News Shop
Events Chat

Cards' score ranking system

I can’t answer in that topic (because of limiting 3 messages at each topic).
So I can explain several moments here.

I am not experienced Codex player, but I was tournament player in MtG and has basic understanding of that how things work.

Starting with end point, tech 2 units.
Let’s take 2 simple units - 3/5 anti-air for 1, and 7/8 for 5.
Difference between them is +4/3 and lose anti-air, for +4 gold.
So for 1 gold we have some less than +1/+1 bonus.
Attack is always have greater value than HP bexause 5/1 is that unit who try to win the game, but 1/5 can only defeat from losing and must be cheaper. 5/1 is that unit who quickly destroys enemie’s buildings and base, but 1/5 can’t do almost anything against them.
That’s why I evaluate Attack as 3 points but HP as only 2 points.
So 1 gold costs 4 points (4/3 = 12 + 6 = 18 pts). 4 gold x 4 pts = 16 pts, +1-2 for anti-air ~ 18 pts.
So 3/5 = 19 pts + anti-air, for 1 card + 1 gold => Tech 2 card costs 15-17.

But for Tech1 and Tech0 things work not the same. Most often units in near costs have difference ~1 attack (3 pts) for 1 gold fifference.
For Tech0 basis is 1/2 (7 pts) for 1 gold, or 4 pts for card + 3 pts for gold.
And for Tech1 basis is 2/2 (10 pts) for 0 gold (10 pts for card).

Have you any questions about other evaluates?

For example:

  • 1 Attack costs 3 pts, = 2 pts at attacking, +1 pts at defending/patrol. It means that frenzy costs 2 pts.

  • Long-randed means that when you attack, you don’t take any damage from opponent’s attack. More attack you have, bigger targets you strike to kill, so bigger damage would take from it if your unit hasn’t
    long-range. That’s why Long-range is linked to your attack. And it costs 2 pts for 1 attack, because it save 1 HP from the similar attack.

  • Unblockable means that you have ability to do damage not only patrol enemies (if exist), but any unit/hero (with retaliation), or any building/base without retaliation. So 6/7 Colossus for 6 cost is good, and it is ~40 pts, 14 at 7 HP and 26 at 6 attack (18 pts) with limited unblockable (8 pts). That’s why I think unblockable is 1.5-2 pts per attack (1.5 if colossus is weak and 2 if colossus is great).

  • Flying is equal Long-range + Unblockable + can’t be target of attacks + can’t patrol (if all enemies are none-flyers and have not anti-air). 3rd and 4th things are nearly compensate each other (if attack ~ HP). 1st and 2nd things sum only particular, because when we use unblockable mode for attacking buildings or base, we have not retaliation (and long-ranged does nothing). That’s why Long-range + Unblockable is 3 pts per attack (not 4 pts = 2 + 2).

  • Haste is great thing that multiply attacking potential nearly twice. But it is useless in defending/patrol, and when you use it, you lose patrol option for this unit at this turn. That’s why Haste costs not 2 pts (as offensive Attack part) but 1.5 pts per Attack.

Oh, so you’re then evaluating the card based on its points value versus the points cost (card cost + gold cost x (3 for Tech 0-I, 4 for Tech II+))?

So, if we use 3 pts per attack, 2 pts. per toughness, 1 pt. per armour, we get something like this:

name stats abilites value cost (gold) cost (points) comments
Tenderfoot 1/2 - 7 1 7 about right
Older Brother 2/2 - 10 2 10 about right
Thieving Imp 2/2 discard (7 pts.) 17 3 13 overpowered, roughly balance by making it cost 4g (points cost 16) or making it 1/2 (value 14)
Rampant Growth +2/+2A can target heroes (+25%: 2 pts.) 10 2 10 about right
Sensei’s Advice +1/+1A twice - 8 1 7 about right
- - - - -
Revolver Ocelot 3/3 sparkshot (1 pt.) 16 2 16 about right
Iron Man 3/4 - 17 3 19 slightly underpowered
Argonaut 3/4 readiness (3 pts.) 20 3 19 about right
Nimble Fencer 2/3 haste (3 pts.) 15 2 16 OK (ignoring virtuoso synergies)
Lobber 2/2 haste (3pts.), can damage building (? pts.) 13+ 1 13 good?
Ardra’s Boulder 0/6 legendary (? pts.) 12? 2 16 underpowered, ignoring legendary / Mythmaking
Dinosize +6/+6A can target heroes (+25%: 6 pts.) 30 4 22 woah!
- - - - -
Oversized Rhinoceros 7/8 - 37 5 36 about right
Crashbarrow 6/2 haste (9 pts.), overpower (5 pts.), ephemeral (-11 pts.) 25 3 28 underpowered, doesn’t seem right
Flying Fox 3/1 flying (11 pts.) 20 2 22 underpowered
1 Like

