Table of Contents
Welcome back to this week’s Developer Update! This week’s edition comes after the launch of the new Series 5 card Bastion and the latest OTA (aka the tech card massacre)! If you haven’t seen what was changed with the balance update, be sure to check out the official patch notes!
If you don’t know if Bastion is worth tokens or Snap Packs, make sure to check out our Bonus Challenge guide for a post-release review of the card and new decklists!
Answers and questions may be slightly rephrased for more clarity and ease of reading. This week’s topics will be divided into Card Specific Questions, Other Questions, and Questions From You!
See all individual questions and answers updated in real time!
Card Specific Questions
Q: Will Jocasta be able to work with cards that have already been activated?
A: Glenn “Yep!”
Q: Does Fallen One’s Max Energy ramp create the “bonus Energy” that Jim Hammond converts into repeatable start-of-turn Power?
A: Glenn “Jim Hammond checks for positive changes in the Energy you’re supposed to have from normal game progress, so anything that changes that (Fallen One, Wiccan, Psylocke) will count.
Similarly, Havok will ‘eat’ bonus Energy, but never cause a Power reduction because Jim doesn’t check for negative gains.”
Q: Why didn’t the bot overlords buff Master Mold during their OTA?
A: Glenn “Guess they really did know what they were doing 😉”
Q: Was Shadow King nerfed because he performed too well in Cerebro 2?
A: Glenn “No, not at all. C3 has been the best-performing Cerebro deck lately, actually.”
Q: Did the amount of Shang-Chi complaints contribute to his nerf decision?
A: Glenn “I think it’s fair to say that a vocal chunk of the community have long wondered what Snap would be like with a weaker Shang-Chi. So for a temporary experiment like this, it made sense to satisfy that curiosity. We did aim for (roughly) a design we think *could* be viable at some rate.”
Q: Why wasn’t Luke Cage targeted this OTA since he’s a global tech card?
A: Glenn “We targeted cards that were performing well or especially popular, and Luke wasn’t really doing either one.”
Q: Why was Killmonger nerfed?
A: Glenn “Seeing what might happen in a world where 1-Costs aren’t checked as harshly has pretty clear value as a big adjustment. Destroy decks have many flavors and tools, they won’t have this one for a couple of weeks.”
Other Questions
Q: Marvel Snap is particularly dense with live updates to the mechanics. Is there still a part of the process to update the game that you feel is ripe for compression? I’m curious how you would break down the timeline of a typical “live” gameplay change, I’d guess ignorantly in terms of duration, the cycle is:, 20% administrative, 50% technical design/coding, 30% testing/cert. Is this even a reasonable way to frame it?
A: Glenn “Localization is actually one of the largest constraints on our timing, as it takes at least 3-4 days and sometimes longer to get those strings updated for every language, assuming the update requires it. Everything else takes less than a day to do, though some might be dependent on another being complete.
Your framing is not really how we look at it, no. It’s more about structuring a workflow and figuring out what can fly simultaneously and what can’t, and then ordering tasks and assignments to suit. But once you figure that out, the process is efficient and replicable.”
Q: Is it about time the game got an action log/history in match?
A: Glenn “I don’t personally prize tracking as much of a skill in games I design, though I enjoy it myself. The primary reservations I have around more and more comprehensive UI, like a log, is that it can become cumbersome while also being too often correct to reference it. There’s an inflection point in there where the utility’s service to fun starts to decline in favor of service to optimal technical play. An example of this concept I often use is Super Smash Bros, where the imprecision of the KO mechanic makes the game more fun.
I do think Snap originally was too conservative here, and we’ve added a variety of small tweaks since release. We’ve also considered adding more info, including some work done mapping what that might look like. I personally think an upgrade is a ‘when,’ not an ‘if,’ but it’s not scheduled yet.”
Q: Could the season pass ever become purchasable with gold?
A: Glenn “The SP actually started as a gold option for purchase before the game released, but was changed based on negative impacts to the game economy. I wasn’t here and couldn’t easily find the relevant patch, so I can’t really speak to the specifics of that change.”
Q: Do you plan on keeping any of the balance changes from this OTA?
A: Glenn “While we don’t actively intend to keep any of the changes, we’re open to seeing what the data says. My guess is if any do ‘stay’ they’ll still get some Power or maybe Cost buffs to find a middle ground and balance things out better.”
Q: Was there (or is there) any thought to making the Seventh Cosmos trigger on turn 4 or something? It currently is cool, but lacks meaningful impact on turn 1.
A: Glenn “Yes, but this wound up removing the meaning from other locations early on–catch-22. It was especially awkward alongside stuff like Asgard, Westview, etc. where how it worked out wasn’t always clear, either. So we preferred this execution.”
Q: Some of us that bought the super premium pass got an avatar sent to our inbox. Can we expect any more previous purchases (like ultimate variants) getting Avatars sent to players?
