Lightmare Community Forums

Infinity Wars => News and Developer Talk => Suggestions => Topic started by: defaultchar on August 25, 2013, 08:42:02 PM

Title: Initial Monetization
Post by: defaultchar on August 25, 2013, 08:42:02 PM
It's... pretty readily apparent that people don't like discussing this, but hey~! Let's do it anyway.

There's two main forms of resource gathering:
Currency gains for people who have already been playing.

Currency gains for initial players.

Of the two, I want to take a look at the second, as I think it's somewhat less contentious and likely to have more meaningful discussion.

-----------------------------------------------

In order to reach the level where you would be comfortable playing in queue, you're going to want a Starter Deck. Anything else is probably a noob trap unfortunately (Base boosters are useless, as you need good HQ (Disregarding Flame Dawn briefly) and blah I won't get into this here. If you disagree, please let me know)

These functionally cost 13000 IP. As there's no initial IP Boost for beginners:

Assuming 10 minute games (SUPER generous for everything except FD, further increasing the motivation to only play FD), and assuming a 50% win rate (SUPER generous), players gain an average of 150 * 3 = 450 IP per hour of play.

If a beginner plays for 2 hours straight per day, they will gain 900 IP, plus FwotD. Giving them... I believe it's about 1500 IP For inital starter quests?

Day 0: 1500
First Day: 1000
Second Day: 1100
Third Day: 1200
Fourth Day: 1300
Fifth Day: 1400
Sixth Day: 1400
Seventh Day: 1400

= 10300 IP

Therefore, after a week of playing a long amount of time, making GENEROUS assumptions in favor of a beginner player, a brand new player will be a bit over 75% of the way to buying a starter deck. So, all things told, they'll need to play about 9 days.

It's rather hugely unreasonable to expect anyone to stick with that, and so they won't: There's little to no indication that precon decks are the correct thing for beginner players, and the IP cost is so astronomical that they're going to pick packs instead, to gain at least some feeling of forward movement.

And, as we know that's the "wrong" choice/ the choice that's unlikely to make players feel meaningfully stronger (Pending happening to get a legendary), you are basically tricking new players into purchasing something that will feel weak/ incorrect for them, except in an exceedingly unlikely scenario.

So... yeah!

Proposed Solution(s):
Massively discount your "first" pre-made deck
Boost to initial newbie IP Gain.
Just have the starter deck be Flame Dawn (touch on this more in the second half)
Other stuff. Dunno. Discuss

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a quick side note:
There are 5 starter decks available.
Of them:

Verore is Slow
FlameDawn is fast to win
GI is Slow, and doesn't have the right commanders to win.
Warpath is fairly fast to win, but has major issues with scaling up
DoD takes forever to win, and doesn't have the right commanders to win

The fairly obviously correct choice here is FD, as it wins/ loses quickly, and will actually (occasionally) reasonably win. This, again, isn't indicated, and because many people will very much like the "feeling" of the decks obtained from the campaign missions (Compare campaign GI and DoD to starter DoD) there's going to be a rather large incidence of "incorrect" choices. Which, again? Very likely to get people to quit.

----------------------------------------------------------------

SO YEAH. Thoughts? Opinions? Problems with my hugely vague mathing?
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kamigawa on August 25, 2013, 08:59:19 PM
Your math is off, because you didn't take in account the soft cap. New players can get up to 1050 per day just by playing against AI, + the first win of 500, so it is 1550 for playing against the AI and a single win against an other player. Not to mention the IP system per minute you mentioned is after you get over the 1050 cap. Before that is 100 per win, no matter how long it was, 75 per draw and 50 per loss. If you like you can calculate again, but I`m sure the number of points per day will be much more.

You don't need any starter deck, I didn't get any and did plenty good. All I did was spend 5$ for the collections pack and buy couple of boosters with the rest. With the cards I got, I cooked a deck, worked around it until I got more IP for boosters and so on. There are some good decks with decent win-lose (70%+) ratio running less than 2 rares. Just saying - think about it.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: defaultchar on August 25, 2013, 09:05:28 PM
Your math is off, because you didn't take in account the soft cap. New players can get up to 1050 per day just by playing against AI, + the first win of 500, so it is 1550 for playing against the AI and a single win against an other player. Not to mention the IP system per minute you mentioned is after you get over the 1050 cap. Before that is 100 per win, no matter how long it was, 75 per draw and 50 per loss. If you like you can calculate again, but I`m sure the number of points per day will be much more.

