PDA

View Full Version : Older sets



Pages : [1] 2 3

WWKnight
05-09-2013, 07:52 PM
Whats the deal for when older sets "rotate out" will those cards still be available for purchase?

Soken
05-09-2013, 07:54 PM
I would assume so, since there is a rotated format, and a everything format.

OP_Kyle
05-09-2013, 07:55 PM
Whats the deal for when older sets "rotate out" will those cards still be available for purchase?

We don't know if we're going to make sets go 'out of print' yet or not; we plan to collect feedback from the players in that respect. Our goal is always to create the best experience for the players possible, and our decisions are always driven in that direction.

WWKnight
05-09-2013, 08:00 PM
My personal feeling is there is no printing costs involved, and you lose nothing by making them available, and there is othing worse to come into a game late to the party and realised you missed out on all these fancy things.

Despite what I said about being greedy and wanting things no-one else has in another thread, I really feel that the option should always be available for a new player to gain the cards they want, even if said cards cant be used in competitive play. (Easily have a warning that says as much when you try and purchase it, so as not to create any ill feelings).

There may be many who want to "grandfather" old cards and keep them expensive and valuable, but that process is a byproduct of a physical product, and IMO, has no place in a digital age.

Having said that, I wont fight too hard, because I like having things other people dont! MINE MINE MINE!!! :P

Daer
05-09-2013, 08:15 PM
I'd prefer sets eventually go "out of print". It makes collecting the cards seem more special, that is reduced if all cards are always available. You could do like Magic does and release a new Core set every couple years, reprinting some useful cards from old sets. New players can always get old cards off the AH if they really want them. Plus after a couple years wouldn't a new player be overwhelmed by seeing 12 sets up for sale?

Xenavire
05-09-2013, 08:18 PM
You say overwhelmed, I say overjoyed at the options...

WWKnight
05-09-2013, 08:24 PM
(Sorry fro bringing this up again, but its relevant!)

One of the selling points for the other game I play, Infinity Wars, is that they pledged that no card would ever be unobtainable to a new player. This excites me, because I feel it is healthy to the growth of the game to make it accessible to all new comers. As the person with the largest in-game collection, it hurts me as I can never profit from the first edition cards.

When faced with the choice of personal gain and growth of something I love, I choose the latter.

Xenavire
05-09-2013, 08:32 PM
I also advocate that sets/cards never go out of print. Keep it fair, and let players tinker with legacy items.

Soken
05-09-2013, 08:50 PM
i like the idea of having cards thats hard to get. I love collecting, and making them always available gets rid of that feeling.
I support having them go out of print

Xenavire
05-09-2013, 08:53 PM
Hey no-one said they have to be easy to get, they can still be rare and in print. No-one usually cares about commons (playsets everywhere) but imagine trying to get playsets of really rare cards only available through some near-impossible task...

Ashenor
05-09-2013, 08:54 PM
If a standard set is 2 blocks, i would say retire cards after 4 blocks. That will help maintain value on the old cards in a legacy type format, and add value to collecting and holding onto cards.

Daer
05-09-2013, 08:54 PM
With the AH cards will always be available so nothing will be truly unobtainable if cards go out of print. Some cards being more valuable/rare then others is fine, it is a tcg afterall.

Xenavire
05-09-2013, 09:01 PM
If they want to drive up value they just need limited use cards like lotus.

In an MMO format, limiting or removing content is usually a bad idea (blizzard had some nasty feedback over exactly that) and a TCG is about players collecting AND playing, not hoarding and living in fear of the block cycling out before they are done.

WWKnight
05-09-2013, 09:39 PM
If they want to drive up value they just need limited use cards like lotus.

In an MMO format, limiting or removing content is usually a bad idea (blizzard had some nasty feedback over exactly that) and a TCG is about players collecting AND playing, not hoarding and living in fear of the block cycling out before they are done.

And on this day, Truth was spoken.

As I said earlier, I am not going to be too upset if they choose to retire cards. Im in a position to greatly benefit from all the cards I will be getting. But I think as a whole for the health of the game, it'd be better if new players werent met with large expanse of cards that they cant get access too!

Brewdinar
05-09-2013, 09:44 PM
What are peoples' thoughts on an artificial rarity increase by scaling up the price of old sets when new ones are released? Much in the way that most older M:tG packs cost more now. Seems like a best-of-both-worlds answer to the two camps on this issue.

Mehlo
05-09-2013, 09:48 PM
I think that doing it artificially will be counter productive. It would happen naturally just through the auction house and player sales, just like in other games. I think that retiring cards is a good idea, because it's not like the cards that exist are gone, reprints are a thing, and they can always do special re releases. I think having them not retire will drive down the value of sets that have been out for any length of time into the toilet

WWKnight
05-09-2013, 09:54 PM
Except those who dont want those cards wont buy them, still keeping the card pool pretty much what it was when teh set stopped being standard legal. The only change it would do is give new collectors an option of bypassing those who want to monopolise the market with steep price increases and try their luck at opening a pack or 10.

This way, the money is also going to Cryptozoiac, and not to a secondary market.

Mehlo
05-09-2013, 10:10 PM
True, but without said secondary market, the game will have serious issues getting a serious base. The only reason i play magic anymore is because of the secondary market, i love to draft, but i am not much of a collector, so i usually make a little profit from doing that. It also makes the product prizes from tournaments have more oomph, since they can have more value.

To give a go example, the two biggest profiting card games right now are magic the gathering and yu-gi-oh. Suprisingly yu-gi-oh has the higher primary market, but their secondary market is dwarfed by magic's. This is what makes magic so popular and active, and with a secondary market like it has, the older cards are only really there to get for collectors value or legacy kind of stuff, and if they are so easy to get, that looses a lot of it's fun.

WWKnight
05-09-2013, 10:12 PM
Then I think its just time to agree to disagree :-) As I said, I can live at the end of the day with either option. I just feel its healthier for the game to have such things always available.

Mehlo
05-09-2013, 10:21 PM
Yea, this is gonna be an interesting issue to see how they solve. I just have one last thing, and this is less a point of debate then just a personal thing, but i happen to own a copy of black lotus. I grabbed it close to a decade ago, and it's a bit of a prize of my collection. If i could go out today and buy a pack that might have one in it, it wouldnt matter at all, and that would make me sad.