A: Griffin “Those were delivered to SPP purchasers as the Avatars were in the marketing for the Pass but were not originally delivered.
We don’t have plans to deliver any more Avatars for other purchases.”
Q: What is the most requested feature at the moment?
A: Glenn “It varies depending on the forum, but a few of the things I see the most:
* Split system revisions for Mastery
* Casual mode
* Draft mode
* Prebuilt decks
* Deck slots”
Q: Are you really considering adding those players requests?And is there any possibility to get an offline Marvel Snap game mode for trying your decks against bots?
A: Glenn “1A. We’re working on draft modes as we can—I’ve personally designed several prototypes. It would be one of the most complex modes we’ve made, so the stakes are high and we want to get it right. That’s contrasts with something like future Grand Arena runs, which also require a lot of work but have defined scope and proven adoption.
1B. We’ll continue aiming game modes at a variety of vibes, and we are considering ways to make the game friendlier to lower stakes play and game quality selection in general. But no, we still don’t plan to add a mode purely for casual play. Even assuming it would be a positive for the game, which is not a given, we have a ton of things we’d rather dedicate those resources to.
2. Very unlikely for offline, our game just isn’t built to work like that. We’re reliant on server authority to govern a lot of it. It’s possible that PvE experiences could join the fray.”
Q: Why is adding deck slots not as simple as adding more? It seems like an easy add, but things aren’t always as simple as they seem.
A: Glenn “It’s never as simple as it seems 🙂 There are some UI/UX factors beyond it being a variable. It’s also an ‘elder player’ feature in that it’s useless to new users for a while but can negatively affect their menu designs, so we’ll want to gate it. There are also ongoing projects that place different demands on deckbuilder design, like game modes and collection improvements, and we’d rather measure twice and cut once.”
Q: Why can’t the team give a simple answer on what a short term roadmap looks like?
A: Griffin “The simple answer is that our plans for the next 3-6 months have been changing so often that the info we would have provided would now be outdated. Based on evolving player feedback we’ve been adjusting priorities.
We’re working on sharing these details with you all.”
Q: Any plans to bring back in-game bundles or the vibranium track to the webshop to get webshop points?
A: Griffin “Yes, we want to bring ALL bundles in-game to the Web Shop eventually but it does require some extra development to do so.”
Q: Have you considered adding card rotations to the base game, or introducing a new mode with that applied?
A: Glenn “We’ve considered it–rotation is a core aspect of many CCGs, with a lot of upsides. But being able to opt into constraints is a lot of fun–having them forced can be a different story. We’re reluctant to pursue traditional rotation for a variety of reasons with Snap, not the least of which is how invested we know players are in their current cards and decks, including their cosmetics.
If we do pursue some larger paradigm shift one day, it’ll be carefully and with the input of creators and players to ensure we’re maintaining a great experience.”
Q: Why do you think giving no roadmap is better than just updating players on changes that occur as you go?
A: Glenn “In the past, it’s often become a flashpoint for negative community sentiment and even longer discussions when we necessarily have to pivot.
I’d much rather community conversations focus around the things you love and even hate about Snap than the things you dislike or don’t understand about our internal sprint planning. The former is super useful to us!”
Q: When Alliances released, you wrote this exciting message about it being “just the beginning” with lots of teasers. WhY happened to that?
A: Glenn “When we wrote that, we were hoping to build upon a stronger foundation than our initial Alliances release provided, so we’d like to improve that before moving forward. So while we’ve got some plans, we deprioritized those this year.”
Q: I noticed an absence of a Catch-Up mechanic for returning Players in your list of most requested features. Is this being worked on, or is it on the back burner in lieu of the other features?
A: Griffin “Definitely being worked on right now. To be clear, Glenn’s list wasn’t exhaustive. We’re aware of many more requests from players as well.”
A: Glenn “For clarity, I was asked what I saw people asking for a lot, not what we’re working on. That one just isn’t as frequent as the rest from my perspective, though I’d argue it’s more important than most of them (hence why it’s receiving internal attention already).”
Q: Why don’t you have Cost modifiers displayed on cards in play?
A: Glenn “In play, we disable these modifiers for systems clarity as well as player clarity. Trying to figure out what Silver-Surfer or Muir Island will pump should be really easy, no math involved. That’s more important than remembering if Surge hit your 2-Cost before you play your Beast for most players and our accessibility philosophy.
I do have tracking players’ available Energy during staging on my wishlist, though.”
Q: Have you considered adding a “trigger” keyword to cards like Bishop or Angela?
A: Glenn “We’ve debated it, but decided not to do so. We don’t currently plan to call those abilities out specifically enough to need a keyword. We also don’t have a keyword we think is clean and unique enough to replace the existing words, which would be the other primary benefit. Just adding ‘Trigger:’ onto Angela’s text isn’t useful enough, and would add a vocabulary word for new players.”
Q: Do you guys know the plot of Avengers Doomsday already to prep for content?
A: Griffin “Haha, no. We don’t get that level of information from MCU projects.”
Q: What kind of early info does Marvel actually share with you from unreleased content?
A: Glenn “We work with Marvel Games, which manages many Marvel gaming licenses, not Marvel Studios. They negotiate access on our behalf when we request future-facing information. The information we request depends on what we’re trying to do.”
Q: What are the appearance rates of locations, especially newer ones?
A: Glenn “We don’t publish that info, as while it is a curiosity to some it’s not actually useful. We use a weight-based system, so the actual percentages change a little every time a new location is released. We’ve also recently added safeguards that reduce the frequency of seeing multiple highly restrictive locations in a game, further complicating the math.”
Q: It seemed like Grand Arena was a hit, so could we see it return in the near future?
A: Glenn “I won’t confirm dates that specifically, but we’re working on future runs for Grand Arena, including new characters, in the near future.”
Q: Has the team considered some type of cube protection?
For example if both players snap, the winner gets 8 and the loser loses 4.
A: Glenn “There are mathematical barriers to some executions of staking. For example, with just the change you suggested, you should always play for 8–if you have a 34% winrate, you’ll earn cubes.
We have experimented with no staking (High Voltage, Grand Arena) and friendly staking (Sanctum Showdown). We have another twist on friendly staking coming soon–I look forward to hearing how players like it.”
Q: Are you happy with the number of players hitting infinite? If not, have you considered adding more bots or rewarding more cubes for opponent retreats?
A: Glenn “As prestige ranks go in CCGs, Infinite’s fairly easy to achieve. We purposefully aimed it to be way easier than systems like Hearthstone’s legend rank, and that continues to bear out.
We haven’t considered the suggestions you noted–they don’t align philosophically or mathematically with what we’re doing, respectively.”
Q: What is the general vibe over on your side for where the game’s at vs. where it needs to be? t’s no secret that the playerbase has shrunk from where it once was. Are we still in a good, sustainable place?
A: Glenn “I think we’ve seen some challenges this year–getting our game turned off for no reason, self-publishing from scratch, and some unforced errors on our end. But we’ve learned a lot and developed several features and processes we’re proud of. We’ve got plenty more SNAP planned, and I’m excited for many of our upcoming updates.”
Q: Why doesn’t the ranked ladder have floors?
A: Glenn “Installing rank floors doesn’t work with the snap mechanic. If you’re at or near a floor, you can push every game to 8 cubes in a way that’s irrelevant to you but costs your opponent, which isn’t a fair stake.”
Q: Are the OTA changes actually real until another OTA? Will there be a faster OTA to change things back?
A: Griffin “This is real. This is the metagame now.
No plans for another OTA between now and our regularly scheduled one two weeks from now.”
Q: How did you come up with the idea for this OTA?
A: Glenn “The idea was just a pitch on how we could make the season memorable in a unique way, and it felt like an appropriate gimmick for the theme.”
Q: Would you do another OTA like this?
A: Glenn “Maybe? Probably not like this, and probably not often, but we might find a similar opportunity.”
Q: Will the next OTA be simply “we reverted everything”, or will there be new changes too?
A: Glenn “We’ll include a normal-sized balance update along with any reversions in two weeks.”
Q: What’s your favorite complaint players have? Do you have situations where you thought the game should do XYZ, but the team went with ABC, and it turns out players wanted XYZ? So you use their complaints to showcase your ideas?
A: Glenn “As a designer, my favorite complaint to hear about a game I’m working on is that the game balance is off, because a) it’s always fixable and b) when it’s loud it means everything else is probably going pretty well.
I think ‘keeping score’ is a fairly toxic thing to do in a collaborative environment–it’s a very human thing to do so I won’t pretend I haven’t had those thoughts, but my view on it stands and I wouldn’t trot such a thing out on Discord.
When I oppose something my teammates favor, it’s my job to a) present the best and clearest case for my position that I can and b) commit to executing whatever we decide as a team to the best of my ability. When we wind up doing the ‘wrong thing’ there’s a good chance I didn’t do a) well enough, and that’s on me.”
Questions From You!
Each week, I ask readers of the weekly dev update to leave their questions down in the comment section. That way we can ask those questions on your behalf, or let you know the answers if those questions have been asked before! I read each comment you leave, so I will be adding this section at the end of each week’s edition to highlight your questions that you asked last week!
Unfortunately, I don’t have any answers to reader questions from last edition. If I do get answers later, I will include them in the next edition!
Keep Your Questions and Feedback Coming!
That’s all for this week’s update! Be sure to check back here at Marvel Snap Zone for next week’s update! If you enjoyed the amount of content in this edition, make sure to keep asking your questions to the developers by submitting it in their official Discord in the “#ask-the-team” channel. If you have questions and don’t use Discord, leave your questions for the developers in the comment section here, and I will make sure your question has been answered by the devs!
If you have feedback or changes you would like to see with these weekly updates, also let us know in the comment section!
More Content