Hello, and welcome back to Burning Questions! Today, we're discussing
[bzhzhzhzhzt]
(Sorry, but the rest of this intro has been Leeched)
1) Does Marvel Snap have a power-creep problem?
This week, we got one of the more direct examples of power creep in Marvel Snap in the form of Sage. While some important ways differ, Sage feels like a far more powerful version of Wolfsbane. Cards like Blob and Red Hulk have power crept cards like Giganto and Infinaut to a degree, and even Nocturne, at 3-5 with a useful ability, applies pressure on 3-Cost cards.
However, the question wasn't whether or not power creep is occurring; it assuredly is, but if Snap has a problem because of it. Not only do I not think it's a problem, I think it's a good thing. Power creep generally occurs in card games to ensure that new products are appealing and will sell, and Marvel Snap is no different. If we just got a bunch of cards around the median power level we already have (like Wolfsbane, for example), the game would get very stale quickly. When other card games struggle with power creep, older cards become totally obsolete. Because of the balance team’s philosophy of constantly buffing and nerfing cards, including older ones, this is a much more avoidable problem. Instead of just new cards, the game's power level generally can be raised (or even suppressed if needed). The other problem that often accompanies power creep, complexity creep, hasn't been a major issue thus far since Second Dinner is committed to keeping the game accessible to those inexperienced in card games as well. Some degree of complexity creep feels rewarding for long-term players who mature along with the game, but too much can be a major impediment to long-term growth. Also, power creeping a card like Wolfsbane, one of the first cards you get in the game, doesn't seem like a big deal. We don't need all the starter cards to feel playable forever, and it's okay to have some cards with their primary niche at lower collection levels. No, I'm not worried about the power creep of new cards. I am a bit worried about synergy creep, though. This is a type of power creep that occurs across synergistic lines. Synergies can become more powerful and more obvious as the more highly synergistic pieces are added. Part of the appeal of Snap is that you feel like you can win with your favorite pet cards and mix and match different groups of cards. As synergies become more and more powerful, ‘pile-of-good-cards’ decks are less and less viable into combo-centric, highly synergistic decks. I don't think it's a major problem yet, but one the team should look out for.
2) What impact has the Leech change had?
The recent OTA change to Leech was controversial. Buffing a card that most players hated before is a brave move. However, since Leech last saw heavy play, his ability has changed. While he still hits a lot of high-value On-Reveal targets, Ongoing cards, and those with static abilities like Vision, Kitty Pryde, and Red Hulk dodge his green hand. I was surprised but cautiously optimistic when the Leech change first came down. Hela’s greater and greater consistency had made her a bit of a pain, and cards like Cannonball and Annihilus ruled the meta. It seemed like Leech had a good shot at a redemption arc. Leech, alongside new best friend Blink, has ushered in change, but is it a positive change? Let's take a look at how the meta has shifted.
The stats for the above table come from our card stats, filtered to Infinite-only ranks, and toggled between the last 7 days and the last 30 days. The trends above will continue to grow as we approach a full week with 4-Cost Leech.
Leech is seeing a massive amount of play at 18.75%, making him the 15th most-played card in the game. That rises to 8th when adding in all ranks, indicating he's an even bigger problem pre-infinite. There is no way that can be seen as an acceptable play rate for a card like Leech. Not included in the above chart is the season pass card and Leech's partner in crime, Blink. She's seeing play in 30.09% of decks, making her the second most played card when filtering for either infinite only or all ranks. A new card seeing such a massive amount of play is shocking and highlights that Blink is the lynchpin of the current metagame. A huge amount of Leech's power and play rate directly results from his usefulness with Blink.
The table above shows that Leech has an immensely deleterious effect on Annihilus. Once the meta tyrant, Annihilus is seeing a tiny amount of play now. Anecdotally, I played a lot of Annihilus last season and gave up on trying to make him work in the face of Leech. Many people expected Hela, who has only been slightly affected, to be the primary target for Leech decks, which is why he was changed. However, I am pretty certain Annihilus decks were too strong last season, and the balance team also targeted them. Lady Deathstrike was having success in Annihilus packages as well, and the double blow of losing a power and dying to Leech has largely pushed her back out of the meta. Perhaps the Leech change alone would have been enough to reign her in.
Another target was likely Cannonball, who was enjoying his role as the new deterministic closer in lockdown decks after Alioth was banished. His play rate is down moderately. Shang Chi is also having a rough go in this meta. Leech, in tandem with the proliferation of Ongoing decks, has seen Shang drop to a near-historic low in play rate, last seen when the Silky Smooth and Werewolf by Night metas were built around ducking him and dodging him. It should also be noted that late-game On Reveal all-stars like Silver Surfer (down to 1.89% play rate), Jane Foster (also sitting at 1.89%), and Arnim Zola (2.4%) are way down in meta share as well. Gamorra (0.42%), Black Panther (0.43%), Heimdall (0.53%), White Tiger (0.53%), Black Swan (0.78%), and Alioth (0.78%) have been pushed from the edge of irrelevance into the abyss.
It is clear that the meta has shifted. How much of that has to do with Leech is unclear, but in my opinion, he's played a major role.