Storm_Fireblade
05-10-2013, 12:42 AM
I absolutely prefer sets to go out of print. The secondary market is such an important thing to keep an enourmous amount of TCG-Players busy and satisfied. Cirumventing this by having every booster (thereby every card) available via shop for eternity simply undermines the economic playstyle of thousands.

Real collectors will have no problems with going out and hunt for their beloved cards, since those will be available via the secondary market all the time. Even more because its a digital game, since cards cannot be destroyed, suffer due to much playing etc.

The digital foundation of this game, which secures that cards never loose their overall quality, makes it even more important for me to have sets go out of print. Having been there from day 1 and seeing even the most rarest cards of the first set being worth absolutely nothing in the future, because the market at every time is flooded with new boosters, would definitively decrease my playfun and even limit myself regarding all the enjoyable trades and economical decisions the secondary market normally offers.

Brewdinar
05-10-2013, 01:41 AM
Some of that I object to. Cards may not be "destroyed" since they're virtual, but they can most certainly still be effectively destroyed simply by having players quit the game. If I have a closet full of cards I'm probably going to sell them or give them away eventually, but if all I have is a digital account, when I get tired of the game I'm probably just going to shrug my shoulders and stop logging in.

I also get the feeling that your definition of "real collector" is much stricter than would really be relevant for the game's economy. People may go to great lengths to pick up a Black Lotus today, but even with those people around the secondary economy is mostly Type 2 and Modern.

Finally, I strongly suspect that restricting access to older cards undermines the playstyle of more thousands than keeping them available does, and to a stronger degree. Both sides have valid expectations of being able to enjoy the game as much as possible.

I expect the designers will choose to have sets rotate out of availability because enforcing churn keeps money flowing, the metagame evolves faster, and excitement and engagement stay high. The biggest flaw I can think of against just offering older packs at increasing prices, is the implication to new players that those cards are more desirable. It's kind of similar to the scenario they discussed about players not rowing high-cost cards in the WoW TCG and so never getting to play them either. Bigger numbers staring people in the face causes them to act irrationally.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 04:12 AM
I don't see an issue with the first sets having less value as time goes by - that is the very nature of an MMO, old content is easier to farm, etc.

You need to stop looking at this from ONLY the TCG side. Retiring decks means less payout to the devs, and robs new players of the chance to open those boosters.

If the AH would be flooded with those cards, it is a non-issue anyway, but players will quit eventually, taking their cards with them. The more of the legacy cards they had, the more the economy loses.

The whole way cycling blocks works will be enough - if they are holding legacy tournaments, and the cards are viable in PvE, they will have demand, but not at the level of the new blocks, and PvP players (the ones encouraged to buy boosters) will be saving their pennies for the new blocks, making the old sets rarer anyway (no incentive to buy means less in rotation).

That leaves it to collectors, trying to luck out, or PvE or legacy PvP players buying them... That should make them rare enough without the need to remove them, but will prevent the prices ballooning to economy breaking levels.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 05:14 AM
There are really good arguments on both sides. I dont envy Cryptozoiac this decision. :-/

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 05:48 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't want to make the decision either.

I do hope they try not making things go out of print first, and testing the waters. They can always remove things later, and it will normalise over time.

They are trying to break some TCG conventions, and this is a staple of every TCG. I hope they go with the best decision, even if it proves me to be an idiot.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 05:57 AM
I dotn think you (or me, or those who are arguing against us) are an idiot. There really is great arguments for both sides of the coin.

There is obviously a desire for people to want to profit off their collection, to turn their money into an investment. Thats understandable, but it is, IMO a byproduct of a different (physical) system. I dont think it needs to be translated into digitial, because there are no printing costs, and there is no need to create such a content chasm for new players joining us in 5 years time.

My concern is that people are, no offense meant to anyone in particular, @$$holes. Mediocre cards that hold no real value will cost an arm and a leg simply because you "cant get them easily" anymore. I dont see this as ever being a problem I will face, as I dont ever intend on letting a set slip me by without me collecting it (free draft a week, watch me make it worthwhile from a collectors standpoint). This is a concern I have only for newer players, and thus the growth of the game.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 06:14 AM
Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly.

Simply adding cards only winnable by topping tourneys, or only from epic raids, will give those people enough trade/auction house fodder. They don't really need the core sets too.

Not to mention card levelling, trophy cases, alternate art/sound effects/specular effects, etc... A dedicated player will have plenty to use.

Storm_Fireblade
05-10-2013, 06:25 AM
I actually have to change my stand on this, since I don't have a problem to admit being wrong in the first place. Xenavire actually said a few things, that changed my mind. First of all, this isn't a digital only TCG - it is a MMOTCG and in an MMO content at some point becomes outdated, although it still exists until getting revamped.

And cards will stay rare somehow, except for collectors buying old decks, because sets at least as far as we know now, will rotate out of the tournament cycle, which will lead people to focus on other boosters.

This and some other stuff definitively changed my mind here. Cards should NOT go out of print! :)

Devaux
05-10-2013, 06:25 AM
I personally want to throw my hat in with never moving things out of print. The devs have said that they want to have a non-rotating format and an "everything format" which I think is great but an eternal format can't be sustained if the cards become inaccessible. Thats a problem Magic is currently having. They no longer support their Legacy (their "everything" format) because they can't reprint a bunch of the staples and so they created another non-rotating format that they would be able to reprint staples for in the future.

Part of the advantage to a fully digital TCG is that keeping a set "in print" costs so little that cards never have to become inaccessible. I sympathize with collectors but if the devs want to be able to grow their non-rotating format in the long run (thusly benefitting existing players with a more robust user base) then the cards need to be accessible to new players.

Daer
05-10-2013, 07:19 AM
If cards go out of print you could always have tournaments that have old boosters as a prize. If you go with a 2-block format you wouldn't see cards going out of print for at least 2 years. Plus you could always have reprint sets that reprint sets from a certain block.

As an extreme example lets say Magic sets never went out of print. A new player wants to play and sees 70+ sets he can buy. I think he says, "Sweet look at all the sets I can buy." a lot less frequently then he say, "WTF LOOK AT ALL THE SETS TO BUY!." And then either gives up, buys from only the latest sets anyway, or has to do research to figure out where best to start spending his money.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 07:27 AM
In a digital format though, the most relevant cards would be placed in plain view, where as the older, less useful cards could be accessed only after pressing "Next" and a warning comes up explaining their reduced use and value.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 07:28 AM
Creating a store interface that directs users more strongly towards new sets and hiding older sets is a relatively simple task. That could avoid the new player being confronted by a list of 10-15 sets and being overwhelmed.

