Very Simple - Bring Back Previous Gauntlet

[buoyant river]

This new release of Gauntlet with simplified synergies is proving to be stale, slow, less engaging and poorly balanced. Previous patch was in a good place other than some minor balance necessities and routine meta massaging.

Can we abort this path of simplified gauntlet... all in favor give a thumbs up asap.

[grim star]

I have mixed feelings, I really like the 5x synergies and team wide buffs.

I do miss the max synergy buffs and would like better/more variety augments, I pretty much use the same 4 augments every game atm.

The new buffs on ally feint can be very broken.

Aside from that there are a lot of balance issues that need addressing! I think the real question is. Would it be a better game with the new system once it's balanced?

[lusty token]

I think that there are things from both systems that work. I do really like the 5 synergy system but I do think it would definitely make some of the old synergys broken strong. Having the full synergy bonus was great and gave you better goals each match. Some omegas are too weak and fairly useless now like the water buffalo, it was better before. Some of the synergy changes do work like bulwark is better but before the resistance you got before was nothing after the ownership update. The new max health boost work well. The augment choices are way too small now. The game is too simple now, I will admit it is good for beginners and new players but what happens when those players aren't new anymore. It will get boring and repetitive. Also the shop still sucks we need to add some sort of priority or pity system to the shop so we aren't stuck rolling the shop 10-20 times without getting anything.

[rocky raptor]

Hey everyone,

Thanks for taking the time to start and contribute to this thread.

The reasoning behind this simplification is to make onboarding easier. I completely understand the frustration from seasoned players like you. If you’ve put in the time and effort to fully learn the game, a change like this can understandably feel like a reduction in features rather than an improvement.

That said, we need to find a middle ground. For a long time, we’ve seen how the game has struggled to bring in and retain new players due to its complexity. On top of that, Arena resources are currently stretched quite thin, so we’re not in a position to significantly expand or rework systems right now. However, we can and will continue doing balance updates and improving mechanics where possible.

I know it’s not realistic to make everyone completely happy, especially when feedback and preferences vary so widely. What we can do, though, is focus on the main pain points where most of you agree.

With that in mind, please share the top three specific adjustments you’d like to see that would make the experience more engaging. Keep in mind that our goal of maintaining simplicity and improving onboarding is still very much in place. So rather than suggesting adding more layers of complexity or entirely new systems, it would be more helpful to point out things like: “This particular mechanic feels boring” and, if possible, suggest ways it could be made more compelling within the current scope.

Looking forward to your thoughts.

Example of feedback would be:

• "This particular augment or synergy feels boring / feels bad, please make it better."

or

• "I like this effect, but it does not shine at its full potential. What about if..."

[vocal osprey]

In my opinion, the most interesting, engaging, and challenging thing would be if, for example, every month after the ranking restart, all the rules changed.

• synergies
• Illuvial balance
• stat and level bonuses
• region effects

and anything else possible

Every month, three days before the restart, new rules for the following month would be announced.
This would be a strategic game requiring players to adapt to the new conditions.
And the larger and more diverse the collection, the greater the competitive opportunities.

Additionally, I would introduce new buffs and debuffs every month, for example:

This month, Illuvials:

• Fire +5% damage

• Water +10% HP

• Mud +10% chance to stun for 0.5 seconds

• Tsunami +15% attack speed

• Earth -5% attack speed

• Toxic -5% HP

Changing rules, buffs, and debuffs every month after the rankings restart would bring more fun to the game, but that's just my opinion; hardly anyone listens to me here.

[hollow geode]

I have a question. What makes us think the block for onboarding is complexity, and not that it's boring? What if players don't like the gauntlet/tft rng format?

[rocky raptor]

There's a proven market for the genre, but that's a bigger discussion.

We have received several feedback from new starters saying that one of their biggest friction points were game complexity/learning it.

[hollow geode]

If the proven market is tft we can scratch that, it's a null and void metric for many reasons.

Not sure how big was your feedback pool from new starters, but maybe the issue is moreso with the game format, rather than it's complexity.

I own something - therefore I can play it on demand - removes alot of that complexity. Just saying

[rocky raptor]

By playing on demand you mean "deck builder"?

[hollow geode]

Not necessarily, we can play with our entire collection on demand and choose our builds as per each game. The rng can come from external sources like which region we play on (different unit bonuses for example, to not have a single meta), aug rng, item rng, ontop of many other things. I don't know why the rng has to come from our choice of units, especially in an ownership based game.

We have the hyper system, which works especially well for this type of rock paper scissors type of game of outsmarting the enemy with which units you choose to use as the game progresses.

That feature by itself should nudge us towards a pick units on demand gameplay rather than gauntlets rng.

