testing for all the cards to make sure OP cards don't happen anymore and we have a more balanced game.
Do you actually have data to prove that this card is underwhelming? In my view the card was designed like a monster and is not meant to be played as often but when its played in the right context it will win more than 50%. Nate himself confirmed that for him he is winning with it. For the guys who participated in the group buy, I think it was also mentioned that they will help in the design and my view to this is helping doesn't constitute to you being the determinant of everything, the team still had rights to the card. "The group that won that price got really screwed by the current Nidhoggr design".In what context are they crewed?, help me understand. Bulldog also won this contest but I doubt very much if he is 100% in agreement of the stats of Risqruel Drath