Long Term Itemization Problems

Good point. So that works out to approx 1 in 33 battles? And 1 in 22 if you have club? I like them odds. I need another blazing shortsword.

 

There also seems to be two different campaign chests... with the last one giving better/more items. If you clear card stock 2 I think you get like 8-10 items so you have a 1/7 chance or whatever of getting an epic. And that crap takes like 15 minutes max. Yeah, it is way faster doing this to get items than mplayer (well maybe the first 3 games for mplayer are easier). However, I cannot see myself doing this long term as it is completely mindless and boring. I'd rather just pay to 2 win for sure, but rather than that I'd just quit. If keeping pace with the top tier of PvPers in terms of items means clearing 10 campaigns a day I won't do it. I will just quit and they will lose membership revenue from me.

I don't see how it hurts anyone else by letting people continue to PvP grind if they want... campaign people have plenty of missions, basically enough to do all day if they were so inclined.

 

This is one of those cases where a guy will never publicly admit he was wrong. However, you can go ahead and google the term yourself. Notice that all replies have to do specifically with LOL. Elo hell indeed is only hell if you get stuck with players that are so bad that getting out is going to be nearly completely random. While in hell the game experience so bad. That does not apply at all in this game or other ones. What you're referring to is that you just don't like competitive games and that is fine.

 

Anyone reading your response will realize exactly how truthful that assessment is, though the target may not be whom you expect. The fact that you continue to deny the existence of Elo hell in any game is telling on it's own. One of the very first google results, since you'd like that used as an example but won't search for yourself to counter my point (note: LoL related in this case)

I'm not sure if you've read the forums here any time recently but people have a few strong feelings about the numbers of AFK/lagging players and the number of players easily giving up just to drop rank. That's not my opinion, that's what the other forum-goers are saying. Seriously, go look at the page one comments under Suggestions in the forum.

In my case, since I've not stubbornly chosen a position where I try to speak for everyone, I have been careful to note my opinion as being shared with a number of people I've talked to but ultimately my own opinion. Since I thought you were were wanting actual discussion on your post and not just people agreeing with you I present you the floor once more if you (or anyone else) would like to debate the merits of my points and not pretend that Ad Hominem constitutes as productive discussion.

Edit:

I do recall from your Legendary thread post that you do seem to be luckier than a lot of players. I noted your numbers a week ago and completing a similar number of missions per day noticed a much worse drop rate (I do have club membership). Fwiw, I'm jelly of the drop rates you have listed in the Legendary luck thread. XD

 

Another thing to add to my idea: Only reset the PvP chain early for guys that have a membership - although I bet most guys who are playing through that all have a membership anyway...

 

ELO hell can only exist in team games that use ELO or some other "skill-based" rating system. There match result depends on your teammates, and you need bit more extra effort to get out. It's favorite excuse for people who are doing worse than they expect. Sadly it cannot happen in 1v1 games so people need other excuses (bad luck etc.)

Ofc definition might have expanded in recent times, but in 1v1 you just can't claim your rating is low because your teammates suck and you are always far better then them.

 

You don't believe the current rating system forces players into rough groups (supposedly) based on skill as it were? The most varied MP builds seem to be fairly low-ranked with certain (imo boring to fight) build archetypes being more prevalent as you go up in ratings (and possibly indicative of people gaining powerful items).

Also, Chess was the original ELO system and it happens to be 1v1 usually. It's not a solved game, but it's much less luck and card based. While I haven't seen ELO-hell referenced in that, I can see the sentiments being echoed if a player constantly saw the defined examples/tendencies that I quoted earlier. :/

Edit: Wording changed to more accurately reflect what I meant.

 

It's still quite different idea than "ELO-hell" which is quite specific term.

 

I suppose it depends on the definition, the one I quoted prior does have uncanny similarities to examples of Card Hunter play that other players have complained about. I used the term more for the feelings it evokes, mirroring a number of players feelings of frustrations with PvP. Although to play the Devil's advocate there are SP missions that bring out a player's ire. XD

 

So basically you've been playing tens of games a day, almost every day for 20+ days, probably worth multiple hours of grinding on a daily basis. And way, way more than what 90%+ of the userbase as a whole does. Still, somehow you are implying the game is unfair because the devs don't let hardcore players grind even harder?

Wow.

Let me tell you, the system is actually very effective in trying to stop hardcore players with lots of free time on their hands from acquiring a huge gap in the number of rare items acquired over that 90% of people who can actually play a bunch of games per week only.

