Ben Brode on Defining Complexity, Depth, and 'Design Space'
Ben Brode came to reddit today to clear up some confusion about his recent comments! He also followed up on some of the reactions people had.
Quote from Ben BrodeHey all!I rarely start new threads here, but there was a bit of confusion regarding recent comments I made about complexity in card design, and since my comments had low visibility, and I thought the larger audience would find it interesting, here I am!
Defining Complexity and Depth
Complexity is different than Strategic Depth. For example, 'Whirlwind' is very simple. So is 'Acolyte of Pain'. So is 'Frothing Berserker'. Together, these cards were part of one of the most strategically difficult decks to play in our history. Hearthstone, and it's individual cards, are at their best when we have plenty of strategic depth, but low complexity.
You can sometimes get more depth by adding more complexity, but I actually think that cards with the highest ratio of depth to complexity are the best designs. That doesn't mean we won't explore complex designs, but it does mean that they have a burden to add a lot of strategic depth, to help maximize that ratio.
My least favorite card designs are those that are very complex, but not very strategically deep. "Deal damage to a minion equal to it's Attack minus it's Health divided by the number of Mana Crystals your opponent has. If an adjacent minion has Divine Shield or Taunt, double the damage. If your opponent controls at least 3 minions with Spell Damage, then you can't deal more damage than that minion has Health." BLECH.
At any rate, making cards more complicated is easy. Making them Strategically Deep is more difficult. Making them simple and deep is the most challenging, and where I think we should be shooting. It's important to note that an individual design doesn't necessarily need to be 'deep' on it's own. Hearthstone has a lot of baked in complexity and depth: 'Do I Hero Power or play this card?' 'Do go for board control or pressure their hero?' And often (as in the case of Whirlwind) a card's depth exists because of how it is used in combination with other cards. Creating simple blocks that players can combine for greater strategic depth is one of the ways we try and get that high ratio of depth to complexity.
Defining 'Design Space'
Sometimes we talk about 'design space'. Here's a good way to think of it: Imagine all vanilla (no-text) minions. Like literally, every possible one we could make. Everything from Wisp to Faceless Behemoth. Even accounting for balance variation (i.e. 5-mana 6/6 (good) and 5-mana 4/4 (bad)), there are a limited number of minions in that list. Once we've made every combination of them - that's it! We couldn't make any more without reprinting old ones. That list is the complete list of 'design space' for vanilla minions.
The next level of design space would be minions with just keywords on them (Windfury, Stealth, Divine Shield, etc). There are many cards to be made with just keywords, and some are quite interesting. Wickerflame Burnbristle is fascinating, especially because of how he interacts with the Goons mechanic. But eventually (without adding more keywords), this space will be fully explored as well.
When you plan for a game to exist forever, or even just when it's time to invent new cards, thinking about what 'design space' you have remaining to explore is important.
Some day (far in the future), it's conceivable that all the 'simple but strategically deep' designs have been fully explored, and new Hearthstone cards will need to have 6-10 lines of text to begin exploring new space. I believe that day is very, very far off. I believe we can make very interesting cards and still make them simple enough to grasp without consulting a lawyer.
Some design space is technically explorable, but isn't fun. "Your opponent discards their hand." "When you mouse-over this card, you lose." "Minions can't be played the rest of the game." "Whenever your opponent plays a card, they automatically emote 'I am a big loser.'" "Charge"
Sometimes design space could be really fun, but because other cards exist, we can't explore it. Dreadsteed is an example of a card that couldn't exist in Warrior or Neutral, due to the old Warsong Commander design. (in this case we made Dreadsteed a Warlock card) The Grimy Goons mechanic is an example that couldn't exist in the same world as the Warrior Charge Spell and Raging Worgen. (in this case we changed the 'Charge' spell)
In a sense, every card both explores and limits 'design space'. The fact that Magma Rager exists means we can't make this: "Give Charge to a minion with 5 Attack and 1 Health, then sixtuple it's Attack." That's not very useful (or fun) design space, and so that tradeoff is acceptable. However, not being able to make neutral minions with game-changing static effects (like Animated Armor or Mal'Ganis) because of Master of Disguise... that felt like we were missing out on lots of very fun designs. We ended up changing Master of Disguise for exactly that reason.
Cards that severely limit design space can sometimes be fine in rotating sets, because we only have to design around them while they are in the Standard Format, as long as they aren't broken in Wild. Because Wild will eventually have so many more cards than Standard, the power level there will be much higher. Most of that power level will come from synergies between the huge number of cards available, so sometimes being 'Tier 1' in Standard means that similar strategies are a couple tiers lower in Wild. We're still navigating what Wild balance should be like. It's allowed to be more powerful, but how much more powerful?
I think defining these kinds of terms helps us have more meaningful discussions about where we are doing things right, and where we have room to improve. Looking forward to reading your comments!
Quote from Ben BrodeI don't know where or even if I read this, but I remember something along the lines, that Wild should not even be balanced, just a clown fiesta of all the old cards to have fun with. Am I just misinformed or was this a thing and got scrapped later?
While "clown fiesta" is the driving goal for most of our decision-making, we would actually like Wild to be balanced. The problem is defining what 'balanced' means in that mode, because the power-level will always be much higher than in Standard. Does it mean all classes are at 50% and see exact equal play? Does it mean Freeze Mage is the best class but there are 4 other archetypes at tier 2? How frequently should we be balancing cards there?
There is a lot to learn about the right way to approach Wild, and what the expectations are from players who like to play there. It's something we'll need to figure out over time.
Great post Ben. Out of curiosity, how do you view linear or parasitic cards like Jade? They tend to open some amount of design space but at the tradeoff of interacting with fewer existing cards. Have you been happy with them so far?
