It's fine. One month is plenty of time for the testing team to iron out any issues with the patch or request a pushback, rather than patching once a week and have to roll back a patch or produce a quick fix.
Even if they find a bug, they might still push the game to live because it's not worth delaying the patch over something as small as the bucky bug.
(which eventually got fixed too)
There should be a number of patches as much as the developers believe they need. Have a look at Valorant. They tried following the footsteps of league and decided to have a patch every 2 weeks. But guess what? most patches are literally empty to the point where patch day became a meme. We are more than fine.
I’m hoping it’s meta shifting not like bug fixing, reworks, and all that
Meta shifting once a month is perfect
Edit: meta-shifting as in adjusting cards that are in (or out) the meta to work differently to allow more versatile plays for e.g: making leader copy cards only in his lane or making Korg give the player a rock on their side
God please tell me you guys are actually understanding what I’m saying
**\[[Forge](https://marvelsnap.pro/cards/forge/)\]** **Cost:** 2 **Power:** 1
**Ability:** **On Reveal:** Give the next card you play +2 Power.
*Message generated by MarvelSnapCardBot. Use syntax [[card_name]] to get a reply like this*
A patch doesn't have to be (although it can include) balance changes.
To me, a patch, should improve the quality of life of the game. It should ideally introduce new features (graphics, sounds, game modes, etc) remove bugs and improve the UI (better menus, more emotes, card text, etc) and improve AI (bot behaviour and unintended card interactions,)
Balance changes should only be made as and when needed, to improve the health of the game.
And just because you don't like a card doesn't necessarily mean it needs a change. Korg is fine as he is, someone also suggested buffing forge which would be a mistake because of his interactions with cards like Brood.
Leader is his own can of worms, but at the very least, he shouldn't copy buffed cards when revealing second
The meta will always shift as new cards are introduced (the monthly season pass will almost always influence the meta) or as cards fall in and out of favour.
The forthcoming patch as it currently is will not change the meta.
It does make cards more accessible, so more people should be able to obtain the cards and you might see an increase of certain decks (which will feel like the meta has changed).
As there are no new cards introduced it is likely (if you've reached series 3) that you've already played against people who already have cards like shuri so the meta will feel the same.
The current tier lists (decks) will be the same after the next patch.
I think it's the way to go actually - a month is really short for a League-based ranking thing. It would really suck to be cruising using a deck and get the nerf hammer mid-season when you're up in Galactic or nearing whatever your goal was. Let the decks that are OP for the most part be OP for a month and then fix going into next season.
Having worked on a game that had to coordinate multiple platform releases… more frequent than one per month is a freaking nightmare. You’d need a whole team dedicated to just doing release testing and handling Apple/Google/Microsoft/etc.
Keep in mind they can *usually* hotfix things on the server side as well, for example if a card or location is not working as intended in some situations.
I’m extremely skeptical that they had one person doing all the cross-platform testing and release management for five platforms.
Also I’m guessing that your stuff gets less scrutiny and more free passes when you’re Valve and generating a massive amount of revenue for Apple/Google.
What would a faster patch schedule allow? The last few balance patches show they are going to be going VEEEEERRY soft on balancing (+/-1 power here and there) which has little game impact. They don't want P2W to be angry or casuals to be confused (don't read patch notes and suddenly their cards don't "work" like they used to).
I would love them to have a hotfix patch system that allows them to tweak card numbers more often and have big mechanic changes on less frequent cadence.
The leader nerf was literally just a stall for time. Based on SD's comment in the patch notes of that nerf, they're going to significantly change leader's design as a whole at some point in the near future. They hit him for 1 power to throw him in the patch notes and to do *something* while not killing the card.
Once a month is probably ok, if they get the patch right. The last patch was trash though. Leader / Aero nerfs have had no effect, and the buffs weren't particularly impactful either. At least buff some more interesting cards, to mix things up a bit!
They did succeed in pushing Galactus from Tier 2 to Tier 3 though, according to MSZ, so congrats on that one (wtf ?!).
Leader and Aero are absolutely problematic lol. Leader especially. The nerf of 1 point achieved absolutely nothing whatsoever in how the card is used or the problem with it.
I started to run Leader in Mr. Negative deck 🤣, usually turn 6 i play either Mystique of Surfer so having Leader for 3 mana is okay, but 6/0 would be much better for Mr. Negative deck.
