PvE droprates are too low

That something is "a boring activity" is not a fact, but your opinion. Maybe you think it's an obvious opinion, but the reality is that the vast majority of online card players like PvE content more than PvP content. As in, they like playing the same PvE content over and over and over ... often instead of playing PvP even once daily. You can't change that by nerfing their drop rates -- you can change their habits, but not their preference. It is not a good thing to have people feel they have to choose between what they like and what is more "valuable" in game terms. I believe that's what exists now.

You may personally not care about PvE and you may find it boring. That doesn't make it a truth on a broader level that PvE content is less important, or less interesting, or less valuable than PvP content. From the perspective of the developer, PvE players who pay monthly fees are lower maintenance and better profit-generators than PvP players in the first place, as a side point. Maybe more interestingly though, the more you cultivate your PvE community, the better it will be for everyone.

 

kthxbye

 

Valimont, of course you are entitled to your own opinion, but you will find in this case that most people disagree with you.

You have explained your reasoning and we have explained ours, if we still agree to disagree, well perhaps we should just leave it at that.

 

Stop harassing him. Release 2.58 and the subsequent two months of PvP burned through 18 months of good will and enjoyment.

 

I think that if the goal is to get more players to join then initial feedback from a new player should be taken at face value. I'm just trying to be helpful with an honest assessment and honestly hoping this community grows. There are several thousand dedicated card players on Kongregate for example and these past years I've spent a good deal of time in their midst, in 4 or 5 different games. I think the PvE element is often underestimated, for good reason (single player people are frequently quiet). Anyhow I thought this discussion was pretty interesting ... and hopefully fruitful. Glad to leave it at that. Cheers!

 

About me: I play SP almost exclusively because I find MP games to be very stressful, and I'm freakishly bad at ranked MP.

I'd like the ability to replay quests once a month. Also, I'd like them to unlock sooner, like maybe when your renown is 5 higher than the adventure level (reaching the renown cap would unlock the remaining quests).

What if instead of better chances to get treasures, MP chests had a chance to give a League Ticket? Gary could give out a few at some point in the campaign.

If we're comparing CH to other online CCGs:
Scrolls has daily challenges displayed on a menu
War of Omens and Hearthstone have daily quests that are displayed when you log in
SolForge straight up gives you a reward the first time you log in each day (plus rewards for your first and third wins of the day).

 

Not sure something like this helps PvE relative PvP

Anyway it sounds like a lot of circles in here. We're definitely committed to improving the singleplayer endgame content but right now the expansion (which might kind of expand that) is our top priority. There's a lot of guessing at our motives. Giving players enough gold to play leagues is not a thing we ever talked about. Again the PvP reward buff was strictly to let PvPers actually play PvP without stopping to grind PvE. This was a major problem and we addressed it.

Now we have a much less pressing problem... and we're addressing it.

Cheers.

 

So when will we know the address of this problem?

@Sir Valimont - I apologize for my curt response earlier, but after gathering massive amounts of data for research (often at 1000 drops per session), drawing a conclusion from such a small sample hit a nerve. There is an "End of Adventure" chests thread Lord Feleran started to track the upgrades of guaranteed uncommons. Note that only items in the club slot were counted - upgrades in the chest were not. I thought there was a summation at the end, but there isn't now - so I pointed you to one in the middle. My numbers were considerably worse than most, but were still better than what you predict.
At this point I suspect you are simply having a run of bad luck, and I hope that improves. On the other hand, I'm in favor of Jon loosening the purse strings slightly, but not drastically. If he doubled the drop rate for legendary items across the board I doubt anyone would notice unless they were keeping close track. IMO, CH has always been on the stingy side. That's better than starting as a Monty Haul game, then trying to rein things in. This game is still young, and I think increasing rewards gradually in small steps is the best method of finding the sweet spot.
Happy Hunting!