The problem I see with giving packs from old sets as prizes is that either your faced with a paradox of "I want to get into this format > I need staples > In order to get the packs with these staples I need to win tournaments in this format" OR you're giving out old packs to the winners of tournaments that use only new cards. Both of these seem... well they seem -ok- but isn't it just simpler and more straightforward to just keep selling the packs?

Daer
05-10-2013, 07:34 AM
Continuing to keep selling packs hurts the value of the cards, since the population of each card continues to get larger and larger over time.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 07:39 AM
But does it? Say we have a pool of 10000 players for the first two blocks. Over time, 3000 of those players quit, and are replaced by 6000 new players.

Those new players focus on the new block cards, and the effective card pool for the first two blocks is down to 7000 players worth. Over time, the player base will increase, but those from earlier sets will come and go, essentially "destroying" the card pool they had.

The game will naturally keep the newest sets in circulation, and only the die hard collectors and newer players trying to build certain PvE decks would need to look beyond the latest set.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 07:39 AM
Continuing to keep selling packs hurts the value of the cards, since the population of each card continues to get larger and larger over time.

Which goes back to the question of do the devs want to maintain the value of collections or prolong the life of their non-rotating format.

Now naturally there are more than just two options here. Hopefully this is something the devs have already discussed internally.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 07:41 AM
If not, I think we've given them a good foundation to start this conversation on! :D

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 07:45 AM
But would it Daer? With no competitive incentive to buy cards, less players will buy them. With players leaving, and whole collections dissapearing, chunks of older sets will vanish.

This is an MMO, if you truly want things out of print you should set a printing limit from the start, to limit the number of cards, otherwise people could buy a near unlimited stockpile before a set cycled out permanently, just because it is digital.

See the problems here? Digital changes a lot.

Daer
05-10-2013, 07:50 AM
If people want to buy an unlimited stockpile before a set cycles out that is fine. Going 'out of print' fits perfectly in with an MMO. You can't buy vanilla WoW and play it. Sure you can have some of the basics of it and other bits and pieces but it is largely gone now and if you didn't play it 7 years ago you are out of luck. Having an AH with old cards available actually would make Hex more forgiving then a regular MMO.

Kami
05-10-2013, 07:55 AM
Having lurked around on the forums for the past few days, I'd have to disagree with digital changing anything in regards to older sets. Look at MTG: Online. Older sets are retired and no longer available despite being digital. Besides, without sets retiring to make older cards rarer, there is little to no incentive to buy boosters.

People would just wait until the price drops due to over-supply and buy on a per-card basis. Imagine if before the reprint of Black Lotus in MTG (from Alpha) that they kept selling Black Lotus all the way through 4th Edition and onwards. The value of that card would be utterly worthless. It also punishes those who spent the money through boosters to obtain those cards. Why would I spend $2 on a booster if I can spend $0.01 custom picking the cards I want?

It is for the very reason that cards are limited that give them value! Otherwise, they might as well just make the entire economy payless.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:04 AM
Not to sound like a jerk, but they didn't remove vanilla WoW, they improved on it. The gear, the dungeons, etc, they are still there, and the FEW times Blizzard ever removed anything, the forums exploded. You can pick up WoW today, and play the vanilla content, albeit mostly upgraded and tweaked, and run those old dungeons and raids.

And we have been over this, legacy cards will not be PvP legal, so there will be constant incentive to buy new instead of old.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 08:09 AM
This is not true as they upgraded talent trees making raiding at level 60 easy

~

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 08:10 AM
Not to sound like a jerk, but they didn't remove vanilla WoW, they improved on it. The gear, the dungeons, etc, they are still there, and the FEW times Blizzard ever removed anything, the forums exploded. You can pick up WoW today, and play the vanilla content, albeit mostly upgraded and tweaked, and run those old dungeons and raids.

And we have been over this, legacy cards will not be PvP legal, so there will be constant incentive to buy new instead of old.

As long as PvP is balanced, they should make sure cards have value.
They'll choose how to do it in due time :)

~

Daer
05-10-2013, 08:12 AM
I believe they have said there will a legacy format along with the 2-block format.

And yes you can still play some of the vanilla dungeons and raids but everything else has been changed. Cataclysm changed the world and the quests, spells and talents have been completely changed, etc...

Kami
05-10-2013, 08:13 AM
Not to sound like a jerk, but they didn't remove vanilla WoW, they improved on it. The gear, the dungeons, etc, they are still there, and the FEW times Blizzard ever removed anything, the forums exploded. You can pick up WoW today, and play the vanilla content, albeit mostly upgraded and tweaked, and run those old dungeons and raids.

And we have been over this, legacy cards will not be PvP legal, so there will be constant incentive to buy new instead of old.

Just because legacy cards will not PvP legal does not mean they shouldn't be limited to keep their value. I don't play WoW but I'm sure if you were to offer a lot of the now unavailable 'perks' or 'pets' or whatever to any new player that joins now, it would piss off a lot of collectors as it would devalue them.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 08:14 AM
Having lurked around on the forums for the past few days, I'd have to disagree with digital changing anything in regards to older sets. Look at MTG: Online. Older sets are retired and no longer available despite being digital. Besides, without sets retiring to make older cards rarer, there is little to no incentive to buy boosters.

People would just wait until the price drops due to over-supply and buy on a per-card basis. Imagine if before the reprint of Black Lotus in MTG (from Alpha) that they kept selling Black Lotus all the way through 4th Edition and onwards. The value of that card would be utterly worthless. It also punishes those who spent the money through boosters to obtain those cards. Why would I spend $2 on a booster if I can spend $0.01 custom picking the cards I want?

It is for the very reason that cards are limited that give them value! Otherwise, they might as well just make the entire economy payless.

MTGO exists only as a supplement to paper Magic. They -could- print a bunch of older sets for MTGO but they dont because they can't do that on paper.