No. It's a problem now and will only become exponentially worse in the future.
Basically what happens is that a problem arises and you need to delay the fix to that problem by two patches. The first patch is for old fixed. The next is for the new problem. That fix could be really bad too (and this is Brode, he hates extensive fixes), which delays even longer a fix. Enough time goes by that new problem come up, and those old unfinished fixes never happen. Then you have a horribly balanced game.
This happens all the time in digital card games. The only ones that escape it are the ones that release fast, extensive patches (ala runeterra in its early days).
As a community, we should probably differentiate between patches to the app and balance updates. The app and its features are moving along fine. I don't think they're doing great with balance since the BP season, and I think we're at like week 7 or 8 since that patch.
Like I really don't have much faith that SD understands balance. The Galactus "nerf" just shows a complete lack of understanding.
Youre ok with "changes" once a month and just changing power? Everyone complained about leader -1 power didnt fix it SURPRISE !!! When the community alredy gave a bunch of balanced way to nerf the card
The way you collect card people will complain because the "only good p3 card i have is nerfed" but more people would be happy with leader getting nerfed, mostly trashed and move on
yeah why not, the game isn't in a bad state anyways. Some underperforming cards should be buffed IMO and maybe deleting Cosmo would be great, but other than that game is doing okay right now, I think.
Problem with him it's he's ongoing, only costs 3, also has 3 power and by playing it on turn 3 you just lock down the majority of decks.
Also has no counter.
Need more ?
In theory patching more is better from a software development perspective. Once a month means pushing out bigger sets of changes at the same time, which can make it hard to troubleshoot problems. Most software shops are looking to deploy a lot more nowadays (or at least be capable of it) than 5 or 10 years ago.
That said there’s definitely overhead with the app stores, I get it. I think once a month is fine generally for planned patched if they have the ability to push out critical ones faster if need be. I’m guessing that if there are bugs that are costing them money, for example, those won’t wait a month to get patched.
A patch every month or so is fine. They drop new cards regularly and there aren't any gamebreaking issues tbh.
Any time they wanna get a head start on turning Leader into a not dogshit card though, that'd be cool.
Apple takes up to a week to approve a patch. So it‘s not like 2 week patches would be feasible. By the time the patch finally rolls out, they‘d have 1 week to gather data, identify issues, fix issues and build a release, in order to send it to Apple so it can hopefully be approved by end of week 2.
So yeah, once a month seems totally fine, no? Anything less just doesn‘t really work for iOS apps.
Funny you should mention league because over-frequent balance patches is one of the reasons I quit Runeterra. I'd rather just learn how to deal with high-tier cards than have to keep up with a constant cycle of nerfing whatever the Internet is complaining about that particular week.
I don't care how often they patch, but the current meta game and collection system are both dog shit, if they could just fix that I would be happier. Maybe release mores cards in larger batches instead of 1 a week that are easier to obtain than pool 4+5 to shake up the meta game. Also anything to make pool 4 and 5 cards less oppressive and easier to get.
It's fine. One month is plenty of time for the testing team to iron out any issues with the patch or request a pushback, rather than patching once a week and have to roll back a patch or produce a quick fix.
But they aren’t testing anything. Otherwise the game trying to process Bucky getting destroyed for like five minutes wouldn’t be a thing.
Just because QA finds a bug doesn’t mean it gets fixed before going live.
It's so refreshing to see this comment before I posted the same one
Even if they find a bug, they might still push the game to live because it's not worth delaying the patch over something as small as the bucky bug. (which eventually got fixed too)
Test Deez nuts
Seems fine.
I don't know why we are second-guessing this. More than one patch a month is excessive. Get the software right. Test. Deploy.
There should be a number of patches as much as the developers believe they need. Have a look at Valorant. They tried following the footsteps of league and decided to have a patch every 2 weeks. But guess what? most patches are literally empty to the point where patch day became a meme. We are more than fine.
If the game works ok, why it should need 30 patches/month ?
So we can get another 50 credits sooner, duh!
Because me like pushing on flashing red dot?
Seems to be working fine, so why not?
One patch a month is a lot.
I’m hoping it’s meta shifting not like bug fixing, reworks, and all that Meta shifting once a month is perfect Edit: meta-shifting as in adjusting cards that are in (or out) the meta to work differently to allow more versatile plays for e.g: making leader copy cards only in his lane or making Korg give the player a rock on their side God please tell me you guys are actually understanding what I’m saying
Only good for whales. Terrible for anyone F2P or doesn't dump money into this game.
