Game Design Gambits don't encourage build diversity

Here's the problem with the Gambit system.

You are heavily punished for not taking every Gambit you can get, since their buffs to end rewards get much stronger the more Gambits you have. But it is too much work to change your build around every time you're raiding to fit the Gambits. Therefore, Gambits don't achieve their goal of making people change builds; instead, they're just random restrictions which can be very annoying.

They can also end up self-contradictory. An example from the Discord is Bleeding Warrior's/Leaden Fighter's/Farsighted/Myopic. Bleeding Warrior gives you -1% damage for every -1% health you have, meaning that as your health becomes low you rapidly lose damage. Leaden Fighter gives you +2% spell cost for every +1% health you have, meaning that as your health becomes high your spells become prohibitively expensive. Farsighted makes you unable to hit enemies near you, and Myopic makes you unable to hit enemies far away from you. All taken together, if you want to maximise your rewards (you will lose half of your bonus aspects and pulls from Gambits if you skip one), you will be caught in a catch-22; you can't escape it.

This is in Feedback and not GenSuggestions because I don't have a suggestion on how to fix this. I ignore Gambits, always take all three, and then numbskull my way through the entire raid with a sustain build.

 

My favorites are the ones where it's like "well, I guess my party members will just have to carry me if this doesn't work out" like "dying reduces your damage" or something.

 

Ultimately Gambits work out to "this is really annoying", "I'll do worse but I won't notice it", and "this is literally a non-issue". Playing sustain Lightbender means the gambits for dying, or not using consumables, don't matter. I don't die, and I don't need potions to stay alive. But also if I take Myopic* I lose half of the no damage I do.

*I don't have access to the fourth slot, because, for some bewildering reason, there's a level system for raids and it takes ages to get anywhere. If Farsighted is present, I am forced to take it.

 

i don't understand the problem, you're saying that gambits don't encourage build diversity, but describe how certain gambits make specific playstyles not work. playstyles are tied to builds, no?? so if you're having an issue of any degree with a specific gambit, you might be inclined to swap to a different build to overcome said gambit's difficulty?

you're basically saying that you build benefits from certain gambits and is hindered by other gambits. so whats the problem?

 

The system obviously looks like it should make you play different builds, but in practice it's expensive to get a new one and tedious to switch, so it's easier to just tolerate annoyance. This was the point I made at the start of the post.

 

ok i know "skill issue" meme, but i think its actually a matter of managing your expectations.

one that performs equally as good as/around the same level as/better than what you're accustomed to.

agree on the part of ability tree, but as far as gear/skillpoint distribution, it is an option to quick swap via island build stands.

thats the point, no? if it disabled your playstyle entirely, that would force the build switch, but since that would be entirely egregious in the other direction, it is safer to have it annoy the player.

i know that you said

but my counterpoint to your opening statement is that it's not a problem with the system, its the way you're expecting it to work.

 

Counter-counterpoint, why should Gambits be annoying in the first place?

In their current state, all they do is force you to choose between getting less rewards, and having more fun, or getting more rewards, and having, depending on the gambit selection, far less fun. My brother does a lot more Raiding than I do, and he dreads Raiding sometimes, because the Gambits are just, so, ANNOYING.
If Gambits were, instead, more fleshed out challenges that significantly altered the Raid experience, forcing the player to approach it completely differently, then, depending on how they're designed, they could be more fun than normal Raids. It wouldn't just be "making it easier for people to get more rewards" either, because they would still be challenges, possibly harder ones than the current Gambits.
Something like this could allow worse players to still get good rewards, especially since Gambit-less Raiding would probably be faster, and allow better players the option to add risk in return for a bigger payout, if they play well enough.

 

Island item holders are infamous for deleting items. Build stands are also Champion exclusive.

 

ok this is what i mean by expectation management. the base reward for clearing the raid, without any additional difficulty modifiers, is a set amount. Every room you clear in the raid rewards you, more so if you survive whilst in the room. Gambits is taking on additional difficulty for additional rewards. If you're struggling with the additional difficulty, they are entirely optional and not having them does not detract from the raid experience. If you think you aren't being rewarded enough for the base raid clear, thats a whole separate conversation entirely.

looking back at the thesis of the post, that being "Gambits don't encourage build diversity", would he be similarly affected if he was playing with a different build? I can tell you with full certainty, from personal experience that my answer to that is a resounding no, i would not be similarly affected with a different build.

but then they wouldn't be gambits? im not sure what you have in mind, but i dont think the base raid experience needs to change atm.

sorry thats on me ive had champion since the day the rank dropped, im privileged as hell. i'll plop down a build stand to make it up for you

 

The wiki doesn't specify, and I don't remember exactly, but I don't think non-champions can use the build stand even if one places it.

 

here's my piece (don't start a shouting match I don't have that in me over this) but sometimes I've just been logging into Wynn and checking gambits, and I just don't feel motivated to play if I don't get the right ones. The fact that re-rolls are a once a day feature without paying means that if you don't take all three on your first raid of the day, it's just. You shouldn't do that. Cause you won't get anything. (This is coming from someone who doesn't have infinity time to play this game and has not leveled a single mythic aspect to II, mainly because stupid raid system it took me like 6 months to get four gambit slots).