Also, for that very reason the average price of a pack in singles shouldn't fall below $2 anyway because if they ever did then packs would sell less until the demand for the cards pushes the average cost back up above $2 and thats even before you account for the fact that not every card will be in the market at once and there are new players joining the market.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:15 AM
But all content has gotten easier in WoW, and it doesn't matter that much about talents, you have years worth of guides etc to make those old raids easy. You could choose not to use those talents, and you have many other options.

For example, they have heirlooms, but you aren't required to use them.

The point is, the content, by and large, is all still there.

EDIT: Kami, that logic doesn't make sense, at all. The way you are describing it, WoW would have removed Vanilla and 60+ levels, and had people roll 60's and play BC.

The only exclusive things in WoW are from PvP, high end raiding when the content is current, and special giveaways. To compare that to a TCG, the only exclusive stuff should be PvP rewards, kickstart rewards, or epic raiding rewards.

Daer
05-10-2013, 08:19 AM
Talents are completely changed and aren't even close to how they were in vanilla. Plus MMOs generally always have various mounts/pets/gear that becomes unobtainable.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 08:21 AM
I think we have gone completely off-track here. What WoW does with its content isnt really relevant to how available these cards should and shouldnt be.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:22 AM
Daer, yes some stuff got removed, but people were not happy about it. Not to mention the suggestions here sound like MMO's remove ALL content that existed when they release an expansion. That has never, EVER, happened (to my knowledge)

Mushroom_C1oud
05-10-2013, 08:23 AM
I would like to see sets never go "out-of-print" because there may be a block of cards that I like over newer blocks that would still be fun to have booster drafts. This would also allow newer players to go back and play some of the more favorite blocks without having to trade for each card or booster pack.

Older block tournaments could happen once a week and then go on rotation as more blocks become available.

Kami
05-10-2013, 08:24 AM
EDIT: Kami, that logic doesn't make sense, at all. The way you are describing it, WoW would have removed Vanilla and 60+ levels, and had people roll 60's and play BC.

The only exclusive things in WoW are from PvP, high end raiding when the content is current, and special giveaways. To compare that to a TCG, the only exclusive stuff should be PvP rewards, kickstart rewards, or epic raiding rewards.

Um... I said nothing about re-rolling. I was talking about things that would not be available to new players being more valuable. As you said, Legacy cards wouldn't be for general competitive play anyway (in other words, they are now in the realm of collectibles) then as such an equivalent collectible such as no longer obtainable mounts/pets/etc in WoW should also be considered collectible, correct?

If so, then would it be fair to those who earned/paid/etc their collectible in WoW see the value of their collectible diminished since everyone still has access to it? Similar case for legacy cards.

As you said, the incentive for purchasing new cards always exists... by making legacy cards limited, the incentive for purchasing old cards will exist as well for collectors.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:26 AM
Mushroom_Cloud makes a good point, if you remove those booster drafts, you are removing a part of the gameplay, meaning PvP players have less to do.

EDIT: Daer, legacy cards wont be competitive in PvP, but they will be in PvE, and giving PvP players preference will aleinate PvE players.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 08:34 AM
I think we have gone completely off-track here. What WoW does with its content isnt really relevant to how available these cards should and shouldnt be.

I agree with this. Unless CZE wants power creep to destroy the game you can't really compare the way WoW handles old content to the way a TCG should.

Kami
05-10-2013, 08:38 AM
EDIT: Daer, legacy cards wont be competitive in PvP, but they will be in PvE, and giving PvP players preference will aleinate PvE players.

A compromise then. Phase out legacy boosters from store but make the cards available to be earned by chance via PvE through random rewards/drops/etc. That way, you give PvE players incentive to play more and it doesn't hurt the card economy as much over time as drop rates can be controlled to keep Common, Uncommon, Rare, Legendary cards at stable percentages.

That way, the content you want hasn't gone away but it also doesn't devalue cards that people have collected as much.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 08:41 AM
A compromise then. Phase out legacy boosters from store but make the cards available to be earned by chance via PvE through random rewards/drops/etc. That way, you give PvE players incentive to play more and it doesn't hurt the card economy as much over time as drop rates can be controlled to keep Common, Uncommon, Rare, Legendary cards at stable percentages.

That way, the content you want hasn't gone away but it also doesn't devalue cards that people have collected as much.

This suggestion pleases me. I could get behind this, assuming if you wanted content from a certain set or block, you could continuously farm a particular dungeon or raid for guaranteed cards from that set or block!

Daer
05-10-2013, 08:42 AM
I like Kami's suggestion.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:44 AM
Power creep should only be a threat in PvE, and PvE content is always a bit like that.

Remember, if sets are cycled, each block can be kept in check.

EDIT: I agree with the sentiment, but I am a little worried about the PvP players complaining that their money was wasted...

If it was handled properly, it would be a nice solution.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 08:48 AM
How are pvp players money wasted?

All cards from teh set/block should be available in this method, INCLUDING pvp cards. As they would be considered legacy cards, I dont see this as a problem for mixing PvP rewards in PvE content.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-10-2013, 08:54 AM
If it comes out of a booster pack then it should be allowed to be purchasable indefinitely. All cards that come from the boosters are allowed in PvP play according to the devs. However, the tournaments are block specific and it seems reasonable to allow tournaments from older blocks based upon popularity.

Cards earned in PvE, from my understanding, are different then the cards found in the boosters.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 08:59 AM
A compromise then. Phase out legacy boosters from store but make the cards available to be earned by chance via PvE through random rewards/drops/etc. That way, you give PvE players incentive to play more and it doesn't hurt the card economy as much over time as drop rates can be controlled to keep Common, Uncommon, Rare, Legendary cards at stable percentages.

That way, the content you want hasn't gone away but it also doesn't devalue cards that people have collected as much.

I like this too. Or some variation of it. I think Kyle is awake now though so maybe he can weigh in (please).

OP_Kyle
05-10-2013, 09:02 AM
I like this too. Or some variation of it. I think Kyle is awake now though so maybe he can weigh in (please).

Don't really want to step in here and sway the conversation one way or another... but I'll just quickly say that currently we are working on a two-block rotation, and we'll be listening to player feedback as we get down the road to make the best decision in favor of the players.

Thanks again for the input and support.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 09:02 AM
WWKnight, people usually don't think thing through rationally, so when the devs go to announce the boosters will be available in PvE, but no longer in PvP, those players MIGHT feel like the money they spent to get those cards was wasted, since now they would be free.

