No Rising Tensions?

1235

Comments

  • Tremayne
    Tremayne Posts: 1,673 Chairperson of the Boards
    @Dropspot - I mostly agree with you, but many collectors has previously disagreed strongly with this attitude about having all cards.

    I think that the biggest problem to this “solution” is that the released cards are so strongly unbalanced. At the moment BSZ is considered the strongest card, once it was Lightning Runner or piggie or ... so as long as one or two cards are ridiculously strong there will be a lust to get these cards.
  • Gabrosin
    Gabrosin Posts: 259 Mover and Shaker
    We're talking about a game where out of 2500 cards you only play 10 in any given deck, and once you've solved an event it basically stays solved forever.  A game where perfection is somewhat routine and more points seem to be lost to software bugs than actual game losses.  Where the only real rewards are delineated in the cards and planeswalkers you have access to.

    For a lot of people, chasing a complete collection is the motivating force to keep playing, even if it's not actually achievable without a prohibitive investment.  It's definitely not necessary to have every card in order to win consistently... but once you can win consistently, does the game not become routine?  New cards provide at least temporary spice to the experience; spreading out the amount of time between getting them is going to make the game less appealing.

  • Tremayne
    Tremayne Posts: 1,673 Chairperson of the Boards
    @Gabrosin - I think that you have claimed “once solved, events stay solved” before, if not someone else have. If this is your attitude when playing MTGPQ, then you are making the game boring for yourself. And I might add that is not the devs fault!

    You could keep the game fresh by trying to solve old events in new ways, that is what I tend to do up to a point.

    However, that way of playing does not excuse the devs incredibly slow pace for creating new content to use all the new (unbalanced) cards, they seem to have plenty of time to code and recode (bug-fixing).

    The other point you are mentioning, about the easiness of winning is very valid, but it seems the player-base would rather have easy wins than a challenge. It is also something that the devs have been struggling with without getting the balance right.
  • Tremayne
    Tremayne Posts: 1,673 Chairperson of the Boards
    @starfall - totally agree, that it is very bad with the current event situation. The prizes in RT were very generous, apparently to generous.

    what I can’t understand is why D3 didn’t just reduce the prices and continued running RT until v3.4 was released.

    Also, I seriously doubt anyone would have complained if D3 had stated upfront that RT would have increased prizes for a limited time after the set was released. As usual D3 are not on the forefront in the communication department.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0 Just Dropped In
    edited May 2019
    Mburn7 said:
    e3vil said:
    Laeuftbeidir said:
    Only around 40% of mythics after half a year? That's a lot. A really good share IMO
    16 (sixTEEN months). One year and 4 months playing... It means I'll not be able to complete the current pool of cards even if I play this game for 3 years in total!
    As someone who has been playing this game for over 3 years in total who does not have even close to a full collection I fail to see your point here.

    Missing 125 mythics. Didnt count masterpieces, rares, uncommons, and commons. 

    I started around when Heart of Kiran was being offered for money. So beginning of 2017.

    All that effort for this? Lol.
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0 Just Dropped In
    Dropspot said:
    No one needs to have all cards. This game isn't about having all cards is about building good decks with the ones we ended up getting. 

    RT was too generous and created the hope that everyone could get close to a complete collection, which is unreal and unsustainable for the game.

    I don't think taking RT out without any replacement is a good thing but I do believe they need to adjust rewards to be something less generous. 

    Tbh I think the greatest mistake in RT rewards is the amount of orbs given. Jewels and gold are on a decent level. Maybe if the card rewarded was a rare instead of a mythic things would be more realistic and wouldn't make so much impact on the game.
    I dont agree. Being able to get all cards reasonably should be an options. Otherwise, the inability to get all the cards will turn people off from the game. There would be no hope, no dream. 

    RT was generous to balance out the utterly non-generous other rewards from other events, in my opinion. Yes, RT was generous but if we say that i bet they will nerf rewards without a second thought. Whereas increasing rewards for anything requires them to put on their thinking caps to squeeze our lifeblood out of us. 

    With content being released at the current rate, it becomes achievable to maybe get all cards - very big maybe (with RT). And even then requires money to be spent in game...

    However if they released cards/sets as they intended (~3ish months), it would be rather difficult to get all the cards without investing. Additionally, there are other feasible means to earn money like skins, etc. They could capitalize on so many different things if they made some proper decisions.
  • Dropspot
    Dropspot Posts: 200 Tile Toppler
    I completely disagree with the idea that players should be able to have all cards or most of the cards. Having access to all cards leads to fewer variety of decks which sounds contradictory, but it's not when you realize everyone can build the same winning deck. When players have card limitations they are forced to find different strategies.