I don't think the Leech change has been as bad as some people do. Buffing him has achieved some of the goals it likely had. But I think his curve-perfect relationship with Blink has made him far more powerful and widespread than intended. You can throw Leech into any deck with Blink and use her to swap him for a larger card. You often don't even care if he's debilitated the opponent since you're swapping him out for something big. He's like a disruptive freeroll. That doesn't seem to be a healthy place for him, and I hope they adjust him again as soon as possible. Maybe by spotlighting his synergy with Blink, they could move him back to 5-3 and still have him be effective enough to see play without being one of the most prevalent cards in the game. Also, let's make Hela a 6-2 while we're at it since he hasn't affected her much (down a tiny bit, but up to 9.34% play rate in Conquest and 9.12% on the ladder when including pre-infinite). Whatever changes are going to be made, I would not necessarily expect them in the next round of changes. The balance team has historically patiently waited for data like this to accumulate.
**One interesting little tidbit that popped out while rummaging through data was that Jeff is the number one card (play rate) in the game regardless of time or rank filters. Jeff, recently nominated for an Eisner award, is living his best life.
3) What's your favorite niche interaction?
Considering how often it has happened to me, I'm not sure how niche it is, but my favorite new interaction is Magneto and Nocturne. Specifically, I love using an opponent's Nocturne. You can shift their Nocturne to change a location or, better yet, anticipate where your opponent will move Nocturne and prevent them from turning off Limbo or another location that benefits you. In the game below, I knew that my opponent would move their Nocturne to Rickety Bridge and could prevent it, while also playing a Kitty Pryde to the left to save my Silk and block anything else they played there.
Marvel Snap Moments on Twitter captured this incredible Nocturne/Magneto triple cross.
Thought I'd be clever and move their Nocturne to change Rickety Bridge. Nope, that's actually worse 😭 pic.twitter.com/8y1OASsfY8
— Marvel Snap Moments (@MarvelSnapRocks) May 11, 2024
Now, let's dive into the official Marvel Snap Discord and check in on what is being asked and answered there.
4) Q: Correct me if I'm wrong, but why is the team's balance philosophy so rigid in its by-the-numbers, wholly internal statistics driven methodology? Especially with balance updates like this most recent one, this methodology seems out of touch with the community as a whole. Isn't there a balance to be struck with cut-and-dry internal statistics and the general community consensus?
Per Glenn's most recent answer regarding Hela, he states that "[Hela decks' ] winrates are sub 50%, and their cube rates are decent but nothing exceptional." We have no way of knowing this, both because SD does not share their internal statistics and because community run data hubs' statistics (our only source of SNAP deck/card data) suggest Hela is a consistently top performing deck at the higher levels of play according to community data. An RNG-based, uninteractive and uninteractable deck should probably not have these accolades.
It is abundantly clear that the community grows tired of the RNG-based yet consistently winning Hela based powerhouses. Even so, the team decides to balance based on their data and nerf LDS and DH, who would be considered cards more fair than Hela or Professor X, for example. Ask any seasoned Marvel SNAP player which pair of cards are more problematic or unhealthy for the game, and they'll most likely tell you the latter.
Also, buffing Leech, who was once likely the unhealthiest card in the game, to become an inelegant answer to yet another unhealthy card feels even more out of touch on the balance team's part - especially because he's not even that great of an answer to Hela and he trashes other archetypes way harder.
So, why is it then that the team insists on purely balancing by these internal statistics that we do not see? I'm not suggesting that the team bend over backwards and nerf every single card the community cries about. But, if there is an attempt to take community consensus into account, it sure did not come through with this last balance update.
A: Gameplay data is the only feedback we receive that accounts for the full sum of player experiences. Online communities and various player groups are fraught with biases by nature of their audiences. Even asking “any seasoned Marvel Snap player” is going to get answers that may not serve other audiences, because not all players are seasoned.
This isn’t to say we ignore community feedback. I mean, I’m right here, writing this. And I’ve written at length how we integrate feedback into our work—it’s never “purely” one way or the other, it’s a mix. Most of game design is, in my experience.
-Glenn
Author's note:
I think many players feel frustrated when balance changes don't square with their experience. I felt that way about the Darkhawk nerf, for example. I think the issue is less that Second Dinner are slaves to their data (indeed, their data is more complete) and more that they are balancing for the entire breadth of players. Most of the readers of this column and the official Discord play a lot more than the average player. Balancing the game for the top 10% in playtime, MMR, and the general player base is challenging. Honestly, I feel like they do an amazing job at balance, and I am especially happy that they try to eliminate the various biases that cloud balance perception.
5) Q: What is the process for how the sub-titles for each season mission chapter are decided?
I love reading these, seeing how they tell a story, and how they fit in to the theme of the season.
I would really like to know if this is a big team effort or just one person working late into the night to get the sub-titles just right. Either way, kudos to you and I really enjoy them!
A: It’s a process of taking a look at all of the elements we have coming together for a season (theme, characters, locations, art, etc) and then trying to bring in a cohesive arc around it. We also make sure to bounce it with each other - especially those of us who are more steeped into the lores - to sanity check that these chapter titles make sense. It’s a subtle touch, but it’s something we put care into when thinking of the season design!
-Charlene
Author's note:
Most people might gloss over the chapter titles, but they're often a fun read, especially if you're a fan of the characters or theme of that season. I'd like to see them push this even further in the form of some images or a bit more of a storytelling aspect. They're pulling from so many interesting comic storylines that feeling even more immersed in the events would be fun.
That's it for this week. Send me a question on Twitter, or head to the comments to share your answers to these Burning Questions. Until next time!