I have seen stuff like that happen a lot, especially in MMO's.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 09:03 AM
Probably take him a while to read the whole thread. And I would prefer he stay silent on the issue, honestly, until he has had a chance to speak with the team and come back with a definate response.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 09:05 AM
Don't really want to step in here and sway the conversation one way or another... but I'll just quickly say that currently we are working on a two-block rotation, and we'll be listening to player feedback as we get down the road to make the best decision in favor of the players.

Thanks again for the input and support.

Fair enough. Its been pretty talked to death here. As CZE has experience working with TCGs I'm confident in their ability to pick something that works.

Also, this is a problem that won't even come up for like 2 more years.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 09:06 AM
Just grabbed this from another thread, from Kyle-

Secondly, you will be able to grind cards into component parts for the crafting system. Then use them to build new and awesome things!


Seeing this makes me advocate even more strongly for the cards to stay in rotation permanently, as doubles/triples will likely get destroyed anyway.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 09:07 AM
Just grabbed this from another thread, from Kyle-

Secondly, you will be able to grind cards into component parts for the crafting system. Then use them to build new and awesome things!


Seeing this makes me advocate even more strongly for the cards to stay in rotation permanently, as doubles/triples will likely get destroyed anyway.

I cant believe I didnt think of that! Good pick up Xena!

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 09:10 AM
Haha, I am really on the ball today. I have never been so fired up for a game that wasn't Pokemon (don't hate me, been a fan forever.)

If I can do anything to help, it would only be better, so I am really hyped and focused.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 09:12 AM
I cant hate you, im too busy directing all my hate at Entei who just keeps SLEEP RUNNING! Not wasting a damn Masterball on him either! $%&@%!

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 09:19 AM
Oh, I hate that! Grab a ghost with mean look, if he stays alseep he cant run at least. Or if you are playing a newer game (HG/SS) get wobbufett with shadow tag, and hope it stays asleep, or doesn't roar.

Enough derailing thread though haha.

Still, card destroying will be big in PvE, hope it can be used to some extent for PvP as well.

Mehlo
05-10-2013, 09:53 AM
Good morning all, glad to see this conversation is growing strong. About the idea of people being able to get the cards from drops from PvE, the one major problem with that is that gold farmers (or their equivilent) would devalue them to the point of uselesness, or if they were rare enough to not make gold farmers impact would make it so rare as that most people would never see what they want. Plus this goes against the very stern (and appreciated) stance of keeping PvE and PvP seperate.

As much as i'm loving this debate i think Cryptozoic, as much as i love they listen to players, should hire an economist. This is probably one of the more important decision they can make. I admit i'm firmly on the cycle out stance, since without it value will always decrease over time, but i want them to look at this more in depth then we can really see it.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 10:06 AM
Well, some PvE rewards could easily become BoP. Goodbye one more gold farming method.

Or they could just make the rarest cards not eligible for AH or trading, but could be given to guild members possibly. More abusable, but still more open.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 10:12 AM
Good morning all, glad to see this conversation is growing strong. About the idea of people being able to get the cards from drops from PvE, the one major problem with that is that gold farmers (or their equivilent) would devalue them to the point of uselesness, or if they were rare enough to not make gold farmers impact would make it so rare as that most people would never see what they want. Plus this goes against the very stern (and appreciated) stance of keeping PvE and PvP seperate.

As much as i'm loving this debate i think Cryptozoic, as much as i love they listen to players, should hire an economist. This is probably one of the more important decision they can make. I admit i'm firmly on the cycle out stance, since without it value will always decrease over time, but i want them to look at this more in depth then we can really see it.

I mean I can't tell them how to run their business but having somebody with a background in economy does sound helpful.


Well, some PvE rewards could easily become BoP. Goodbye one more gold farming method.

Or they could just make the rarest cards not eligible for AH or trading, but could be given to guild members possibly. More abusable, but still more open.


Everything I've read from them makes it sound like they don't really want anything to be Bound. I mean maybe they will but from what I've seen it doesn't seem likely.

Mehlo
05-10-2013, 10:15 AM
I'm hoping for bound at least the sign up starter deck

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 10:15 AM
I hope they manage to avoid binding as well. Except for the Lotus Garden, it doesnt suit the TCG genre. (Key letter there being the T)

Mehlo
05-10-2013, 10:17 AM
I hope even the lotus garden is tradeable (And i think i saw somewhere it is). Not that i ever plan on trading it, but having the option is nice.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 11:05 AM
Well, if the crafting/destroying feature is done correctly, old cards will become far too rare if they can be destroyed.

I stay adamant on the view that nothing should be removed.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 01:18 PM
My understanding was that Lotus Garden will be BoP but Lotuses will be tradeable.

~

C-Drive
05-10-2013, 01:44 PM
I really think they should rotate the sets "out-of-print" at some point. The collector aspect of the game is strengthened by that. Currently, in Magic, you have players who would never pick up a cheap reprint over a Alpha/Beta original to build their deck with. And if reprinted core cards had different artwork, like MTG cards through the years, collectors and those players with particular artwork favorites would have a reason to hunt down older cards. If those cards were easily gained because the original boosters were still available for everyone, and the secondary market flooded with every card ever, I think it stomps on the "trading" part of TCG (formerly known as "collectable" - and for good reason).

Should boosters NEVER be available after the initial run? Of course not. It's an income for CZE, and when having an hypothetical "out-of-print" Set 1 pop up as a "weekend special" on the store, it creates demand that otherwise wouldn't be there, demand that can have higher asking prices. Alongside special sales, the old boosters would be available as prizes for different PVP tournaments and through various other PVP methods (never PVE bonuses).

I think having the older sets around for new players is a bad idea, the game needs to evolve, and CZE will need to push the block rotation to build a constant stream of income from the need of players to buy new product. If I was running the show, current block boosters would be $2. The two previously-rotated blocks would be $3 a booster. The two previously before that, $4. Anything before those blocks would be the "out-of-print" setes. This way, players would have access to at least 6 expansions/sets at a time, creating something like MTG's Extended format. Push the optional subscription charge they recently talked about - $4 a month for a free booster a week - by having that able to cover any of the six available sets, regardless of store price. Also, any optional subscribers can use their free booster for the week on any special sales "out-of-print" boosters presented.

Now, the crafting featuring the ability to destroy cards throws a wrench in the idea of "out-of-print", but I have a feeling the crafting will be relegated to PVE-only cards in the first place.

