Wishing Well (new shop)

This suggestion would actually mean exactly that.
Having access to less cards means you are forced to play the same easier to get decks.
If you had a chance on some specific legendaries (or 3 of some specific rares/epics), you could try many different builds.

Plus we need a money sink. Having more than 5000 gold, but nothing worth buying should never happen. It makes treasure undesirable trash, which lessens the chances of getting something useful from a chest.

(Speaking of chests (epic and magnificent): First of all, if I buy a chest, I dont want any treasure in it. Treasure greatly lessens the chances of getting something useful, as said above. Secondly, if I buy a basic set chest, I dont want any Citadel or Artifact items in it. If I would want them, I would buy those chests instead. They further reduce the chances of getting something I would actually use (95% of items I would want, come from the basic set). Its getting harder everytime new items are added. I would actually wish to reduce useless items from the game. Especially those which are nothing but an inferior version of the same thing and which cost exactly the same. You would simply be stupid to use those. Ultimately I would like to have a chance to buy, for example, chests which would only contain basic set items of level 12-13. In that case I might buy more pizza to buy chests, unlike now. But that would probably be wishing too much. I guess I must go back to grinding level 12-13 adventures to at least have a chance.

 

Different topic. I fixed my phrasing, hopefully it's clearer now.

We have two- two different rare item shops that can spawn legendaries.
The request here isn't to create a money sink or to allow easy purchasing access to rare items, we already have that.
It's to give more reliable and alternative, more expensive means to approach buying items.

There kinda ISN'T a basic set chest, it's more of a 'generic' chest.
Also, no store-purchased or -redeemed chests CAN drop treasures, am I missing or forgetting a context point?

And sure, yeah, getting the rarer basic set items is generally harder [I say generally, because right now it's really hard to get citadel legendaries, since they're all at level cap and rarely drop in part because of that]. So you make a good point there, actually- as the campaign increases, those items will get even harder to farm out.

Well, that's true for tabletop card games, though- like how older sets of Magic are harder to find and often worth a lot because of it.

On the flip side, I don't see why we couldn't, say, add a Wandering Merchant shop that can occasionally pop up after adventures or PvP chests [sorta similar to Loot Fairy and Hidden Bandit in how it procs (other than also being able to be activated via PvP), but by being an otherwise-normally-locked shop] and have a selection of Legendary Basic Set item to purchase after finding it.
Certainly, giving a 'random proc event' to PvP would likely really spice it up for PvP players and maybe help mitigate the feeling of grinding some.

Okay, those are stupid. Eventually they need to be edited to at least have slightly different cards or token costs..

Yeah, the problem is, the devs don't necessarily want to encourage buying items via pizza too much :X
As I said, their main emphasis is trying to keep the game from feeling pay to win.

 

Here are two different patterns of thinking:

1) Choose a build, then think about what cards you still need to complete the build.

2) Examine what cad you have, and then think about what builds you could make with those cards.

Number 1 is a deficit model of thinking. It's about what you don't have and what you still need. Number 2 is more centred on opportunity. It's focused on what you can do.


I remember when I first got a Helm Of Reinforcement, and I thought "Now I can make new builds centred around high armour and heavy healing." And when I first got Blazing Shortsword I thought "now I can design warrior builds which use a token on their racial skills!" and when I got Staff Of Winter, I thought "now I can make cold based builds".

There was never a shortage of options. But each new item opens new options and new opportunities. Each item gives you something new to think about, and makes new builds possible. Or, the more negative way of thinking about it is that you aren't allowed to use certain builds until you have certain items. Both ways of thinking about it are true, but the more positive way of thinking about it is what make people have fun finding new items; whereas the negative way of thinking about it makes people feel like they need the items before they can start having fun.

 

Very well put, Karadoc!

 

You can certainly have fun experimenting, and be successful with almost any cards in the campaign. You dont need a single legendary or even epic to complete it. In some adventures, for example Troll Tyrant-Black Plume, you really have to think and build a completely new deck from the cards you happen to have. It is fun indeed when you figure it out.

From my understanding, this suggestion concerns about being able to make several different kinds of successful builds for pvp. After about rank 1400, you wont be succesful with those experimental fun builds any more. You have to become extremely selective on the cards you use (in addition to maximizing their use and being an excellent player). You absolutely must have that single legendary, or in many cases 3 copies of it, to be successful at high level. Without it is like starting a chess match without your queen.

To sound more positive, leagues are fun. And a new month now, yay

 

That is interesting. In order to have a chance of 80% to get a least one asmods chain, i need to crack 1611 chests. In order to have a 90% chance I even have to open 2303 chest. I hope, that your number is wrong.

Anyway, how many legendaries took you into account? I think there are more than 300 legendaries, so even if I get a legendary item, I only have a chance of less than 0,0034% to get the legendary I want to get, right?

To stay on topic. I guess there should be something to give me the feeling to stay on track, to get somewhere. In hearthstone there is the stardust I can collect and even if I get only a few amount, I am doing a little progress. As I said, I would prefer a more on theme kind of way to get items, like using the cards out of the items to craft new items or something like that. This would fit the name of the game, since it is not called item hunter.