You don't need any starter deck, I didn't get any and did plenty good. All I did was spend 5$ for the collections pack and buy couple of boosters with the rest. With the cards I got, I cooked a deck, worked around it until I got more IP for boosters and so on. There are some good decks with decent win-lose (70%+) ratio running less than 2 rares. Just saying - think about it.

That was in fact exactly how I calculated it.

100 IP for a win, 50 for a loss = 150 / 20 minutes (assuming 10 minute games) at 50-50 w/l.
I did make a different mistake, which I fixed. Not a particularly meaningful difference (about 1k) but 'eh.

New players do NOT get 500 IP. They get 100. That's why the daily amount increases by 100.

Most beginners don't grind games against bots, and assuming they will is a really bad idea, so I didn't bother including that. Also, arguing that they should/ have to is probably the absolute fastest way to get someone to quit a game.

Quote
All I did was spend 5$ for the collections pack

If the baseline argument is "they can just spend money" then that's a problem.

Quote
There are some good decks with decent win-lose (70%+) ratio running less than 2 rares.

I don't really understand what that has to do with my argument. I'm not saying ANYTHING about long term game monetization.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kamigawa on August 25, 2013, 09:18:49 PM
That was in fact exactly how I calculated it.

Interesting how you did it, when there was 375 ip and ~9000 total when I wrote my post, and suddenly after that it says 450 and ~10000 after it. Haha. Don't answer that.

Anyone who thinks that he/she will come to a new game and start winning right off against others without getting to know the game mechanics, the environment, etc is a fool. The way to get that experience is to:
A) Play against the AI
B) Get the living puffy out of you against other players. 

To the FD point - since I'm one of THOSE guys playing with FD - FD is not WIN IT ALL button. If the other player knows what he is doing the rush is useless. I had won a lot of games against FD, as I had lost a lot of games playing the FD.You say the Cult is slow, well they have enough kill cards to make a FD player bite the keyboard. All tho I have to agree the DoD is kinda hard to play without some key rare+ cards.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: moominpeter on August 25, 2013, 09:26:30 PM
A couple things:

First, I think the biggest problem is just that new players aren't really guided in what to do. Many probably don't realize that they should play against the computer to get their daily IP, or that they can play merged to get their daily win until they have a bigger collection themselves.

Second, if Lightmare wants to throw a little more start up IP at noobies this can be done either through the campaign or through the leveling system pretty easily.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Hitori on August 25, 2013, 09:40:36 PM
I honestly don't see why would people go into a game, never complete the campaign which challenges you against interesting situations, not do the first quests presented (add a friend, play merged deck) and then quit because they instantly queue into a PvP match.

There is a tutorial, even if just a basic one.
There is a pretty hefty campaign for a beta (8x6 = 48 missions) and a few scenarios.
There is a merged deck which relies solely on luck and not at all about who spent money on what.

What else is there to ask for?
I realize this is my personal experience and only mine, but when I started playing I did a whole week of A.I matches to get the hang of it...maybe it's just me expecting things to be hard.

--

On a side note, I think promoting the first pre-made deck is an interesting idea, the problem is how to disallow it from veterans on alternative accounts that can abuse it to get very easy rares+ cards.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: TimetoSplit on August 25, 2013, 09:46:30 PM
A couple things:

First, I think the biggest problem is just that new players aren't really guided in what to do. Many probably don't realize that they should play against the computer to get their daily IP, or that they can play merged to get their daily win until they have a bigger collection themselves.

Second, if Lightmare wants to throw a little more start up IP at noobies this can be done either through the campaign or through the leveling system pretty easily.

There are so many things that can help in IW if you learn them early on, and new players suffer because they they're not aware of them, OR players just rapidly click through the tutorials and want to play rather than read and miss important stuff, OR even if they read through the tutorials they may not know about things like using 4-6 characters of the same card as a commander, or the trading post (esp. turn 1 mulligans), etc.  I think short, instruction videos should be inserted throughout the campaign which can be skipped, but would also help.  OR what else would be cool is if the tips were listed during the game's startup while loading (before you log-in), where it would display 1 random tip each time.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: defaultchar on August 25, 2013, 10:04:57 PM
Interesting how you did it, when there was 375 ip and ~9000 total when I wrote my post, and suddenly after that it says 450 and ~10000 after it. Haha. Don't answer that.

Quote from: Lightstriker
I did make a different mistake, which I fixed. Not a particularly meaningful difference (about 1k) but 'eh.

Sigh.

