I feel like clash royale ruined one of its strong points which was its relatively simple but skill based gameplay, nowadays evolutions and tower troops have messed with that and it's sad
Evolutions made the rarity thing even more illogical. Now, even Common cards feel too complex to be on that rarity because of their Evolutions. Rarities are really now a shadow of their former self, with only Champion being the one that is still true to its name.
lol one elixir Evo skeleton can 3 crown you if I split my troops and bait your spells because it's a walking 5 elixir grave yard all in 4 skeletons 😹💀 the OG Devs that created the skeletons didn't attend them to be used like that but this current Dev team is sooo hell bent at destroying any form of years of balancing the game has done till now just to make some money in the expense of the game losing its point/ very core and point
@@belloayodeji8459I think what they should do but probably never will is take a look at all the cards and look at their mechanics and see which cards have super simple mechanics which have super complex mechanics and rearrange which cards belong to which rarities. Maybe for evolutions they could follow a similar idea commons have the simplest mechanics and legendaries if they decide to give them evolutions should have the most complex mechanics.
I personally think evolution is a completely different rarity, the level of complexity of evolutions are somewhat similar. And the fact that evolutions can only be obtained by purchasing and not from chests (?)
Battle healer being a rare kinda makes sense cause the heal spell came out before her, if im not mistaken, so "healing" was not a unique thing only she did. Of course, when heal spell died and we got HSpirit, they COULD have put her rarity up a little, maybe epic, cause healing was more of her thing now, but anyways. Best card, best design. Give us that Shield Maiden from clash mini as a champion or I'll commit depressed suici.
Card strength shouldn’t play into their rarity anyways. It’s actively bad when legendaries are more powerful than commons. Card complexity, though, makes more sense at higher rarities and is the right way to design an incentive. And they have done that with Champions. It’s not as bad as you make it seem in this video
I paused the video the moment he mentioned how "some of the best cards are commons and some of the worst are legendaries". Card rarity is not supposed to factor into balance. I don't want to spend 8 minutes listening to lazy commentary.
@@mimicmage That sort of game design philosophy is directly what leads to the most anti-consumer products on the market. If that’s really what you believe, then go play Raid Shadow Legends, you’re sure to love it
@@beanburrito4405 anti consumer? Y'all complaining are not making the purchase your complaining it's a cash grab from the game anti anything is your winning and complaining the game should die if everyone supports this weak shit
Battle healer is a rare and yet have a special ability The only rarity matters now is champions because they have special ability and most of them are good Expect golden knight
@@Ry-li2ds zap was a spell and ice spirit was melee and died when attacking. The two wizards were the only that could sustainably attack using the elements and could also apply them from range.
I think part of it is that it's almost impossible to come up with new cards that should be common, without it being redundant and there being something that does the exact same thing. Commons are meant to be cards that do very basic things, like barbarians and archers. But how are you going to add a basic ranged troop that isn't just the same as archers. You need to make cards more complex for them to make sense to add to the game. I think they have changed what it means to be a common or rare so they can add more of them, which actually makes it better for F2P.
People always say this like it’s a bad thing but it’s just… not? It felt super crazy before because of how rare they were. Getting legendaries less was not a positive thing lmao
@galaxyrend4512 before when you'd have to spend thousands to max out it made it so much more of a real grind (playing the game) cause no one could be dropping that money but RU-vidrs. Now everyone is maxed out no one is unique for there cards being high level
@@lolbitmanss_ yeah, true but firecraker , a "common" has almost the same reach, more damage, can deal better whit swarms, has more hp and have that jump back which increases her survavility even further for the same elixir While the "legendary" princess has just a little more reach, less damage, and can be killed by ANYTHING. The survivality alone turns the firecraker better than the princess most of the time and firecraker is "common"
@@nunobatista5822 the survivability or how good a card is doesn't determine what makes a legendary though, its the function, which makes princess a perfect legendary as its main function, being able to target the tower from the bridge, is unique enough to land it in the legendary category while firecracker basically shares a function with bowler.