    Also if you are an F2P you shouldn't expect to have full collection. That doesn't mean F2P can't be competitive and play at the highest level. But collection size is something that paying customers should have have advantage when investing money into the game.
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    For years I was a really successful F2P player, but better rewards and cool content motivated me to put hundreds of $$$ into this game, partially because I wanted the cards, mostly because I wanted to contribute to the positive direction the game is going.

    Now, I only log on for the daily pack and coalition event now.  If VIP happens and this game becomes pay to play, I will no longer contribute financially, because it is no longer foundationally a game of strategy and skill, but an elitist competiiton of deep pockets.
  • Tremayne
    Tremayne Posts: 1,673 Chairperson of the Boards
    @Gabrosin - Great answer (as usual from you)! If I understand your points correctly, it seems the main area of difference is on the puzzle aspect I.e. solving the events, so I’ll focus on that here.

    MTGPQ is not a crossword puzzle or a sudoku, which only has one solution, so there is no point in redoing them after they have been solved (to state the obvious). MTGPQ is something else entirely, it is a puzzle with multiple solutions (for the majority of the events).

    My point is that if you are playing MTGPQ expecting the devs to give you a new daily challenge (like a sudoku), then MTGPQ will disappoint you rather quickly. Because that is not the product  the devs wishes to deliver (so it seems).

    If this perceived lack of challenge makes a player focus on the collection challenge, then I fear s/he is just preparing an even bigger disappointment for themselves. Because that is the next thing the devs do not wish to deliver e.g. a full collection. I fail to grasp how a full collection is going to fix the missing challenges of daily puzzles, if the owner does not try to solve the puzzles again with the new cards?

    So I think that the whole point of MTGPQ is to play around with the cards you have and try to join them in new an never tried (by you) combinations to see what will work and what will not. The whole match3 thing is just the testing area for your ideas. This leads me to my next point.

    If MTGPQ is supposed to be your 5 mins of relaxation every day, then you are probably better of with bejewelled or something similar. Don’t get me wrong MTGPQ can be a 5 min break once in a while but you have to embrace the tinkering aspect daily for MTGPQ to make any sense.

    This is why I really think that the “once solved, events stay solved” attitude is so extremely dangerous. Simply put, the gap between the player expectation and the devs desired product is simply to big to bridge (provided my assumptions about the devs plans and goals are correct).

    however, this discrepancy in expectations does not excuse the horrendously slow pace of creating new event/levels by the devs. I urge them to focus on making 1 or 2 new story chapters a month (which should give app. 10-20 new levels) and at least one new event per month.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Tremayne
    Tremayne Posts: 1,673 Chairperson of the Boards
    @Dropspot and @Machine - as I read your posts, you are arguing two separate points! Dropspot is arguing MTGPQ is a game of solving a puzzle with limited resources (cards). Machine is arguing MTGPQ is about completing a collection of cards with which to play with.

    if I’m right then you are trapped.
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0 Just Dropped In
    Machine said:
    Dropspot said:
    I completely disagree with the idea that players should be able to have all cards or most of the cards. Having access to all cards leads to fewer variety of decks which sounds contradictory, but it's not when you realize everyone can build the same winning deck. When players have card limitations they are forced to find different strategies.

    Also if you are an F2P you shouldn't expect to have full collection. That doesn't mean F2P can't be competitive and play at the highest level. But collection size is something that paying customers should have have advantage when investing money into the game.

    IMHO it's not about having all the cards or not, but it should be reasonably possible to get all the cards, even for F2P. That's a big drive for a lot of players to keep playing this game. That doesn't necessarily imply that those players play the same decks over and over. I'm one of the players that tries new cards and strategies for several reasons. It offers variety, offers insight into new / unused cards and helps with card mastery. I do all this without having a limited card collection.

    So, I also don't agree with your statement that F2P shouldn't expect to have a full collection. Paying customers can expect to reach full collections EARLIER, which doesn't mean that F2P can't have full collections at all. We already lost RT, meaning a much slower access to new cards with content already being VERY stale, stale events, losing jewels and crystals during coaltion events due to bugs with no hope of getting compensated. If the outlook for F2P is that getting all cards becomes impossible, players like me will be less incentivized to keep playing.

    Saved me the trouble. Thanks.