Then comes the ownership angle and why it's better that way.

It is also much easier (complexity wise) to master a single team and progress/branch out/build upon it with time.

I don't see a single reason why we should choose a tft rng based approach for our project specifically.

[rocky raptor]

The decision long ago was to go all in on Gauntlet. All tech was built around that. If we wanted new ascendant to exist, it had to be a mini gauntlet, otherwise, not enough resources available for it.

What you are suggesting would be definitely fun, and goes more in line old ascendant and how it could have been upgraded. But we cannot go back to that path at the moment, there's other priorities being worked on, like Survival web2, deathmatch and the MMO.

[hollow geode]

I know mate, it's not a dig at you or anyone else. I'm just stating my opinion of why it's not going to work and what might.

Survival web2 - I have a better idea than what's being developed, guaranteed.

Deathmatch - not going to do anything.

MMO - black hole of resources and manpower, understandable.

But we are doing the exact same thing which we always do - try to publish something as fast as possible, with whatever resources available. We ship it in not a good or finished state, then we jump on to the next thing. We might want to slow it down and think what has a chance to work, what doesn't. And focus on the things that do 🫡

[rocky raptor]

Thanks for your insights @hollow geode!

[valid trout]

I think the challenge with onboarding new players are not just the complexity of the game. It's also how a new player experience the first few games when entering a ranked match in terms of matching against existing top players, and not having any Illuvial or clear progression or reward to keep you engaged.
(I know there has been a few feedback posts on this topic... like this one #1474132540670607552 message
but I feel its just as important, if not more.. than simplifying the game).

I dont know if its even technically possible to give a starter deck of random Illuvials that are "off chain" and cant be traded.. but that could go a long way to get new people introduced to the concept of owning Illuvials, and they can at least see they gain some XP from playing ranked.

And we also need to find a way to get some sort of League implemented, to "shield" new players against getting completely crushed in the first games they play. (would rather have more "beginner bots", at least until we get a bigger player base).

[lusty token]

I think the number 1 thing that is making it hard to bring in new players is the ownership aspect because we are expecting players to try to play a game where they have to go and buy illuvals from other where they have no idea what is currently good and they are stuck playing games against either players with decent teams or bots that don't even give them a chance to actually play and enjoy the game. I think we need to take away ownership in casual to actually make it casual or give players a set of 0 stat illuvials that are locked to their account that they can't trade or sell but can still level them up even in casual so they can start to build a usable team. I don't like option 2 as it would probably hurt the market but it could help give the new players a little bit of hope. But I do believe the thing that hurts most is being expected to spend money without knowing anything

[lusty token]

Also just a little more input I love ownership and just think that there needs to be a way for new players to be able to play, get to know the game and not get stomped in their first games

[buoyant river]

Yep, I get it.

A middle ground could definitely be made without becoming a resource heavy endeavor.

Some ideas:

• Keep the simplified structure (I don’t actually mind the 4 Composites / 5 Class-Affinity). It does make things easier to track. But add a meaningful breakpoint bonus at max synergy. Doesn’t have to be complicated, just something that makes chasing them feel exciting again.

• Increase augment pool rotation or introduce weekly/monthly modifiers so things stay fresh and we don’t get stuck in RPS doom forever.

• I do feel augments have become overly simplified and some feel negligible. Six options added RNG but at least there was variety. Right now it’s the same three, just shuffled. That part feels weird too. If it’s going to be three, keep them in the same placement so we can pick off muscle memory. If it’s six, randomize properly.

Having some augments that can lead close to a broken carry is good in my opinion. That creates intensity, chase, excitement. Make high investment carry paths viable again. It currently feels like white bread gameplay with the occasional naughty Rhamphyre or Jotun getting a little strong. Games coming down to the wire with two super carries going at it was high class drama. Feels like we’re missing that now.

Simplification is fine, but flattening the ceiling removes identity and tension.

Non gameplay things:

Some light UI polish. The popup at the end of a game that says press OK feels clunky. If it needs to be there, make it feel intentional.

Allow leaderboard viewing while in queue.

[rocky raptor]

Thanks for the ideas guys. I agree with most of what you guys are saying, but unfortunately we are in no position to make any important changes, like starting deck features. I do agree that removing ownership in casual would be great for onboarding as well.

What we can do is work on in-game elements, like bringing back the old forge augments. To be fair, I mostly simplified them thinking of ascendant, but ascendant won't be using augments, so we can brick back the old forge augments and optimize their descriptions.

Old forge augments + balance iterations will help a lot towards a better, more enriching experience.

[buoyant river]

sounds like a happy medium 👌

[noble orbit]

This would be a great first step. Simplifying them was important but yeah maybe it went a step too far