And I'm really hoping the new account starter decks are account-bound.

tl;dr - I'd prefer out-of-print sets.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 01:57 PM
Out of print doesn't mean way more expensive, you're talking about Alpha/Beta that is 20 years old and on a very small scale (not even mentionning all the Black Lotus that have been destroyed playing without sleeves and playsets of moxes replacing lands and getting destroyed too)

~

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 01:59 PM
They are already having alternate art in the first set, as a rarer version, that already gives collectors something to shoot for. You are too focused on the TCG side, and not enough on the MMO side.

There is going to be more than enough demand to keep supply needed for all sets, just because thats how a playerbase in an MMO works.

And since PvP cards work in PvE, I don't see why PvP cards couldn't be destroyed.

You have a nice take on it, in general, but you are leaving a huge disadvatage for new players, and MMO's DEPEND on new players in a way a normal TCG wouldn't - and considering the mentality of an MMO player, and the niche market this would have, you don't want to alienate casuals.

Collectors will have more than enough on thier plates, and I doubt even the higher kickstart tiers will have gauranteed complete collections with every alternate version of a card out of their boosters, so I suggest taking a step back and looking at the scope of it before dooming sets to oblivion.

Kami
05-10-2013, 02:20 PM
They are already having alternate art in the first set, as a rarer version, that already gives collectors something to shoot for. You are too focused on the TCG side, and not enough on the MMO side.

There is going to be more than enough demand to keep supply needed for all sets, just because thats how a playerbase in an MMO works.

And since PvP cards work in PvE, I don't see why PvP cards couldn't be destroyed.

You have a nice take on it, in general, but you are leaving a huge disadvatage for new players, and MMO's DEPEND on new players in a way a normal TCG wouldn't - and considering the mentality of an MMO player, and the niche market this would have, you don't want to alienate casuals.

Collectors will have more than enough on thier plates, and I doubt even the higher kickstart tiers will have gauranteed complete collections with every alternate version of a card out of their boosters, so I suggest taking a step back and looking at the scope of it before dooming sets to oblivion.

I could also make the counter-argument that in pretty much all TCGs, you don't get 'items' (or in this case, cards) for free. You're trying to make this MMO-newbie friendly but at the end of the day, it's far more a TCG than an MMO.

This is looking more like a TCG with RPG elements, not a MMORPG with some minor TCG stuff. In TCGs, there is always a buy-in for new players. Even in MTG and it's still going strong.

I could also argue that there will be enough for 'casuals' to play with. Why would casuals care about buying boosters from an older set? How many casuals would pay?

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 02:29 PM
Well, thats the fun of MMO's, there are many different kinds of casual.

And depending on where you live and what TCG you play, and how well you perform, you can get stuff for free - very collectable stuff.

But you have to look at it in the MMO sense - a person comes in, casually. Depending on what he/she happens to see, and how much they like it, can turn them into a regular or hardcore player. And those players would be able to benifit from those older sets.

Don't forget, if people quit, cards dissapear, and other than starting decks, there are no cards magically created by having new players join - if enough old cards rotate out due to players quitting, there wont be enough of those old cards to make an impact - you might find one every now and then at an insane price, which is not healthy for the economy.

MMO's are an entirely different beast, limiting content is not a smart idea.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 02:38 PM
This is how I see it, and how I would do it if I was CZE :

The Free Players will have a starter to play with and beat the couple first dungeons easily, they'll create new characters, read the lore and so on, but they won't finish the game easily.

Then they'll have the choice of farming the content they can for months to improve their deck or to buy a couple boosters and move on the next dungeons.

~

Kami
05-10-2013, 02:39 PM
I disagree.

I find it very hard to believe that a person who or starts late will have no chance of playing and completing the PvE portion of the game. If they miss out on cards, well, that's the way it is but I seriously doubt it would make it impossible for them to have a good time regardless. So what if others can do better?

Even Starter Decks in MTG weren't completely terrible. Not only that, there will always be new cards created besides the Starter deck just by playing through PvE that they will receive for FREE and as they earn Gold, they can buy more boosters and/or cards. The only difference is that their pace may be slower depending on their play.

And so what if an old card is listed an insane price? It is NOT essential for play. Those who have it, that's their 'luck'. Those who don't will find other ways.

If you really want to compare MMORPGs to this game then please stop making suggestions where we are always hand-holding new players. They are given the basics, they have to earn the rest. Not everything is always available. Event quests, special prizes, etc. Legacy cards are no different. Even if they are phased out for purchase, I'm sure the game will be balanced with new cards to make it enjoyable and playable still!

This needs to be thought out rationally, not in an emotional what-if scenario of trying to please everyone always.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 03:01 PM
I am sorry, how is not phasing out old sets hand holding? I am just going to use my previous example for this - do MMO's remove dungeons after they make 5 new ones? Do they retire gear after you can get something newer and flashier? No.

They leave that content in, for players to experience the full game, from start to finish. If some skip stuff, that is their choice, but the option is there.

I do not see it any more difficult or easy for new players, it just lets them experience the full range of the game.

I just hear people who are trying to have special somethings - the kickstarter, and tournament prizes, and whatever other giveaways aren't enough? You sound like entitled children, and that bugs me. I was hoping the community would be amazing, and it has been nice, but this is the same kind of elitism that is killing most major MMO's.

Mehlo
05-10-2013, 03:03 PM
Hey now, calm it down all. There are good arguments on both sides of the debate, but we need to keep it relaxed. We dont have nearly enough info to get too carried away in either direction, just time for putting out ideas.

Kami
05-10-2013, 03:10 PM
How is that entitle-ism or even elitism? This is the foundation of any game with 'randomized' drops.

Just because old boosters are phased out doesn't mean the cards disappear. They are still in circulation. I don't understand how this is any different from gear/equipment in an MMORPG that is no longer available except via trade. It's not like I'm saying to remove PvE content.

The content is the game, not the cards. The cards only enable play, they do not make the game. New players can enjoy the game with newer cards as well. If they manage to trade or purchase older cards that are no longer available through boosters, that's just like trading or buying a piece of gear/equipment that is no longer obtainable in any MMORPG.

Another comparison is how MMORPG players quit and take their gear with them too. This is no different.