Nice table!
But I disagree with thing about Lobber like “ignoring building damage”.
Lobber has 2 attacking options:

  1. 2 dmg to patrol (which cost 8 pts if you do it now from spell) MINUS several retaliaton damage
  2. 1 dmg to building (which cost 5 pts if you do it now from spell) without any several damage

I think that 2nd option often is not worse than 1st option, so we shouldn’t ignore it, is useful. Especially in that case that 1 dmg is enough to destroy important building now, not later.

I think also that +6/+6 (Dinosize) is worse than 1/1 multiply 6 times. Because often part of this big bonus is excess.

Crashbarrow: I think that Haste + Ephemeral is nearly compensate each other (but if HP = 1, because more HP is useless). So we have 6/1 unit (20 pts) with overpower ability (5 pts), or 25 pts.

Flying Fox (3/1): in my system flying cost 3 pts per attack, total 9 pts not 6. That’s why it is 20 pts, not 17.

Maybe, for flying more correctly count as 4 pts per attack (because can’t be target of enemie’s ground attacks => survive longer and do more damage) but minus 1 pts per HP (because can’t be patrol against ground).
So then Flying Fox is 22 pts.

By “ignoring”, I just mean that I wasn’t sure how to set the points for it in your system. I’ve made that more explicit.

I’m glad you’re understanding this Mouse cause this is beyond me

1 Like

The system assigns a points value to a card, based on stats (stats added in the case of spells), which is then adjusted for other effects/abilities.

It also assigns a points value to the card/gold cost of the card, and you can then compare the two points values to roughly evaluate how good/cost-effective the card is.

Basic system for card value:

  • 3 points per attack
  • 2 points per toughness
  • 1 point per armour

Basic system for card cost:

  • 3 points per gold cost for tech 0/I cards
  • 4 points per gold cost for tech II cards (and tech III?)
  • 4 points in card cost for a tech 0 card
  • 10 points in card cost for a tech I / spell
  • 16 points in card cost for a tech II
  • not sure about tech III / ultimate spell card costs

That seems flawed; spells definitely can’t be evaluated by the same system as units for reasons:

  1. Requiring a hero to be cast
  2. Can’t affect the board state outside the moment they are cast

Also I think gold cost matters way more at tech 0, than any other tech level. Changing something by 1 is a huge deal!

I think that ultimate spell cost near 27-30 per card (example: Research & Development for cost 2 gold, draw 5 cards), and 3-4 pts per gold.

Tech 3 units are very complex, because of mad abilities and having very imbalanced units like Pirate Gunship. So Tech3 is that unit giving very big advantage to you and win if you survive
and it usually doesn’t matter how great this huge advantage is.
In other words, the imba of several Tech 3 units does not break the game.
I think, the base cost of Tech 3 card is about 80 for most units (+4 pts per gold?).

  1. Yes, Tech0 spells must cost 1 pts more for require hero - but practically they do about the same 4/7/10/13 pts.
  2. Spell are played now, but units can attack only next turn. That’s why spell damage to patrol cost 4 pts but unit’s attack costs only 3 pts (4.5 pts with haste).

I also definitely think you’re underestimating how much cost affects the card. Stating that spore shambler is OP is just… a little crazy. The difference between 1, 2, and 3 gold at tech 0 is massive, and cannot be understated.

My proposal is that gold at tech 0 is weighted at 5 points, and 4 at tech 1.

Are you talking about early game? Cards like Spore Shambler get better later, when you have more workers.

Sure, but tech 0 cards matter most (and should be rated with a weighting towards) in the early game, when gold is tight and they’re all you have access to. Saying “Spore Shambler is OP and should cost 4 because it’s good late game” completely ignores the utility of that card early, when you most care about the cost.

Stats-wise, Shambler is worth 12 and costs 13, so it might be due to how Nargott evaluates the rune-passing ability.

Spore Shambler is not worse than: pay 3 + 2 = 5 gold, and 1 card for:

  • 0/1 unit
  • 2 copy of Bloom (each of it cost 10 pts - 2 gold and 1 card)
    Pay 15 + 4 = 19 pts, for 2 + 10 + 10 = 22 pts. That’s why is OP
    If Spore Shambler is OK, it means that Bloom is weak (8-9 pts not 10)?