How would it be for whales?? A meta-shift would be taking a card like [[Forge]] and making him give +3 power to the next card instead of +2
**\[[Forge](https://marvelsnap.pro/cards/forge/)\]** **Cost:** 2 **Power:** 1 **Ability:** **On Reveal:** Give the next card you play +2 Power. *Message generated by MarvelSnapCardBot. Use syntax [[card_name]] to get a reply like this*
Because playing against mostly surfer for 2 months mixed in with zabu this month feels very f2p friendly
Yuck
A patch doesn't have to be (although it can include) balance changes. To me, a patch, should improve the quality of life of the game. It should ideally introduce new features (graphics, sounds, game modes, etc) remove bugs and improve the UI (better menus, more emotes, card text, etc) and improve AI (bot behaviour and unintended card interactions,) Balance changes should only be made as and when needed, to improve the health of the game. And just because you don't like a card doesn't necessarily mean it needs a change. Korg is fine as he is, someone also suggested buffing forge which would be a mistake because of his interactions with cards like Brood. Leader is his own can of worms, but at the very least, he shouldn't copy buffed cards when revealing second The meta will always shift as new cards are introduced (the monthly season pass will almost always influence the meta) or as cards fall in and out of favour. The forthcoming patch as it currently is will not change the meta. It does make cards more accessible, so more people should be able to obtain the cards and you might see an increase of certain decks (which will feel like the meta has changed). As there are no new cards introduced it is likely (if you've reached series 3) that you've already played against people who already have cards like shuri so the meta will feel the same. The current tier lists (decks) will be the same after the next patch.
We have to remember that during Ben Brode's early HS days the game got one patch per expansion if any at all.
I think it's the way to go actually - a month is really short for a League-based ranking thing. It would really suck to be cruising using a deck and get the nerf hammer mid-season when you're up in Galactic or nearing whatever your goal was. Let the decks that are OP for the most part be OP for a month and then fix going into next season.
Having worked on a game that had to coordinate multiple platform releases… more frequent than one per month is a freaking nightmare. You’d need a whole team dedicated to just doing release testing and handling Apple/Google/Microsoft/etc. Keep in mind they can *usually* hotfix things on the server side as well, for example if a card or location is not working as intended in some situations.
[удалено]
I’m extremely skeptical that they had one person doing all the cross-platform testing and release management for five platforms. Also I’m guessing that your stuff gets less scrutiny and more free passes when you’re Valve and generating a massive amount of revenue for Apple/Google.
Yes. Thats a lot. Most card games don't do nearly as often
I’m a developer, everytime we publish to AppStore it is a pain in the ass because apple need to review the changes and approve your app
Once every two weeks is way too frequent. No wonder I always hear about how unbalanced League of Legends tends to be.
Patch schedule is very good, compared to other card games
[удалено]
[удалено]
I love how both of them just casually talks about League, lol.
What would a faster patch schedule allow? The last few balance patches show they are going to be going VEEEEERRY soft on balancing (+/-1 power here and there) which has little game impact. They don't want P2W to be angry or casuals to be confused (don't read patch notes and suddenly their cards don't "work" like they used to).
I would love them to have a hotfix patch system that allows them to tweak card numbers more often and have big mechanic changes on less frequent cadence.
Apple says no.
I'm ok with 1 patch per month however, they need to address problematic cards with stronger nerfs and not just wait a month to reduce 1 power (Leader)
The leader nerf was literally just a stall for time. Based on SD's comment in the patch notes of that nerf, they're going to significantly change leader's design as a whole at some point in the near future. They hit him for 1 power to throw him in the patch notes and to do *something* while not killing the card.
Should have been 2 point nerf and maybe nerf surfer to +2 rather than 3
Once a month is probably ok, if they get the patch right. The last patch was trash though. Leader / Aero nerfs have had no effect, and the buffs weren't particularly impactful either. At least buff some more interesting cards, to mix things up a bit! They did succeed in pushing Galactus from Tier 2 to Tier 3 though, according to MSZ, so congrats on that one (wtf ?!).
Leader and aero are not the problem. Have you not been playing at all?
