Author Topic: Initial Monetization  (Read 6268 times)

Offline Third

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
  • I like YOBO!
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #15 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.

Offline Kilroy512

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 745
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #16 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.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2013, 09:23:28 AM by Kilroy512 »
Quote from: WWKnight
You are probably going to end up quoting me in your sig.  Everyone else already has.

Offline Third

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
  • I like YOBO!
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #17 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.

Viquel

  • Guest
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #18 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...

Offline Glognar

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #19 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) ;)

Offline Hitori

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1668
  • #YoboSwag
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #20 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).
I conceive that a great part of the miseries of mankind are brought upon them by false estimates they have made of the value of things.


Viquel

  • Guest
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #21 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

Offline Glognar

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #22 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.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2013, 11:31:43 AM by Glognar »

Offline Koey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
  • The one trapped in the Hamster ball.
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #23 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.

Offline moominpeter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #24 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.

Offline TimetoSplit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #25 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.

Offline Hitori

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1668
  • #YoboSwag
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #26 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).
I conceive that a great part of the miseries of mankind are brought upon them by false estimates they have made of the value of things.


Offline ItsRedd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #27 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.)

Core i5 3570k 4.9GHz @ 1.245V | Dark Rock Pro 2 | Z77 Extreme4 | 2x4GB Corsair Vengeance@1600 | Gigabyte Radeon 7950 Windforce x3 | Samsung 840 250GB SSD | WD Black 500GB | 2x WD Green 1TB | Tt Chaser Mk I

Offline moominpeter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #28 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.

Offline ItsRedd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
    • View Profile
Re: Initial Monetization
« Reply #29 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.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2013, 01:59:58 PM by ItsRedd »

Core i5 3570k 4.9GHz @ 1.245V | Dark Rock Pro 2 | Z77 Extreme4 | 2x4GB Corsair Vengeance@1600 | Gigabyte Radeon 7950 Windforce x3 | Samsung 840 250GB SSD | WD Black 500GB | 2x WD Green 1TB | Tt Chaser Mk I