    But so everyone knows, at one point in time, i also thought full collections should not be accessible for reasons along the same lines. So, i can understand where dropspot is coming from. Over time, i realized not all people are the same - some are truly collecting, some experiement, others dont care, etc. But what annoyed me was always not having access to cards you dream of building a deck with, like thematic decks. When i 1st started i wanted to build an eldrazi deck.. 2 years later.. still dont have pieces and now ive stopped caring.. this is not motivational at all. There was no point in dreaming about the cards to begin with since they would never be in my possession. 
  • Gabrosin
    Gabrosin Posts: 259 Mover and Shaker
    Tremayne said:
    @Gabrosin - Great answer (as usual from you)! If I understand your points correctly, it seems the main area of difference is on the puzzle aspect I.e. solving the events, so I’ll focus on that here.

    MTGPQ is not a crossword puzzle or a sudoku, which only has one solution, so there is no point in redoing them after they have been solved (to state the obvious). MTGPQ is something else entirely, it is a puzzle with multiple solutions (for the majority of the events).

    My point is that if you are playing MTGPQ expecting the devs to give you a new daily challenge (like a sudoku), then MTGPQ will disappoint you rather quickly. Because that is not the product  the devs wishes to deliver (so it seems).

    If this perceived lack of challenge makes a player focus on the collection challenge, then I fear s/he is just preparing an even bigger disappointment for themselves. Because that is the next thing the devs do not wish to deliver e.g. a full collection. I fail to grasp how a full collection is going to fix the missing challenges of daily puzzles, if the owner does not try to solve the puzzles again with the new cards?

    So I think that the whole point of MTGPQ is to play around with the cards you have and try to join them in new an never tried (by you) combinations to see what will work and what will not. The whole match3 thing is just the testing area for your ideas. This leads me to my next point.

    If MTGPQ is supposed to be your 5 mins of relaxation every day, then you are probably better of with bejewelled or something similar. Don’t get me wrong MTGPQ can be a 5 min break once in a while but you have to embrace the tinkering aspect daily for MTGPQ to make any sense.

    This is why I really think that the “once solved, events stay solved” attitude is so extremely dangerous. Simply put, the gap between the player expectation and the devs desired product is simply to big to bridge (provided my assumptions about the devs plans and goals are correct).

    however, this discrepancy in expectations does not excuse the horrendously slow pace of creating new event/levels by the devs. I urge them to focus on making 1 or 2 new story chapters a month (which should give app. 10-20 new levels) and at least one new event per month.
    The collection is the challenge.  It's a mentality.  I'll freely admit that I don't really need any of the 310 cards I'm still missing, but having them would open up new possibilities for improvement that I don't currently have.  Unfortunately only about twenty of them would be worthwhile to acquire, but targeting those cards isn't easy.

    I appreciate that you play the game differently than I do, and that my approach isn't for everyone.  I enjoy throwing myself into long, difficult challenges; collecting as many of the available PQ cards as possible, without pouring a lot of money into the game, is one such challenge.  Supporting and maintaining my coalition's place atop the leaderboard, week in and week out, is another.  Grinding through uninteresting daily events like TG and TotP for their rewards is simply a cost towards those long-term objectives.  The game presents us with limited opportunities to earn cards and currency, and the goal is to collect those rewards with a minimal amount of time and energy invested.

    I might enjoy the game more on a day to day basis if there was a wider variety of challenging content, like randomized secondaries which truly forced me to think about my deckbuilding choices instead of firing up my spreadsheet to look at my optimal deck from the last time the event ran.  But in the absence of that, I'd rather push through the daily grind and spend the extra time playing other, more compelling games.

  • Tremayne
    Tremayne Posts: 1,673 Chairperson of the Boards
    @Gabrosin - fair enough, you have chosen a path that I fear the devs are actively tried to prevent. Good luck!
  • Gabrosin
    Gabrosin Posts: 259 Mover and Shaker
    Tremayne said:
    @Gabrosin - fair enough, you have chosen a path that I fear the devs are actively tried to prevent. Good luck!
    They're not doing a great job of it then :)  I've gone on at length about how some fundamental design decisions for the game leave them in a bind when it comes to making sure there's variety and interesting new challenges.  And it's still far more interesting, to me, than other comparable match-3 games and mobile apps... they get to draw from one of the most complex and varied games of all time, so they ought to be able to maintain a similar level of freshness to the paper game.  But I'm afraid they're falling far short of that right now.

Categories