Most gambits screw over most of my builds. That's honestly (usually) not that bad for me, because prior to 2.2 I had five max level classes, one for each class and that meant usually one of them could take 2+ gambits easily. Nowadays I just play on Mage because it's been fun, but it feels like I am plain wasting my time doing the same raid over and over again, because at a certain point without any tangible reward, repeating the increasingly dull task of clearing NoL rooms just keeps. getting. less. fun. To the point where I barely have logged on in the past few weeks and barely have played at all.

(Also, gambits switch out every day. If I don't have a build on hand, it usually takes me a few hours to design and and collect the pieces for it, and even then it's not a guarantee it will work in general, much less in a raid. If gambits rotated weekly or bi-weekly, it would be annoying but it would encourage build-switching more, which would technically address the thesis of the thread in a way that Culpit would probably still be upset about.)

Anyway so let's talk about gambits and why they might be frustrating to face in the pool.

Anemic: A screw-you to Paladins, Acolytes, Lightbenders, Riftwalkers, and Ritualists specifically. Should you have to change archetypes (and then change back) for a few extra aspects?

Arcane Incontinent: the only situation I see this ever being annoying for are Tierstack and Cancelstack. Haven't run those with this one. Otherwise this is borderline the easiest gambit.

Bleeding Warrior: read Leaden Fighter and then tell me honestly that these gambits weren't designed independently and then clumped together (same goes for Farsighted and Myopic, as Culpit mentioned in the original post)

Burdened Pacifist: fine as it is. It definitely affects different playstyles heavier but that's fine because only like, a wacky Ego build that relies on Radiance, would be fully screwed.

Cursed Alchemist: A screw-you to every archetype except the ones listed for Anemic. Can Archer take this one without Epoch or Ignis?

Dull Blade: A screw-you to Shadestepper, which other wise just prevents oneshotting mobs.

Eroded Speedster: I've never taken this one, but unlike all the other gambits it practically affects everyone equally. Of course if you do more damage faster then it's obviously better than if not.

Farsighted: A screw-you to Warrior, Assassin, and also Riftwalker (Teleporting straight into the Parasite only for the rift open to deal no damage is always a fun one.)

Foreseen Swordsman: got buffed? Nerfed? How do you say that? I remember it being 30 hits a second, not 4?!??! I don't know if that's remotely doable anymore.

Glutton: aspect gimme. It's way more common for me to take all 3 buffs than not.

Hemophiliac: Screw-you to non-glass cannons. I don't take this one because I like Agility and Defense thank you very much.

Ingenuous Mage: is annoying because my melee builds are too quirky for raids and I'm pretty sure that hits mana steal so good luck hhybrids you'll need it.

Leaden Fighter: Whoever designed this gambit needs to be told that Fallen isn't an archetype for every class. I understand every class can do glass cannons but this gambit is especially terribly designed imo.

Maddened Mage: is the screw-you to Ritualist. A screw-you. Ritualist was hated by whoever designed these. In every raid except NotG, where it is super annoying, this gambit is almost unnoticeable.

Myopic: the problem with this Gambit can be summed up in one word: Archer. I pity Revolution builds taking this gambit.

Outworn Soldier: is peak gambit design. Depending on your build it will hit harder, but it something general while also not being egregious or easy. It rewards and punishes builds differently but not playstyles.

Shattered Mortal: is fine. Bland but doable, and the rest of the raid system incentivizes you not to die very strongly anyway. If stacked improperly with other gambits it could be nightmarish though.

1. Conflicting signals: there's usually only going to be a few different archetypes that can satisfy a particular set of gambits. At a certain point you'll have to take things that don't fully align, but something went wrong with the fact that a Shaman or Archer might feel forced to go Cursed Alchemist, Myopic, and Leaden Fighter.

2. Going after archetypes (and more specifically playstyles) was a mistake imo. Read my take on Outworm Soldier for more info.

3. Gambits suck because they go after my favorite archetypes in general: rift, acro, ritualist, and also just. Archer in general, it doesn't matter what I'm playing. Paladin got mostly left alone, but I CANNOT take Anemic or Hemophiliac because they don't make it harder, they make it impossible

 

I have a problem with the wider concept of Gambits, and more of a problem with how they're actually implemented.
In my experience, all they add to the Raiding experience is more rewards at the end, which is just kinda disappointing game design.
My semi-suggestion was trying to get away from the current concept of Gambits (which, as I understand it, is "optional challenges meant to encourage variety in builds"), because I just think it's kinda boring and annoying, especially given how builds are.
Most people (which would include me) don't have the time, emeralds or knowledge to come up with or buy a new build every time the Gambits don't match their current one. It's easier to tank it and suffer, or just not interact with the system at all, which isn't a good outcome.

I know I'm just repeating a lot of what Culpit said, but that's just cause he said good stuff.

 

I think one of the big issues with gambits is that virtually all of them are just Some Numbers Are Different. That doesn't really make gameplay different at all. Raids are repetitive, and gambits don't change that. I'd much prefer gambits that actually make you play different.

________________________________

For instance, here's a Gambit What Makes You Play Different: "every second you're within 3 blocks of a mob, you take 10% of your max HP in damage". Builds that are already rangers don't have much to worry about, although they'll now have to take more care to be in a safe spot. Builds that melee have an avenue to keep doing that - hit and then run away really fast. That makes it play differently. It still achieves a 'don't play X kind of build' effect, but more interestingly.

 

maybe but that feels like farsighted with extra steps. and also brutal to assassin specifically

 

Farsighted with extra steps is better than Farsighted, tho.