@@lolbitmanss_ but if a common card is often best than a legendary card in every way whats the point of the weaker one being legendary? Just because a little gimmick? Firecraker also has those like the jump back and even has a evolution to completly obliterate the princess Normally in any game you would use a legendary because it was extremely hard to get, but its pretty usefull, often being better than others options in similar roles. In this case if you have both you will probably use Firecraker 90% of the time over Princess. Firecraker deals more damage, in a bigger area and since she can survive far more than the princess means she is more usefull. And the only advantage the princess has, her reach, is not enough to compete. Also the fact that Firecraker is easier to evolve is absurd. A legendary card being completely suprassed by a common card in pretty much every way is absurd
I think what they should do but probably never will is take a look at all the cards and look at their mechanics and see which cards have super simple mechanics which have super complex mechanics and rearrange which cards belong to which rarities. Maybe for evolutions they could follow a similar idea commons have the simplest mechanics and legendaries if they decide to give them evolutions should have the most complex mechanics.
actually yes. but I think they made him a common in order to teach people to play the game. Up until now for me its the only enemy card that I use to activate king tower, but even thinking about it is kind of revolutionary for a new player
The problem is, the more Supercell adds levels to the game, the more the rarity gets dilluted. The whole point of rarity was that commons start at the bottom while legendaries (and champions) started at a pretty high level
I remember when the release of legendaries was, ya know, legendary. Like a card that nukes everything but at the cost of a long charge, a card that was very squishy but can hit the towers at safe distances. Back then, these were unheard of and it's what made them special.
The problem was is that there is only a certain amount of “simple” cards you can add before you start getting too similar cards, so when supercell wanted to add these cool complex and unique cards they had to put them in rarity that’s don’t suit them
I didn’t even think about this. Well there’s only 5 commons you could argue don’t belong there: Skeleton barrel, firecracker, royal recruites royal delivery, and royal giant. Royal giant makes the most because regular giant is a rare maybe both of those giants should be commons? Their also can’t be more than 5 if any rares, epics, or légendaires that don’t belong.
You mentioned that adding more legendaries makes it harder to get the one you want but this is incorrect since the odds of getting a legendaries is directly affected by the amount of legendaries there are in the game which balances out the fact that the one you want is harder to find amongst them.
I think the purpose of rarities now is to control the management of magic items and card levelling. They design the cards so you generally run a mixture of all rarities in a deck so you can level more simultaneously rather than being bottlenecked
I think one reason for the rarities that is a bit more in depth is the ease in getting them. Certain cards are good even at a lower level because the do something cool (like which, tornado and skarmy). Other cards are not nearly as good if they are not tournament standard because the interaction get significantly worse if under levels (like ice golem, musketeer and ice spirit). When these cards are under levelled the musketeer dies to fireball, ice spirit does not get to the tower, and ice golem does not kill skarmy when it dies. For this reason I prefer that they are a lower rarity so that these cards can be more easily upgraded.
The thing is that rarities should probably also apply to how "badass" a card is. Pekka being just a rare would feel lame. No matter how simple the mechanics, how it feels to play it is also important
rarity is also how easily a card should be leveled especially at the time, if everyone is going around with a max pekka then it would completely change the interactions at the time, so for the pekka i’ll explain it like that. same with the legendaries. the easier card or common can be upgraded to match higher rarities strength
The reason clash added way more legendaries is because there’s far less to do with common cards once you have the base ones. You got your swarms, basic attackers and mini tanks, etc. Adding more legendaries is way more cool and adds allows for much more variety in the new cards.