 

Well as a new player I may have identified the problem from the wrong end -- that is, that PvE drop rates are too low in comparison to PvP -- as opposed to looking at it the other way around. Given the game's history it can make sense that players would resist buffing PvE drops. Either way the status quo presents a drop rate in PvP which is too much greater than PvE. It has and will have as effect that PvE players feel cheated, and compelled to choose between content they enjoy versus content that is more beneficial in game terms. It's not a judgment call -- it's outright better to play PvP even if you take 20 minutes per game and lose 3 games in 4.

I am not someone who has been here a long time and I don't have the benefit of history. What I do know is card games, especially in this space (online) and the players that play them. My reactions are based on what I've seen elsewhere as much as they're based on my experiences here. It turns out that PvP drop rates have recently been buffed artificially to encourage PvP play, so it's understandable why things are so out of whack. And they are. I'm just pointing that out in case it's not obvious to those already inside the box, so to speak.

I would be just as happy with PvP drop rates being nerfed to a reasonable level as a solution to this issue. Anyway I'm happy to leave well enough alone as we're just repeating ourselves at this point. I guess being right (as I am) it's tough not to reiterate the point.

 

My proposal (suggested before by others, I'm sure) was in response for a request for SP endgame content. It kinda assumes a large collection. Also, it would be a goal to work towards in SP. Try to get a bit farther each time with the better stuff you're getting. It's a feature of the format, not a flaw. Still, I'd be all for more SP options for both newer and older players.

I'm very glad to hear from Flaxative Blue Manchu is/will be working on SP endgame content. Currently it seems to be the area where most improvement is called for.

It's a known fact of player behaviour that they will optimize to boring if the system allows it. See e.g. this: http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/26/6850517/destiny-loot-cave-exploit
I don't think anyone finds repeat grinding not boring. We humans are quirky that way that if we see it as the most efficient way we will keep doing the boring thing even in what is supposed to be an entertaining hobby even when it's no fun whatsoever.

It's a fact most people like SP much more than MP and many will never play MP under any circumstances. Wanting to play SP only is not the same thing as wanting to repeat the same content endlessly and these should not be equated. I'm sure most would prefer changing content. It's just it's all too seldom available (some games have good procedural content). The repeat grinding is not a preference, it's just often it's all that's available.

SP preferring players will not switch to MP, that's not happening. They'll just quit if they find the going too unrewarding.

I don't think anyone thinks SP is less valuable. Different strokes for different folks. We know 90-95% of game play globally is SP. It's so in Card Hunter, too. SP is a lot more important than MP in global time played. MP still has a lot of value and should not be ignored, either. A balance is best.

Then, to the core of your claims. Based on your personal experience you feel MP is greatly more rewarding than SP. I'm not convinced this is actually the case. The issue has been discussed extensively over Card Hunter's lifetime.

The official word on the recent MP/SP reward balancing:
http://www.cardhunter.com/2014/09/get-more-stuff-changes-are-coming-to-the-card-hunter-economy/
Player reactions (see at least Flaxative's posts in the thread:
http://forums.cardhunter.com/thread...s-are-coming-to-the-card-hunter-economy.6444/
Other relevant discussions:
http://forums.cardhunter.com/threads/suggestion-mp-incentives-re-think.6245/
http://forums.cardhunter.com/threads/feedback-mp-vs-sp-rewards.6002/
http://forums.cardhunter.com/threads/final-chests-in-sp-adventures.6060/

I was not able to synthesize a reliable-feeling summary of the findings in those threads. It's still bit too much based on feelings based on anecdotes, I fear.

There isn't currently a contemporary, comprehesive analysis with actual data and maths of the MP/SP reward balance.
@Flaxative, could you guys please run an analysis and see how actual MP/SP rewards currently stack against each other (maybe you already have)? It would be so much more efficient for you with the actual stats than for us players to run another six-month data trawling project... I'm not asking for precise numbers if you don't want to share them (be glad to get them, of course) but just a general outline of what the state of the union actually is.