Quote
Anyone who thinks that he/she will come to a new game and start winning right off against others without getting to know the game mechanics, the environment, etc is a fool

I don't think you actually understand the point I'm making.

Quote
To the FD point - since I'm one of THOSE guys playing with FD - FD is not WIN IT ALL button.

Yeahhhh

Never said FD was a win button. I said it's one of the strongest starting decks, and is inarguably the FASTEST starting deck: If you want to get IP at a reasonable rate, it is inarguably correct. Verore can beat it as I... explicitly stated..., but it's SLOW to beat it. Again, I am being stupidly generous when I say that games take 10 minutes. Only FD can get anywhere near that rate. Verore isn't even close.

Quote
There is a tutorial, even if just a basic one.
There is a pretty hefty campaign for a beta (8x6 = 48 missions) and a few scenarios.
There is a merged deck which relies solely on luck and not at all about who spent money on what.

Doesn't matter though.

You need a feeling of initial progression in order to attract players. People feel weak when they start. If you give them more cards, they feel stronger, and they get attached: They're moving forward.

The campaign has a couple issues, most notably that playing it straight through goes WAY past the "IP Cap" mark.

If you need to play a week before you can feel that there's a progression, then that's a genuine issue. I understand that merged deck is intended to mitigate this, but how many of those games have you played with a starting deck? :) It kinda rubs it in your face, because you draw your cards, which are bad, and their cards, which aren't.

It's also a fairly dubious intro format for a few reasons ("Here's a ton of cards, half of which you've probably never heard of") but that's off-topic.

Quote
Second, if Lightmare wants to throw a little more start up IP at noobies this can be done either through the campaign or through the leveling system pretty easily.

I agree entirely. My entire point was to argue that they SHOULD be doing something like that, and I don't really understand why they're not. If they don't want to provide more initial IP, I was also providing alternatives (ex: Discounting the first pre-con deck)

Quote
the problem is how to disallow it from veterans on alternative accounts that can abuse it to get very easy rares+ cards.

Account lock pre-con rare cards. *Shrug* Plenty of ways to get around that. And if people DO abuse that, they rather rapidly lose value.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: runforrestrun on August 25, 2013, 11:15:10 PM
Suggestions:

- IP Discount on new user's first pre-constructed deck.
- Lock rare cards from pre-constructed decks to the purchaser's account.
- Provide more campaign missions for the factions, have these campaign missions use prebuilt decks from the faction. Like the first 3 missions, I feel those missions are enough for new players to get a taste of the faction, but giving them a bit more would help new players select decks they will feel happy with.
- Tips on loading screens. "Not happy with your hand? Mulligan at the trading post on turn 1!"

These are probably all coming, they just aren't the biggest priority at the moment :)
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kilroy512 on August 25, 2013, 11:20:32 PM
As far as I am aware, the only TCG that is more easily accessible than this game is Scrolls and that game has an entirely different business model.

The problem being faced by new players right now is that there isn't a very large populace of new player, combined with the fact that a matchmaking system is out of the question right now. (due to having a small overall population) Once the game launches and gets larger, has a match making system, etc. most of these problems will dissolve. For now, there are NPCs, pauper matches, and merged deck that people can use to break in.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kira on August 26, 2013, 12:52:08 AM
100 IP for a win, 50 for a loss = 150 / 20 minutes (assuming 10 minute games) at 50-50 w/l.

I don't have much to say about this, but assuming new players will have anything near a 50-50 is being far too generous.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Zinqf on August 26, 2013, 02:02:19 AM
As far as I am aware, the only TCG that is more easily accessible than this game is Scrolls and that game has an entirely different business model.
Probably the part where you front the company $20 to start playing. Which isn't a bad system imo, a B2P CCG is alright, but likely to fall off the board when it comes to putting out new content.
Quote
- IP Discount on new user's first pre-constructed deck.
- Lock rare cards from pre-constructed decks to the purchaser's account.
- Provide more campaign missions for the factions, have these campaign missions use prebuilt decks from the faction. Like the first 3 missions, I feel those missions are enough for new players to get a taste of the faction, but giving them a bit more would help new players select decks they will feel happy with.
- Tips on loading screens. "Not happy with your hand? Mulligan at the trading post on turn 1!"
Would also like to add - Super Booster for every 5 levels. (In addition to whatever else was planned for level ups)

The daily win can be really good, albeit very very random. The only time I got something better than an uncommon, it was a legendary. I know people who gets rares, epics, legendaries and even super boosters from the daily win.