I think that a logical way to determine the rarity of a card upon release would be to see how important is leveling up that card, and thus considering how much does it rely on particular abilities (such slow effects, range, duration for spells or buildings or the fact that a troop can respawn) rather than statistics (such as HP and DPS). That's because when leveling up a card one increases its statistics by 10%, and this means that if a card is harder to get (i.e. it is of a higher rarity), it is better for it to rely on things that do not need to be leveled up to be strong or useful. In this sense I can see how legendary cards are usually cards have a peculiar trait, as those traits don't usually increase in value when leveling up, and thus the card is useful even if it's harder to get. In my opinion the rarity of every card should be reconsidered applying this thought, but now it's too late, as people have spent money to get Mega (Thrash) Knight to level 14 (if not even 15) and thus it would be quite a scam for them.
<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="242">4:02</a> I think the reason the Battle Healer and Heal Spirit are rare cards is because the Heal Spell was a rare card.
you're right, rarity matters from the mechanics of the cards but it also counts how powerful and how much damage it does, and how much health it has, for example the battle healer has a unique mechanic but anyway it does little damage and has little life
How strong a card is stat-wise has 0 effect on its rarity. Princess does little damage and has little health but it's legendary. Royal giant does high damage but it's common.
I think the idea of complexity got more arbitrary over time, as skill levels rise and players get better, so the less complex recent cards show up in lower rarities compared to other more complex cards getting rarity.
i didnt watch the video but i 100% agree with the title and thumbnail, the problem is that you cant realy remove them after they have been in the game for so long
The reason for one chamoion per deck is not because they are so powerful. It is the same as the reason for the three card cycle. You only have one ability button, so there can always be only one champion
I think what they should do but probably never will is take a look at all the cards and look at their mechanics and see which cards have super simple mechanics which have super complex mechanics and rearrange which cards belong to which rarities. Maybe for evolutions they could follow a similar idea commons have the simplest mechanics and legendaries if they decide to give them evolutions should have the most complex mechanics.
common rare and epic rarities don't really matter and they shouldn't, they seem to be chosen by the troop role, elixir cost and complexity as you said, but I also think they are given based on how easy it is to level then up, it doesn't matter at high level gameplay but in mid ladder if some cards were a lower/higher rarity it would probably make the gameplay a lot worse but being too high leveled or low leveled
I play games on mobile phone and ps and I can say that gaming has dropped a lot, microtransactions are now also in the games you buy, so you have to make an effort to find something interesting regardless of where you play
I think part of the issue is that supercell only wants to release cards with new and unique effects because they are what generate the most hype and interest. If the archers were released in 2024, they would be seen as boring and lazy on the developers’ part. However if every new card needs to be unique and interesting then it’s hard to make cards for the lower rarities.
In the start of the video i wondered of pekka but i thought, the way you play pekka is very skillful, with most expensive common cards, you can just play them and expect results but with pekka this is not the case at all, it is stupid easy to counter on its own so it is rare, but its elexir cost and mass stats dont allow it to be a rare, also it wouldnt make sense to be lower than the mini pekka at the time of release
Honestly, the card complexity logic doesn't really make sense it didn't even apply at launch Fireball and rocket are really simple- just deal damage to troops that it hit. And they are rare cards. Mini Pekka is no different from knight and barbarians. Just a simple melee damage dealer. Rare. (you also covered Pekka)
one thing has to be said here - if the devs don't make money, the game doesn't exist. I agree with you beyond that, but its really hard to balance the dev's need to make money with our need to enjoy a balanced game. so overall I still think clash royale is great
I dont think it is just for money tbh. Its just that at this point, there are so many cards, which means new cards NEED some sort of special ability to feel actually unique, but just having every card be a legendary is also kind of boring (e.g. the goblin drill, which was supposed to be legendary but was made epic before release cause they had just released another legendary)
Card rarity shouldn't be a factor in balancing. This is how you get extreme pay to win games. Many other card games are like this the difference between rarities is the uniqueness in gameplay, mechanics, and character design. As it should be.