 

Thats a great idea .. I think I suggested that somewhere (to Jon on PM I think..) .. but I see a problem there - Balance could be hard (as Bandreaus suggested) .. someone could "break" the game and get too much of LOOT.
And in order to prevent that, challenge itself could be too hard.. (some players finish 1HP lvl18 maps, and some feel that regular are too hard). Maybe that "nudie run" or something (but that wont be easy to implement).

@SirValiant: No, there is no need to nerf PVP drop rates.. that wont solve the problem (of PVE end-content) .. There is actually no need to raise this to PVP vs PVE level... PVE end-content has a problem and that's it.

 

Well ... I don't know what else to say. I think it's completely obvious that when you have a guaranteed 2 at-least-rares on your first and third PvP win daily, and a guaranteed epic chest for winning one time in a league, that PvE grinding utterly pales by comparison to PvP drop rates. Maybe everyone is fine with that but I'm not sure how you can possibly argue that that's not the case.

 

Exactly.

Btw - take leagues -> as experienced player, play 4 matches and you'll usually get an epic chest .. for what 30minutes (plus 2 Yellow's for winning). Often you can get a Legendary item out of that.
On the other side, I happened to farm SP for days and days without Legendary item. I dont know what comparison is there to make..

But it's OK.. leagues are great.. that doesn't need to be nerfed .. I as a veteran and "customer" would just like some SP content (so I dont have to spend time on forum rather to play )

 

You guys are just continually proving my point. PvP is better for drops, but you like PvP so that's fine. I'm totally cool with that ... it's just not catering to PvE players at all. Quite the opposite ... it seems to me they would be encouraged to leave.

 

Could you clarify? Not sure what you mean.

Good thing to refer to. I'll check with Jon to see if we have stats on 'value farmed' (doubt we do) but at the end of the day PvP rewards are calculated to be roughly in line with what speed farmers can do in raw gold value/time. Keep in mind that the most visible people reporting on the PvP rewards they receive are usually really good players who win games faster than the average. Also people are most likely to report on loot runs that aren't average...

 

I'm just reporting based on my own personal experience. I'm not a bad player but I'm a new player so my PvP winrate is not even 50%, and I take a long time to play PvP. I am efficient at PvE but obviously not a gold farmer who is just grinding. For me it would be insane to play PvE for the rewards if that were my only goal. Even playing PvP badly I can do better. Heck, even playing PvP to try to lose, looking for suckers but quitting on strong players, resigning on purpose, waiting for someone else to resign -- that sort of thing -- would net me more loot than PvE. Not that I'm recommending it, but just to illustrate the point. It's out of whack.

Incidentally I really don't think you should pin your design on what an efficient gold farmer can do. Those are not people using the PvE content in the proper fashion, and the ones at risk are those who do use PvE in the proper fashion. That is, to play through a level casually and enjoy it as such. When you design against the worst possible user, you are letting those people dictate your design ... and it affects all the people who are using your content the right way.

Besides, this game has no economy because there's no trading between accounts. It doesn't really make any difference if there is the occasional gold farmer who maxes his items through non-intended playing. That person doesn't harm the community because his gold doesn't enter the competitive landscape.

 

Easily.

Getting three MP wins means playing six MP matches for the average player. The matchmaker eventually settles you in the rank bracket where you're 50-50. An MP match takes what, 10 minutes on average? More? That's an hour of playing or more. Any waiting is on top of that. Let's say an hour and 20 minutes all together.

Getting third place in a league (to get an epic chest) takes 1 - 4 wins, unpredictable. Hard to know what the average is. Let's say two. Getting two wins takes 4 matches on average. The league matches can be longer than the regular ranked matches. Let's say it takes an hour.