(http://i41.tinypic.com/22c00g.gif)

Quote
Verore is Slow
FlameDawn is fast to win
GI is Slow, and doesn't have the right commanders to win.
Warpath is fairly fast to win, but has major issues with scaling up
DoD takes forever to win, and doesn't have the right commanders to win

The fairly obviously correct choice here is FD, as it wins/ loses quickly, and will actually (occasionally) reasonably win. This, again, isn't indicated, and because many people will very much like the "feeling" of the decks obtained from the campaign missions (Compare campaign GI and DoD to starter DoD) there's going to be a rather large incidence of "incorrect" choices. Which, again? Very likely to get people to quit.
It's a good point. All of the decks are fairly even power-wise, but run at different speeds. Flame Dawn and Warpath tend to do great vs AI.

Quote
I think it would be great if the "Choose your Faction" starter decks were rentable for free as preconstructed decks that can't be changed. Keep in mind that the player would not own these cards, but they could see every card in the set (Which is a handful of uncommons, rest commons) and could make a decision on what they wanted permanently by completing the quest.

In the meantime, these "Precon decks" would be usable in the campaigns. Could even let players borrow an unmodified regular Starter Deck to use for Campaigns and viewability in the deck builder when their faction's campaign is finished. Gives people a good idea of how the starter functions before they purchase it permanently.
I perceive this like a "Free Rotation" for Champions in Smite, LoL, etc...except it is a CCG version which combines faction unlocking and trying things out to understand how they work before you get em permanently.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: defaultchar on August 26, 2013, 03:10:55 AM
100 IP for a win, 50 for a loss = 150 / 20 minutes (assuming 10 minute games) at 50-50 w/l.

I don't have much to say about this, but assuming new players will have anything near a 50-50 is being far too generous.

Oh, I totally agree. Both the 50-50 AND the 10 minutes are both absurdly generous, and the 2 hours straight is fairly unrealistic as well. With that said, HOPEFULLY matchmaking would help to bring it to fairly close to that

I thought that I'd rather be much too generous and work based off the knowledge that I'm describing an already dedicated player, rather than try and argue from a "this is a reasonably average player" perspective.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Third on August 26, 2013, 07:49:19 AM
Just a small Suggestion, or at least something I think would make this game more newbie friendly..

Have the campaign award IP above and beyond the IP cap. 150 IP a game.

There are as far as I know 3 tutorial missions and 48 campaign missions, that would give 7650 or 1½ Superbooster on your first day of playing (presuming you would beat it all in a day. Pretty sure the tutorial is also awarding some bonus IP? If so, add that to my number.. When rewards for leveling up is introduced I think this will also levitate the problem a bit.

I applaud Lightmare though, for actually using the term "beta" as it should be used. Instead of as a "demo" light the rest of the industry has been doing for years..

:)
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kilroy512 on August 26, 2013, 08:18:45 AM
Just a small Suggestion, or at least something I think would make this game more newbie friendly..

Have the campaign award IP above and beyond the IP cap. 150 IP a game.

There are as far as I know 3 tutorial missions and 48 campaign missions, that would give 7650 or 1½ Superbooster on your first day of playing (presuming you would beat it all in a day. Pretty sure the tutorial is also awarding some bonus IP? If so, add that to my number.. When rewards for leveling up is introduced I think this will also levitate the problem a bit.

I applaud Lightmare though, for actually using the term "beta" as it should be used. Instead of as a "demo" light the rest of the industry has been doing for years..

:)

The game is going to have a real money auction house and also accounts are free... good idea, but it would destroy everything, everywhere. :o
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Third on August 26, 2013, 08:53:21 AM
The game is going to have a real money auction house and also accounts are free... good idea, but it would destroy everything, everywhere. :o

You think it would destroy the economy if a new account could earn a Superbooster on the first day? Well I don't =)

It would still have to be played to level 5 before it could trade.. And I hope that Lightmare will monitor if there will be lots of differnt accounts from the same IP (talking abusive many) and ban those accounts.

I played some Might & Magic: Duals of Champions back when I didn't know any better. And one think I liked was how that game allowed me to, when I was done with the campagin, to play like 3 games against players, and then afford a big pack of cards.. There is no trading in that game, so not directly comparable. But I think it is VERY important for a new player to feel like they get something out of playing early on.

