PDA

View Full Version : how i get wildcardS??



Zydar_GG
05-03-2014, 01:11 AM
7 days rewards y get ONE tomorrow

the hon packs gave wildcards some time ago, now they dont so how i get the cards i need?? :( the daily quest i dont have cards to win 10 duels with academy for example :/

gabusan
05-03-2014, 01:28 AM
Well, if you buy something with seals, you will get wild cards. You can also complete campaign missions with all factions. And daily quests, of course. But we all know these are not reliable. Even if you manage to win the needed duels with a certain faction, sooner or later you will get the "win a swiss tournament" quest. And until you complete that one, say goodbye to quests that reward you with wildcards. Do try not to burn all your tickets trying to complete it.

Getting wildcards in a reliable, regular way is something of the past under the new economy. The only thing reliable for wild cards now is the weekly login reward. So take that wild card you are getting tomorrow and put it on a display case. You are not going to get many.

Zydar_GG
05-03-2014, 02:39 AM
so sad

the greed of the human kind

ArcaneAzmadi
05-03-2014, 03:05 AM
They don't want you to get wild cards, they want you to buy seals. Sorry, you're screwed. As are we all.

IamAndy
05-03-2014, 04:27 AM
This game is turning to P2W game, you need to at least buy some base II set box first, that will help you to get 25 wild cards for 1000 seals and cards to complete the campaigns, and you might get some hero to use to complete campaign. Base II set box is a wonder for starter, at least 2 needed to get a solid overall deck, and you can master one using the wild card you have.

Really hard for beginners ... I really hope they give more advantage for new comers.

Breakhorn
05-03-2014, 07:43 AM
I don't understand why beginners NEED wildcards, how peoples were playing when wildcards didn't exist ?
I don't say the game isn't pay2win in open, but the standard is far from it. I don't remember the game being unfun when I had a kelthor deck with one Vulture :)

gabusan
05-03-2014, 08:52 AM
I agree, a beginner does not really need wild cards, because opening packs is enough to get new cards. It is only in the late game when you need them, when opening packs is an exercise in frustration.

zapp626
05-03-2014, 08:57 AM
You get wildcards by paying. And no, I don't think thats as bad as it sounds, it's only problematic because it was promised differently and the high ranks are clugged with people with who have complete decks.

Breakhorn, sure np there. As long as you stay away from champion level and don't try to compete in tournaments you should be fine.

Guerthal
05-03-2014, 09:04 AM
You get wildcards by paying. And no, I don't think thats as bad as it sounds, it's only problematic because it was promised differently and the high ranks are clugged with people with who have complete decks.

Breakhorn, sure np there. As long as you stay away from champion level and don't try to compete in tournaments you should be fine.

Since it takes about 25 wins over loses to arrive in Champion, you're basically saying lose purposefully or lose cause you reached Champion 1? Or was it just sarcasm? It's hard to tell.

thanasis
05-03-2014, 10:56 AM
As long as you stay away from champion level and don't try to compete in tournaments you should be fine.

I take this as sarcasm.

thanasis
05-03-2014, 11:00 AM
I don't understand why beginners NEED wildcards, how peoples were playing when wildcards didn't exist ?
I don't say the game isn't pay2win in open, but the standard is far from it. I don't remember the game being unfun when I had a kelthor deck with one Vulture :)

Here is your answer:

Some are saying "but why does a new player need WC?". A new player was able TO START COLLECTING WC for the time he would need them. Nobody forced him to spend them right away. I played casually for about a month before the expansion, never spent a WC and have accumulated about 120 of them. And I'm not yet Champion rank. With the new system I would have none of them. With the old I have 120!
As things are now a player will be able to start collecting WC exactly when he would normally have needed to start spending them to make 1-2 strong decks. That's completely irrational.

malkorion
05-03-2014, 11:07 AM
You buy seals.

AmineM2
05-03-2014, 11:13 AM
With the new system I would have none of them

This is not correct.

You would still get the WC from the campaigns.

Surely less than 120, but you would have something to begin with.

thanasis
05-03-2014, 12:02 PM
This is not correct.

You would still get the WC from the campaigns.

Surely less than 120, but you would have something to begin with.

Even if a new player spends all his gold just to buy the starter decks so that he can make decks for every faction, he can hardly complete all the campaigns with those decks, especially the FW and 5T ones. But how many WC would that give him anyway?
I mentioned my 120 WC just as a rough measure to compare the 2 systems, because I hadn't spent my gold having in mind to maximize my WC accumulation either. I have bought 2 Champion boxes and 90 reinforcement packs, just because I wanted to complete the Base Set achievements. Had I bought much more expansion packs instead, I would have many more WC than 120.

Guerthal
05-03-2014, 01:40 PM
You get only 50 WCs from the campaign if you finish everything. Not even 2 epic cards.

Breakhorn
05-03-2014, 02:16 PM
If you want to build that Deleb deck as a new player, yeah, 50WC is crap. On the other hand, 4 epics from the faction you like (Banshee, Caller of the Void, Dervish Master ...) is only 28 WC, you add the good unique from that faction you like, 35 WC.
Oh my god, Zardoc looks so cool, I will totally buy it : 42 WC spent.
WC weren't mean to build whole decks, but you can still buy 4 Epics as a new players to start a strongy deck. As an older player, with already one strong deck, you can use them to fill your collection with those so cool Lava Spawn.

Guerthal
05-03-2014, 03:31 PM
Dark Assassin, Wolf Captain, Naga Tactician, Hasafah The Unseen Arrow, Glyph-Carved Golem, Chaos Imp, Nyorai Sairensa, Eleonore Voice of Harmony, Blood Caller, Hikyu Fist of Fury, Damran The tainted, The Gate To Nowhere, The Song Of The Lost, The Silent Death, The Might Of Nature, The Forbidden Flame, The Light of Tomorrow, The Strenght Of The Sea, Throne of Renewal, Kat's Grand Finale and finally the five tower buildings. Those cards are all epic cards behind the pay wall. Any of those cards is 28 WCs for 1.

Rotting Mummy, Void Shade, Sahaar Hunter, Pao Deathseeker, Moonsilk Spider, Void Keeper, Soul-Consuming Wraith, Void Sycophant, Vestal, Shanriya Priestess, Taweret Warrior, Djinn Mentor, Immaculate Glory, Hellfire Juggernaut, Living Nightmare, Blacksull Vulture Rider, Sayama Predator, Sun Crusader, Pit Lord, Chaos Sorceress, Fate Sealer, Celestial, Abyssal Lord, Kensei, Ghost Dragon, Sacred Kirin. Those are all RARE creatures behind a pay wall. Any of those cards is 20 WCs for 1.

The idea when the WCs were created was to help people get those 1-2 cards they were missing. I.E. a player who had spent MORE THAN HIS FAIR SHARE of gold/seals and was not close from having a set of 4 of an important card for one of his deck because of bad RNG when opening those packs. That player could turn around and finish his deck. Now, 50WCs is a joke, you can't even finish a set of 4 RARE cards if you only had 1 already. You'd be 10 WCs short!. And then that's not all. We're talking of the price a player would pay RIGHT NOW. Back then, you'd have gotten those 3 missing rare cards for cheaper as long as they were not from the brand new expansion.

If you wanted to complete a BS2 deck with those wildcards you could buy around 5 epic cards and 3 rare ones and then you'd be out of WCs. For good.

If you were a brand new player and added to that all the rewards you get from the campaign and from leveling up to level 20 for example. And then you spent those seals cause you didn't know better. You'd get 8 more WCs from buying packs of BS2 with your seals.

Now if I did all the calculation for what you could have gotten in WCs prior to the last expansion, and then I factored in the price of those pre-expansion rares and epic cards, you'd think it was Christmas ALL YEAR LONG!

A fair point here would be to say: Hey, you know maybe they were giving out too much back then. And you might be right. But those players are still playing against the newcomers and for them, it's as easy as playing a game of Scrabble against a toddler.

So to all the new players that don't get it yet I say this: You'll just NEVER have a proper competitive Open deck. Period. Not with the current price in WCs.

Vengyre
05-03-2014, 04:27 PM
BS2 cards are absurdly cheap, they're cheaper than they've been before! I wanted to make a gimmick Namtaru Chaneller deck, now it became much easier.
And not every deck is meant to be cheap. Ariana is, Deleb isn't. Pretty much the same as it was before with, say, Crag and Cassandra. Cheap and expensive decks. But both perform well.
Open... yeah, open is doomed. Hope they'll put Emilio for gold.

AmineM2
05-03-2014, 06:34 PM
Even if a new player spends all his gold just to buy the starter decks so that he can make decks for every faction, he can hardly complete all the campaigns with those decks,

He doesn't need to complete the campaigns to get the wild cards. Every expansions' mission is rewarded with 2.


But how many WC would that give him anyway?

Around 40. Maybe 10 of them are difficult to obtain.

And you said:


With the new system I would have none of them

I think we can agree that 40 wild cards is much more than 'non'.


I mentioned my 120 WC just as a rough measure to compare the 2 systems, because I hadn't spent my gold having in mind to maximize my WC accumulation either. I have bought 2 Champion boxes and 90 reinforcement packs, just because I wanted to complete the Base Set achievements. Had I bought much more expansion packs instead, I would have many more WC than 120.

That's exactly why the old system was changed: collecting cards was so easy and unchallenging they had to do something. The old system let you build your first t1 deck after 20-30 hours of play. Was it a collecting card game anymore?


BS2 cards are absurdly cheap, they're cheaper than they've been before! I wanted to make a gimmick Namtaru Chaneller deck, now it became much easier.
And not every deck is meant to be cheap. Ariana is, Deleb isn't. Pretty much the same as it was before with, say, Crag and Cassandra. Cheap and expensive decks. But both perform well.
Open... yeah, open is doomed. Hope they'll put Emilio for gold.

This!

thanasis
05-04-2014, 08:39 AM
That's exactly why the old system was changed: collecting cards was so easy and unchallenging they had to do something. The old system let you build your first t1 deck after 20-30 hours of play. Was it a collecting card game anymore?

I'll accept your numbers. That means a casual player needed about a month to make ONE strong deck. But the fun in this game is not to play the same deck again and again, but to have a variety of good decks. So a casual player would be able to make 2-3 good decks before each expansion was released, when he would have to start buying new cards again to complete these decks with the new expansion. That was about it. Not even one strong deck for each faction. If he wanted to have more variety in his game, he would have to either play more or spend money.
Was he able to play for free? Absolutely yes! He just couldn't have all the variety that this game can offer.
AND THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED TO STOP.
They didn't just increase the time one would have to play to get a good deck. They made it almost impossible!
They didn't just make collecting cards more difficult, they made it almost impossible for the casual player to really enjoy this game by having a chance at being competitive.
Because now a casual player either doesn't have quests that give WC or even if he has, it's almost impossible for him to get those WC because these quests require from him to have several good decks already. Even if he is able to complete those quests, he would have to spend all of his playing time, playing with inferior decks he won't enjoy, just to get the WC.
Do you get the difference? Previously one could improve his deck by playing with the deck he wanted to play and had fun playing. Now in order to improve his deck he has to spend most of his time playing with OTHER decks, that quite possibly he doesn't enjoy. So what's the point to improve your deck since you would hardly use it?
Is it a fun card game anymore?

AmineM2
05-04-2014, 11:49 AM
I'll accept your numbers. That means a casual player needed about a month to make ONE strong deck. But the fun in this game is not to play the same deck again and again, but to have a variety of good decks.

I strongly disagree.

If you are a casual you don't need a variety of top decks. You have no time to play them, nevermind learn how to do that properly.


So a casual player would be able to make 2-3 good decks before each expansion was released, when he would have to start buying new cards again to complete these decks with the new expansion. That was about it. Not even one strong deck for each faction.

Sure, It was a big hindrance for a casual player. Had such a player have 6 top decks, he would play less than 1.5 game each deck per day on average.


If he wanted to have more variety in his game, he would have to either play more or spend money.

Sure. He had no time to learn the decks he had, but he would spend money to have more top decks he will never learn.


AND THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED TO STOP.

They had to stop this card getting eldorado because building a top deck become unchallenging at all. This is supposed to be a grinding game. Getting top staff should be challenging. And it wasn't. Do you know any other grinding game where a player gets top gear after 20-30 hours?

The old system spoiled us. It had to be changed.


Because now a casual player either doesn't have quests that give WC or even if he has, it's almost impossible for him to get those WC because these quests require from him to have several good decks already. Even if he is able to complete those quests, he would have to spend all of his playing time, playing with inferior decks he won't enjoy, just to get the WC.
Do you get the difference? Previously one could improve his deck by playing with the deck he wanted to play and had fun playing. Now in order to improve his deck he has to spend most of his time playing with OTHER decks, that quite possibly he doesn't enjoy. So what's the point to improve your deck since you would hardly use it?
Is it a fun card game anymore?

It looks like you are under impression I oppose your analysis. Well, I don't. I pretty much agree with everything quoted above.

Imho most of the problems you mentioned would be solved with redesigned daily challenge concept (cancel mission button for starters, less faction oriented dailies etc).

But I still stick to my guns:

1. The old system was bad for the game as the top decks were too accessible. It needed to be changed.
2. Your assessment "With the new system I would have none of them" is not correct.

malkorion
05-04-2014, 11:56 AM
The old system spoiled us. It had to be changed.

1. The old system was bad for the game as the top decks were too accessible. It needed to be changed.
2. Your assessment "With the new system I would have none of them" is not correct.

I wonder what a new player thinks of the environment the old players enjoyed. Do you think it's fair to them too? It was so good, and the new players will never get to enjoy all the good stuff.

If there is one thing I hate about CCGs it's this - limited access to cards. When I have access to the majority of the card pool, I have more fun because I am not stuck with one or two decks. Not to mention my past frustration in Swisses. I play Garant, and I see Kelthor keeps winning. I build the deck - get Forbidden Flames, Zefiria, etc. - and all of a sudden it's no longer about the cards, it's about my skill. Not having access to cards is just frustrating.

AmineM2
05-04-2014, 12:50 PM
I wonder what a new player thinks of the environment the old players enjoyed. Do you think it's fair to them too? It was so good, and the new players will never get to enjoy all the good stuff.

They probably feel like any other person who missed a limited time bargain offer. They wish they were there.

But I can tell you one thing: I was there when the system was introduced. I was a casual player (I have - and had - 1h a day for duelling) and I spent around $20 on the game. I had better fun before the Wild Cards were introduced.

Surely, I was all in for letting players get a specific card from time to time. But the number of the wild cards Ubi gave was insane.



If there is one thing I hate about CCGs it's this - limited access to cards. When I have access to the majority of the card pool, I have more fun because I am not stuck with one or two decks. Not to mention my past frustration in Swisses. I play Garant, and I see Kelthor keeps winning. I build the deck - get Forbidden Flames, Zefiria, etc. - and all of a sudden it's no longer about the cards, it's about my skill. Not having access to cards is just frustrating.

Well, we were talking abut the casuals. This is not a big problem for the casuals, but I agree it might concern more dedicated players.

I believe that the new system is too restrictive and the cards should be more accessible. Redeveloping quest system might solve the problem.

Thorssen64
05-04-2014, 01:50 PM
Regardless of whether it was too good before, once Pandora has been let out of the box...

The game needs new players to stay on if it is to survive; putting them at a huge disadvantage to existing players (beyond the natural disadvantages they already have) is more likely to see them leave (and the ones who leave at the point they realise this will be just the ones that would have stayed previously). Ubi have made this mistake before, so even if some players do not recognise this truth, then Ubi have no excuse.

gabusan
05-04-2014, 01:53 PM
Regardless of whether it was too good before, once Pandora has been let out of the box...

The game needs new players to stay on if it is to survive; putting them at a huge disadvantage to existing players (beyond the natural disadvantages they already have) is more likely to see them leave (and the ones who leave at the point they realise this will be just the ones that would have stayed previously). Ubi have made this mistake before, so even if some players do not recognise this truth, then Ubi have no excuse.

But new players are not aware of how dire things will get later. When they are starting, they get loads of new cards they dont have yet just by playing, buying BS2 boosters. Everything looks peachy for them.

Thorssen64
05-04-2014, 02:00 PM
But new players are not aware of how dire things will get later. When they are starting, they get loads of new cards they dont have yet just by playing, buying BS2 boosters. Everything looks peachy for them.

Re-read my post. I'm saying that the ones who stay beyond that first phase (because a large % will leave anyway), will gradually realise how disadvantaged they are. At that point a bunch more will leave - and they could have been retained if Ubi had made the correct decision that they would be on a level playing field.

npavcec
05-04-2014, 02:07 PM
But new players are not aware of how dire things will get later. When they are starting, they get loads of new cards they dont have yet just by playing, buying BS2 boosters. Everything looks peachy for them.

It looks peachy until they realize they have collection of 686 cards with tendecy to get another 10 cards per day on average.. indefinitely. While there are players with 5k+ cards and complete upper hand in the deck building flexibility versus them... also, indefintiely. Unless, you open up your wallet to "catch" them.

AmineM2
05-04-2014, 02:09 PM
Regardless of whether it was too good before, once Pandora has been let out of the box...

Pandora in the box... Nice :-)


The game needs new players to stay on if it is to survive; putting them at a huge disadvantage to existing players (beyond the natural disadvantages they already have) is more likely to see them leave (and the ones who leave at the point they realise this will be just the ones that would have stayed previously).

I don't think there is a big problem as long as the new players don't have to compete with the old players on regular basis. And the exact matching sorts it out.

The dailies need to be fixed that's for sure, and when it's done properly most of the issues will be solved.

npavcec
05-04-2014, 02:59 PM
I don't think there is a big problem as long as the new players don't have to compete with the old players on regular basis. And the exact matching sorts it out. The dailies need to be fixed that's for sure, and when it's done properly most of the issues will be solved.

Ranking system needs a fix so only the standard format matches are counting toward the progress and CP, or even better, make separate ladders for each format competition, so when you have a good standard deck, you're matched vs high ranked standard format opponents and when you have bad open deck, you're matched vs low ranked open format opponents.

Weekly, IMHO, could also use separate ladder - this would actually be the best ladder to showcase the player overall skill and flexibility. But in order to compete in this, one needs at least 90% collection of all cards x 4, IMHO. Which brings us back to a first argument - are new players even capable to get them 90% collection? Not even close. They can play 24/7, they would still not be able to make open format or weekly decks. So, I think that is the core of all problems that needs to be dealt with (new players not being able to get cards consistently), instead of "cosmetics".

One other thing, it would be nice to implement some "daily quest mode" at which all the matches you play would not count toward your competitive ranking - only to completion of daily quest. I regularly ruin my ranking every second day doing 5 wins with faction X, for which I don't even have decent decks (because I lack cards).

Thorssen64
05-04-2014, 05:37 PM
I don't think there is a big problem as long as the new players don't have to compete with the old players on regular basis.

Once you make Champion I level you will though. And it's fairly easy to get there.

thanasis
05-05-2014, 07:45 AM
I strongly disagree.

If you are a casual you don't need a variety of top decks. You have no time to play them, nevermind learn how to do that properly.

Sure, It was a big hindrance for a casual player. Had such a player have 6 top decks, he would play less than 1.5 game each deck per day on average.

Sure. He had no time to learn the decks he had, but he would spend money to have more top decks he will never learn.

Except nobody forced them to play with all of their decks every day.
Most people are tired of playing with the same deck again and again, regardless if you disagree or not.
I would certainly want to try many of them.


They had to stop this card getting eldorado because building a top deck become unchallenging at all. This is supposed to be a grinding game. Getting top staff should be challenging. And it wasn't. Do you know any other grinding game where a player gets top gear after 20-30 hours?

The old system spoiled us. It had to be changed.

So, for you, having to play for a month in order to get one strong deck was not challenging enough.
And for a player to be able to have 2-3 strong decks and just be able to keep them up to date with each expansion, was too much. And it had to be changed into what exactly? Not being able to have even one strong deck, unless you play a few hours every day with decks you don't enjoy (in the best case)?
Well, apparently Ubisoft thought so too.
In my opinion that was the least a F2P game should offer to its players. Because giving anything less doesn't give the possibility to the players to actually play the game. It just offers them a free demo of the game.
And apparently a lot of other players think so too.

thanasis
05-05-2014, 07:53 AM
I don't think there is a big problem as long as the new players don't have to compete with the old players on regular basis. And the exact matching sorts it out.

Except, if you want to get any WC at all you HAVE to compete with the old players on a regular basis. Or, since you like so much being totally exact with numbers, make that "if you want to get any WC besides the 3 WC you get from weekly rewards and those given to you once in your lifetime from campaign and achievements".

Ur4b4sk
05-05-2014, 09:02 AM
Except, if you want to get any WC at all you HAVE to compete with the old players on a regular basis. Or, since you like so much being totally exact with numbers, make that "if you want to get any WC besides the 3 WC you get from weekly rewards and those given to you once in your lifetime from campaign and achievements".

Man I wish it was 3 WC. I've gotten 1 WC every week since the patch hit.

AmineM2
05-05-2014, 01:28 PM
Man I wish it was 3 WC. I've gotten 1 WC every week since the patch hit.

In long run you will probably get close to 3 WC per week on average. I'm below the expected average as well.


Except, if you want to get any WC at all you HAVE to compete with the old players on a regular basis.


Once you make Champion I level you will though. And it's fairly easy to get there.

As far as I know the matchup system is based on your MMR not your rank. If you are a Champ I (MMR around 1100) and you chose exact matching you will never meet players like cucu, l4m4, jkkk, Zerg, and hundreds, hundreds more (@all pro players: sorry I couldn't name all of you :-)

So yea, you can meet some good/old players from time to time, but - as it isso easy to get to CH I for everyone - It's hardly 'on regular basis'. At the moment going to CH I is not very attractive for new players as they will have big trouble with completing certain quests, but when they fix it it will be ok.

Surely it depends on global influx of new players: if there are no new players you will be forced to play old/good players eventually as they will be most part of the bracet.


Ranking system needs a fix so only the standard format matches are counting toward the progress and CP, or even better, make separate ladders for each format competition, so when you have a good standard deck, you're matched vs high ranked standard format opponents and when you have bad open deck, you're matched vs low ranked open format opponents.

Agreed


Weekly, IMHO, could also use separate ladder - this would actually be the best ladder to showcase the player overall skill and flexibility. But in order to compete in this, one needs at least 90% collection of all cards x 4, IMHO. Which brings us back to a first argument - are new players even capable to get them 90% collection? Not even close. They can play 24/7, they would still not be able to make open format or weekly decks. So, I think that is the core of all problems that needs to be dealt with (new players not being able to get cards consistently), instead of "cosmetics".

It's a core problem for the weekly only. And not every weekly as well. Some weeklies (like BS2 cards only) are new players friendly.

In other formats you need just 59 cards + lest say 20 extra cards to make meta adjustments. When a player achieves that he can compete on highest level and calmly collect more cards for other decks.


One other thing, it would be nice to implement some "daily quest mode" at which all the matches you play would not count toward your competitive ranking - only to completion of daily quest. I regularly ruin my ranking every second day doing 5 wins with faction X, for which I don't even have decent decks (because I lack cards).

Agreed again.


Except nobody forced them to play with all of their decks every day.
Most people are tired of playing with the same deck again and again, regardless if you disagree or not.

You stated the obvious. I fully agree: most people get tired of playing with the same deck again and again and again. Eventually.

But how long does it take for an average player to get sick with one top deck?



I would certainly want to try many of them.

What does it mean 'to try'?

Do you want to become a competent operator of such a deck and then find out what the deck is capable of? Or just play a couple of times?

If the later then I have no sympathy for casuals who don't want to pay: if they are interested in a deck they can watch streams or build sub-optimal (yet still strong) decks.

If the former, then we have another question: how many hours does it take to become an competent operator of a moderately demanding deck? How many times do you need to play against every other top deck to discover how to play efficiently?

And then, when our new casual player is ready to compete: how many competitive games does it take to get sick of a deck?

And then, when you get those numbers, please convert them into minutes...

So how many decks does a casual player really need before release of a new expansion (lets say every 3 moths)?



So, for you having to play for a month in order to get one strong deck was not challenging enough.

1. 20-30 hours of play is not challenging enough for sure. It's just bad for the game. People think it would make them happy and committed if they have easy access to the staff but it is exactly opposite: people don't value easy obtainable things, they don't get attached to easy obtainable things and they drop them very easy. Just let's compare this to millions of Diablo II players who spent hundreds of hours trying to get one character to the top with no guaranties they will eventually success.

2. We are talking about top decks, right? Not just 'strong' decks, right? 'Strong deck' is a subjetive term: it depends on the decks other players have access to. On recruit/squire lvl a deck containig 4 lighting bolt looks quite strong, doesn't it? Top deck is as objective as you can get: you cant improve such a deck much even if you get access to all the cards.

3. Giving a new player a top deck is like giving a Ferrari to a person who just got his driving licence. It will just spoil that guy.


And for a player to be able to have 2-3 strong decks and just be able to keep them up to date with each expansion, was too much. And it had to be changed into what exactly? Not being able to have even one strong deck, unless you play a few hours every day with decks you don't enjoy (in the best case)?

Are you under impression I'm happy with current system?

All I'm saying is:

1) the old system was bad
2) the new system migth work, but it needs to be redesigned. Especially dailies, but match_up system modifications would help as well.

Thorssen64
05-05-2014, 02:13 PM
IF they fix it... Take nothing for granted.

thanasis
05-06-2014, 09:02 AM
What does it mean 'to try'?

Do you want to become a competent operator of such a deck and then find out what the deck is capable of? Or just play a couple of times?

If the later then I have no sympathy for casuals who don't want to pay: if they are interested in a deck they can watch streams or build sub-optimal (yet still strong) decks.

If the former, then we have another question: how many hours does it take to become an competent operator of a moderately demanding deck? How many times do you need to play against every other top deck to discover how to play efficiently?

And then, when our new casual player is ready to compete: how many competitive games does it take to get sick of a deck?

And then, when you get those numbers, please convert them into minutes...

So how many decks does a casual player really need before release of a new expansion (lets say every 3 moths)?

I think you're making this game sound much more complicated than it really is. Or perhaps we just have different goals when playing a game. Most people don't want to make a second job out of any game. They just want to have fun playing it.
My interpretation of having fun is to not feel like you're being stomped. That means to have a win rate of around 50% or more at a high rank and be able to enjoy some variety in your game. Most people, after playing with the same deck for a month would want to try something different. It doesn't matter if a player will be able to play a deck optimally. We're not talking about winning the championship here.
For me that's the least I would expect from a F2P game in order to justify the claim that they are offering a free playing experience. Anything less would be just a free demo of the game.
This is my view. Your view seems to be that they should offer a free demo of the game and if you want the real game you should either pay or make a job out of it. Apparently we are viewing things differently.
However we should take note of how other succesful F2P games are operating. In them players are able to play the complete game. People that pay money are those who want to advance faster or have more variety.

gabusan
05-06-2014, 09:08 AM
As far as I know the matchup system is based on your MMR not your rank. If you are a Champ I (MMR around 1100) and you chose exact matching you will never meet players like cucu, l4m4, jkkk, Zerg, and hundreds, hundreds more (@all pro players: sorry I couldn't name all of you :-)

I believe your champion level is different from your MMR. I am Champion II and, with exact matchmaking, I was often paired with Champ III people when I was playing in a more active manner. So I dont understand why you think that "you will never meet" these players. Get a lucky streak of wins and your MMR skyrockets. Your % of progress in your rank, not that much.

thanasis
05-06-2014, 09:12 AM
1. 20-30 hours of play is not challenging enough for sure. It's just bad for the game.
3. Giving a new player a top deck is like giving a Ferrari to a person who just got his driving licence. It will just spoil that guy.

1. I've grown up playing games which had a gameplay of around 20-30 hours, the best of them. For me 20-30 hours of playing for a single deck is certainly challenging enough. I wouldn't want to make a lifetime goal of getting my first top deck in MMDoC.
But how did you come to this number anyway? I think it's completely arbitrary.
A much more realistic assessment would be to accept that one needed about 30 levels to make a, not very expensive, top deck. That would have given him around 100 WC.
Could you level up every hour of playing? I know I certainly couldn't. So the reality is that you needed much more than 30 hours to make one top deck. You needed the time it took you to level up 30 times, and for a casual player that's much more than an hour per level.
3. That's your view. My view of this situation is like demanding from a kid to go to college first in order to buy him his first toy.

Ur4b4sk
05-06-2014, 10:28 AM
3. Giving a new player a top deck is like giving a Ferrari to a person who just got his driving licence. It will just spoil that guy

I really don't get why people seem to think this game is somehow special in some way that new players can't possibly understand the game. It's just another CCG. If you've played MtG or w/e you can pick it up relatively quickly. Slow card acquisition just handicaps players without any real benefit (for players). Devs have to find a balance between finding ways to make players spend money and keeping them from being severely handicapped because they don't buy their way into a format.

Heck, the card pool in Open is smaller than the beginning of a rotation for Standard in MtG. If you've been to a random FNM you'd see all the 12 year old kids that can handle that.


I believe your champion level is different from your MMR. I am Champion II and, with exact matchmaking, I was often paired with Champ III people when I was playing in a more active manner. So I dont understand why you think that "you will never meet" these players. Get a lucky streak of wins and your MMR skyrockets. Your % of progress in your rank, not that much.

Generally you'll hover around 1100-1400 MMR while in champ I. The way progression works if you're hitting high MMR you've probably made some good progress towards the next rank.

AmineM2
05-06-2014, 06:26 PM
IF they fix it... Take nothing for granted.

Well, I'm sure they will do some changes. Sooner or later. They acknowledge some problems and they know some complainers have some valid points. I can't be sure if the changes will be sufficient but I'm sure they will come.


I think you're making this game sound much more complicated than it really is. Or perhaps we just have different goals when playing a game. Most people don't want to make a second job out of any game. They just want to have fun playing it.

Ok.



My interpretation of having fun is to not feel like you're being stomped. That means to have a win rate of around 50% or more at a high rank and be able to enjoy some variety in your game.

So, you want to have high rank, but you don't want to master a single deck... Playing one deck for 20 hours is too much. This a contradiction which is mother of many misconceptions.

If you want to have a high rank you need to play well with your deck. To play well well with your deck you need to know it. To get to know it you need time. If you are a casual you don't have time to play 6 different decks.

If you don't care about your rank, you can experience everything you asked for without spending a single wild cart: you will have many different decks, you will have win rate around 50%. Non of the decks will be optimal for long time, but if you don't care about the rank you will not need a top deck: you will have strong decks at your rank.

A game where it is possible to get a high rank without skill is not a strategical game. It's a lottery.


Most people, after playing with the same deck for a month would want to try something different. It doesn't matter if a player will be able to play a deck optimally. We're not talking about winning the championship here.

1. Well, some people play just 10 hours a month. Should they have a top deck after a month as well?

2.why exactly a casual player needs a top deck to enjoy this game?

At the moment, when you get sick with your pro deck you can build a sub-optimal deck and enjoy the variety. Why do you need a top deck to do that?

You said about your experience. Let me tell you about mine. This game was most enjoyable for me before the Wild Cards system was introduced. My deck was extremely far from being a top deck: it contained 1 Pao 1 Banshee and 1 Seria Last Order, for long time I had just 3 Decay Spitters. It was nowhere near to perfectness. Yet no other deck gave me more pleasure. I never got to a high rank with it (highest was elo 1350 after few extremely lucky games), but I was happy.



For me that's the least I would expect from a F2P game in order to justify the claim that they are offering a free playing experience. Anything less would be just a free demo of the game.
This is my view.

It's false.

Demo mode doesn't allow you to finish the game and disables some functions.

This game is fully functional for free players in the Standard format (Open is not f2p by any stretch of imagination): you have access to every card, but unless you play a lot you cant have all. But you can compete with the payers even if you don't pay a penny.


However we should take note of how other succesful F2P games are operating. In them players are able to play the complete game. People that pay money are those who want to advance faster or have more variety.

You mean like Hearthstone for example? Do you know how hard it is to get a top deck there?


I believe your champion level is different from your MMR. I am Champion II and, with exact matchmaking,

That's what I said.



I was often paired with Champ III people when I was playing in a more active manner.

I never said you will not meet Ch III players when you are a Ch II.


So I dont understand why you think that "you will never meet" these players. Get a lucky streak of wins and your MMR skyrockets.

We are talking about new casual players. A new player will not get close them by luck. Their MMR is 1500+.


I really don't get why people seem to think this game is somehow special in some way that new players can't possibly understand the game. It's just another CCG. If you've played MtG or w/e you can pick it up relatively quickly. Slow card acquisition just handicaps players without any real benefit (for players). Devs have to find a balance between finding ways to make players spend money and keeping them from being severely handicapped because they don't buy their way into a format.

Heck, the card pool in Open is smaller than the beginning of a rotation for Standard in MtG. If you've been to a random FNM you'd see all the 12 year old kids that can handle that.

I don't get why people seem to think that knowing the cards and the rules means they know the game...

And as we are with MtG: people enjoy this game without having access to 6 top decks every expansion release. I wonder how it is possible...

Vengyre
05-06-2014, 07:43 PM
Idk. Now I get 3 wc/day average (sometimes 0, but +weekly reward and also sometimes 5). Before patch 2/day (2 packs) would be decent, more would require tryharding in JP.
Not counting Swisses, they've became just better (more rares for 1st place, extra pack for 2nd, lucky refund).
I think the system finally became rewarding instead of communistic.

Also I thought that WCs needed a nerf. They were simply too much.

Thorssen64
05-06-2014, 08:00 PM
Also I thought that WCs needed a nerf. They were simply too much.

Says the King to the starving beggars...

Vengyre
05-06-2014, 08:08 PM
Says the King to the starving beggars...
Everyone that played at that moment was in the same situation. Wildcards gave simply too much. Instead of buying pack for the content, it was bought for a WC primaly. This kinda breaks the fun of opening random packs and seeing what you get.

The problem is, that instead of playing, you guys focus too much on collecting cards. Instead of having a nice game you "grind" for cards, because you want to have every top deck. At least how it looks like. Noone forces you to compete with top players. Swiss can be won with mediocre deck and JP just does not worth it (unless the format is fun). Eventually, you'll get the cards you need for top decks.

Ur4b4sk
05-06-2014, 08:52 PM
I don't get why people seem to think that knowing the cards and the rules means they know the game...

That's not what I was implying. I was implying that getting to a semi-competitive level or understanding a format is not as difficult as the devs or other players seem to think it is.

By far the most difficult part of that process is acquiring a competitive deck. Like I said, I've seen twelve year olds compete at Standard FNM, They understood the meta and how to play the game and tier one decks properly. MMDoC isn't special in some way that means that it's any different. It's just another CCG.


And as we are with MtG: people enjoy this game without having access to 6 top decks every expansion release. I wonder how it is possible...

MtG is not F2P so you don't need to play (or win) in order to acquire new cards. If MMDoC tried to go with a pay to play card acquisition model like MtGO the game would die in a week. They need to be F2P so they have users in their game. They cannot rely on casual play like MtG does; they just don't have the players for it. Their model assumes that people will play in ladder and swiss to acquire cards. That means players need to be competitive; something that isn't necessary for kitchen table MtG. Comparing MtG on that level and saying it somehow justifies an extreme paywall or grindwall is ridiculous. This game needs F2P players to be able to get competitive decks in a reasonable amount of time because otherwise they just quit. And that's pretty much what seems to be happening.


This kinda breaks the fun of opening random packs and seeing what you get.

Oh god. I don't even ...

Thorssen64
05-06-2014, 10:16 PM
Everyone that played at that moment was in the same situation.

Exactly. Everyone who was playing has all the cards they need. Newer players are cut off from them.

Maybe in time, if Open disappears, and they aren't too quick on new expansions, it might sort itself. But even if the first part happens, then I doubt that the second will. The packs for gold are pretty useless; new players will never catch up, even on Standard, using them.

Vengyre
05-06-2014, 10:37 PM
Exactly. Everyone who was playing has all the cards they need. Newer players are cut off from them.

Maybe in time, if Open disappears, and they aren't too quick on new expansions, it might sort itself. But even if the first part happens, then I doubt that the second will. The packs for gold are pretty useless; new players will never catch up, even on Standard, using them.

New players got better starter decks and need less cards to complete the collection compared to those that started earlier. For example, they dont need 4 DA/WC.
Open is pretty much locked for them, sadly.

Keynomaru
05-06-2014, 11:45 PM
Idk. Now I get 3 wc/day average (sometimes 0, but +weekly reward and also sometimes 5). Before patch 2/day (2 packs) would be decent, more would require tryharding in JP.
Not counting Swisses, they've became just better (more rares for 1st place, extra pack for 2nd, lucky refund).
I think the system finally became rewarding instead of communistic.

Also I thought that WCs needed a nerf. They were simply too much.

The 1st few days of the update I was getting 3 WC a day. I thought it was pretty awesome every 7 days get a missing hero or epic... but then win a swiss came and ruined it all.......

AmineM2
05-07-2014, 12:45 AM
That's not what I was implying. I was implying that getting to a semi-competitive level or understanding a format is not as difficult as the devs or other players seem to think it is.

It is difficult enough to take many hours to get grip of a deck and to learn how to play it against other top decks.



By far the most difficult part of that process is acquiring a competitive deck. Like I said, I've seen twelve year olds compete at Standard FNM,

So? It's still about experience. I put all my money this kids played more than 20 hours with one deck. And my opponent thinks that 20 hours (or a month as he says) is enough to get sick and he needs another top deck. And then another. Actually it looks like he thinks that a casual player needs 6 top decks in 3 months. If not it's just a demo mode.



They understood the meta and how to play the game and tier one decks properly. MMDoC isn't special in some way that means that it's any different. It's just another CCG.

I agree with this. And I don't know a single person who disagrees. But I dont know a CCG game where you need a new top deck every 20 hours you play...



MtG is not F2P so you don't need to play (or win) in order to acquire new cards. If MMDoC tried to go with a pay to play card acquisition model like MtGO the game would die in a week. They need to be F2P so they have users in their game. They cannot rely on casual play like MtG does; they just don't have the players for it.

It looks like you missed the point a bit.

We (me, thanosis and npavec) and are talking about new, casual players. If you want to talk about more committed players' situation - fine, I will be glad to exchange opinions, but our subject was a bit different so far.


Their model assumes that people will play in ladder and swiss to acquire cards. That means players need to be competitive; something that isn't necessary for kitchen table MtG. Comparing MtG on that level and saying it somehow justifies an extreme paywall or grindwall is ridiculous. This game needs F2P players to be able to get competitive decks in a reasonable amount of time because otherwise they just quit. And that's pretty much what seems to be happening.

1. People were leaving massively before the new expansion was released, during seals and wild cards eldorado. Imho one of the main reason is: the cards were too easy to obtain so people didn't get attached. People don't value easy obtainable things. And it's not just a speculation: there are empirical researches suggesting such a behaviour is normal for us humans: we don't care for easy obtainable things (if you want me I can get you some scientific data about that).

2. What is a reasonable time to get one of the best decks in the game for you?

For me anything below 50 hours is easy (assuming you can get a reasonably good deck like one of the old t3 decks in half of that time).

Ur4b4sk
05-07-2014, 03:44 AM
t is difficult enough to take many hours to get grip of a deck and to learn how to play it against other top decks.

So getting stomped by people with comp decks while playing with a pile of commons/uncommons teaches them something? Like what, power creep based on rarity?


So? It's still about experience. I put all my money this kids played more than 20 hours with one deck. And my opponent thinks that 20 hours (or a month as he says) is enough to get sick and he needs another top deck. And then another. Actually it looks like he thinks that a casual player needs 6 top decks in 3 months. If not it's just a demo mode.

Actually he said you should be able to get a budget comp deck in 30 levels. 30 levels is probably upwards of sixty hours for most people (15 games per level @ ~ 8 minutes per game).


I agree with this. And I don't know a single person who disagrees. But I dont know a CCG game where you need a new top deck every 20 hours you play...

That's not what you posted. You posted that giving a new player a top deck is like giving someone who just got their license a Ferrari. That analogy implies that it's not the speed of acquisition that is the problem but that they can't properly play the deck.


We (me, thanosis and npavec) and are talking about new, casual players. If you want to talk about more committed players' situation - fine, I will be glad to exchange opinions, but our subject was a bit different so far.

Card accquistion in MMDoC is based on quests and ranked play. There really isn't actual casual play which is relevant to the argument you were having. Casual play that lets you acquire cards just doesn't exist in this game. Not sure why you're trying to change the subject like that but the scope of your argument wasn't as focused as you're implying.


1. People were leaving massively before the new expansion was released, during seals and wild cards eldorado. Imho one of the main reason is: the cards were too easy to obtain so people didn't get attached. People don't value easy obtainable things. And it's not just a speculation: there are empirical researches suggesting such a behaviour is normal for us humans: we don't care for easy obtainable things (if you want me I can get you some scientific data about that).

You're trying to attribute causation which is convenient for your argument; it's likely that is one of many factors causing players to leave. It's also more likely that the game just doesn't have enough exposure to get the new players they need. This is a very common problem in F2P games where they have a limited budget and spend little on advertising outside of a few ads here and there and making appearances at conventions. Games like this tend to live or die based on the initial reception of the game and the amount of players they can retain after steam launch. If they're not a big hit at that point they tend to just die while the devs/publishers struggle to find ways to promote the game.


2. What is a reasonable time to get one of the best decks in the game for you?

For me anything below 50 hours is easy (assuming you can get a reasonably good deck – like one of the old t3 decks – in half of that time).

Like Thanasis said 30 levels is reasonable. That's ~ 70 packs of BS2. You could get close to a comp deck but it's very likely you'll be missing copies of key cards that make a big difference. Once you're past that you start running into the problem where you're pulling duplicates AND not getting the cards you need. I think the problem is that the current wildcard system has to be limited in order to prevent players from getting piles of wildcards for new sets when one of the major barriers for new players is just getting the right cards in BS2. They should create a separate type of WC for BS2 cards that you can get in BS2 packs so that new players can more easily round out their collection.

But then they've still got the problem where open is just plain inaccessible.

jetz0r
05-07-2014, 08:01 AM
You're trying to attribute causation which is convenient for your argument; it's likely that is one of many factors causing players to leave. It's also more likely that the game just doesn't have enough exposure to get the new players they need. This is a very common problem in F2P games where they have a limited budget and spend little on advertising outside of a few ads here and there and making appearances at conventions. Games like this tend to live or die based on the initial reception of the game and the amount of players they can retain after steam launch. If they're not a big hit at that point they tend to just die while the devs/publishers struggle to find ways to promote the game.

Steam launch led to a slow bleed from its peak, which is to be expected. Most of the players that start won't stick with the game. 5T wasn't a very exciting set, then there was a long period of stasis waiting for BS2 to drop. There was a player spike post-BS2, then it faded quickly and the game is almost back to the pre-BS2 lows.

Out of all the players that I got to try DoC, none of them quit because cards were too easy to acquire. The only ones that stuck around were ones that were able to figure out the system well enough to actually get enough cards to be able to build a decent deck or two. They were also the more competitive types, while the casual players who quit are now playing HS.

Casual players form the base of games like this, and DoC is VERY focused on competitive play with a bad attitude towards non-competitive players. ELO dropping being the best way to farm gold completely screwed up the low/mid range ranked fights. There's no rewards for practice duels or duels between friends. Jackpot is TERRIBLE for most players. And swisses are shark tanks. The only things that changed with BS2 was that ELO dropping was killed, and there's now a single player campaign that's good for some amount of time with solid rewards.

The idea that actually getting cards drives people away is incredibly bad. If a CCG ceases to be interesting once you acquire all the cards, it's either a trash game that isn't worth your time, or you're a compulsive gambler. Magic isn't still hugely popular because people need to keep cracking packs, it's because the gameplay, deckbuilding and social aspects drive players. Booster sales derive from those, not the other way around.

Ur4b4sk
05-07-2014, 08:43 AM
Out of all the players that I got to try DoC, none of them quit because cards were too easy to acquire. The only ones that stuck around were ones that were able to figure out the system well enough to actually get enough cards to be able to build a decent deck or two. They were also the more competitive types, while the casual players who quit are now playing HS.

I doubt that it was zero players. Some people probably dropped it with the intent of playing it later. I've done that with a few MMOs/FPSes. If it doesn't take much time to get access to content then you can pick it up again whenever you want.


Casual players form the base of games like this, and DoC is VERY focused on competitive play with a bad attitude towards non-competitive players. ELO dropping being the best way to farm gold completely screwed up the low/mid range ranked fights. There's no rewards for practice duels or duels between friends. Jackpot is TERRIBLE for most players. And swisses are shark tanks. The only things that changed with BS2 was that ELO dropping was killed, and there's now a single player campaign that's good for some amount of time with solid rewards.

I completely agree; the game just actively discourages casual play. But regardless as to what they do to casual it seems like it's just asking to be exploited.

Maybe if they could get a format like EDH going. But MMDoC isn't exactly made for multiplayer and there really aren't enough cards to really build casual decks that aren't just bad instead of being fun.


The idea that actually getting cards drives people away is incredibly bad. If a CCG ceases to be interesting once you acquire all the cards, it's either a trash game that isn't worth your time, or you're a compulsive gambler. Magic isn't still hugely popular because people need to keep cracking packs, it's because the gameplay, deckbuilding and social aspects drive players. Booster sales derive from those, not the other way around.

Well that's what HS is like for me now. The meta is stale (and casual is basically just people farming randoms with comp decks) and I have all the cards so I barely log in. It's still a great game though.

I think the social aspect is so much stronger in MtG that's it's not really fair to assume the same principles apply to MMDoC in the exact same manner. People usually pick up MtG at school because their friends play it. MMDoC you pick up because it's an online CCG. They're almost polar opposites in that regard.

thanasis
05-07-2014, 11:06 AM
If you want to have a high rank you need to play well with your deck. To play well well with your deck you need to know it. To get to know it you need time. If you are a casual you don't have time to play 6 different decks.

A game where it is possible to get a high rank without skill is not a strategical game. It's a lottery.

Again, we seem to disagree on how difficult this game is. I don't think it's that difficult at all, and I don't think that skill takes so much time to develop.
Also, may I say for one more time, no-one forces you to play with 6 or 26 decks at the same time. You just have the option, when you log in, to play whatever deck you feel like. A free player could choose between 2-3 decks. A paying player or die hard fanatic had the option to chose from many more.


If you don't care about your rank, you can experience everything you asked for without spending a single wild cart: you will have many different decks, you will have win rate around 50%. Non of the decks will be optimal for long time, but if you don't care about the rank you will not need a top deck: you will have strong decks at your rank.

I knew you would say that, that's why I edited my post to add the "high rank" phrase.
Part of the fun in any game is the competition element. Any player wants to be a good player, regardless if he ever manages to be one of the top players or not.
And in order to be good in this game you need a top deck, even if simply because all the others will have one.
All the demos do exactly what you say, they let a player reach a certain level, but he can't advance past that level unless he pays. Any game with such a philosophy is a demo for me.

thanasis
05-07-2014, 11:13 AM
It's false.

Demo mode doesn't allow you to finish the game and disables some functions.

This game is fully functional for free players in the Standard format (Open is not f2p by any stretch of imagination): you have access to every card, but unless you play a lot you cant have all. But you can compete with the payers even if you don't pay a penny.

MtGO also lets you play for free, using some starter decks. I wouldn't call that Free to Play game. I would call that a Demo.
If this game comes down to letting you play just some inferior decks without giving you the ability to make them stronger, then this would be a Demo too.

thanasis
05-07-2014, 11:32 AM
New players got better starter decks and need less cards to complete the collection compared to those that started earlier. For example, they dont need 4 DA/WC.

:confused:
It will always be the same in CCGs. Players will always need 4 of some certain epic or rare cards to make a top deck.
And new players would like too to be in the top 100 players just like you, without taking them years of opening packs to get the epic cards they need.

thanasis
05-07-2014, 11:51 AM
Out of all the players that I got to try DoC, none of them quit because cards were too easy to acquire. The only ones that stuck around were ones that were able to figure out the system well enough to actually get enough cards to be able to build a decent deck or two. They were also the more competitive types, while the casual players who quit are now playing HS.

Casual players form the base of games like this, and DoC is VERY focused on competitive play with a bad attitude towards non-competitive players. ELO dropping being the best way to farm gold completely screwed up the low/mid range ranked fights. There's no rewards for practice duels or duels between friends. Jackpot is TERRIBLE for most players. And swisses are shark tanks. The only things that changed with BS2 was that ELO dropping was killed, and there's now a single player campaign that's good for some amount of time with solid rewards.

The idea that actually getting cards drives people away is incredibly bad. If a CCG ceases to be interesting once you acquire all the cards, it's either a trash game that isn't worth your time, or you're a compulsive gambler. Magic isn't still hugely popular because people need to keep cracking packs, it's because the gameplay, deckbuilding and social aspects drive players. Booster sales derive from those, not the other way around.

I agree completely.

thanasis
05-07-2014, 12:55 PM
And my opponent thinks that 20 hours (or a month as he says) is enough to get sick and he needs another top deck. And then another. Actually it looks like he thinks that a casual player needs 6 top decks in 3 months. If not it's just a demo mode.

You've been posting arbitrary numbers and distorting my views all over your posts.
I'm starting to believe you don't understand what I'm saying and I'm just losing my time.
Perhaps you would like to read more carefully what a) my views are and (more important) b) what the real situation with this game was before the patch, in this quoted post:

I've grown up playing games which had a gameplay of around 20-30 hours, the best of them. For me 20-30 hours of playing for a single deck is certainly challenging enough. I wouldn't want to make a lifetime goal of getting my first top deck in MMDoC.
But how did you come to this number anyway? I think it's completely arbitrary.
A much more realistic assessment would be to accept that one needed about 30 levels to make a, not very expensive, top deck. That would have given him around 100 WC.
Could you level up every hour of playing? I know I certainly couldn't. So the reality is that you needed much more than 30 hours to make one top deck. You needed the time it took you to level up 30 times, and for a casual player that's much more than an hour per level.


2. What is a reasonable time to get one of the best decks in the game for you?

For me anything below 50 hours is easy (assuming you can get a reasonably good deck like one of the old t3 decks in half of that time).

It's the first time you actually post a number of what would be for you a reasonable time for someone to be able to make a top deck.
And, guess what? It's exactly the time one would need with the previous system to make such a deck, as is explained in my quoted post.
So, it seems, you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.

npavcec
05-07-2014, 01:19 PM
Casual players form the base of games like this, and DoC is VERY focused on competitive play with a bad attitude towards non-competitive players.

First of all, casual play also can be competitive. Every game, the pure definition of game is some kind of competitiveness. So, you cannot exclude one from the other.

The problem with todays DoC is that in order to get in-game assets, you absolutely need to be competitive - otherwise you won't even finish a 2k gold quest. Another problem is that getting cards is very very hard.. be it new or veteran player.

AmineM2
05-08-2014, 01:13 AM
I'm starting to believe you don't understand what I'm saying and I'm just losing my time.

I'm feeling exactly the same regarding you.



Perhaps you would like to read more carefully what a) my views are and (more important) b) what the real situation with this game was before the patch, in this quoted post:

Perhaps you would like to do the same.


It's the first time you actually post a number of what would be for you a reasonable time for someone to be able to make a top deck.
And, guess what? It's exactly the time one would need with the previous system to make such a deck, as is explained in my quoted post.
So, it seems, you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.

1. I posted the number of hours which I reckon makes the game easy. And I said I don't want this to be easy.
2. If you are happy with 50 hours per top deck you can't demand one top deck per month for a casual player. A player playing more than 100 minutes a day is not a casual by any stretch of imagination. A casual player plays 1 hour a day at most. And guess what? If he needs 50 hours per top deck he doesn't need 6 top decks nor 5 or 4. He doesn't need even 3 top decks. He needs to complete up to 2 top decks decks between the releases. If you really are happy with one top deck every 50 days of grinding then there is no much difference between us indeed.

3. If a new player knows what he is doing (and this is supposed to be an easy game to understand, right?) he will have no problem with getting his first top deck after 50 hours of play with the new system if they sort out the quests issue properly. Asalah Immolation deck or Seria deck (a bit more expansive) are very much achievable as 7 weeks of playing gives 21 WC on average for logging in + 30 relatively easy WC from the campaigns. Plus there are around 20 WC you can get for completing achievements. +4 WC you will get for seals from achievements. Together 75 WC. Not exactly your 120 but many enough to build a competitive deck.


You've been posting arbitrary numbers and distorting my views all over your posts.

I'm sorry but my numbers are based on facts.

In the former system it was very much possible to build a complete Kelthor deck after 25 hours of play.

Avkall's deck cost 1770 seals. You could get it easily on lvl 8 or 9.

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/2414

Enclase's record of getting to lvl 8 is less then 4 hours of play without any codes, gold boosts or experience boosts. Nothing. With all this staff (codes and boosts) a competent player should have no problem to get there in, let's say, 5 hours. (People are saying DoC is an easy game so maybe I'm a bit too generous,maybe I should say 4...)

Then you have 20 hours to transform Avkalls deck into something like this:

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/7711

In order to do so you needed to unlock just HotV and FW expansions which was very much achievable, wasn't it?

AmineM2
05-08-2014, 04:21 AM
So getting stomped by people with comp decks while playing with a pile of commons/uncommons teaches them something? Like what, power creep based on rarity?

With a good match-up system such situations are rare. DoC is close to reasonable good match-up system - your example is void.



Actually he said you should be able to get a budget comp deck in 30 levels. 30 levels is probably upwards of sixty hours for most people (15 games per level @ ~ 8 minutes per game).

He said a minimum a casual non-paying player should get after a month is 1 top deck. 60 hours per deck means such a player needs to play 2 hours everyday. Would you call such a player a 'casual'?

Apart from this, 20-30 hours.for a top deck was very much possible under the former system. And 60 hours per deck will be very much possible when they introduce simple improvements to the quests system. (I've typed more in my post above)



That's not what you posted. You posted that giving a new player a top deck is like giving someone who just got their license a Ferrari. That analogy implies that it's not the speed of acquisition that is the problem but that they can't properly play the deck.

One does not exclude another.

I do think DoC is like any other good CCG (and you suggested that I don't)

I do think a typical player doesn't need a new top deck after every 30 hours of play in any sensible CCG I know.

I do think that you need more than 15 hours of play to learn how to play a moderately demanding deck in any sensible CCG: be it MtG, Vtes or DoC. You mentioned a 12 years old playing MtG. You were misled by his age: he was an experienced player who spend many hours learning how to play.


Card accquistion in MMDoC is based on quests and ranked play. There really isn't actual casual play which is relevant to the argument you were having. Casual play that lets you acquire cards just doesn't exist in this game.

Well, I beg to differ sir. It does exist. When they improve the quest system it will be ok.



You're trying to attribute causation which is convenient for your argument;

Sure.

You said: "This game needs F2P players to be able to get competitive decks in a reasonable amount of time because otherwise they just quit."

and that's ok.

I said: "Imho one of the main reason is: the cards were too easy to obtain so people didn't get attached."

and that's not ok....


it's likely that is one of many factors causing players to leave. It's also more likely that the game just doesn't have enough exposure to get the new players they need. This is a very common problem in F2P games where they have a limited budget and spend little on advertising outside of a few ads here and there and making appearances at conventions. Games like this tend to live or die based on the initial reception of the game and the amount of players they can retain after steam launch. If they're not a big hit at that point they tend to just die while the devs/publishers struggle to find ways to promote the game.

Agreed.

As I said: the reason I gave I find as "one of the main" reasons. You just named another.


Like Thanasis said 30 levels is reasonable. That's ~ 70 packs of BS2. You could get close to a comp deck but it's very likely you'll be missing copies of key cards that make a big difference.

Well, when they modify the quests system it will be very very improbable you will not be able to build a relatively cheap top deck (Seria or Asalah for example) - if you spend your wild cards wisely that is.

AmineM2
05-08-2014, 04:34 AM
Out of all the players that I got to try DoC, none of them quit because cards were too easy to acquire.

How can you tell?

You asked them, right?

It's like asking people if tv adverts make them to buy things... Well, people usually think that the stupid tv adverts don't affect them, but researches prove it is exactly opposite.

And there is scientific data strongly suggesting that people don't value easy obtainable things.

If you want to read about one of such experiment please use the link below:

http://www.psychwiki.com/wiki/Aronson,_E._%26_Mills,_J._%281959%29._The_effect_o f_severity_of_initiation_on_liking_for_a_group._Jo urnal_of_Abnormal_and_Social_Psychology,_59,_177-181.

Just let me know if you want know more about this subject :-)

Ur4b4sk
05-08-2014, 07:35 AM
With a good match-up system such situations are rare. DoC is close to reasonable good match-up system - your example is void.


Not really. What ends up happening is that people at lower MMRs run into the people getting beat down from higher MMRs. So you've got this constant tug of war where people with access to good cards get paired up against new players, and the difference in card quality just means that a lot of those new players just get smashed mercilessly.


As I said: the reason I gave I find as "one of the main" reasons. You just named another.


Because I believe it is not the main reason O_o

Those people are more or less outliers. Plus while it was easier to obtain cards prior to the patch, relative to most games (e.g. buying a $60 retail game) the grind was still pretty rough.


Well, I beg to differ sir. It does exist. When they improve the quest system it will be ok.


No it doesn't. There are what two quests which get you gold outside of ranked? They're still going to have pretty much all the quests in ranked play so there really isn't much about the quest system that will change things.


I do think that you need more than 15 hours of play to learn how to play a moderately demanding deck in any sensible CCG: be it MtG, Vtes or DoC. You mentioned a 12 years old playing MtG. You were misled by his age: he was an experienced player who spend many hours learning how to play.


They picked up the game a month beforehand and were competing with players who had been playing for a decade or more. The amount of time they put in relative to other players was trivial. DoC is also easier to pick up (if you have the cards) because you can practice against the meta more easily than in paper MtG because the game is online. Honestly I'd say 30 hours is about all you need for a card pool that small. The main problem with MMDoC is the lack of sites that actually analyze the meta regularly whereas someone can just hop on Mtgsalvation and read up on the meta easily.


He said a minimum a casual non-paying player should get after a month is 1 top deck. 60 hours per deck means such a player needs to play 2 hours everyday. Would you call such a player a 'casual'?

No? But did I ever agree on that number?

jetz0r
05-08-2014, 08:18 AM
How can you tell?

You asked them, right?


Because none of them had enough cards to have had an easy time acquiring anything. "I can't even try another faction with this account?" and "I keep getting rolled by way better decks" were the early complaints.

When a game loses as many players over the last 4 months as doc has, the response should not be "How can we add more barriers to enjoyment and make the game less fun?" Bad plans don't become good by doubling down on them.

Your whole argument seems to be that people need to spend either a large amount of time or money on a game, or they don't feel any attachment to it, so forcing those investments to be higher is good for the game. Leaving out the obvious option C of quitting when a player has to deal with a huge mountain to get anywhere of value in the game.

malkorion
05-08-2014, 11:20 AM
Personally, I feel that there is an endurance period in this game, where you have to take a lot of smack from other players. Out of all the people I know that played this game, I was the only one who was persistent enough to make it this far. If you're F2P, you need to be dedicated to this game. But with the new economy, that's even harder.

I was a new player once, I know what it feels like. But I think that these people just give up too quickly.

Gouster
05-08-2014, 12:47 PM
I was a new player once, I know what it feels like. But I think that these people just give up too quickly.

They’ re the microwave generation. The want everything now and everything must be easy.
I hate it because developers try to cater for these people, toning down their games, making them ridiculously easy. I cant remember what mmorpg I recently played. First time I died in the game I was level 12. I was playing for hours not even knowing what happens if I die, where do I spawn, do I lose stuff? Lots of games are like this, because these kids want to become “competitive” right away. If they face a challenge they will cry pay2win andgo find something easier to play.

Vengyre
05-08-2014, 12:58 PM
They’ re the microwave generation. The want everything now and everything must be easy.
I hate it because developers try to cater for these people, toning down their games, making them ridiculously easy. I cant remember what mmorpg I recently played. First time I died in the game I was level 12. I was playing for hours not even knowing what happens if I die, where do I spawn, do I lose stuff? Lots of games are like this, because these kids want to become “competitive” right away. If they face a challenge they will cry pay2win andgo find something easier to play.
So true...

GenericManGuy
05-08-2014, 04:39 PM
They’ re the microwave generation. The want everything now and everything must be easy.
I hate it because developers try to cater for these people, toning down their games, making them ridiculously easy. I cant remember what mmorpg I recently played. First time I died in the game I was level 12. I was playing for hours not even knowing what happens if I die, where do I spawn, do I lose stuff? Lots of games are like this, because these kids want to become “competitive” right away. If they face a challenge they will cry pay2win andgo find something easier to play.

Playing a game for endless hours in order to grind equipment or cards is an idiotic waste of time. Just because a game requires lots of grinding doesn`t mean it`s hard.

Ideally the game should be fun at all levels, so that people will play for enjoyments sake, not because they`re chasing virtual rewards.

The game is fun at lower levels, the only problem is that remaining there gets old fast, especially when you realise the people above you who keep beating you aren`t winning because they play better, but merely because they have higher quality cards than you. The game seems fairly banal at that point, and the endless grind looming before you is disheartening. I don`t blame players who quit at that point; I was considering quitting then myself. In order to retain players the grind should be minimised. The only reason to play this game is if you enjoy strategy. The ``gaming as a second job`` mentality of MMORPGs is horrible and should remain in MMORPGs.

The game has more problems than just economy though. They`re overlooked or underestimated because there are many of the many of them, and not all of them apply to every single player, but I`d guess that many players have their own pet grievance as a result of some change or another. My own was that they didn`t reset ranks, so quit because I was forced to play in the same league as people with much better cards than me (I only bought twenty super packs, which wasn`t enough to make top tier decks for all factions). To many people the daily quests are irritating and drain the fun out the game, forcing them to do arbitrary things, rather than play the way they feel like playing. The meta of standard is another annoyance, and I`m guessing the pointless nerfing of all former rush decks (Ishuma, Hack, Kelthor) got rid of a lot of people who really liked playing those decks (I know I did). Also the the way they tied game earnings to time limit was stupid, and now people like to drag out their turns. It was a really petty way to spite rush decks. Really I think that rush decks were the most enjoyable kind for most people, and the devs were incredibly arrogant and stupid to nerf and spite them for no reason other than that they were popular. The devs seem like power drunk authoritarian maniacs, rather than reasonable people who communicate and discuss their plans with the community in order to make the best possible game.

In all the game is really sucky now and I am glad I quit right after the new format came out. I played two matches just now, to see if my opinion had changed, and it hadn`t. I faced a Necro in standard, and than an inferno in standard. Both matches were predictable, and neither was any fun.

Thorssen64
05-08-2014, 08:06 PM
So true...

Akhevan2
05-08-2014, 08:42 PM
The real problem is, there is no real 'professional' endgame in DOC like the pro tours and invitationals in MTG. Not on the same level. At the same time, the gap between a below average player (a novice on the way to getting his collection) and above average (a lower limit competitive/semi-hardcore player with good skills and collection, but not top of the ladder) is too great. Even MTG has less of this effect, and getting competitive in T2 in MTG is not even that hard nor it does take this much time.

Putting the strain to grind out your collection onto the average player is definitely not the way to go. I admit, the game is more newbie-friendly (STILL more so after all the nerfs) than HS, Solforge and MTG, but that alone does not really get you anywhere. Player retention is key, and that's something most found in the middle class of players.

thanasis
05-08-2014, 11:24 PM
I'm sorry but my numbers are based on facts.
!!!

In the former system it was very much possible to build a complete Kelthor deck after 25 hours of play.

Avkall's deck cost 1770 seals. You could get it easily on lvl 8 or 9.

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/2414

Enclase's record of getting to lvl 8 is less then 4 hours of play without any codes, gold boosts or experience boosts. Nothing. With all this staff (codes and boosts) a competent player should have no problem to get there in, let's say, 5 hours. (People are saying DoC is an easy game so maybe I'm a bit too generous,maybe I should say 4...)

Then you have 20 hours to transform Avkalls deck into something like this:

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/7711

In order to do so you needed to unlock just HotV and FW expansions which was very much achievable, wasn't it?
Errr, no, you also needed to have the WC to buy the cards.
Which btw are about 100 WC just for the epics and rares. And of course no player at that level would even have all the uncommons he needed, not even all the commons he needed.
How exactly would you get those WC in 20 hours?

thanasis
05-09-2014, 12:07 AM
He said a minimum a casual non-paying player should get after a month is 1 top deck. 60 hours per deck means such a player needs to play 2 hours everyday. Would you call such a player a 'casual'?
Yes I would. I would call a casual player any player that plays 1-2 hours a day. That's my view. Yours is different, fine.

Apart from this, 20-30 hours.for a top deck was very much possible under the former system.
No, 20-30 hours for a top deck was not possible even under the former system.
You used this arbitrary number and said that it wasn't challenging enough. I accepted this number because IN MY VIEW even 30 hours for a top deck IS challenging enough. Your view is different, fine. But it wasn't the case previously.

And 60 hours per deck will be very much possible when they introduce simple improvements to the quests system. (I've typed more in my post above)
You keep talking about a mythical version of the game that we haven't seen yet.
Well, I'm not interested about this mythical version, that takes as granted that changes will indeed happen, and that they will be how you imagine them to be. I want to compare the 2 systems as it is now and as it was previously.

thanasis
05-09-2014, 12:46 AM
2. If you are happy with 50 hours per top deck you can't demand one top deck per month for a casual player. A player playing more than 100 minutes a day is not a casual by any stretch of imagination. A casual player plays 1 hour a day at most.
So, you want to debate what's the meaning of a casual player now as well?
I call a casual player any player that plays 1-2 hours per day. You disagree, that's fine.
You said 20-30 hours of play is not challenging enough. I said, FOR ME, 30 hours of play IS challenging enough.
And after that you keep posting, trying to prove that my view is wrong. Well, guess what? There is NO right or wrong view about that, we just see things differently.
But that's irrelevant anyway, because it's just a theoretical discussion.
What really matters is if getting a top deck with the actual previous system was too easy or not.
You said more than 50 hours of gameplay for a deck was difficult enough.
I have already posted that in order to get a cheap top deck previously you needed at least 100 WC. As a matter of fact you needed much more than 100 WC for most top decks.
Even the deck in your own example requires at least 100 WC, and it's based on a premade deck and also it probably was the single less expensive deck anyone could construct. If they felt it was too easy to get a top deck, all they had to do was to just stop selling that premade deck, or raise its cost.
Now, in order to get those 100 WC you needed about 30 levels. So a player usually needed more than 30 levels to complete one top deck.
How much time a player needed to level up 30 times? It depends on the player. For the majority of the players though that time was much more than 50 hours.
Thus, it has been proven beyond doubt that the game previously was certainly challenging enough, even according to your standards.
I don't think there is anything else to be said about this matter.

BMJedi
05-09-2014, 02:07 AM
I'm a beginner, and I'm doing great so far up to Knight 80%. I regularly win against opponents with far superior decks, but far less skill. I'm sure I'll eventually be up against opponents with superior decks AND skill, but it hasn't happened yet. I'm finding the game extremely friendly to beginners, and I am one. I think a lot of people put far too much emphasis on what cards they can get, and far too little emphasis on deck-building and play skill.

Ur4b4sk
05-09-2014, 05:51 AM
I'm a beginner, and I'm doing great so far up to Knight 80%. I regularly win against opponents with far superior decks, but far less skill. I'm sure I'll eventually be up against opponents with superior decks AND skill, but it hasn't happened yet. I'm finding the game extremely friendly to beginners, and I am one. I think a lot of people put far too much emphasis on what cards they can get, and far too little emphasis on deck-building and play skill.

No one at knight has good decks...

I don't even. Basically 99% of the people in knight are playing with lightly modified starter decks.

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 07:16 AM
@Ur4b4sk

Please use full quota system with the name and link to the quoted post so I can easily navigate to comments you are quoting. It will help me very much, even if you do that once at the beginning of your answer.


Not really. What ends up happening is that people at lower MMRs run into the people getting beat down from higher MMRs.

Exact match_up prevents this.



So you've got this constant tug of war where people with access to good cards get paired up against new players, and the difference in card quality just means that a lot of those new players just get smashed mercilessly.

At low levels as long as majority of the players with similar MMrs have similar card pool there there is no problem with that.

A little tweak of the match-up/dailies would sort it out.



Because I believe it is not the main reason O_o

Those people are more or less outliers.

As empirical data strongly suggest most people don't value easy obtainable things. They are not out liners.

People were leaving massively before the changes. Now they have a handy excuse which can explain their behaviour.



Plus while it was easier to obtain cards prior to the patch, relative to most games (e.g. buying a $60 retail game) the grind was still pretty rough.

Rough? Really? There must be so many grinding games out there where grinding is easier so a player can get top staff easier then in pre-patch DoC... Nothing springs to my mind at the moment, but surely you can bring a lot of examples...


No it doesn't. There are what two quests which get you gold outside of ranked? They're still going to have pretty much all the quests in ranked play so there really isn't much about the quest system that will change things.

Well, it does.

You said:
Casual play that lets you acquire cards just doesn't exist in this game. Not sure why you're trying to change the subject like that but the scope of your argument wasn't as focused as you're implying

I know for fact you are wrong. I play casually (1 hour for duelling per day) and I steady collect the cards (1 pack a day on average).


They picked up the game a month beforehand and were competing with players who had been playing for a decade or more.

One moth of intense training can do that. One month of casual play? Definitely not.



No? But did I ever agree on that number?

Did I ever suggested you agreed?

One more thing: you answered to BMJedi:


No one at knight has good decks...

I don't even. Basically 99% of the people in knight are playing with lightly modified starter decks.

I think your answer shows the core of the problem.

He probably has a strong deck. A strong deck for his MMR. Surely, when he advances and his deck will become weaker and weaker he will have to improve it deck. But at the moment his deck is strong. He can compete with similar players and he enjoys his game. As long as majority of the players in his MMR are similar to him he'll be fine. And when he gets to high his MMr will drop and he will meet weaker decks again.

He doesn't need a top deck to steady collect the cards and enjoy the game.

@other posters

I will answer the other post later during the day

bambikitkat
05-09-2014, 07:53 AM
He doesn't need a top deck to steady collect the cards and enjoy the game.

yeah he doesnt need to reach champion, after all getting only 50% of the gold and xp reward below champion (oh my you forgot that ?) is more than enough to farm card :)

I remember when to get deal with the low elo farmer i asked for ubisoft to buff the reward you get in high lvl elo games, so ppl would go up to 1000 or 1500 elo to farm and stop bothering new players, what happened ? instead of increasing the reward of the best, they decreased the reward for the lowest, mean punishing new players even more.

what you can read here is truly funny.

Ur4b4sk
05-09-2014, 08:44 AM
Please use full quota system with the name and link to the quoted post so I can easily navigate to comments you are quoting. It will help me very much, even if you do that once at the beginning of your answer.


If you can't be bothered to remember what you wrote ...


Exact match_up prevents this.

And then you end up sitting there forever. Already takes thirty seconds to two minutes without it (and you only really end up at most 100 MMR difference)


As empirical data strongly suggest most people don't value easy obtainable things. They are not out liners.

People were leaving massively before the changes. Now they have a handy excuse which can explain their behaviour.
Look, you're referencing one study. It's not the complete guide to understanding human motivation or some crap. Motivation is not so simple that you can just assume that they've solved it with one paper. I seriously doubt that the people conducting that study would even agree with the way you're trying to apply it to this context.


Rough? Really? There must be so many grinding games out there where grinding is easier so a player can get top staff easier then in pre-patch DoC... Nothing springs to my mind at the moment, but surely you can bring a lot of examples...
Grind is just replacing money spent with time spent. Any retail game represents a significantly better value than MMDoC. Lets say CSGO. You can get it for $5 and you've got a complete game where basically the only thing between you and your opponent is skill.


One moth of intense training can do that. One month of casual play? Definitely not.


You're kidding yourself. This isn't the pro-tour. It's just FNM and in MMDoC it's just ladder play against people that are competing on basically the same level as FNM.


I know for fact you are wrong. I play casually (1 hour for duelling per day) and I steady collect the cards (1 pack a day on average).

Are you trying to imply that ladder play is casual? Because no it isn't.



He probably has a strong deck. A strong deck for his MMR. Surely, when he advances and his deck will become weaker and weaker he will have to improve it deck. But at the moment his deck is strong. He can compete with similar players and he enjoys his game. As long as majority of the players in his MMR are similar to him he'll be fine. And when he gets to high his MMr will drop and he will meet weaker decks again.

He doesn't need a top deck to steady collect the cards and enjoy the game.
No, he'll hit a higher MMR and hit the grind/paywall and bounce back and forth between higher and lower MMR until he gets a competitive deck together.

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 09:17 AM
I'm a beginner, and I'm doing great so far up to Knight 80%. I regularly win against opponents with far superior decks, but far less skill. I'm sure I'll eventually be up against opponents with superior decks AND skill, but it hasn't happened yet. I'm finding the game extremely friendly to beginners, and I am one. I think a lot of people put far too much emphasis on what cards they can get, and far too little emphasis on deck-building and play skill.

It looks like the top decks obsessions, doesn't it? :-)

Of course when you'll advance you will face stronger opponents - save your WC and spend them wisely :-)

Good luck and have fun :-)

thanasis
05-09-2014, 09:19 AM
And guess what? If he needs 50 hours per top deck he doesn't need 6 top decks nor 5 or 4. He doesn't need even 3 top decks. He needs to complete up to 2 top decks decks between the releases.

You keep posting arbitrary numbers out of your mind. Who said anyone needed 6 or 5 or 4 decks for anything?
He may need 6 top decks with the current system in order to complete the quests.
Replying to your numbers, which I accepted for the sake of discussion, I said that, as I see it, 30 hours of gameplay for a top deck is challenging enough. But that was just an academic discussion.
What was really happening, in the actual case, was that a casual player, in your terms (playing an hour a day), could barely make a top deck before a new expansion. Which he needed to complete with the new cards after the expansion, in order to keep it a top deck. That is a fact.
You posted that, in your opinion, that was not challenging enough and that you like the new system more, because now it's more difficult to make a top deck.
Which means that now a casual player needs more than 3 months to make a top deck, which in effect means that he can never have a top deck, because, before he would be able to complete his deck, after 3 months he would need to add new cards, from the new expansion, in order to keep his deck updated.
Again, whether someone thinks that this is better or not than before, is just a subjective opinion and can not be right or wrong by itself.
What matters is to let new players know how things are, so they can decide by themselves if they want to be involved with such a game or not.

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 10:07 AM
If you can't be bothered to remember what you wrote ...

Well, I remember what I wrote, but might not remember what I was answering to. Before I answer I always want to check the context.

Please, don't delete link to the post you answer.



And then you end up sitting there forever.

This is just not true. After around 60 hours of play a casual player will have around 75 wild cards which is enough to have a deck close to the top, or a very good grinding deck.


Look, you're referencing one study.

Do you want more? There are many....

The thesis that people don't value easy obtainable things is well researched.



It's not the complete guide to understanding human motivation or some crap.

Of course it's not. It shows one of the basic mechanisms: when people get something easy they value it less.


Motivation is not so simple that you can just assume that they've solved it with one paper.

Sure, and I'm not saying that this mechanism explains all human behaviour. I'm saying this mechanism does exist.

So far you chose to ignore this mechanism entirely.



I seriously doubt that the people conducting that study would even agree with the way you're trying to apply it to this context.

Well, we'll never know.

We can be sure their conclusion is: when things are easy to get people value it less.


Grind is just replacing money spent with time spent.

No it's not. The grinding/collecting games are the games where one of your goals is to develop your account by collecting cards or other staff. Some grinding games require you to pay to even start grinding (Diablo)



Any retail game represents a significantly better value than MMDoC. Lets say CSGO. You can get it for $5 and you've got a complete game where basically the only thing between you and your opponent is skill.

CSGO is not a grinding game.

CCG means collecting card game.

Please give me an example of a collecting game. There are so many collecting games around you surely can give one name.



You're kidding yourself. This isn't the pro-tour. It's just FNM and in MMDoC it's just ladder play against people that are competing on basically the same level as FNM.

Sure I'm kidding myself.

How do you know how much time has this kid spent on training?




Are you trying to imply that ladder play is casual? Because no it isn't.

Because...


No, he'll hit a higher MMR and hit the grind/paywall and bounce back and forth between higher and lower MMR until he gets a competitive deck together.

right...

And getting a competitive (close to the top) deck is very much achievable for a casual player around 60 hours of play.


yeah he doesnt need to reach champion, after all getting only 50% of the gold and xp reward below champion (oh my you forgot that ?) is more than enough to farm card :)

1.
Players are being matched on their MMR basis, not rank. Even if you become a Champ but you are beaten frequently, your MMR will drop and you'll be paired with weaker opponents.

2.
Even if a casual player (up to 1 hour a day of playing) doesn't get to the Champ lvl he will collect WC from campaigns (around 30 relatively easy obtainable cards), from some easy to complete quests.(around 20) and from weekly rewards (3 WC/per week on average). After few weeks it will be enough to play at around MMR 1100.


what you can read here is truly funny.

I agree :-)

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 12:11 PM
So, you want to debate what's the meaning of a casual player now as well?
I call a casual player any player that plays 1-2 hours per day. You disagree, that's fine.

Sure I disagree. 60 hours a month is a part time job and you said you don't want to take into consideration people who make this game their second job. But as you said that's fine, as long as we understand what what we mean when we use a term.



You said 20-30 hours of play is not challenging enough. I said, FOR ME, 30 hours of play IS challenging enough.
And after that you keep posting, trying to prove that my view is wrong. Well, guess what? There is NO right or wrong view about that, we just see things differently.
But that's irrelevant anyway, because it's just a theoretical discussion. What really matters is if getting a top deck with the actual previous system was too easy or not.


Had you just said what you prefer there would be no debate at all. But we are discussing what is good/bad for other players and for the game. If you were under impression I want to talk about your likings I have to apologise for misleading you.



You said more than 50 hours of gameplay for a deck was difficult enough.
I have already posted that in order to get a cheap top deck previously you needed at least 100 WC. As a matter of fact you needed much more than 100 WC for most top decks.
Even the deck in your own example requires at least 100 WC, and it's based on a premade deck and also it probably was the single less expensive deck anyone could construct. If they felt it was too easy to get a top deck, all they had to do was to just stop selling that premade deck, or raise its cost.


1. Pre 5T release I watched one of the Enclase's challenge. He was going to build full Ishuma deck in one day. He gave up after around 10 hours as this was an impossible task... He made several serious mistakes with his resources allocation. I know it was pre 5T so it would be more difficult as there were 21 WC less in a relevant box (but the relevant boxes cost 200 seals less so it was not that bad) but still 30 hours for Ishuma deck (with Sayama Champions replaced by Kappas) looks possible.

2. It doesn't matter what Ubi could or couldn't do. The fact is: it was possible to have first top deck playing less than 30 hours.



Now, in order to get those 100 WC you needed about 30 levels. So a player usually needed more than 30 levels to complete one top deck.

It is true for the ladder play only.

After you completed your first top deck the best grinding way was to play tournaments. A moderately good player could win 1/3 swisses and get second on 1/3. That makes 1.4 WC per swiss.



How much time a player needed to level up 30 times? It depends on the player. For the majority of the players though that time was much more than 50 hours.
Thus, it has been proven beyond doubt that the game previously was certainly challenging enough, even according to your standards.
I don't think there is anything else to be said about this matter.

Apart from saying that getting new top deck was not even half as hard as you make it. Especially after you got your first good farming deck.


You keep posting arbitrary numbers out of your mind. Who said anyone needed 6 or 5 or 4 decks for anything?

You said:


But the fun in this game is not to play the same deck again and again, but to have a variety of good decks. So a casual player would be able to make 2-3 good decks before each expansion was released, when he would have to start buying new cards again to complete these decks with the new expansion. That was about it. Not even one strong deck for each faction.

you also said:


So, for you, having to play for a month in order to get one strong deck was not challenging enough.
And for a player to be able to have 2-3 strong decks and just be able to keep them up to date with each expansion, was too much (...) In my opinion that was the least a F2P game should offer to its players.(...)

I was under impression you think 2-3 decks is minimum and 6 top decks is a desirable number (hence you used the word 'even'). If I was wrong I have to apologise...



He may need 6 top decks with the current system in order to complete the quests.

No he doesn't.

Actually some faction's top decks are worse in regards of completing dailies then good farming decks from the same faction.

A good deck for dailies needs to be very quick: even if your winrate suffers you will still complete your quests faster.

You know what? You don't need a single top deck to be an effective farmer at Ch II. Reasonable good quick rush decks will do.



What was really happening, in the actual case, was that a casual player, in your terms (playing an hour a day), could barely make a top deck before a new expansion. Which he needed to complete with the new cards after the expansion, in order to keep it a top deck. That is a fact.

I know for fact this is not true.

I have had one hour for duelling a day. I was able to collect all I needed for several top decks and i was wasting the Wild Cards left right and the middle. I bought 3 Wards against Darkness and Noboru to test how works a deck with Curse of Plenipotent. I spent 45 WC on Dangerous Research just to find out if I can build an Asalah Mill OTK. I was able to spent around 60 WC to complete The Collector achievement.

All this between the releases. And I'm not even a good player...

This are facts.



You posted that, in your opinion, that was not challenging enough and that you like the new system more, because now it's more difficult to make a top deck.

True.



Which means that now a casual player needs more than 3 months to make a top deck,

Not true. Now a casual player is able to build his first top deck in 60 hours. Next top decks are buildable quicker.



Again, whether someone thinks that this is better or not than before, is just a subjective opinion and can not be right or wrong by itself.

I agree.

But the thing is your numbers are incorrect.

Had it been true, that a casual player can't get one top deck between releases I would be with you. And I would be very vocal, believe me.

Had it been true that the old system provided just enough resources that "a casual player (...) could barely make a top deck before a new expansion" I would leave this game long time ago.

But both your thesis are very far from being true.

bambikitkat
05-09-2014, 02:13 PM
well its been probably 40 hours since i started this new account (lvl 24) im far from having competitive deck (and im an old 1500+ player when it was still hard to do it)

i think i'll need atleast to get to level 40 or more to get atleast one decent deck with some missing card though (for example a good stronghold rush deck or an rush inferno without lava spawn and the rare from hon)

i sit on 62 WC but i got 50 of them thx to the 2k seals i got before the release so atm i wont use them would not be fair)

so stop talking about number amine when you dont know what you are talking about, if an experienced player cant get atleast one competitive deck in around 40 hours (given the fact that all my dailies are to win in a swiss tournament for 2 weeks now, which i cant with the card i own) i highly doubt a new player will be able to get one before 60 hours.

and from all the player i added while grinding , only the old player are still playing, all the new players i added didnt connect for like 1 week or more and didnt even reach lvl 10

but its ok keep thinking ubisoft did well, enclase saying player to not start doc on his stream, new players giving up really fast, i guess they all are wrong.


ps : i guess we dont need to talk about the spectator mode or the draft mode they promised 9 months ago.

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 03:11 PM
i sit on 62 WC but i got 50 of them thx to the 2k seals i got before the release so atm i wont use them would not be fair)

If you were able to get just 12WC from the play you just don't know what you are doing.

12 Wild Cards after 40 hours and two weeks play...

1. There are 4 relatively easy achievements that give you 21 WC ( Win without drawing, beat your opponent by 5, beat your opponent by 9, start Twitch, win with 209 cards deck).

3. You were given 2-12 WC from the weeklies...

2. At lvl 20 you should have 550 Seals from achievements That gives you enough to buy: 4 BS2 Superpacks (8 WC) or 3 HoN Suprpacks (6 WC)

Together: 29WC minimum.

Your former nick was kitkatroll, right? I remember I admired your troll skills.

But this time it's just not enough :-)

kitkatroll harder.

bambikitkat
05-09-2014, 03:21 PM
i spent more than 50 wc already, to buy some maniac some 2/0/4 stronghold and zephiria + the 3/3/7

and still isnt enough to get one top deck

so instead of using your number like a kid, try to think, to build a top deck like lets say deleb you need deleb, 21wc + 4 lava spawn 84 wc, +5 others epic or 7 if you play the phoenix so 49 WC + some rare from HoN , so its over maybe 250 wc to get ONE DELEB deck,

atm im playing kat and i can play inferno a bit aswell but they are far from behing competitive deck. im around champion 2 since level 9. only deck i could build to do swiss is necro, but necro isnt strong in top ladder so for me would be a waste of WC to spend it in necro cards.

and calling other ppl troll is just proving you are out of argument.

btw my former account wasnt "kitkatroll" you are pretty bad at guessing aswell :p

ps : cant do the achievement winning by 9 unless my opponent let me do it, and didnt try the 209 card achievement aswell.

and got 6 WC within 3 weeks of dailies 2 xp boost 1 gold boost and 0 ticket so far.

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 03:45 PM
btw my former account wasnt "kitkatroll" you are pretty bad at guessing aswell :p


http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/832417-Base-Set-Two-Card-List-Feedback-Thread-Event?p=9533731#post9533731

"it was kitkatroll; i traded it for a hearthstone account 3 months ago maybe he is still 1500+ dunno i gave it to a new player atleast it made one people happy. you can try to mp it if he still play."

So we know you lied. You lied then or you lied now.

If taken seriously the rest of your post proves your incompetence: you were able to collect 6 WC from play + 6 from weeklies and you spend your wild cards on different decks. And you think your experience should be a benchmark for the new system assessment.

Seriously, you are not half as good as you used to be.

bambikitkat
05-09-2014, 04:23 PM
oh i though it was eyesdeuxo, weird i named it like that but yeah look like i was kitkatroll (eyesdeuxo must have been picked at that time) then.

but still the same, i spend my wilcard on 2 faction only and 2 neutral epic that are good in a lot of deck, just proving if you are new there is no way u'll make it to top elo in a reasonnable amount of time which should be a goal in a competitive ccg :)

but what we are debating is useless if they really are planning to change the daily quest system to make them doable (with 3WC a day would take one month to get one top deck, but as it is now, you cant complete them unless you are already a old player)

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 04:40 PM
but still the same, i spend my wilcard on 2 faction only and 2 neutral epic that are good in a lot of deck,

Not only this. You also spent your precious Wild Cards on


(...)some 2/0/4 stronghold (...)

Well. in Standard there are two Stronghold creatures with 2/0/4 stats. Dreamreaver and Blackskull Shredder. I'll be kind and assume you bought just 2 Blackskull Shredders. They cost you 6 Wild Cards, right? As anybody can check there is 1 Blackskull Shredder in the Stronghlod starter. A starter costs 50 000 gold. So basically you decided you prefer to keep 100 000 then 6 WC..

How much should a Wild Card cost in gold to make it attractive for you? Cos 16 000 looks too much.


just proving if you are new there is no way u'll make it to top elo in a reasonable amount of time

Well, if you spend your WC like this...

bambikitkat
05-09-2014, 04:47 PM
well didnt know for the starter to hold that card, but a new player will spend them even more randomly, since he is knew and doesnt know the game.
or there should be a warning when you get wilcard saying "keep them for later when you know the game".

its just that they removed so much from what you were getting before the patch, that i wasnt used to have to grind that much (even though i was the 1st one saying ubisoft gave too much wilcard whan FW came out)

but after 5T it was just fine no need to remove them that hard (and im still waiting for some esport, this game is 20 months old now, and it cant get more than 300 viewers on twitch which is sad.)

ps : wanted to get rid of my daily quest to win a swiss, went in the tournament, faced a bad stronghold i won, a full build deleb with lava spawn and co, won too thx to my god hands and won against a full build arianna, so look like i didnt spend my wc stupidly, even though i got extremely lucky to win my 1st swiss tournament.

but try to throw a new player vs some full arianna or deleb decks, he'll probably go 0/3.

AmineM2
05-09-2014, 06:30 PM
there should be a warning when you get wilcard saying "keep them for later when you know the game".

I agree.

The system should be also foolproof. For example: it shouldn't let you buy 2nd unique or 5th other card without specific warning.

And regarding your spendings.

You are an experienced player, you know how to play, right?

So maybe you should consider building a rush/midgame deck and then farm the JP Standard tournament to get gold? If you can get to t2/t1 consistently you will have enough gold to get good foundation for future development.

As you have some essentials you may consider something like this:

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/8087

It's relatively cheap, and looks good.



ps : wanted to get rid of my daily quest to win a swiss, went in the tournament, faced a bad stronghold i won, a full build deleb with lava spawn and co, won too thx to my god hands and won against a full build arianna,

Congratulations.

Ps. I think I was a bit too harsh in my previous comments: I'm sorry about this.

bambikitkat
05-09-2014, 07:04 PM
well rush deck arent the deck i like playing, im more of a control player (creature based deck but control)

so investing wc in deck i dont wanna play is kinda useless for me, though i started with inferno as a starter bought maniac and lurker and won like 28 games out of 30 when started)

but the wall i face now in champion 2 is really hard, thats why i want to build some kind of dhamiria control or heaven/sanctuary control deck)

but all those deck need like a tons of epic card, once i can farm swiss on a daily basis will be easy to get them though (i have 23 ticket waiting to get used)

but i still think new players should get the opportunity to chose what they get early on, i mean all the open format card we get from campaign is useless for a new player, at least some super bs2 or hon pack would help way more )

and swiss tournament should get his own ladder and mmr based only on swiss games, like if you fail a lot you play vs ppl that fail a lot so atleast you'd have a chance.

thanasis
05-10-2014, 01:13 AM
Sure I disagree. 60 hours a month is a part time job and you said you don't want to take into consideration people who make this game their second job. But as you said that's fine, as long as we understand what what we mean when we use a term.
30 hours a month is a part time job as well with that logic.
Perhaps you'd like to post a link to a dictionary that states that casual means playing a game for 1 hour a day?


Had you just said what you prefer there would be no debate at all. But we are discussing what is good/bad for other players and for the game.
That's what I said.


1. Pre 5T release I watched one of the Enclase's challenge. He was going to build full Ishuma deck in one day. He gave up after around 10 hours as this was an impossible task... He made several serious mistakes with his resources allocation. I know it was pre 5T so it would be more difficult as there were 21 WC less in a relevant box (but the relevant boxes cost 200 seals less so it was not that bad) but still 30 hours for Ishuma deck (with Sayama Champions replaced by Kappas) looks possible.

2. It doesn't matter what Ubi could or couldn't do. The fact is: it was possible to have first top deck playing less than 30 hours.
In order for it to be a fact you have to prove it somehow. You haven't proven anything yet. You just make an arbitrary statement.
Here, let me give you a clue.
Pick any T1 deck from the thread by SoAmazinglyBad, make a sum of the number of WC you would need to make that deck, and then explain to us how would you get that number of WC in 30 hours.
Then it will be a fact. Anything else is arbitrary statement with no foundation.


After you completed your first top deck the best grinding way was to play tournaments. A moderately good player could win 1/3 swisses and get second on 1/3. That makes 1.4 WC per swiss.
I think you said that for the majority of the players it was too easy to get top decks. Now you say that they would get the WC to make these decks from winning swisses.
If the majority of the players are placing consistently in the top 2 places in swiss tournaments, then who the hell occupies the bottom 6 places?
Not to mention that in order to win in swiss, a player should have already made a top deck in another way.


Apart from saying that getting new top deck was not even half as hard as you make it.
There is an ancient saying in my country "You will not convince me, even if you convince me".
Apparently it's relevant in other countries as well.


I was under impression you think 2-3 decks is minimum and 6 top decks is a desirable number (hence you used the word 'even').
I thought "desirable" had a different meaning than "needed".


I know for fact this is not true.

I have had one hour for duelling a day. I was able to collect all I needed for several top decks and i was wasting the Wild Cards left right and the middle. I bought 3 Wards against Darkness and Noboru to test how works a deck with Curse of Plenipotent. I spent 45 WC on Dangerous Research just to find out if I can build an Asalah Mill OTK. I was able to spent around 60 WC to complete The Collector achievement.

All this between the releases. And I'm not even a good player...

This are facts.
Again, a fact is something that has been proven.
I haven't seen you post anywhere how many WC you were getting in 30 hours, and explain how you did that.
You said "a casual player could get a top deck in 20-30 hours". Well, explain to us how such a player would get 100+ WCs a top deck needed, in 20-30 hours?
Anything else is just arbitrary statements.


Not true. Now a casual player is able to build his first top deck in 60 hours. Next top decks are buildable quicker.
You still haven't posted any actual numbers proving that indeed a player previously needed less than 60 hours to build a top deck.
Now you are saying that with the new system a player can make a top deck in 60 hours or less.
I thought you liked the new system more, because it's more challenging now to make a top deck than before. Or perhaps you like it more because it's easier now to make a top deck?
Or you just like it more without knowing exactly why?


But the thing is your numbers are incorrect.

But both your thesis are very far from being true.
Except I have posted concrete examples proving my case.
On the contrary, all you have done so far is just posting arbitrary statements.

AmineM2
05-10-2014, 04:17 AM
30 hours a month is a part time job as well with that logic.
Perhaps you'd like to post a link to a dictionary that states that casual means playing a game for 1 hour a day?

No,I wouldn't.

I said I'm happy we understand what each of us means by the term.



That's what I said.

And before you said that, you said I was talking about your likings.



In order for it to be a fact you have to prove it somehow. You haven't proven anything yet. You just make an arbitrary statement.

Well, I have seen it.

I've seen nearly completed Random Garant after 10 hours of play (maybe not atop deck, but a very competitive, brilliant farm deck)


Here, let me give you a clue.
Pick any T1 deck from the thread by SoAmazinglyBad, make a sum of the number of WC you would need to make that deck, and then explain to us how would you get that number of WC in 30 hours.
Then it will be a fact. Anything else is arbitrary statement with no foundation.

Except your method is flawed to the point its nearly useless.

It assumes you don't find anything useful in the packs you open.

Every time you ignore the hundreds of cards we were getting from the packs you give the reason why the changes were necessary. DoC is supposed to be a card collecting game. The old system turned it into the Cart Constructing Game. In this game the players are supposed to collect the cards not to make them.

But you know what?

I'll do that for you:

Crag hack. After you buy Avkall's deck (lvl 8 or 9):

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/2414

you need to transform it into this:

http://www.mmdoc.net/show_deck/17306/

In order to do so you need to buy a Crag Hack deck for 125 000 in gold to get Crag Hack and Pao there and then add:

4x Serpentflies (12)
1x War Olifant (3)
4x Black Volture (12)
1x Raanar Harpy (1)
1x Blackskull goblin (6)
4x Sacrificial Altar (4)
3x Stampede (18)

Together: 56 WC

Most of the cards listed I would get from the packs so realistically I would have to spend maybe 20 WC. Or less. The only problem would be unlocking two expansions, but even incomplete CH deck was good enough to compete in JP tournaments to farm some extra gold.

There are few more cheap decks on the SAB's list (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/817223-Decktierlist-5-Towers). Let me list just two:

Acamas Surprise I

http://www.mmdoc.net/show_deck/19099/

Acamas Surprise II

http://www.mmdoc.net/show_deck/16523/

If you want me I'll do the math.


I think you said that for the majority of the players it was too easy to get top decks.

Thinking is good, but quoting is better.



There is an ancient saying in my country "You will not convince me, even if you convince me".
Apparently it's relevant in other countries as well.

We'll see if its relevant in your country.



Again, a fact is something that has been proven.
I haven't seen you post anywhere how many WC you were getting in 30 hours, and explain how you did that.

A fact is something what happened - it does not matter if I can prove it or not. Sometimes unproven witnesses' testimonies are proves on themselves, aren't they? The only question is if a witness is reliable and truthful.

I told you about my experiences. They are facts. You might believe me or not, but I'm not going deny my experiences only because proves (e.g. gamelogs) are out of my reach.

The way I got my WC (which I then wasted like a madman)? I farmed swisses.

I played mostly Ishuma creatureso my average game time was below 7 min.

And I got a lot of good cards from the packs I opened so I didn't need to spend full WC cost on my decks .

I also bought few useful rares in the Infernal Pit.

Thorssen64
05-10-2014, 08:28 AM
What Crag Hack deck? It isn't possible to buy this any more that I can see.

thanasis
05-10-2014, 10:20 PM
Thinking is good, but quoting is better.
Optimal is remembering what you've said though.
Instead of making witty comments perhaps you could give a straightforward answer for a change. Isn't that what you're claiming?


We'll see if its relevant in your country.
As I said, apparently it's relevant in other countries as well.

thanasis
05-10-2014, 10:39 PM
A fact is something what happened - it does not matter if I can prove it or not.
"A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

thanasis
05-10-2014, 11:06 PM
The way I got my WC (which I then wasted like a madman)? I farmed swisses.
Let me remind you that you said you prefer the new system because with the old one it was too easy to make a top deck.
In a swiss tournament only 2 out of 8 places get prizes. So, for obvious reasons, out of the whole population only a minority can consistently place well in them.
Not to mention that you had to own already a top deck and be experienced enough in order to place well in swisses.
For that minority it might have been too easy to make new decks, I don't know. Is that minority what you were talking about?
Because when we are judging a system we're supposed to take into account what applies to the majority of the population and not just an elite minority.
And you can't seriously expect from the majority of the population to acquire their WC through swisses. There should have been 5-6 prizes awarded for every 8 players in order for that to be possible.

thanasis
05-10-2014, 11:35 PM
Every time you ignore the hundreds of cards we were getting from the packs you give the reason why the changes were necessary. DoC is supposed to be a card collecting game. The old system turned it into the Cart Constructing Game. In this game the players are supposed to collect the cards not to make them.
This is your theory.
Every CCG I know of, gives the possibility to the players to acquire speciffic cards. And rightly so, because otherwise a player would need to grind for endless hours or spend ridiculous amounts of money in order to get the cards he needed.
And those that grinded the most hours or spent the most money would be at the top, because they would have the most useful cards.

thanasis
05-10-2014, 11:55 PM
But you know what?

I'll do that for you:

Crag hack. After you buy Avkall's deck (lvl 8 or 9):

http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/2414

you need to transform it into this:

http://www.mmdoc.net/show_deck/17306/

In order to do so you need to buy a Crag Hack deck for 125 000 in gold to get Crag Hack and Pao there and then add:

4x Serpentflies (12)
1x War Olifant (3)
4x Black Volture (12)
1x Raanar Harpy (1)
1x Blackskull goblin (6)
4x Sacrificial Altar (4)
3x Stampede (18)

Together: 56 WC

Most of the cards listed I would get from the packs so realistically I would have to spend maybe 20 WC. Or less. The only problem would be unlocking two expansions, but even incomplete CH deck was good enough to compete in JP tournaments to farm some extra gold.

There are few more cheap decks on the SAB's list (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/817223-Decktierlist-5-Towers). Let me list just two:

Acamas Surprise I

http://www.mmdoc.net/show_deck/19099/

Acamas Surprise II

http://www.mmdoc.net/show_deck/16523/

If you want me I'll do the math.

This is your statement:

The old system let you build your first t1 deck after 20-30 hours of play.
Can you please show me how I could build a T1 deck from the thread that you posted in 20-30 hours?

AmineM2
05-11-2014, 03:10 AM
Optimal is remembering what you've said though.

It is optimal if your memory serves you well.



Instead of making witty comments perhaps you could give a straightforward answer for a change. Isn't that what you're claiming?

No it's not what I was claiming (I'll explain below).


"A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

The bolded phrase is the definition.

The second part informs how we usually test statements of facts. You mixed up the term (fact) with the indicator (test).


Let me remind you that you said you prefer the new system because with the old one it was too easy to make a top deck.
In a swiss tournament only 2 out of 8 places get prizes. So, for obvious reasons, out of the whole population only a minority can consistently place well in them.
Not to mention that you had to own already a top deck and be experienced enough in order to place well in swisses.
For that minority it might have been too easy to make new decks, I don't know. Is that minority what you were talking about?
Because when we are judging a system we're supposed to take into account what applies to the majority of the population and not just an elite minority.
And you can't seriously expect from the majority of the population to acquire their WC through swisses. There should have been 5-6 prizes awarded for every 8 players in order for that to be possible.

Your analysis is correct for homogeneous sub-population of players who all share the same goals (be competitive as soon as possible and be competitive as much as possible) and are ready to pay the price (example: sacrifice personal preference regarding playstyle or faction). Fortunately, people differ and people's motivations differ. Some players experiment a lot and they play suboptimal decks they hope they can improve. Some players don't know the game and bring miserable decks to the tournaments. Some players play troll decks with lower winrate but spectacular outcome when the deck clicks in. Some players are attached to their playstyle/factions and they pay a price with lower winrate...

And that's why (among other reasons) a win oriented player had good chances to win a swiss tournament.

Look, not so long ago you said:


I think you're making this game sound much more complicated than it really is. Or perhaps we just have different goals when playing a game. Most people don't want to make a second job out of any game. They just want to have fun playing it.
My interpretation of having fun is to not feel like you're being stomped. That means to have a win rate of around 50% or more at a high rank and be able to enjoy some variety in your game. Most people, after playing with the same deck for a month would want to try something different.

When I read it I was tempted to use the same argument: let's assume this is a minimum for all the players. If this is the minimum for staying in the game, then in short time nobody will stay... Even if all the players have exactly the same skill, someone has to have a low rank for someone else to have a high rank, right? Majority can't have a high rank...

I resisted this temptation, cos I know that your requirements are not shared by all. There are people who don't care about their rank/winrate/topdecks as much as others, and thanks to them many people with high expectation regarding their rank/winrate can be happy.

My claim was (and is): it was very much possible to have a top deck after less than 30 hours of play. It was very much possible to win 1/3 swisses with a top deck.

In order to do so player needed to:

1. Have average or better playing skill
2. Know exactly what he wants to do with his resources
3. Be ready to pay the price regarding playstyle/factions


This is your theory.

No, it's not my theory. Its the name of the game: card collecting game.



Every CCG I know of, gives the possibility to the players to acquire speciffic cards. And rightly so, because otherwise a player would need to grind for endless hours or spend ridiculous amounts of money in order to get the cards he needed.

Sure. You stated the obvious.

Getting a specific card from time to time is a good thing.

But you wanted me to explain how I build my deck(s) using wild cards only, ignoring cards from packs. And that's exactly what happened to the game: we stopped to collect the cards. We were collecting the WC to build entire decks.


This is your statement:
0
Can you please show me how I could build a T1 deck from the thread that you posted in 20-30 hours?

I did.

Any deck which - with a reasonably good operator - could take you to t1 in jackpot on regular basis in less than 20 games is a t1 deck in my book. Crag Hack most definitely did the trick.

But whatever we agree or not what is a t1 deck do you agree that it was possible to have a strong competitive deck after less than 30 hours of play?

Regalian6
05-11-2014, 05:49 AM
Fortunately, people differ and people's motivations differ. Some players experiment a lot and they play suboptimal decks they hope they can improve. Some players don't know the game and bring miserable decks to the tournaments. Some players play troll decks with lower winrate but spectacular outcome when the deck clicks in. Some players are attached to their playstyle/factions and they pay a price with lower winrate...

And that's why (among other reasons) a win oriented player had good chances to win a swiss tournament.



Amine2 I feel that you're greatly disconnected from reality. Maybe because you're a top player in the game and can farm swisses successfully or the fact that you joined the game early when everything was fine and dandy.

I have no idea where you get 'experiment a lot' using 'sub-optimal deck' from. When you don't have an optimal deck, it's hard to win tournament jackpot and swiss, and unless you artificially lower your ranking you won't be able to farm a lot of cards in a long time. This means you won't get a lot of cards, hence there's no way to experiment. I was stuck on my garant starting deck for a long time because the best placing I can achieve in Jackpot was tier 5 and it was no fun grinding. So for someone to be able to experiment they need to have a strong deck in the first place, and as you've said further down, you can't be locked into a single playstyle/faction so you probably need to have a few good decks.

I didn't read though the whole conversation but from past experiences, I don't think your arguments would make sense, probably because you're one of the gifted few in this game that's different from everyone else.

Thorssen64
05-11-2014, 08:10 AM
And I repeat, Crag Hack deck is no longer available.

AmineM2
05-11-2014, 08:23 AM
Amine2 I feel that you're greatly disconnected from reality.

Thank you, you are very kind


Maybe because you're a top player in the game and can farm swisses successfully or the fact that you joined the game early when everything was fine and dandy.

1. I'm not a top player
2. I joined the game just after HotV release.



I have no idea where you get 'experiment a lot' using 'sub-optimal deck' from.

I have no idea why you think it's my idea.


When you don't have an optimal deck, it's hard to win tournament jackpot and swiss,

Have I ever said anything else?

I said it was easy to farm swissess with a top deck as there were many suboptimal decks in the swisses. It was true especially in January and February as top players didn't play swisses that much.

Anecdata: I played 2 swisses last night. I've met decks with 100+cards there.



I don't think your arguments would make sense, probably because you're one of the gifted few in this game that's different from everyone else.

You are wrong. Many other players though that the best way to get new cards was farming the swissess. I've read many such advices for new players: when you get a good deck and learn how to play it go and farm swissess.



And I repeat, Crag Hack deck is no longer available.

I know. Avkall's deck is no longer available as well.

We are discussing pre HoN meta.

I try to prove my point that it was possible to get a top deck in very short time during pre HoN era.

guest-F9pS8GRI
05-11-2014, 08:51 AM
I try to prove my point that it was possible to get a top deck in very short time during pre HoN era.

GZ, you failed hard, the question is how hard is it to get a top deck post HoN, not pre HoN, which was in the past and doesn't matter for new player who startet after HoN release.

AmineM2
05-11-2014, 09:06 AM
GZ, you failed hard, the question is how hard is it to get a top deck post HoN, not pre HoN, which was in the past and doesn't matter for new player who startet after HoN release.

I'm sorry we were discussing a sub_topic without your permission. Please accept my apology. It will never happen again. :-)

Regalian6
05-11-2014, 10:55 AM
You said "Some players experiment a lot and they play suboptimal decks they hope they can improve."
But for someone to be able to experiment a lot, they need to have a good deck and be good at the game already hence your sentence doesn't make sense.
As said before you're very gifted, going against someone with 100+ cards in swiss? That's the kind of luck I never had, and I've finished 2nd 6 times in a row in swiss before giving up on that silly daily quest.

AmineM2
05-11-2014, 11:21 AM
You said "Some players experiment a lot and they play suboptimal decks they hope they can improve." But for someone to be able to experiment a lot, they need to have a good deck and be good at the game already hence your sentence doesn't make sense.

Let my try to explain one last time.

I listed reasons why people played suboptimal decks. One of the reason I mentioned is: some of the players use experimental decks. I know I'm right cos I was one of such a person. After I farmed enough swissess with my Ishuma to have few good decks I started to experiment. I created an Asalah Mill OTK and I tried it during swisses. The deck failed miserably, but you could face me there..

Granted: after the patch, as the tickets are not so easy to get, it is not important factor.

gabusan
05-11-2014, 02:26 PM
The short answer is that you need to complete the "win a swiss tournament" daily quest so you can hopefully get a quest that grants wildcards in that slot.

Regalian6
05-11-2014, 09:00 PM
Let my try to explain one last time.

I listed reasons why people played suboptimal decks. One of the reason I mentioned is: some of the players use experimental decks. I know I'm right cos I was one of such a person. After I farmed enough swissess with my Ishuma to have few good decks I started to experiment. I created an Asalah Mill OTK and I tried it during swisses. The deck failed miserably, but you could face me there..

Granted: after the patch, as the tickets are not so easy to get, it is not important factor.

Whoa, there again, you're showing just how special you are with an abundance of tickets to waste. So many places to play a fun deck and you take it to swisses. I doubt if there are many if any like you.

AmineM2
05-11-2014, 09:50 PM
Whoa, there again, you're showing just how special you are with an abundance of tickets to waste. So many places to play a fun deck and you take it to swisses. I doubt if there are many if any like you.

Why are you still doing this personal references?

Of course pre-patch the tickets were very easy to get. There were players who saved more than hundred of them. It was nothing special to have some spare tickets to waste.

Thorssen64
05-11-2014, 10:01 PM
We are discussing pre HoN meta.

I try to prove my point that it was possible to get a top deck in very short time during pre HoN era.
And that is bad? I think that most new players would like that opportunity too.

Regalian6
05-11-2014, 10:57 PM
Why are you still doing this personal references?

Of course pre-patch the tickets were very easy to get. There were players who saved more than hundred of them. It was nothing special to have some spare tickets to waste.

So you're saying you like the new system while taking advantage of the old one, which was clearly much better. "Tickets to waste" Hahaha.

I need to do this personal references because all your experiences have been extremely special, and I'm pretty sure only applies to you and very few others.

Shinrin
05-11-2014, 11:13 PM
Honestly, wildcards and wild card costs are to high imo when seals are pretty much impossible to gain in free to play.
I got stored up close to 50 wild cards, because I simply can't justify using em on the cards i want(28 for a chaos imp is -_- )
It's a redicilous amount of play time needed to gain the wild cards needed for 4 and that's discounting the rest of the deck i intend to make.
(if only getting wild cards from the 7 days in a row that would make it 784 days in a row you'd have to login to get the cards for 4 chaos imps........... really?....)

It should be 5 wild cards for a 7 day in a row login imo not a lame 1 WC, seals should be easier to get, even if just recieving 25 a week it would be good enough.

wouldn't mind seeing more wild cards in daily reawds either.

AmineM2
05-11-2014, 11:26 PM
So you're saying you like the new system while taking advantage of the old one, which was clearly much better.

No this not what I'm saying.

All I' saying is:

1. The old system was bad (but it was generous)
2. The new system might work if some important changes are introduced.


"Tickets to waste" Hahaha.

Is it so strange?

I've seen Revalon's screenshot: he saved more than 100 tickets.

Here you have another example:

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/867668-So-how-many-seals-did-you-guys-manage-to-grind-out-before-BS2-hits?p=9907794&viewfull=1#post9907794

Having a spare ticket from time to time wasn't anything special.



I need to do this personal references because all your experiences have been extremely special, and I'm pretty sure only applies to you and very few others.

Well, for me it looks like you have some beef with me. Have I harmed you? Been disrespectful? If so I'm sorry.

Regalian6
05-12-2014, 10:08 AM
No this not what I'm saying.

All I' saying is:

1. The old system was bad (but it was generous)
2. The new system might work if some important changes are introduced.



Is it so strange?

I've seen Revalon's screenshot: he saved more than 100 tickets.

Here you have another example:

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/867668-So-how-many-seals-did-you-guys-manage-to-grind-out-before-BS2-hits?p=9907794&viewfull=1#post9907794

Having a spare ticket from time to time wasn't anything special.



Well, for me it looks like you have some beef with me. Have I harmed you? Been disrespectful? If so I'm sorry.

Yes, it's strange. I have joined the game since Nov 2013 and have diligently collected every single daily reward and have not used a single ticket until swiss dailies showed up. I also have 100+ tickets saved up, but that doesn't mean I'll go around 'wasting tickets'. Tickets are effectively seals which now are only able to be acquired with real money. All I'm saying is your arguments for what you think is good that happened to the game differ greatly from many others, maybe because of the unique situation you're in, but it is extremely detrimental to the game IF Ubi values your opinion over others.

The new system might work if it gets changed, this means it's bad right now without changes, and Ubi sure is taking their time to improve it.

Edit: Let me word it this way. Basically as a person who can afford to waste tickets, can win a swiss whenever you want to, and have acquired the majority of the cards in this game (cause it was so easy back then), I don't feel your input in regards to the economics system has any value. You are like those rich guys in the middle east with several luxury cars that is out of touch with the hardships ordinary people have to go through in a normal economy. But your opinions on issues such as card balancing etc would surely be appreciated.

thanasis
05-12-2014, 11:21 AM
I did.

1. All you did was take a premade deck they were selling and modify it a little. If that was what made acquiring a top deck so easy, according to you, then all they had to do was to stop selling that deck, instead of ruining the game.
2. You said the game was not challenging enough to keep people interested. Yet, you, and the few others making the same claim, stuck around for almost a year or more. Let's see how much the new players will stay.
3. If for a player like you, who has almost everything (because of how the game used to be), is more difficult now to make top decks, then imagine how difficult it must be for a new player or someone that started a couple of months ago.
4. For someone who likes the game, yet he feels it's not too challenging, there is an easy solution: Give up your pimped up account and play with a new one (permanently).
Still, I don't see any of you doing that, probably because this game is more enjoyable after you have acquired a lot of things than it is when you're actually acquiring those things.
You just want other players to spit blood (or money) before they are able to get the same things that you have gotten for free.

AmineM2
05-12-2014, 11:23 AM
Yes, it's strange. I have joined the game since Nov 2013 and have diligently collected every single daily reward and have not used a single ticket until swiss dailies showed up. I also have 100+ tickets saved up, but that doesn't mean I'll go around 'wasting tickets'. Tickets are effectively seals which now are only able to be acquired with real money.

As you said now

Before the patch we were given tickets just for playing.

As they say: easy come easy go.

I think I was not clear what 'wasting tickets' meant in my comments. Maybe word I used is too strong. What I meant was: some players who had top decks in their inventory deliberately picked weaker/unproven decks (be it to test them or just for fun or whatever). It's not like putting a ticket into a trash bin.

But you know what? No matter what the reasons were: in the pre-patch era there were quite a few not t1 decks in the Swiss. A win oriented player with a top deck and reasonable skill could easily get more than 30% tournament win rate.


The new system might work if it gets changed, this means it's bad right now without changes, and Ubi sure is taking their time to improve it.

My thoughts exactly.

AmineM2
05-12-2014, 12:57 PM
1. All you did was take a premade deck they were selling and modify it a little. If that was what made acquiring a top deck so easy, according to you, then all they had to do was to stop selling that deck, instead of ruining the game.

You asked me to show how it was possible to build a top deck in less then 30 hours. I did what you asked me to do.

Do you agree it was possible?



2. You said the game was not challenging enough to keep people interested. Yet, you, and the few others making the same claim, stuck around for almost a year or more. Let's see how much the new players will stay.

Had I been happy with the new system I would agree to test it that way.

But I'm not happy.

If they don't introduce major changes very soon the new system will repel new players for sure. A new competitive oriented player has to develop all 6 factions in the order to collect Wild Cards and it's just stupid. Developing one is hard enough. And adding a cancel mission button will not help that much. Even then if a player wants to collect the Wild Cards in reasonable time he needs to develop 3 or 4 factions.



3. If for a player like you, who has almost everything (because of how the game used to be), is more difficult now to make top decks, then imagine how difficult it must be for a new player or someone that started a couple of months ago.

I don't have everything. I'm not even close.

Before the patch I had all the cards for Necro (apart from Namtaru Channeller and few spells), nearly all the cards for Sanctuary and many cards for Academy. I made a long term decision to focus on those 3 factions. I told you:I spent 1 hour on duelling per day so i would have no time to try all the builds from those 3 factions never mind 6. For long time I have been burning in the pit everything else (no matter rares, commons or Epics - I just kept some for achievements). Then after the HoN I was in trouble (comparable to the new players' problems) There is still a long way ahead of me to collect all the cards for standard never mind Open.



4. For someone who likes the game, yet he feels it's not too challenging, there is an easy solution: Give up your pimped up account and play with a new one (permanently).
Still, I don't see any of you doing that, probably because this game is more enjoyable after you have acquired a lot of things than it is when you're actually acquiring those things. You just want other players to spit blood (or money) before they are able to get the same things that you have gotten for free.

Why did you use a plural form? 'any of you'? Last time I checked I was a single person. And I don't represent anybody but me. Please when you talk to me use singular form.

I spat my blood already. I've been playing this game when it was very hard to get a top deck. Much harder than it is now. 120 hours of play and a deck not even close to the top. Granted I made a lot of mistakes, but even a top player needed to play 90 days of extensive play to get a deck which was capable to get into the t1 in the Jackpot.

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/795856-Experience-1500-Elo-without-real-money-MMDoC-Pay2Win

And, please take a note: his deck is still far from perfectness.

I went through my "initiation rite". I see no reason to walk though it again.

And I don't want the new players to have half difficulties I had. I just want the game to prevent players from completing first t1 deck before 60 hours of play.

For good of the game because people don't value easy obtainable things.

Regalian6
05-12-2014, 02:09 PM
As you said now

Before the patch we were given tickets just for playing.

As they say: easy come easy go.

I think I was not clear what 'wasting tickets' meant in my comments. Maybe word I used is too strong. What I meant was: some players who had top decks in their inventory deliberately picked weaker/unproven decks (be it to test them or just for fun or whatever). It's not like putting a ticket into a trash bin.

But you know what? No matter what the reasons were: in the pre-patch era there were quite a few not t1 decks in the Swiss. A win oriented player with a top deck and reasonable skill could easily get more than 30% tournament win rate.



My thoughts exactly.

Given tickets for just playing? You mean the one time achievements that offer tickets?

Easy come easy go eh? You must be truly different because that's not how people organize/judge their real world possessions. Say the value of a card in MTG doubles today (Due to being unbanned etc), you're not going to trade it for another card that only has half its value, which was its value when you acquired it, instead, you'll be judging it at its current value.

AmineM2
05-12-2014, 03:51 PM
Given tickets for just playing? You mean the one time achievements that offer tickets?

Again wrong guess :-)

Ubi was giving us 0-9 tickets a week (I would say it was 4 tickets a week on average) + anything between 65-180 seals, 1 ticket cost 46 seals.

As I mentioned before, I had 1 hour for duelling a day. This makes 2 swiss tournaments every other day and 6.5 swiss per week on average. As you see all needs of a 1_hour_a_day player were covered with free staff Ubi was giving out for free.



Easy come easy go eh? You must be truly different because that's not how people organize/judge their real world possessions.

That's exactly how it works in real word. I didn't make this proverb out,did I? In my mother tongue there is exactly the same.

I linked a research to show how people don't value things that came easily. There is more empiric data regarding similar subjects. You can find it in many economy, sociology and psychology coursebooks.

If you are really interested in the subject I can get you some more data.


Say the value of a card in MTG doubles today (Due to being unbanned etc), you're not going to trade it for another card that only has half its value, which was its value when you acquired it, instead, you'll be judging it at its current value.

Of course I wouldn't do that. I would sell items as close to the market value as I can.

Not because I value them so high, but because other people do.

Not because I'm attached to the cards, or I liked them but because I can spend money on things I like.

If you want to make people loyal to your trade mark your goods cant be cheap or very easy to get

Regalian6
05-13-2014, 04:11 AM
Again wrong guess :-)

Ubi was giving us 0-9 tickets a week (I would say it was 4 tickets a week on average) + anything between 65-180 seals, 1 ticket cost 46 seals.

As I mentioned before, I had 1 hour for duelling a day. This makes 2 swiss tournaments every other day and 6.5 swiss per week on average. As you see all needs of a 1_hour_a_day player were covered with free staff Ubi was giving out for free.



That's exactly how it works in real word. I didn't make this proverb out,did I? In my mother tongue there is exactly the same.

I linked a research to show how people don't value things that came easily. There is more empiric data regarding similar subjects. You can find it in many economy, sociology and psychology coursebooks.

If you are really interested in the subject I can get you some more data.



Of course I wouldn't do that. I would sell items as close to the market value as I can.

Not because I value them so high, but because other people do.

Not because I'm attached to the cards, or I liked them but because I can spend money on things I like.

If you want to make people loyal to your trade mark your goods cant be cheap or very easy to get

Yeah, as said in previous post, you are very different, because you're simply overflowing with resources just like rich dudes in middle east. They don't save because money comes to them since they have oil. In an episode where a family got interviewed, the daughters didn't even know how many cars their family had (all luxury cars). That is not the case with everyone else, it's pretty much only you and a few others.

AmineM2
05-13-2014, 04:24 AM
Yeah, as said in previous post, you are very different, because you're simply overflowing with resources just like rich dudes in middle east. They don't save because money comes to them since they have oil. In an episode where a family got interviewed, the daughters didn't even know how many cars their family had (all luxury cars). That is not the case with everyone else, it's pretty much only you and a few others.

You are wrong again.

Everybody was given the same number of tickets and seals as me. Basically, Ubi provided enough free resources for a 1_hour_a_day player to play swisses on every opportunity.

But you know what? I was wrong as well.

I said the tickets were provided just for playing which is not true. All the resources needed to play swissess on every opportunity were provided just for logging in.