 

Not really. It is possible to obtain ~1600 ELO without using legendary/epic items (for example carefully designed party with 3 elf warriors can usually do the trick*). Obviously in some archetypes of parties legendary items are pretty mandatory (i.e. within burst+buff 2wizard/1priest team), but I don't see this as an issue as long as there are other, easily obtainable, competitive builds in-game.


*It was tested before EttSC release. I believe it should still be possible today.

 

Fairly sure my number is at least close to right. However, the 0.1% already includes the 315ish legendaries in the game.

There's a distinction between "you can get a build you can do well with" and "you can get a build you can do well with and enjoy". Some people seem to think only the former is necessary; I think the latter is probably necessary, and if not definitely still desirable. And, well, some people don't want to play three warriors.

 

I once made a suggestion that we could find 'Runes', each one representative of a specific card, and build a custom item with it, albeit with some restrictions [only one of each card max per custom item, only one custom item max per player].
Too open a crafting system removes desire to hunt items, but having something else to hunt is always fun.

No, see, now you're reversing our sentiments. We're saying the off-the-cuff builds are fun and you can do as well with them, you're saying you need a specific build to have fun at all [and possibly also saying you can't do as well with off-the-cuff builds?]
The difference isn't us 'settling', it's you not finding fun in just playing, or in making a more unpredictable build: But wanting a very specific, 'ideal' example of that build concept to run with.


Or as an example, it's us saying "All bacon tastes great, and makes a burger delicious." and you're saying "Only bacon cooked to an exact temperature and duration tastes great, and makes a burger more delicious than your bacon".

In some ways, it's actually a subjective comment, even if there are objective elements in it.

 

I think everyone knows about the 3 elf warriors (even that required 3 copies of a few rares and you might not have 3 of them each). I have played many modified versions of it myself and it can be fun. But, the point is being able to play anything else, more than one deck every time, and still be successful at high levels.

Can anyone show any other builds without legendaries and ranking over 1500, if there is one?

 

I wrote about 3 warrior team as an example, and only because playing with it was very enjoyable for me. Different players have obviously different tastes so they would create a totally different build in order to do well while having fun.

I would support your suggestion, but with a small modification so there would only a one copy of item in Wishing Well shop per month. Is it not possible to buy "unlimited" number of copies of item from any shop at the moment, and I don't see why Wishing Well should be an exception.

 

You are right. Mine was false. I calculated the probability and thought it were percantages.

If I calculate also the randimars and the daily deal, I have to wait only 265 days (if I open an epic a day) to have a 90% chance to get a specific legendary. Without an epic a day it will be 293 days. Did I calculate the randis and daily deal wrong or is it really as impactful?
I think you have a =10/7 chance to get a legendary in randis and 7/7 chance of getting a legendary in the daily deal. With 315 legendaries floating around this will make a chance of 0.77% per day to get a specific legendary, right?

 

Do you have an assumption of the chance a rare is been upgrade to a legendary?

 

Meh, and I just deleted my post under the 'Meh, screw math' banner.
[Restating: Did you account for various other sources of loot/they seem very favorable to getting a good deal of items within half a year for a pvp player/but I feel that doesn't adjust for chances of getting duplicate items.]

Typically we've been assuming an average (across all tiers) of 25% chance to upgrade per tier [which would actually put common to legendary at closer to 0.4%]. So if epics have 15%, it'd perhaps be around 3% for a rare.

 

The reason for this portion of the suggestion is that it does not seem fun to need to use it on the same item for multiple consecutive months. It's not necessary by any means, but I think this would still be more fun.

 

I do not want this shop in the game. This kind of "item X will be everything I need" thinking will not help the game in terms of competitive build diversity. I don't know about you guys, but I do see a lot of different builds at considerably high elo.

Additionally, it would promote very specific competitive builds, to the point that a single build with minor variations could be dominating the game. It would also encourage copying, and would ****** creativity.

I have a lot of fun with the game just because I work around the items I have. You can also still remain competitive despite experimentation - my build variations last Citajul are proof of this. You just have to take smaller steps with changes to builds and not just immediately change your entire build completely because you got beat by someone who had 4 Searing Pains.

I don't want to see more people playing the same Searing Pain and Strongarm builds. That's obviously what this suggestion will lead to: the same builds made over and over again.

 

The proper solution to this is to balance those items, not simply prevent more people from getting them.

 

Because that is were the people have the stuff to build different things.

I have to disagree. Not having this possibility leads to the same build over and over, namly cultist and stab elves. If it would happen, you would need some changes for balancing. If you are right, than this builds are superior. So at the moment everyone having this items has a superior build and will win more often because he has that items? That does not sound fair.

I think the perspective do the best with the items you got, is fine for single player and coop. There I love this idea. But multiplayer is competive and there this idea just does not work out.

Btw. since there are four leagues every day now, I know how I will play until I get my hands on another build than the elf warriors.


Edit:

You were faster than me. I totally agree.