I have heard though, Teremus talk about a few ways though, to allow new players access to better decks early on.. So let's see what will happen.. I don't think it would be such a bad idea, even just giving one of 5 decks out at level 5. And have them be constructed by pros and have like 2 Rares on them.. This would devalue those two rares, but wouldn't mess up the economy of the game.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kilroy512 on August 26, 2013, 09:18:01 AM
It's not a matter of each new player getting a free super booster. It's a matter of the 50,000,000 bot accounts that would get free super boosters every couple hours... A better way of going about it would be to award a free super booster to players who complete the tutorial and some amount of the campaign that has the restriction of the cards not being trade-able. That would give new players something without ruining the economy.

[Edit]

As someone who has tried to use IP bans to suppress trolls in the past I can tell you that it takes about 2-5 minutes to change IPs assuming you are doing it manually... It sucks, but if people know what they are doing it's incredibly hard to stop them with traditional methods these days.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Third on August 26, 2013, 09:39:46 AM
I have heard though, Teremus talk about a few ways though, to allow new players access to better decks early on.. So let's see what will happen.. I don't think it would be such a bad idea, even just giving one of 5 decks out at level 5. And have them be constructed by pros and have like 2 Rares on them.. This would devalue those two rares, but wouldn't mess up the economy of the game.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Viquel on August 26, 2013, 09:50:29 AM
I still don't see why they don't like the idea of having non-tradeable promo-cards to limit abuse, I think it would make it way easier to give away stuff without heavily devaluing cards. The promo-cards could also be excluded from ranked matches or tournaments and be kept tradeable.

There are many ways that could be tested for acceptance during beta, especially since Teremus and LM assume that everyone invited to IW knows what to expect from a beta :>

But seriously, maybe new players would accept time-limited decks, or locked pre-made decks that can't be altered and they don't actually own but could use to get to know the cards. We already have a few players who are rather good at constructing decks, how about having them provide such a locked deck anyone can use in a weekly rotation?

How about granting a token that unlocks the faction's deck for a week in such a locked mode on campaign completion?

There are really lots of things that digital games can do that would be really hard or simply not viable on physical games - a completely free draft-mode with no buy-in for new players that has little rewards, an IP buy-in where nobody gets to keep the cards but that shuffles around the entry-fees up to real drafts that work just like physical ones, all of them would help newer players to have fun without spending money.
Yet there is merged mode, which is under-appreciated and sometimes abused (by providing only crap in the own deck, that just isn't fun to have 43 militia and rely on the other player completely), so if new players don't care to get informed themselves it's hard to provide the means without giant green arrows and aleta providing hints ;)

I'm pretty sure that the drafting-approaches are being worked on right now and if not "right now" in the near future, so that could maybe already be enough for new players...
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Glognar on August 26, 2013, 09:43:15 PM
As a new player myself who only started last week I was going to post something similar under suggestions.

I am actually enjoying the game, however my initial impressions are that the actual starter packs at 12k IP are far too much, considering you only get IP for the first campaign of each faction, it just doesn't make sense to me that  the others don't give IP.

I played the first mission on each faction and chose the CoV starter pack (which isn't the actual starter pack you can purchase (again doesn't make sense)). I don't play a lot but have played about 50% of the campaign and played a couple of merged deck games against others for the daily win and have 4400 IP currently, about a third of the way to a starter pack in a week.

I don't feel you get a sense of which starter pack to pick from just playing the first mission of each faction and in fact I didn't claim the reward until I had done the first three of each, and even now still not sure I picked the right one for me, but will never know as playing the other missions you don't even play that factions decks, I now chose my own deck and ended up playing against some undead guys  and not the faction whose missions I picked, so the campaign storyline doesn't make sense either.

My suggestions as a new player are that either IP is awarded for every campaign mission or the starter packs are reduced in cost, so they are achievable in a week of playing. Though reducing them in cost will mean they can all be got quickly, awarding IP from campaign missions means people can only get one of them which is probably the best way.

The campaign needs to be re-done so that when I pick the Flame Dawn missions for example I'm fighting the Flame Dawn or I use a pre-made deck as the Flame Dawn, this will help people further understand the factions as the first 3 missions isn't enough. At the moment I'm playing my deck (no warpath in it) and fighting say the zombies in the Warpath campaign as an example. How is that anything to do with the Warpath story??

As for multiplayer, with no current matchmaking system I feel the only way to be competitive and earn my daily bonus is with merged decks, but sometimes I can be queuing for a while before a game is found as not many play it. As for grinding games against the AL for IP, yes we could do that but how is that fun? especially when the campaign is basically grinding against the AL anyway but with no IP reward.