I tend to like some parasitic designs, but I don't think we should do them exclusively. C'Thun was also a fun parasitic design.
While the stuff about limiting design space is all well and good (you should definitely move Magma Rager out of classic so we can all happily pay for another one in a future expansion without the risk of having four equally statted minions in a deck... :s) I would like to know how Ragnaros is impeding this design space?
Are there plans to add another card that deals 8 damage to a random enemy at the end of a turn? Do you want to add more cards that deal differing amounts to random enemies but feel that having too many of them would be bad for the game? Maybe a card that activates "end of turn abilities" immediately?.. Most likely.
Respectfully I would ask you to leave Rag alone. He's one of the few neutral legendaries from classic that is playable in various deck types.
Oh and P.S. I probably wouldn't like it at the time but right now I would sooner lose to multiple shots from Rag in one turn than die on turn 3 or 4 to this pirate bullshit we currently have. Followed by a "Well Played" from the other player as if they did something good and original.
Please add a "yawn" emote so I can burn them with the full extent of my hatred.
@Ramah_Palmer_Llama_Farmer Was about to leave almost the same comment! Well said. I feel the same way about that Rag "design space" comment from the last article.
No, you misunderstand the problem. The limiting factor is not the cards specific ability.
This is exactly the problem. Because its such a good card, that requires no support cards and can be played in so many decks, less powerful cards don't get a look in. The same problem existed for Dr Boom and Piloted Shredder. They all limit creative deck building because they are the most powerful option across multiple archetypes.
By that logic: Tirion and Grommash would also be "limiting" for design space, because they're also some of the best 8 drops in the game. However, there isn't an issue with them because they're considered iconic cards for Paladin and Warrior, respectively.
Well.... Ragnaros is iconic for Hearthstone overall. Few cards such as Ragnaros have been able to provide for so many highlight reels, enjoyed by so many, just by being played. The combination of RNG, flavour, and just pure fun in both competitive and casual environments that Ragnaros brings to the game is what Hearthstone is all about. Frankly, I know some people who literally started playing Hearthstone just because of Ragnaros (not referring to myself).
Also, who says that Ragnaros is so detrimental for design space? simply printing new cards to counter large minions such as Big game hunter is enough to create design space for more creative, and different 8 drops to be made. He is also very easily countered by aggro decks who can flood board, as stated by kureggu. As long as there remains numerous viable ways to deal with him, he shouldn't be a problem.
One must also think: maybe the reason he seems so "limiting" to design space is because Ragnaros is so powerful without the use of synergy? Maybe it's time that we consider the fact that power should not only come from stand-alone cards, but from synergy, or perhaps other mechanics that could be implemented in the future. If we think in this manner, and if team 5 really puts an effort to be creative, then really, Ragnaros is the far from "limiting" for design space. If anything, he serves as inspiration to create more cards with unique effects and interactions.
The issue here is that unlike Tirion and Grommash, Ragnaros is a neutral minion, and while they're all very high in power level, the fact that Ragnaros can be be used across all classes is what seems to bother some people.
I will admit, if there is somehow more powerful 8 drops like Ragnaros printed as neutral minions, then there will be an issue with design space. However, seeing as Ragnaros is currently a stand-alone 8 drop in power level for neutral minions, as long as more 8 drops as powerful as Ragnaros aren't printed as neutrals, there shouldn't be a problem.
Cheers.
I find it hilarious that day in and day out people come to this forum about hearthstone to complain about the game but why are you still coming here? I'm guessing you also still play an hour or more a day as well....but noooo I hate hs but I'm gonna make an effort to comment on every news story and design thread I can about how shit this game is while i buy some amazon coins on my phone and buy some packs and complain about the drop rates whole I get onto my desktop and help everyone on Hp understand how shit this game is.
Sheep
The same reason people who come into a town hall meeting don't just leave town. We like this game, and we want to see it get better.
LookingForOwls, I have a funny feeling you aren't the type of toxic person I'm talking about. Just saying you want to see it get better is one of the most mature comments I've seen from someone on this site. Everyone else is either a teenager or a excessively angry adult because It's all very childish. I enjoy the game, it can be annoying at times, they can be really frustrating loses but personally I think it's getting better. So +1 for positive community feedback
Ah, thx bro. Nicest thing that's ever been said to me on a forum.
This was a very satisfying read, thanks Brode!
ITT: People downvoted by sheep towing the line.
I honestly hope this is a troll post.
Be careful, if you argue against team 5 in this website you are going to get some hate.
I don't think you got what I meant. What I meant is that fanboys are blind to the truth and will attack you even if you're right or if you're just giving your opinion.
Did you miss the blue post just before this one where everyone hated on Brode and were upvoted for it?
It is not fanboyism if they agree with him at one point when they have criticized him ruthlessly until now. You are just trying to come up with excuses for why you are being downvoted.
The easy part about downvoting you is that you're not right. But you're not necessarily wrong either. Opinions, like assholes, everyone has them.
IMO team 5 has one goal and that's to make this game fun (as that keeps people playing and buying). They don't nerf stuff because they don't want players using certain cards unless they have some data to back it up. Because, you know, it's a business. A pretty big one, too.
On the other hand, if you make some overused unsound statements or just babyrage, you are going to get some hate too.
"End the game by turn 5 is one of those simple, yet complex philosophies we came up with. "
- with love, from team 5
Coming from the team that created cards that literally can decide a game within the opening hand and first turn. I don't think you have much to teach us in the way of depth or complexity Blizzard. You are lucky that people like to play control decks, because outside of tourneys, there is literally no reason or advantage to spend more than 5 minutes in a game of Hearthstone. Get the fuck out of here Blizzard. I am sick of hearing the same hollow rhetoric when it comes to your design choices.