If the system was designed the way you are proposing, chances are a very restricted group of pro grinders would have double/triple the amount of rare+ items they got at this point in time. Let alone in a month from now. Actually, it's not like things stand in a different way as of right now. Only, things would be very much worse.

The game wouldn't be fairer by any meaningful degree, let me tell you.

Also, the rate at which you can acquire items has very little to do with the amount of time a new player would need to spend in order for him to be able to compete with veterans.

This isn't a game where the player with the most items always wins. I know you don't agree with me on this, nor I expect you to.

Simply put, even if you owned everyone of the 1000+ items in the game, you still can only equip a bunch on any of your characters. Every PvP characters shares the same level which is set to the max cap. Furthermore, the power tokens system helps a lot with assuring overpowering your opponent by simply owning better equip alone is somewhat of a lessened problem.

Looking at things from a more rational perspective, it's feasible for a newer player to still be able to compete on fair ground even if there's a huge gap in number/quality of items owned, given he puts enough dedication and time into the game. Yes, the newer player will have to grind himself for quite some time in order for him to acquire the gear he needs to compete with more experienced players, but the issue is not nearly as gigantic as you are stating. The key point here is, the new player needs learning and getting good at playing the game too.

Even if, say, a complete newbie would have a way to instantly acquire every item in the game (and let's also say he didn't have to pay a penny for it), things wouldn't be much different anyways. Why? Because a veteran player with months and hundreds of hours (thousands of hours?) of in-game experience would still outsmart the newer player.

It's not all about the items. By having to play for a long time in order to grind for items, you're also acquiring hours of precious in-game experience. So, ultimately, you can't be competitive at high levels without playing the game for a damn lot regardless.

The "acquiring items" part is there to give you an incentive along the way, and also to let you experiment with increasingly more complex mechanics in an iterative, incremental fashion. You take a new player and put him in front of 1000+ items all at once, and his brain will likely explode.

Furthermore, it's not like you can get infinitely more powerful items as you play the game, ad libitum. At some point, even the most hardcore item-grinder will stop gaining a tangible benefit from acquiring more items. The first time you acquire a really powerful legendary, your deck-building capabilities do rise significantly. The trend doesn't follow a linear law of growth though.

This goes on up to a certain point. But, and this is counter-intuitive, at a certain point you do get diminishing returns. Once you get a good number of really effective items for your to build your decks, getting one more epic/legendary can only give you a very negligible advantage. It becomes a game of mix-maxing where you've already got extremely close to the very maximum potential the system would theoretically allow you to reach.

That time to reach that point, that critical mass of # of assorted good items actually is the very big factor, gearwise, in determining how long you need to grind in order for you to (in theory) be able to compete at high levels. That critical mass of items likely isn't that huge either, for competing at high levels is not a matter of you being potentially able to play every variation of a build in existence, but rather one of you being able of masterfully play a handful of effective strategies.

Take chess, for instance. You don't get additional pieces as you win games. The way you get a better chess player is by studying the game. And that kind of stuff takes a lot of dedication, hard work and practice. Things like grinding for days/months/years simply pale in front of such a magnificently hard and rewarding task.

The same is going on with most competitive games. And I believe that's also true with CH. Only, since the game still is relatively new and evolving, people tend to put a much stronger emphasis on things like gear or luck. Both of those obviously are a factor, but still not the most important ones.

But I don't think you'll appreciate these other very important facts much. We did have a brief exchange of opinions yesterday in the lobby, and I kind of got what your thought-process on these kind of arguments is, so I don't expect you to realize or understand where the holes in your arguments are anytime soon.

All I get from your post is you would really like being able to grind for items even more than you are allowed to at the moment. You might as well just say that and avoid throwing every kind of complementary argument around as filler.

Not intended to be harsh or offensive. Just my honest two cents.

 

I don't think this is an issue, considering this is a f2p the devs were really generous by giving the best items a chance to drop for anyone at a reasonable rate. Many other f2p games slap you with ridiculous pay walls, energy requirements and p2w mechanics. I do agree that there should be something to strive for after the epic chest, there have been a few times where I have wanted to play some more pvp after getting it but without the added goal of going for chest i quickly lose interest. That being said I don't think a full reset is they way to go, to get all those gold chests straight after the epic would be a little much. My idea would be that after you get the epic every 5 wins you get another gold.

 

This is completely ridiculous. How can you write something that is so plainly wrong. That shows a serious lack of critical thinking skills if you truly believe that.

And again, that is where I will stop reading your post (Glad I learned to do this for my sanity's sake).

 

Yes that was a poorly constructed sentence but the rest of the points are still valid. Dismissing his long post that he replied in your thread is pretty bad form.