For what its worth I'm loving the game and hope it carries one, I will be buying $50 of currency on payday to buy all the starter packs, and some RISE boosters, but these are my impressions as a new player. (or maybe the whole point is to encourage people to buy starter packs with money) ;)
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Hitori on August 27, 2013, 06:52:00 AM
If I was to put in 50$ after the 31st of August I would probably buy boosters only (50% RISE / 50% CORE).
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Viquel on August 27, 2013, 07:57:54 AM
At the moment I'm playing my deck (no warpath in it) and fighting say the zombies in the Warpath campaign as an example. How is that anything to do with the Warpath story??

Play the Sleepers campaign - I think this one actually works like you want them to work - being "forced" into using that faction's deck.
All other campaigns rather tell the story of that world - IW needs some major work on the lore-side as it's really hard to get in touch with it ingame (you find quite some stuff in forums) It's more of a functional beta at the time, that includes the different styles of the campaigns
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Glognar on August 27, 2013, 11:29:03 AM
If I was to put in 50$ after the 31st of August I would probably buy boosters only (50% RISE / 50% CORE).

I can see where you are coming from, but wouldn't it be better to buy all 5 starter packs? that's a lot of cards that can be the staple of any of those factions. Aren't you relying on luck a bit by just buying boosters?

At the moment I'm playing my deck (no warpath in it) and fighting say the zombies in the Warpath campaign as an example. How is that anything to do with the Warpath story??

Play the Sleepers campaign - I think this one actually works like you want them to work - being "forced" into using that faction's deck.
All other campaigns rather tell the story of that world - IW needs some major work on the lore-side as it's really hard to get in touch with it ingame (you find quite some stuff in forums) It's more of a functional beta at the time, that includes the different styles of the campaigns

Aye I realise its only a beta and the lore will probably be fleshed out properly, however its not so much the story that bothered me, more the learning of the factions cards, how can I find out how WP (or any faction) cards play when their campaign (after the first 3) doesn't even use their cards either letting me play them, or face them.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Koey on August 27, 2013, 01:55:56 PM
At the moment I'm playing my deck (no warpath in it) and fighting say the zombies in the Warpath campaign as an example. How is that anything to do with the Warpath story??

Play the Sleepers campaign - I think this one actually works like you want them to work - being "forced" into using that faction's deck.
All other campaigns rather tell the story of that world - IW needs some major work on the lore-side as it's really hard to get in touch with it ingame (you find quite some stuff in forums) It's more of a functional beta at the time, that includes the different styles of the campaigns

Aye I realise its only a beta and the lore will probably be fleshed out properly, however its not so much the story that bothered me, more the learning of the factions cards, how can I find out how WP (or any faction) cards play when their campaign (after the first 3) doesn't even use their cards either letting me play them, or face them.
[/quote]

I think sleeper is the new campaign standard they are aiming at. The current campaign for the other 5 factions have been there since Alpha last october. So I would say there would be a lot to remake. The tutorial was just recently re-made right before the Invite Beta.
I do agree that past the first 3 having a custom deck does make it odd to work with since it doesn't teach people much.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: moominpeter on August 27, 2013, 02:36:31 PM
I hope and expect that the current campaigns are not what we will have on launch. This is definitely one of the areas where IW could improve its newbie friendliness.

The main reason I'm posting, though, is because I really like Viquel's idea of having a "deck of the week" that people can play but cannot modify and do not own the cards in. Don't let this deck enter ranked play, but let people play it against the AI or against other people in non-ranked matches. This would give people a taste for what a well constructed deck is like and may actually encourage them to shell out some money so they can build one themselves. It would also introduce new players to multiple play styles. Finally, it could be a great opportunity for Lightmare to build community, since decks could be community-designed and even community voted on. The winner doesn't even need a prize, just an acknowledgement in game--so when people click on their deck it says "designed by so and so." This alone would no doubt be enough to get people to try really hard to win the contest.

I'm sure the programming for something like this would be a lot of work, and I don't expect to see it tomorrow, but if it's feasible to one day have it then I think Lightmare should really consider this as a feature to add somewhere down the line.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: TimetoSplit on August 27, 2013, 02:43:38 PM
I also completely agree about more single player support, especially because it could help new players - as well as more challenging missions. When I first heard about IW, I was really excited because I thought I could just play vs the AI all the time, but unfortunately the campaign isn't that long.  I suppose that player ranking is more important though, so new players don't get owned by veterans anymore - that's probably the #1 thing that scares people away I'd guess, most of the other complaints root from that issue.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Hitori on August 28, 2013, 05:23:23 PM
The thing about some of the rares/epics you get in the starter pack of each faction is that they are either relatively easy to get by trading (since they are less needed or more common than others) or simply not that needed for the faction to run (I'll take 'The Dragon Project' as an example for this case).