I don't understand how they are not experiencing the full range of the game as you are arguing. Please elaborate.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 03:28 PM
Dungeons and loots should NOT phase out
Boosters should

We all agree on that Xena

~

Mehlo
05-10-2013, 03:29 PM
Actually fireblast the problem is we dont all agree on that, it's the big debate (I am on the phase out side thought btw)

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 03:33 PM
I actually don't know any MMO's that remove the gear completely when something new comes along - it still drops, but it isn't as useful as it used to be. Same story here - it becomes vendor trash, or in the case of cool bind on use, or unbound items, they go up on the AH - sometimes for a lot, sometimes for not much.

Thats the same here - you don't have to remove the sets, the cards themselves get less useful. I seriously don't see where removing the older content benefits anyone except hoarders and people wanting to be special snowflakes. It doesn't lead to a good community spirit.

As for content? PvP content is limited entirely by what sets are available. There will be legacy tournaments, free for alls, etc. So retiring old sets IS removing content for a PvP player, as you can no longer do that format as a draft etc.

For PvE the impact is less severe, but new players miss out on cool card combinations, or retro/old school decks, meaning they miss out on the feeling people had at launch - something a lot of people might miss out in certian MMO's, but usually they can go back and attempt content - if things are limited to the point they can never get them, that chance is gone.

There is NO benifit to removing things, when you look at the grand scheme. Especially with card destroying, everything will be kept in check.

EDIT: Phase out is different to removing them completely - PvP goes in blocks, sets will phase out over time, but there is no benefit to cutting out a piece of the game that the devs can make money off.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 03:34 PM
I didn't understand the thread then, I just thought it was about : should prints be stopped at some point :)

I think old content (dungeons/raids/loots associated) should remain there for new players (and nostalgic ones).

Veteran players wouldn't be interested in a newbie dungeon to raid with starter from set 2, would they?

~

Joolz
05-10-2013, 03:37 PM
They remove stuff all the time in the WoW mmo. Pretty much every quest reward that existed in vanilla WoW is now gone, numerous pets and mounts are no longer attainable, lots of titles cannot be gotten, achievements, etc, etc.

I think both sides of this issue have perfectly valid points and the nice thing about this being a digital card game is even if they decide one way it's not too difficult to go the other way pretty quickly.

I personally am in favor of sets going "out of print". It seems like there are worries that there will be some situation where some out of print cards will be deemed "necessary" to play and be difficult/impossible to acquire. I highly highly doubt Cryptozoic would ever allow that situation to happen. They can easily "print" more or worst case scenario errata them which is incredibly easy for a digital card.

For collectors who are worried that getting into the game late will limit the ability to get all the cards you want, there will always be some amount of cards available even if out of print. If you have the means you can go buy a Black Lotus card right now and that's like the holy grail of rare tcg cards.

Kami
05-10-2013, 03:37 PM
Xenavire, you keep missing our point. We are not saying to remove the cards. We are saying to phase out old legacy BOOSTERS. In other words, anything that would drop would still drop, anything that's tradeable is still tradeable, etc. The legacy cards would still EXIST.

This is how it would be in any MMORPG. As you say, new players would miss out on cool equipment combinations, etc. Same deal. Again, this is no different.

The benefit to limiting the supply is value. Imagine you somehow managed to get one of a hundred limited cards. That's SPECIAL. It adds to your enjoyment of the game, collector or casual. If rares are no longer rares, then why bother?

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 03:45 PM
First of all, the vanilla quest rewards were removed because they redid the vanilla zones in cataclysm, a WIDELY unpopular expansion.
And nearly every example of removed content in WoW was either due to it being a world event, a revamp of old content (basically reprinting it), or poor design choice. There are very few things ingame that are not avilable - a few mounts (most of which are PvP only), a few pets (most are from blizzcons or other giveaways), a tabbard or two (also giveaways) and a few achievements or feats of strength.

A dedicated player with a lot of time on their hands could still start WoW, right now, and be able to collect 90%+ of the achievements, mounts, and pets. Very few things are exclusive there.


And you keep forgetting that this is a digital MMO, people are more likely to quit this and forget about it, leaving thier collection in limbo permanently. A real collector quitting a card game would likely sell their cards, but this is all digital, so you have very little connection in real life to those pixels, and it is easy enough to quit an MMO.

There are plenty of other ways to make cards rarer, more valuable, etc, there is no need to resort to removing sets from game.

EDIT: I know exactly what you point is, you want it to be a clone of a real life TCG, and ignore that it is NOT, and enforce your own ideas in it. This is a digital game, and it doesn't fit by the real world limitations. Imagine a game where a set doesn't go out of print, and the old sets have their own active metagames - it would have so much more to do than having a 2 set block to play.

Kami
05-10-2013, 03:48 PM
Again, nobody is saying to remove sets. We are talking about phasing out supply through boosters and such... existing cards would still exist. It's not like: "Oh, let's make sure not even a single legacy card exists anymore."

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 03:48 PM
I think in order to create a proper economy via the Auction House, and giving players more of an incentive to purchase Booster Packs, is to eventually phase out a block after a set number of time (i.e. Block 1 will no longer be able to purchase after being in circulation for 2 years). I see this as beneficial to the players in most aspects. Knowing that each purchase you make now is technically an "investment" makes purchasing packs more freely easier IMO. There are certainly downsides to this, but I think the pros far outweigh the cons for both players and CZE.

As far as phasing out dungeons, I could go either way with this really. I don't feel like newer players would feel "left out" by not being able to do 5 year old dungeons, if the current content was large and in-depth enough to keep players busy. Every MMO that I can think of has phased out dungeons and equipment to a certain extent, even WoW. And again, knowing that running dungeons now can leave you with drops that will be worth far more down the road gives the player more incentive to work harder at collecting because those drops will be worth more down the road.

If dungeons are kept permanently, older content will be more for newer players to experience past events. As well as loot prices being dirt cheap by that point, because everyone and their mother will have run it and gotten everything they need and then some. Is it worth it to keep older content in for this reason? To some yes, to others no. The problem is HEX draws a large pool of different types of games being that it is both MMO and TCG.

There is no pleasing everyone with any of these decisions. We just need to work on what the majority of players will find beneficial to their needs.

Joolz
05-10-2013, 03:49 PM
There is NO benifit to removing things, when you look at the grand scheme. Especially with card destroying, everything will be kept in check.