 

There are two very good arguments going on here-
Let me address both:

Against Change:
Making items too easy to gain will lead to very specific builds. If not a min-max element, it'll at least turn into a 'which items do I need the fewest of to make a good party', and it'll end up with new players grabbing very similar items.
This diminishes the dynamic elements of PvP and would deteriorate the quality of play on the whole [due to even more extensive repetition, ala Bejeweled].

Claiming that you NEED items to do well in PvP is nonsensical; ELO scales to the number of players. If items matter as much as suggested, then the few players with 'ideal' builds are all at the very top, and shouldn't affect ELO directly below them very much. As for being able to beat them- well, you shouldn't be able to. The entire draw of nearly every competitive CCG is in the gaining of the cards involved, especially the rare ones, and removing the need to extensively farm those out, especially in a loot-driven reward system, would make the compulsion to keep playing PvP diminish dramatically.
Likewise, everyone directly below the top players would be in the same boat as you, having non-ideal decks.

Of course, even all that is presuming skill or 'non-ideal' builds can't match up, and there's no actual proof of that, that has been presented.


tl;dr version: Adding too free a rein on items would remove compulsion to play, imbalance the game, dilute build diversity, and doesn't entirely seem to be necessary past a point.


For Change:
Low-tier play already does have extensive repetition- the rarity system the game uses helps make items of every level and rarity useful, but it also means that potent, more common items will dominate play up to a point.
Adding a bit of variation to that isn't bad.

Other CCGs tend to have more ways to aim for a specific build, as well as more specialized sets/etc to purchase, thus allowing you more options to narrow down on a specific card than CH provides.


tl;dr version: Adding more options to get items would potentially enhance lower tier to mid tier pvp play, and offer more freedom in trying to build toward specific goals.





In other words, both sides have excellent points-
And it seems that we need to add more options for pursuing builds, but without going too far in making loot overly accessible.


Here's a thought- Lets scrap the idea of specific purchases altogether, since that appears to really be the main issue.



Here's a proof of concept for a non-static loot table adjusting mechanic.

Doesn't need to necessarily apply as described, just coming to the conclusion that something that affects loot tables might appeal enough to both sides to work.

If nothing else, maybe it'll jostle some new ideas of your own

 

This is a legitimate concern, but new players will not find it trivial to get the non-legendary items for a good party. I expect what would happen is that you look at your rares and epics, choose something which appeals to you and which you have the items for, and then buy the one or two legends you need to actually play it.

As mentioned, Bejeweled already is a thing. If there are 10 different decks people want to play, and can actually get, rather than 1, it'll be 1/10 as repetitive as now.

Nobody has fun losing to people because they don't have good items - go tell someone they have to go play against $whoever_won_the_last_tennis_open, and because that person has played more tennis than them they also have to play with one arm tied behind their back. If someone gets to the top of the ladder, they shouldn't be given any further advantage than they have by being good at the game; skill should be more than enough to keep a good competitive game.

The issue is the frustrating [EDIT: I forgot to finish this sentence. Should have been: "The issue is the frustrating games where someone with more items and less skill is matched up with someone with fewer items and more skill - and wins, and the games where this appears to one player to be the case (whether or not it is)."]

No need to provide a proof - being handicapped is always unfair, and we should try to reduce that as much as possible while not removing the drive to keep playing the game/to play SP.

Allowing players to access high-rarity items doesn't imbalance the game; it just makes any imbalance that already existed more evident. If the game is imbalanced, we should fix that. All of the above arguments worked fine for pre-nerf VP, and we all agree that thing was irredeemably broken and needed to be changed. The game is indisuptably better after the balance update; if these changes make another such update necessary, so much the better.

I see no reason to comment on any of this as it's a summary of some of my points - however, I would like to also add that there's a gross imbalance in "PvP using only easy-to-get items" towards elven warriors; if someone wants to play a 3 priest or 3 wizard team, they're immediately at a massive disadvantage. Don't punish players for having playstyles that the game doesn't support. (For reflection: Is a F2P MMO fair if a free player can easily get a viable build for a healer but not for a tank or dps?)

That is the main _requirement_ - because of how CH handles rarity and items (especially with regards to high-consistency items like Vibrant Pain), you need to be able to get a specific item or you can't play many builds (go ahead, show me a burst build without a burst staff, a volcano build without a volcano staff, a bless build without the bless bones, etc). Every other CCG on the market has either trading or a way to buy/craft specific cards (to my knowledge, and excepting terrible F2P games that have things like cards you can only get by spending money). No reason CH needs to be an exception.

My issue with this is that it doesn't let you say "I want to play burffft", or "I want to play AT", or "I want to play vampires" or anything like that. A step in the right direction would be being able to name a _card_ you want ("I want Invigorating Touch"/"I want Accelerate Time"/"I want Arcane Burst"), but even then some items just aren't accessible. Maybe being able to name a card you want plus making all items that receive a rarity bonus for repeated cards always available in some other way (fixed shop (like holiday event, maybe)? wishing-well-like thing?) would work; I can't think of any builds that you couldn't at least make some weaker version of that way - but that's about it)

Sorry for the wall of text, I'm about 2/3 asleep and just rambling.