 

You don't need the best gear to compete with Veterans. "Veteran" doesn't denote a "top 100" player, we have new players joining every week since starting and the comparative levels of gear does have diminishing returns for the time invested as has been said. For example, I have an Impervious Panoply that I got in my first week of playing. I don't really need a Bern's Untouchable Mail to be competitive if I were a new player.

 

Fine I'll finish reading the rest of it and give my thoughts.

How is this true when a person is already somewhat linearly (assuming all 20 games are complete, that is) rewarded for 4+ hours of PvP game play per day? There is nothing casual about playing 28 hours a week for PvP only. On top of that a person can do the single player missions to their heart's content and get even more items. Basically there is already 8+ hours a day for people to play in the game... there is nothing casual about that. Limiting a person's ability to get items from only one part of the game, per day, is what I have a problem with as it is completely arbitrary.

What the system actually does is give recreational players a decent boost. If they can only play a few games per day they get a few extra gold chests. To me that is great and I encourage that.

I do agree with that statement. However the key word here is *always*. A bad player with bad items even can win sometimes. That is because this game has a large chance element, especially depending on what items they use. Winning sometimes is not the same thing as being competitive, though. If you look at the truly top tier legendary items there is indeed a large gap between normal ones. In the long run they will provide a significant advantage. A legendary firestorm wizard has double the fire power of a normal one. Warriors loaded out with hack master, vibrant pain and bern's untouchable mail is going to be arguably ~50% more efficient than one with normal class items. All the tactics in the world aren't really going to help a person beat that over the long haul.

Let's say I could use all the items in the game. You could pit me up against any player of your choice, with their current items. Would you want to bet against me? I really doubt it. What about in 3 months time? I know I'll happily take that bet. Even though some guys have months more of experience on me. In fact, I really will do this if there is some sort of test server we can do it on. If so, perhaps you can put your money where your mouth is.

This is just not true at all. There are great token free legendary items as well. For example, the strongarm has 42 damage on it and doesn't take a token at all. For comparison, the next best item that I could find that doesn't take tokens has about 30 damage... although that is even worsened by the fact that armor will create an even bigger gap. So if a person wanted to free up some tokens on their warrior to, say, add a helmet that has team sprint... well now they have an option if they have this item.

BTW I am not writing all of this to complain about strong items. I am completely fine with them being in the game. What I do have a problem with is that it will take a new person a year to be able to properly compete, regardless of his willingness to work (unless again he will grind campaign missions, which is not for a lot of people). And ultimately for the casual player how does it make a difference how a person got his superior items? If a person can already grind the hell out of the game to get that perfect set up, and have a big advantage I don't see how you're making things worse by giving people better options for doing it.

That is basically exactly what I said in my OP. I pointed out that right now they arbitrarily can't do this (through PvP).

Did you actually read my OP? Where did I say anything about this?

If that is all you got from my post then feel free to not read them again in the future.

 

I'll also give some closing thoughts on your post.

On the one hand you seem to think that allowing people to grind a lot and create a large gap is bad:

But on the other hand you're arguing that items don't matter (much):

Your view seems pretty confused.

You ultimately never responded to what my entire OP was about, anyway. That why should a person only be able to play up to X hours a month (of PvP, and endless PvE), completely disallowing a new player to catch up in a reasonably time frame? Keeping in mind that a large gap will be created between grinders/payers and recreational ones regardless of if this is allowed or not.

 

There is nothing linear in that. There big dropoff right after 1st win, another after 3rd and so on.

What you are suggesting wouldn't help casual players at all. It wouldn't also help new HC players compared to old HC players. It would only help HC players compared to casual players.

But as discussed earlier, PvP is really bad way of getting items. Except for extra HC (12+ hours per day with full campaign and 20 PvP chest). So you shouldn't be concerned about PvP returns in 4+ hour mark, those who want to play PvP will get items, those who want items have plenty of action at SP.

Clearing campaign and most of the quests is rather reasonable imo. And if 12 or so hours of gameplay per day isn't enough, maybe it isn't problem of the game, but of the player.

Now, normal chests after 20th MP win wouldn't be that bad although not that usefull either.

 

Here is my logic on the chests. A purple chest is worth 5 gold ones - based on the cost of a chest in the store. Here are the values using this, per win, cumulatively.