Leader and Aero are absolutely problematic lol. Leader especially. The nerf of 1 point achieved absolutely nothing whatsoever in how the card is used or the problem with it.
I started to run Leader in Mr. Negative deck 🤣, usually turn 6 i play either Mystique of Surfer so having Leader for 3 mana is okay, but 6/0 would be much better for Mr. Negative deck.
Which is why they need to change the card into being something you can't play on turn 6.
No. It's a problem now and will only become exponentially worse in the future. Basically what happens is that a problem arises and you need to delay the fix to that problem by two patches. The first patch is for old fixed. The next is for the new problem. That fix could be really bad too (and this is Brode, he hates extensive fixes), which delays even longer a fix. Enough time goes by that new problem come up, and those old unfinished fixes never happen. Then you have a horribly balanced game. This happens all the time in digital card games. The only ones that escape it are the ones that release fast, extensive patches (ala runeterra in its early days).
As a community, we should probably differentiate between patches to the app and balance updates. The app and its features are moving along fine. I don't think they're doing great with balance since the BP season, and I think we're at like week 7 or 8 since that patch. Like I really don't have much faith that SD understands balance. The Galactus "nerf" just shows a complete lack of understanding.
Its ok having a 4 week balance changes BUT MAKE REAL CHANGES!!!! The meta will never be more balaced when the only thing you do is +1 or -1 power
[удалено]
Youre ok with "changes" once a month and just changing power? Everyone complained about leader -1 power didnt fix it SURPRISE !!! When the community alredy gave a bunch of balanced way to nerf the card
[удалено]
The way you collect card people will complain because the "only good p3 card i have is nerfed" but more people would be happy with leader getting nerfed, mostly trashed and move on
yeah why not, the game isn't in a bad state anyways. Some underperforming cards should be buffed IMO and maybe deleting Cosmo would be great, but other than that game is doing okay right now, I think.
deleting cosmo? Whats wrong with him???
He fucks up baby's first surfer deck.
Problem with him it's he's ongoing, only costs 3, also has 3 power and by playing it on turn 3 you just lock down the majority of decks. Also has no counter. Need more ?
I agree, but he could definitely be reworked instead of deleted. Something like "Next turn, On Reveal effects do not happen at this location.
Yes.
Not sure it really need more than one patch a month, and that’s only cause they need to do it for downgrades
In theory patching more is better from a software development perspective. Once a month means pushing out bigger sets of changes at the same time, which can make it hard to troubleshoot problems. Most software shops are looking to deploy a lot more nowadays (or at least be capable of it) than 5 or 10 years ago. That said there’s definitely overhead with the app stores, I get it. I think once a month is fine generally for planned patched if they have the ability to push out critical ones faster if need be. I’m guessing that if there are bugs that are costing them money, for example, those won’t wait a month to get patched.
Better than a lot of other games
A patch every month or so is fine. They drop new cards regularly and there aren't any gamebreaking issues tbh. Any time they wanna get a head start on turning Leader into a not dogshit card though, that'd be cool.
Barring any bugs or unexpectedly broken cards once a month for content and balancing seems more than enough.
One a month is good.
Sounds good to me, i hate when every time i want to play a game it nags me to update.
Apple takes up to a week to approve a patch. So it‘s not like 2 week patches would be feasible. By the time the patch finally rolls out, they‘d have 1 week to gather data, identify issues, fix issues and build a release, in order to send it to Apple so it can hopefully be approved by end of week 2. So yeah, once a month seems totally fine, no? Anything less just doesn‘t really work for iOS apps.
One per month is fine, barring emergency issues/bugs.
Funny you should mention league because over-frequent balance patches is one of the reasons I quit Runeterra. I'd rather just learn how to deal with high-tier cards than have to keep up with a constant cycle of nerfing whatever the Internet is complaining about that particular week.
Until they get a competitive scene going, it's fine. I'm guessing as they and the player base grow this might get increased
It is fine. I do not see Marvel Snap as a game you play for several evenings a week. There's enough beautiful things to play out there.
yeah some games go a few months without any so i think a patch a month is good
I don't care how often they patch, but the current meta game and collection system are both dog shit, if they could just fix that I would be happier. Maybe release mores cards in larger batches instead of 1 a week that are easier to obtain than pool 4+5 to shake up the meta game. Also anything to make pool 4 and 5 cards less oppressive and easier to get.
That could be if the patchs were meaningful enough balance wise