Standard Tech0 units are:
1/2 for 1
2/2 for 2
3/2 for 3

Standard Tech1 units are:
2/2 for 0
3/3+ for 2
4/4- for 3

Don’t you agree?

At tech 0 gold cost “much”, but only if we compare it with cost of card draw (only 4 pts at first round).
Later game, gold cost less, compared with card cost (or draw cost).

In pts system, there are no reasons, to evaluate gold as 4-5 for Tech0 units, because most of them miss.

Shambler runes are not the same as Bloom runes, since they can’t attach to heroes. You’re paying 19 for 18, based on that difference alone.

I’m also not sure why Bloom gets bonus points for haste-like effect and potential synergy with offensive keywords, when e.g. Rampant Growth doesn’t.

Agree, I had mistake - only units. Rune of Shambler cost 8 pts, and removing rune for 1 gold is “fair” exchange. So having 2/3 units with useful ability like: tap - gain 1 gold and spend it for remove rune :slight_smile
I think now Spore Shambler cost 13-14 pts and is OK (12 pts base + 1-2 pts for ability).

Because the first effect is now + later, and the second effect is only now (so “haste” cost is the only cost of second effect).
Playing new unit’s base effect is late (without now). That’s why +1/+1 bonus for creating new unit, for constant spell, and for instant spell are different at pts:
+1/+1 rune = 8 pts (if to unit only) - now + later
+1/+1 instant = 4 pts (if to unit only) - now
+1/+1 unit (without depending on ATK/HP abilities) = 5 pts - later

Fair enough, I got confused by it being described as a haste-like effect. I’m not convinced by the synergy part, though. Maybe have the extra 1 point be because, unlike haste, the effect still does something if the unit doesn’t attack that turn.

Crashbarrow (6/2 haste overpower ethemeral):
Haste means +2 pts for offensive part of Attack and -0.5 pts for defensive part Attack (because first patrol we can skip).
Offensive part of Attack with Haste is double (2 + 2 pts).
Overpower mean +1 pts per Attack (except the first), and only to offensive part of Attack.
So offensive part of Attack with Overpower is x1.5, with Haste is total x3 (or 6 pts).
Total cost of Attack with Haste + Overpower is 6.5 (0.5 pts for defending part).
So if unit already has Haste, giving it Overpower ability costs 2 pts not 1 (haste is double attacking potential and double attacking ability).

6/1 overpower = 20 pts base + 10 pts overpower = 30 pts, not 25 :slight_smile:
It is strong unit, of cause.

Another way to evaluate: equal spell does 6 dmg distributed between 1-2 patrols (or “overpower” damage).
Overpower damage cost as 150% damage except the first, or 1 + 5 x 1.5 = 8.5 dmg = 34 pts.
But if “patrol damage” will cost 3.5 (not 4) is will be 29.75 pts (same as 30 pts).

Update (sorry I am limited at new posts):

Agree that ethemeral evaluation model works bad. Good is only ignoring HP.

6/1 unit is a unit for one-strike, it is “near” ethemeral even without it.
I think that haste ethemeral is like 6/0 with 1 pts per attack bonus (x4/3). (If without ethemeral it will be standard 1.5 pts per attack for haste, +2 pts for 1 HP)

Plus overpower (as general +1 pts to Attack, or +50% to offensive part of Attack), or Attack x 1.5 (except the first 1).
Overall: cost the first damage = 4, cost the other 5 damage = 6, for total of 34 pts.
It is very strong. Is it normal and unit is really OP and must have only 5 attack for fair 28 pts?
Or it means that overpower is overvalued? And it costs lesser, 0.5 pts per attack (with haste 1 pts)?
In other words, 5 overpower damage (while unit is attacking):

  • is equal to 6 clear damage (+25%)
  • or is equal to 7 clear damage? (+50%)

The haste effectively cancels with ephemeral with respect to attack, so why would the overpower bonus get doubled?

I think the system is interesting. Clearly, there are some caveats, with respect to a card’s value depending on what other cards are present, but that’s an understandable limitation of a point system if you don’t want to drive yourself mad by trying to account for everything.

Something that I’m not sure about is whether the system should be used to compare cards from different tech levels, which, as far as I know, doesn’t have an equivalent in Magic.

At the moment, cards are assumed as standard-quality if their point value and their point cost is roughly the same, but I’d clearly prefer to play a standard-quality card from a higher tier. This means the system is currently decent for comparing cards from the same tier, but not cards from different tiers. To allow the latter, you might want to reduce the increase in card cost between tiers, or even have no increase. If you only want to compare cards in the same tier, the card cost and different gold costs serve no purpose.