So that's 2 h 20 min for 4 Rares and 1 Epic in MP. Based on the threads I linked and earlier data in this thread I say that's about 35 SP maps to get the same, about 10 adventures. Flaxative's average in farming experiments was 6 min per adventure . That's one hour. He was fast, said many. Let's say it takes 50% more. 1 h 30 min.

These are ballpark figures. I can still come up with a snap judgement number that says in SP you get markedly more loot than in MP. What is the current truth? I don't know. That's why I ask Blue Manchu. What is the real balance?

Judging balance on anecdotes from a few players is misleading. Unfortunately, randomness is such that for a single player things can be out of whack for a looong while. Just ask Sir Veza about his dry spells in farming. To get the system right there is no way around data collection.

I'm sure everyone would like the balance between MP and SP rewards to be about even. Maybe skewed towards MP a bit to encourage those on the fence to opt for the social option. That's good for the community and therefore the game. But not too much skewed.

I think we all have the same goal here. We're just discussing what the right call is. It'a a good thing to regularly discuss, thanks for bringing it up!

 

Flaxative, do you refer to "speed farmers" as the very top performers or as what an average player can do when speed farming? I agree with Valimont that the yardstick should not be the top guys.

 

Thank you very much! If you don't, could you please run the numbers? Surely this is important for the long-term planning for the game and thus time well spent? We're well aware how resource-limited you are, of course. Maybe just a quick approximation could be run? It doesn't have to be that precise. Maybe the monthly drop total of random MP only and SP only players (probably pretty easily identifiable) could be compared? I'm sure you have/can easily come up with a quick and dirty method for this. No pressure, though, you must be very busy with the expansion right now. Maybe after that rush is over there would be a small window for stuff like this?

 

One post ago you were chiding people for telling you what proper enjoyment of the singleplayer content should look like. We don't even like SP farming, not sure what you're trying to prove my friend

I think that there will always be some difference between what Player A makes in PvE and what Player B makes in PvE... as well as a difference between what Player A makes in PvE and what that same player makes in PvP... there's no way to ensure that loot/time is the same in all modes unless we remove drops entirely and only give players rewards in the form of gold/minute for all game modes I understand you perceive a discrepancy between how [some set of players] get rewarded in PvP and how [some other set of players, including you] get rewarded in PvE, but that discrepancy will always be there. It might look different. You might compare your loot drops against a different set of data. But there's no actual normalization possible, and the two things we're definitely not going to do right now are:

1. Nerfing PvP rewards, as that would hurt PvP players' ability to engage in the PvP environment, something we worked hard to make possible.
2. Buff normal campaign chest rewards, as that would mess with the campaign progression.

Is there some reason you don't like the idea of us working on better PvE endgame content? I think that's a pretty good way to give PvE more interesting & rewarding gameplay, but please tell me if you think it's a bad idea!

This is against our guidelines for ranked play, and anyone who participates in such activity is to be reported for messing with the ranked environment through match-throwing, eventually to be banned if they persist in their toxic behavior. So that's not really something we expect to see much of.

Except if farming is way more productive than playing multiplayer to get loot, people who would rather spend their time playing ranked matches are going to grind to get that loot. This is precisely what I was talking about before. I'm not worried about one or two farmers having better collections than our ranked players. I'm worried about losing ranked activity to farming. Let me know if this is unclear, or if you're confused about the problem here, so I can try to do a better job explaining the issue.

Will see what I can do.

In the end, the vast majority of sp players don't participate in MP, don't use the forums, and don't complain about their rewards. So this probably isn't as big an issue for the game on the whole as some might suggest. The reason we dealt with the loot discrepancy before with such drastic change in rewards was that the draw away from ranked play to campaign grinding was making the ranked experience worse for all ranked players... whereas if one or two grinders give up on the game because they have one or two bad loot runs, or if they go to multiplayer because the rewards are better, it doesn't really ruin anything for anyone.

I think the distinction is clear enough, and I keep saying that I want to make things more interesting for our singleplayer-preferring players, but that's the best I can do in the immediate term!