1 win gives 1 chest, for 100% gold chest per win
3 wins gives 2 chests, for 66% gold chest per win
6 wins gives 3 chests, for 50% gold chest per win
11 wins gives 4 chests, for 36% gold chest per win
20 wins gives 9 chests for 45% gold chest per win

I was trying to imply in my post that you only really get a boost on the first and sort of third game. Indeed if you play through all games it is somewhat linear from there. This chart doesn't even demonstrate things properly. The 3rd win is really on 50% gold chest per win (2 games) and the 6th win is really a 33% gold chest per win, whereas the 7th-20th win is really 43% gold chest per win. IMO this is all pretty close to linear (at least that is how I think about it).

I really have to scratch my head sometimes and wonder how you arrive at these conclusions. If PvP is such a bad way to get items (and it is) why do you care if people are allowed to play PvP instead of grind PvE? Wouldn't that mean the hardcore player has worse items after X months? What is wrong with them having that choice...?

How is that reasonable at all? A lot of Card Hunter's customer base is made up of people that prefer using their brains in PvP compared to PvE. I am definitely not alone in folks that just won't be grinding campaign maps over and over again for months on end. That is an awful, mindless game play experience for me.

 

I did not reply to your main inquire because that's a non-issue really. As you said yourself, people can already play 8+ hours per day getting very good amounts of loot, and people who does so can't be considered casual in any way. Actually, even playing 4 hours of PvP per day and getting to the epic chest isn't casual either. Casual players will maybe get themselves to the 2nd or 3rd golden chest in MP and simply stop there (because, you know, they are casual).

You like extrapolating sentences out of their context, and that's exactly in accord with the rest of your thought process.

I think pointing out that if you don't put an arbitrary limiting cap to the amount of epic chests you can get a day, then the people who acquired the the gap you fear so much will have a way to simply increase that gap over time, never letting anyone play the catch up game.

Even if the situation was that bad, things wouldn't be that much different either (which is what I'm trying to hopelessly make you realize). As I said, CH doesn't feature infinitely more powerful items you can acquire via playing an arbitrary amount of time.

At some point, they simply stop getting better items. They can only get themselves more varied deck-building options which, although nice, simply isn't as much of a deciding factor (in one-sidedly deciding a game) as you are trying to make a point with.

You would like to make people (misguidedly) believe that a player owning 300 out of the very best items in the game would be able to one-handedly own each and every player lacking an equally large items pool. That simply is untrue, as a newer player will likely only need 30 to 60 of those assorted items for him to be able to compete on the same level, at least gear-wise.

And yet, I do tell you the veteran player would still win that dedicated newer player, simply because of how much of his time he has put into actual in-game experience and studying how the game dynamics work. And that's because I say what you're stating is utterly irrelevant.

By the time a newer player actually acquires the in-game experience and skill to compete, chances are his items collection will be more than enough for him to do so. The real catch-up game the newer player needs to play is the one to master the required skills rather than the one to get more gear. The former simply takes longer than the latter. The dedication required to really master the skills is far, far superior to the one needed to grind for items.

You believe the main factor setting apart a competent, high level player from a worse one is the number of hours they can put in the game in order to get loot. Which is as naive as you can get.

The other day in the lobby, you bragged about having been a high master SC2 player at some point, like it was equivalent to being among the very best players in the world. Kardnel, you simply don't get what competing at high levels actually means just as much what being a high master SC2 player does.

You let this game grow some more, and you will see how a very tiny group of players will start really mastering it. When that happens you might be able to get what I mean by "you don't need to own each and every top-tier item to be competitive". And trust me, you won't be able to compete with those people just as much as I won't. Difference being, you will probably whine about you losing to those players only because they own the best items in the game and you don't.

I could explain the why-s behind this, but if you can't make the connection for yourself, well it's pointless. Feel free to laugh about or counter argument single sentences while willingly dismissing the larger picture entirely.

 

Same here

Anyways, seems you're setting arbitrary limitations that then cause a problem. Then try to change the game to fix that problem. Easiest fix is to forget those limitations. Coming up with a solution based on those limitations isn't all that helpfull.

As I said, I have nothing against unlimited normal chests from PvP. It just feels pointless and most certainly isn't solution to item problem as you see it.

As I said earlier, PvP grinding can have bad sideeffects. High number of wins doesn't actually go well with high winrate. Which can lead to too early resignations, which I hate. Or rush tactics, which is in theory ok, but only as long as there isn't too many people grinding that way. Hence I advocate SP grinding to those who feel like they should grind.

Edit: And to state clearly, I think goal of each match should be trying to win it. Not "win in 1st or 2nd round or resign" or "get as many items as possible". It's basic good manners towards your random opponent.
Testing stuff and such is ok, occasional fun/troll build is ok.
Throwing games and entirely optimising tactics towards some metagame aspect are not.