50$ worth of boosters is...well...about 25 boosters. That's 375 cards, you'll get some spares to trade for specific rares you didn't get, and you're more than likely to have the basics to run any faction.

You may be right though, I never did buy any starter deck (or maybe only the one).
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: ItsRedd on August 29, 2013, 08:55:22 AM
The main reason I'm posting, though, is because I really like Viquel's idea of having a "deck of the week" that people can play but cannot modify and do not own the cards in. Don't let this deck enter ranked play, but let people play it against the AI or against other people in non-ranked matches. This would give people a taste for what a well constructed deck is like and may actually encourage them to shell out some money so they can build one themselves. It would also introduce new players to multiple play styles. Finally, it could be a great opportunity for Lightmare to build community, since decks could be community-designed and even community voted on. The winner doesn't even need a prize, just an acknowledgement in game--so when people click on their deck it says "designed by so and so." This alone would no doubt be enough to get people to try really hard to win the contest.

I should probably quote Viquel's post, but yours was about the same idea.

I love the above idea in essence, but don't we run the risk that players that have a somewhat bigger card database will make counter-decks to these weekly decks constantly? To put it very bluntly: They could literally farm newer players and know beforehand what deck, cards, etc they have. This seems like quite a large advantage for the one battling against the weekly deck. (I'm coining it: The weekly newbie-slaying-meta.)
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: moominpeter on August 29, 2013, 11:53:46 AM
The main reason I'm posting, though, is because I really like Viquel's idea of having a "deck of the week" that people can play but cannot modify and do not own the cards in. Don't let this deck enter ranked play, but let people play it against the AI or against other people in non-ranked matches. This would give people a taste for what a well constructed deck is like and may actually encourage them to shell out some money so they can build one themselves. It would also introduce new players to multiple play styles. Finally, it could be a great opportunity for Lightmare to build community, since decks could be community-designed and even community voted on. The winner doesn't even need a prize, just an acknowledgement in game--so when people click on their deck it says "designed by so and so." This alone would no doubt be enough to get people to try really hard to win the contest.

I should probably quote Viquel's post, but yours was about the same idea.

I love the above idea in essence, but don't we run the risk that players that have a somewhat bigger card database will make counter-decks to these weekly decks constantly? To put it very bluntly: They could literally farm newer players and know beforehand what deck, cards, etc they have. This seems like quite a large advantage for the one battling against the weekly deck. (I'm coining it: The weekly newbie-slaying-meta.)
If the decks aren't allowed in ranked, what would someone get from doing this? If it becomes a problem you could further limit accounts over lvl 15 or 20 or something so that they no longer get IP or XP from unranked games, but I doubt it would be necessary. Or you could just include matchmaking in unranked games so someone with tons of experience isn't paired against a new player.

And anyway, if the system is such that experienced players with big card selections can profitably play noobs, people will abuse it no matter what. If the deck of the week is well designed it will still be less of a slaughterfest than if you let experienced players play against noobs who only have access to their own cards.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: ItsRedd on August 29, 2013, 01:58:25 PM
If the decks aren't allowed in ranked, what would someone get from doing this? If it becomes a problem you could further limit accounts over lvl 15 or 20 or something so that they no longer get IP or XP from unranked games, but I doubt it would be necessary. Or you could just include matchmaking in unranked games so someone with tons of experience isn't paired against a new player.
Farming IP and XP will be enough of a reason to do it I'm afraid, so that would indeed need to be locked somehow. (Less IP/XP from playing against weekly-deck? Or even less IP/XP based on level disparity?)

And anyway, if the system is such that experienced players with big card selections can profitably play noobs, people will abuse it no matter what. If the deck of the week is well designed it will still be less of a slaughterfest than if you let experienced players play against noobs who only have access to their own cards.

The problem is that without matchmaking, this 'newbie slaughtering' happens due to veteran players having the real strong cards (like it is right now). The martyr golems, etcetera. Once this deck of the week is published, players with less cards could take advantage of that, tailoring a deck to counter the weekly one, rather than "only" the players with 3 copies of all the cards in-game.

Perhaps this can be solved by having several of these pre-made decks (that can still change on weekly basis) and only having these pre-made decks face off against eachother instead of including custom decks. This would also give players a chance to see well constructed decks, even adding a choice rather than "just" 1 weekly deck, and it would prevent players from making tailor-made decks to counter newbies on a weekly basis.

Again, loving the idea @ both you and Viquel. Not trying to be the king of negativity here, but it seems to be a slippery slope.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: grahaminator on August 29, 2013, 02:52:14 PM
The problem that many of you are ignoring is that it will always be hard for new players in card games because they don't know every card. New players will always be disadvantaged because of their lack of familiarity with the cards...a filterable in game index of all cards is sorely needed. So much of a turn can go into knowing what your opponent can possibly do with their purity and resources available and planning around that. I made an acct recently and was playing and beating people with real decks with free Verore deck (and cards from the campaign) combined with 15 conscripted militia.Its hard but doable. It was even easier when I got a single Constructor from campaign and added Defense Golems and other Genesis campaign rewards.

I agree that new players should get pushed towards merged games since those are much easier to win with little to no cards but the same goes for that. My friend that I recruited Mip (one of the best Cabals players) did very well in that mode and was even beating me sometimes while he was having to read every card card because he didn't know what they all did.

When people say Scrolls is easier for a new player they also have to consider the initial money put in. If they put in $20 and bought packs or a starter and some packs they would probably be at the same place. Maybe people should be forced to play more of the campaign to unlock more cards for them before they can queue for standard games, idk. Whoever suggested that campaign give IP above the max, they are onto a good idea. If someone wants to grind it all out in 1 to a couple of days they should be rewarded.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Glognar on August 29, 2013, 05:02:49 PM
The thing about some of the rares/epics you get in the starter pack of each faction is that they are either relatively easy to get by trading (since they are less needed or more common than others) or simply not that needed for the faction to run (I'll take 'The Dragon Project' as an example for this case).

50$ worth of boosters is...well...about 25 boosters. That's 375 cards, you'll get some spares to trade for specific rares you didn't get, and you're more than likely to have the basics to run any faction.

You may be right though, I never did buy any starter deck (or maybe only the one).

I did some working out last night to see which is the best option

$50 (not including the bonus IP) allows you to get the collection pack plus 18 super boosters giving 308 cards (at least 20 rare, 1 epic, 1 legendary). or the Collection pack, 5 starter packs and 6 super boosters giving 343 cards (at least 18 rare, 6 epic, 1 legendary).

looking at the starter packs most of the commons/uncommons are gained from the campaign (though maybe not 3 of each).

So I'm thinking I will spend it all on super boosters and use the bonus IP to get  one or two starter packs depending on what rares+ I get and what faction I will mainly use/epics needed. Or just get another 4 or 5 super boosters

The decision now is whether to get core or rise and how many of each.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Kilroy512 on August 30, 2013, 01:05:27 PM
The thing about some of the rares/epics you get in the starter pack of each faction is that they are either relatively easy to get by trading (since they are less needed or more common than others) or simply not that needed for the faction to run (I'll take 'The Dragon Project' as an example for this case).

50$ worth of boosters is...well...about 25 boosters. That's 375 cards, you'll get some spares to trade for specific rares you didn't get, and you're more than likely to have the basics to run any faction.

You may be right though, I never did buy any starter deck (or maybe only the one).

I did some working out last night to see which is the best option

$50 (not including the bonus IP) allows you to get the collection pack plus 18 super boosters giving 308 cards (at least 20 rare, 1 epic, 1 legendary). or the Collection pack, 5 starter packs and 6 super boosters giving 343 cards (at least 18 rare, 6 epic, 1 legendary).

looking at the starter packs most of the commons/uncommons are gained from the campaign (though maybe not 3 of each).

So I'm thinking I will spend it all on super boosters and use the bonus IP to get  one or two starter packs depending on what rares+ I get and what faction I will mainly use/epics needed. Or just get another 4 or 5 super boosters

The decision now is whether to get core or rise and how many of each.

Depends on what kind of deck you are trying to build. Certain factions, like FD, have a lot of necessary cards from Core whereas most of the good GI cards come from Rise with only a handful coming from Core. For most cases I would suggest a 2-1 ratio of Core-Rise.
Title: Re: Initial Monetization
Post by: Hitori on August 30, 2013, 05:49:07 PM
I would quite easily make it 50/50 Core-Rise ratio if you're not sure which faction to play.