Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1

    There should be a benefit for going second.

    In a game where most of my matches end by turn 3 or 5, the idea that the second player doesn't get a rather large benefit to offset the inherent disadvantage of going second is troubling. I find I lose most of the games I go second, but win most that I go first. First player to drop Gyle and just unload Thor and Drall generally wins, you just can't come back from that 600-700 life defecit before dying yourself.

  2. #2
    I've been thinking about this for a while now and seen a bunch of suggestions, I think the best approach that won't un balance the game is to * MAYBE * give the first player 1 less move * OR * the second player 1 extra move on first turn. Its not a significant advantage and adds something for going second without adding too much.

    I'll be honest though I don't have the issues you all have with going second. I win about the same percentage either way. I think going second has a psychological affect on some people that makes them feel like they are losing just because the opponents health is higher and they make mistakes because of it. I never feel like I'm loosing until the match is over.

    I would guess whether I go first or second my win rates in the 60-65% range at the moment, but because of the psychological affect of going second I also prefer going first

    I just refuse to let it determine who wins or loses, always liked being the underdog that comes from behind and takes the win, going second gives that opportunity and reward

  3. #3
    I haven't noticed a pattern with going first and losing, but given the amount of RNG in the game, I wouldnt mind if it is decided randomly and not in order of player ID or something silly like that...

    FYI this is also being discussed here

  4. #4
    happens that who start first mees up your side of the board and second star cant combine decent combos and first they have fill primal gauge in 1 o 2 turns ,second cost more time to fill primal gauge

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Manuel Chu View Post
    happens that who start first mees up your side of the board and second star cant combine decent combos and first they have fill primal gauge in 1 o 2 turns ,second cost more time to fill primal gauge
    I feel the same. Not only the second player fills second, but they fill slower because of the messed tiles.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Manuel Chu View Post
    happens that who start first mees up your side of the board and second star cant combine decent combos and first they have fill primal gauge in 1 o 2 turns ,second cost more time to fill primal gauge
    Like in the other thread I do not have a problem to go second. I don't like that in 3 of 4 arena games I play against bots that sucks most I want to fight real people. When you are the second player I think you have the same opinions on deck like the first sometimes the first player doesn't have any cascade and then you do better

  7. #7
    Sometimes i start second like 10-15 in a row and just win 3 o 4 matches

  8. #8
    Going first you have about a 40-50% advantage (at least for me). I can win 90% of the games if I go first, but only 35% if I go second. BTW I happen to go 2nd 70% of the time.

    I agree with Player going first gets 1 move, going second gets 2 moves and then it becoming normal.

    I don't know if the disadvantage is because I use 2 healers and their effects are felt usually later in the game when you get some guys to 50+/5. You don't suffer any damages from your enemies so they can't fill up their heroes' bar and your destruction is pretty deadly. I can activate my heroes like every move/other move.

  9. #9
    The problem with going second is that your tiles would get messed up and can hardly do combos.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •