Double events: a terrible idea

Morphis

Now in the saheeli event thread some people started discussing the problem of having two event at once.
well IT IS a problem.

- First of it all we have no deck saves.
So getting different decks for different objective may require many adjustement.

- Second going back and forth you can easily forget what the hell you are playing. You are in saheeli? Or was it NoP? ****? You feel lost.

- last but not least: it is exhausting!!!
My head hurts
My eyes are on fire.
While it's true no one is forcing me to play for personal prizes I would feel bad for leaving my coalition without a member. So I want to play at least to get some ribbons.
This leads to me making mistakes even stupid ones while playing(like my first **** match: I forgot to put phone in charge and lost the match cause of shut down).
Every time things go bad for luck, cards or whatever you get even angrier than normal cause you are tired, very tired.

So pleas PLEASE DEVS.
I don't know why you decided to make this happen.
If it will ever be decided to bring some special event back at last time, REMOVE temporarily the current ones.

Thanks.
P.s. Hope this topic makes sense, my English gets worse when I am tired

EDHdad

OTOH, it does give more people the opportunity to win more prizes. I understand what you're saying, but this really is only a problem if you assume that your coalition always has to be the top coalition in every event. I'm sure there are several teams in the top 10 / top 25 / top 100 of some event which have never been in the top 10 / 25 / 50 before.

KoopaTroopa

EDHdad wrote:

is only a problem if you assume that your coalition always has to be the top coalition in every event.

That is the least of his problems when there are people botting and using modded apps

Pqmtg-

Morphis wrote:

Pqmtg- wrote:

2) I do applaud the decision to give more events and even overlapping events. Currently coalitions are set up in a way that pretty much guarantees top coalitions stay on top(as they keep powering up with more mythics). This at least gives the smaller coalitions a chance by eventually forcing some coalitions to focus on one event or another. Would prefer coalition tiers too, but I'll get what I can get.

I think you are optimistic.
As long as event will not require the same time that qb leaderboard does, top players will be able to simply dominate every single event.
Its not hard to play 2 or even 3 events at the same time.

See. It's working already.

Morphis

Pqmtg- wrote:

Morphis wrote:

Pqmtg- wrote:

2) I do applaud the decision to give more events and even overlapping events. Currently coalitions are set up in a way that pretty much guarantees top coalitions stay on top(as they keep powering up with more mythics). This at least gives the smaller coalitions a chance by eventually forcing some coalitions to focus on one event or another. Would prefer coalition tiers too, but I'll get what I can get.

I think you are optimistic.
As long as event will not require the same time that qb leaderboard does, top players will be able to simply dominate every single event.
Its not hard to play 2 or even 3 events at the same time.

See. It's working already.

I have to admit I underestimated the size of the problem before trying it in first person.

That said probably it won't matter much.

Some people could get more than usual cause they see it as a unique chance.
Some other will fall behind cause it's not worth it for them to try this hard.
That wI'll only affect a low % of people.
For all others it will only mean getting same results(talking about each individual event) with much more effort(because you are playing 2 event together 2 times in a row during a single weekend)
It begins to feel too much like a job.

If giving a better chance to more player or "rotating" somehow winners is the matter there was an easy Solution from the very beginning: if you run 2 events let people only be able to join one.
This would have also fixed the problem of people already owning saheeli competing for saheeli again.

Simple.

warcin

With the addition of coalitions and their rewards doing multiple overlapping events like this was a horrible idea. I have to admit that I have been asking myself if this game is really worth the investment since I am suffering an extreme amount of burnout. The quick battles are not an issue since I am only affecting my own progress by deciding the amount of play I want to put in, but the other events my choice affects everyone else in my coalition. If this happens often I have a feeling it will drive away many more players than it will ever gain

Pqmtg-

Morphis wrote:

Pqmtg- wrote:

Morphis wrote:

Pqmtg- wrote:

2) I do applaud the decision to give more events and even overlapping events. Currently coalitions are set up in a way that pretty much guarantees top coalitions stay on top(as they keep powering up with more mythics). This at least gives the smaller coalitions a chance by eventually forcing some coalitions to focus on one event or another. Would prefer coalition tiers too, but I'll get what I can get.

I think you are optimistic.
As long as event will not require the same time that qb leaderboard does, top players will be able to simply dominate every single event.
Its not hard to play 2 or even 3 events at the same time.

See. It's working already.

I have to admit I underestimated the size of the problem before trying it in first person.

That said probably it won't matter much.

Some people could get more than usual cause they see it as a unique chance.
Some other will fall behind cause it's not worth it for them to try this hard.
That wI'll only affect a low % of people.
For all others it will only mean getting same results(talking about each individual event) with much more effort(because you are playing 2 event together 2 times in a row during a single weekend)
It begins to feel too much like a job.

If giving a better chance to more player or "rotating" somehow winners is the matter there was an easy Solution from the very beginning: if you run 2 events let people only be able to join one.
This would have also fixed the problem of people already owning saheeli competing for saheeli again.

Simple.

I think I'm pretty hardcore, and even I have decided to not play saheeli this time round. I was going to go for it the last event, and realised it cut into my enjoyment.

Morphis

Again I would have not played saheeli either if it was not for coalition ranking.
Right now I am going only for one secondary in terror in the shadows, making is much less of a problem, cause I still hate that event even outside of the double event.

This way the whole thing is less of a problem for sure but again, double events does not accomplish much:

- top people and coalition will still be overall the same level probably.
Some going a little up some going a little down

- saheeli prize will for a big % go to people that already own It, so wasted.

The only good thing it does for sure is to give more prizes overall.
That goal can be achieved in better ways.

Also by a pure game design perspective people should be able to get the most out of a game while having fun.
Putting so much content that implies not having fun to play it all, it's bad for the game.

Pacone

Sure overlapping events is crazy, but I don't think they should never do something like this again.

Makes people choose where to invest their time, more progression prizes for everyone...and gives those with job and kids a chance to get a higher rank

EDHdad

Running some actual numbers of the top 10 in both events:

At this time, there are 8 coalitions which are top 10 in both events.

There are 2 coalitions which are top 10 in the Saheeli event, but not the Terrors event.

There are 2 coalitions which are top 10 in the Terrors event, but not the Saheeli event.

Of the top 10 all time coalitions, 9 are in the top 10 of one event or another.

So, just for the top 10:

* 160 players will receive double prizes for being top 10.

* 80 players will receive one prize for being in the top 10.

If there was only one event, you'd have 200 people getting one prize for being in the top 10.

This means that 240 people, 20% more, will receive at least one prize for being top 10, and 160 of those will receive double prizes.

It's probably similar for other prize brackets.

BTW, if you don't already have Saheeli, it's not difficult to avoid winning her. My coalition is in the top 10 of the Saheeli event, and I'm #341 in my bracket in the same event.

EDHdad

If the problem is too much grinding, then the solution would be to cap the max number of games.

Right now, you get the top Progression Award for winning about 25 to 30 games. But you can play up to 70 games in the event.

I'd much rather there was a system where, once you had your 25 to 30 wins, the event ends for you and you can get on with your life.

JMussels

I am LOVING having multiple events. More opportunities to get prizes for playing a free game over the weekend? Yes, please!! Thrilled at multiple chances at Saheeli. The ONLY beef I have at the moment is with the inability to save multiple decks - it is getting old switching Kiora between **** and SR!

Pacone

Keep in mind that we are all on the same grounds with secondary objectives. You either micromanage your decks, switching cards between events, mix cards to meet all secondary requirements (creating some really weird concoctions, as I've witnessed), or pass altogether.

So long as we are on the same conditions, I'm fine with it.

Morphis

The problem is not it not being "fair"(@pqmtg stop right there, don't even try to talk ), it's just bad.
Not claiming I am at a disadvantage compared to others or it is affecting me more than others(even if by logic if you are on top you can only go down).

We all are going to enjoy less the game, i'd like for us all to enjoy it more instead.
That's at least IMO.

There are probably people that enjoy playing so much in such a short time span.
I don't and think many like me don't.

ridfrenzy

Coming soon: Triple events!

Pqmtg-

Morphis wrote:

Again I would have not played saheeli either if it was not for coalition ranking.
Right now I am going only for one secondary in terror in the shadows, making is much less of a problem, cause I still hate that event even outside of the double event.

This way the whole thing is less of a problem for sure but again, double events does not accomplish much:

- top people and coalition will still be overall the same level probably.
Some going a little up some going a little down

- saheeli prize will for a big % go to people that already own It, so wasted.

The only good thing it does for sure is to give more prizes overall.
That goal can be achieved in better ways.

Also by a pure game design perspective people should be able to get the most out of a game while having fun.
Putting so much content that implies not having fun to play it all, it's bad for the game.

You don't have to play both events. You can leave your coalition if they insist you do. These are personal choices. You get what you put in. You can't complain just because you're now currently hitting the ceiling of what you feel you can put in.

Entertaining this kind of complaint is like entertaining demands to make events 6 hours long because someone can't afford to play all day because they "have a life".

EDHdad

There are probably people that enjoy playing so much in such a short time span.
I don't and think many like me don't

Do you have to play every event with maximum effort? Nobody complains that Quick Battle events are going on at the same time as Coalition events. Nor that Story Mode is still there. If you can choose to play or not play Quick Battle, couldn't you also choose to play or not play Saheeli? Or at least not play her with 100% pedal-to-the-metal effort?

As far as I'm concerned, they could have events every hour. People are always complaining about stingy drop rates and prize payouts. But then they double or triple the number of prizes being given out in a certain week, and people complain about that as well.

LeafHyren

Morphis wrote:

Now in the saheeli event thread some people started discussing the problem of having two event at once.
well IT IS a problem.

- First of it all we have no deck saves.
So getting different decks for different objective may require many adjustement.

- Second going back and forth you can easily forget what the hell you are playing. You are in saheeli? Or was it NoP? ****? You feel lost.

- last but not least: it is exhausting!!!
My head hurts
My eyes are on fire.
While it's true no one is forcing me to play for personal prizes I would feel bad for leaving my coalition without a member. So I want to play at least to get some ribbons.
This leads to me making mistakes even stupid ones while playing(like my first **** match: I forgot to put phone in charge and lost the match cause of shut down).
Every time things go bad for luck, cards or whatever you get even angrier than normal cause you are tired, very tired.

So pleas PLEASE DEVS.
I don't know why you decided to make this happen.
If it will ever be decided to bring some special event back at last time, REMOVE temporarily the current ones.

Thanks.
P.s. Hope this topic makes sense, my English gets worse when I am tired

Absolutely Agree Morphis. It feels like we have become numbers in graphs and not individuals trying to enjoy this wonderful game, and I say this because the multiple events clearly increase user play time. It increases the quantity of play and not the quality. Stop treating us like statistics please.

Have taken a break from my coalition because of this, and I like my coalition a lot. I can't contribute all the time! So I am upset the supply they made available ruined my experience.

Pqmtg-

EDHdad wrote:

There are probably people that enjoy playing so much in such a short time span.
I don't and think many like me don't

Do you have to play every event with maximum effort? Nobody complains that Quick Battle events are going on at the same time as Coalition events. Nor that Story Mode is still there. If you can choose to play or not play Quick Battle, couldn't you also choose to play or not play Saheeli? Or at least not play her with 100% pedal-to-the-metal effort?

As far as I'm concerned, they could have events every hour. People are always complaining about stingy drop rates and prize payouts. But then they double or triple the number of prizes being given out in a certain week, and people complain about that as well.

No one likes to admit it, but everyone prefers if only they could get top rewards. What value is your favourite chase mythic if everyone could get it?

Events every 6 hours would be great and shut so many complaints about timezones.

Morphis

Ok as usual people get meaning out of nowhere based on simple assumption and not even reading well what one writes down.

I'll put some facts here:

- my coalition DID NOT IN ANY FORM force me or any of us to play.
The leader also pinned a post on slack stating "to all members: do not force yourself too hard in this weekend of double events".

- I am perfectly fine if other people get prizes I don't. Where did I write anything against it?!
It's been a long time since my last QB competition.
There are other people getting the prizes there. I'm perfectly fine with it.

I simply don't feel like putting my whole coalition at a real risk of heavily underperform.
So yes I am still playing.
will get less prizes with less fun.
I think that's enough to tell the double event is a bad idea.

As I stated if they made events "exclusive"(you can only join one) I would have been ok with that.
For sure would have not complained cause "OMG I can't get all the prizesssss".

Or even better, remove coalition leaderboard from saheeli event to allow people that don't have it to actually get it. Yes some people would have still competed while having her for the 125
In that case it's a choic you can make that affects only yourself.

Pqmtg-

Morphis wrote:

- I am perfectly fine if other people get prizes I don't. Where did I write anything against it?!
It's been a long time since my last QB competition.
There are other people getting the prizes there. I'm perfectly fine with it.

As I stated if they made events "exclusive"(you can only join one) I would have been ok with that.
For sure would have not complained cause "OMG I can't get all the prizesssss".

You really could do with some of that reading carefully too. That wasn't even directed at you. Just a general game theorish/economics observation.

So to summarise your problem with double events :

1) your coalition specifically urged you not to play both if you don't want to

2) you do it anyway.

3) complain you didn't want to do it, but felt obligated to your coalition despite (1) stating you shouldn't feel so.

Wut?

That just tells me you shouldn't be playing both events. It certainly doesn't tell me that it's a bad idea.

A lot of coalitions were basically resigned to never being competitive. This double event gave them a ray of hope. Sorry, it's not a bad idea just because you had less fun playing in a way everybody told you not to.

I'm with edhdad. More events = better. More free stuff for everyone, and more people feel involved. Why would anyone be against that?