Counter argument: You're half wrong. Most legendaries come with a unique clutch/mechanic, WHILE being cost-effective, compared to the other rarities. That's why there's no common Royal Ghost, nor common Princess, etc., they're cheap. Try imagining a 3 elixir common card that can shoot at the tower without crossing the bridge, or a 3 elixir card that freezes things in place; If legendaries were any other rarity, they'd be worth at least 1 more elixir. That said, there definitely is a profit motive with the new cards they're adding.
Then honestly there is no reason why battle healer is rare, egiant is epic but the night witch is legendary, at the start maybe it made sense but after a few years new cards have been put into random rarities, and that honestly pisses me off
@@Larry1631 yeah, battle healer should definitely be an epic. As for night witch, she becomes a big problem when your tower is distracted and your baby dragon out of cycle(assuming there's no golems or giants to distracting it). An epic rarity night witch would probably have cost 5 elixir like the other 2 witches, making her a bad card again.
I gotta disagree about them making Legendaries more for money, there's only so far you cam go with "common cards are basic" style of design before it gets boring and cards like Elixir Golem, Fire Cracker, Electro Giant could br bumped up in rarity and they'd still fit in. Royale is at the point where if a new card is added it _has_ to be unique, but then that would mean every new card ks a Legendary but there's a reason they aren't.
Your reasoning doesn’t make sense. It’s so they can make more money which is why a lot are higher rated, but pretty much all epics/legendaries deserve to be in that tier. It’s actually the commons and rares that are commonly in the wrong place. They can’t just bring out 30 legendaries
The "devs" have nothing to do with it... They just do what they're told to do, what they're paid to do... Blame the directors board at supercell who took those poor decision 💩
Problem, they aren't as bad as you describe like they are bad but not that bad, the reason they aren't consistent is dependent on the card but the ones that come to mind are the royal giant and the elite barbarians which were of lower rarity because it means more play styles for lower latter which granted backfired horribly but that doesn't change the fact that it was ment for them, also higher rarity aren't that hard to level uo if you know what you are doing also they nerf cards when they are overpowered day one which dismantles your claim that supercell is all for the money and are willing to turn clash Royale into a pay to win game rather than a skill based game, now they do want the money and are willing to do a lot of things that players would not like but at the same time they are willing to sacrifice short term gains in exchange to allow themselves to maintain profits mid to long term, stop being so negative and see that they aren't Nestle or ea they are rather normal not willing to sacrifice the entire game and business just to squeeze every last bit of money out of a player no matter how much they want to, they are a company who weighs the pros and cons of each action and making more cards for profit isn't one of them mostly because of the fact that they would have rushed more cards like they did in the past which they stopped because the cards were a buggy mess and players didn't like that with the perfect example being the executioner which on arrival was a vary buggy mess, if they were as bad as you say they are then this game would be more similar to clash of clans which is certainly a vary pay to win but that was that type of game really
lol the fact one elixir Evo skeleton can 3 crown you if I split my troops and bait your spells because it's a walking 5 elixir grave yard all in 4 skeletons 😹💀 the OG Devs that created the skeletons didn't attend them to be used like that but this current Dev team is sooo hell bent at destroying any form of years of balancing the game has done till now just to make some money in the expense of the game losing its point/ very core and point Evo firecracker now has slow effect and more damage to be like a walking poison spell poison is an epic card but a Evo common card now shoots the spell with a massive splash radius and great sight range again
honestly, I never felt there are too many cards that dont feel like their specific rarity. RG like you said is fair, but the only card I feel like absolutely ignored rarities is the firecracker. knockback after every shot and projectiles that have an 11 tile range, which is absolutely insane when you consider the princess has a 9 tile range and magic archers arrow travels 11 tiles, so that kind of range was obviously reserved for higher rarity cards. She absolutely shouldve been a legendary, epic wouldve even felt low
that statement is so untrue, it it was true, then how the hell did I get all my rares to level 14 before epics? I still dont have enough cards to get every epic to level 14 while all my rares easily got to 14 first and commons even easier.