If there was no benefit this discussion wouldn't be happening :) Prints stopping makes older cards rarer and more valuable which is important to some people.

To keep extending the WoW mmo analogy take the old honor system from Vanilla. They removed it in BC which made the associated titles and gear rare and special for those that were around for it. Over the last couple years Blizz made aspects of that system available to everyone, first with being able to earn the old titles again, then with bringing back the gear but making it restricted to those who had the original titles, and finally making all the gear available to everyone. Every step of the way people complained that their uniqueness was being given away.

I'm not saying they were right, in fact probably more people like it than not, but the fact is there are people who dislike that sort of watering down.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 03:53 PM
Leaving old encouters/dungeons/raids available is bad for nobody, it doesn't even cost CZE anything (some database entries?)

If players wanna do them, let them do, they'll get nothing except fun out of it.

~

Kami
05-10-2013, 03:57 PM
Yep. Basically the current arguments are thus:

Pro-phasing out:

- Phase out boosters for legacy, to stall/limit increasing supply
- Leave existing content in-game
- Allow for random chance to obtain at least some cards through PvE content

Anti-phasing out:

- Unlimited supply
- Nothing ever lost or eliminated from game
- Everyone can have everything eventually

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 03:57 PM
But that is the very core of the issue - people want to be unique, and dont care if it negatively impacts others.

If they never removed those rewards, those people would have had nothing to complain about when they became public again - follow my logic here?

This would circumvent the issue of not having enough cards in circulation, and inflated prices, and inevitable complaints when someones rare card is suddenly reprinted and everyone has it again. There is no reason to push up the rarity or the price, and as new sets come out, people will eventually buy far less of the older blocks anyway, acheiving almost the exact same thing.

I don't understand why this is such a big draw to some people - you think that you should be rewarded for being here first? Kickstarter. End of story.

Kami
05-10-2013, 04:03 PM
If a card set is reprinted, it wouldn't matter. People deal with this scenario all the time.

In a previous example, someone state Magic's Alpha Edition Black Lotus. Even though it was reprinted eventually, people still want the original because of it's rarity.

As for Kickstarter, let me ask you, would you be willing to donate a large sum of money ($500+) with no perks so that you can be on equal grounds with 'new' players who didn't help fund the game?

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 04:04 PM
But that is the very core of the issue - people want to be unique, and dont care if it negatively impacts others.

If they never removed those rewards, those people would have had nothing to complain about when they became public again - follow my logic here?

This would circumvent the issue of not having enough cards in circulation, and inflated prices, and inevitable complaints when someones rare card is suddenly reprinted and everyone has it again. There is no reason to push up the rarity or the price, and as new sets come out, people will eventually buy far less of the older blocks anyway, acheiving almost the exact same thing.

I don't understand why this is such a big draw to some people - you think that you should be rewarded for being here first? Kickstarter. End of story.

I think you are missing the point that items being exclusive will benefit newer players eventually too, because even their stock will grow in value over time. Do people not play MTG because sets are phased out? You need to look at the benefits of phasing out items. It's certainly not a "Look at me I'm special" that you keep suggesting. I don't recall reading even a single comment that alluded to that fact so I don't understand where you are pulling that from. There are clearly benefits to doing this.

Dungeons are a different issue and I am not agreeing or disagreeing with your views on that.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 04:10 PM
But isn't that what all the fuss is about? In WoW, people were angry about something limited becoming unlimited, it is the exact same story. People will get angry, they always do. And there are no downsides to anyone to leave it in print, it just means the prices will not inflate.

And about kickstarter, they didn't have to include such good perks, any perks would have been incentive. Limited cards is a really big pull to some people, which is what this whole conversation has been about, but had they offered no cards, but other perks, people would have still pledged. As for no perks, I might have still chipped in - I was considering it when I heard what hex was, before I realised there even were perks. So I might not do $500, but I can't afford that even with the perks it has now, so it doesn't really matter.

It might have been slower with no perks, but I think it still could have got the full amount considering the amount of support the community has given.


EDIT: Other than raising the value of the cards, name a benefit of phasing them out, that makes sense. And having the market flooded with them is a non-issue, old sets will be bought less over time anyway, so new players will vaccuum up the excess.

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 04:11 PM
If a card set is reprinted, it wouldn't matter. People deal with this scenario all the time.

In a previous example, someone state Magic's Alpha Edition Black Lotus. Even though it was reprinted eventually, people still want the original because of it's rarity.

As for Kickstarter, let me ask you, would you be willing to donate a large sum of money ($500+) with no perks so that you can be on equal grounds with 'new' players who didn't help fund the game?

Yes because having too many perks keep people away from the game, and I'd rather be like everyone else in a million players game than being on par with the other 2K funders

~

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 04:17 PM
But isn't that what all the fuss is about? In WoW, people were angry about something limited becoming unlimited, it is the exact same story. People will get angry, they always do. And there are no downsides to anyone to leave it in print, it just means the prices will not inflate.

Look at it this way, by allowing cards to never phase out, eventually all older sets will be worth next to nothing in terms of value. Now you know that when you buy a booster or a high priced card, eventually the price is going to drop on it anyways and your investment in your cards is only going to decrease, preventing you from ever trading up.

Now if a set is phased out after a few years, those cards gain exclusivity and value, allowing you to sell off what you don't want to trade up for things that you do. A new player comes in after 10 years, he can't easily gain cards from Set 1, but they are available to him if he wants to pay the premium. The new player knows that buying cards will eventually gain value over time, allowing them to look at their purchases now as an investment, eventually allowing them to sell their cards for a premium as well.

Do you understand what I am saying there? Cards become an investment and buying more can yield returns, as opposed to buying cards now, only to have them become all too common and not being able to sell them down the road.

Joolz
05-10-2013, 04:23 PM
*throws hands up in the air*

Let's just give every player 4 of card whenever a set is released.

I'm still having trouble seeing what's so daunting being a new player coming into a game that has sets that are out of print...
Want to play competitively? Play core constructed or draft.
Want to play unlimited competitively? Good luck, a tcg would never use that for a main format for many reasons in addition to cards being hard to get.
Want to mess around with old cards to play with your friends? I wouldn't be surprised if there were ways to play with cards you don't actually have (there's already a limited way to do that with guild vault). In a physical game this involves a common card and a sharpy.
You "need" X card to beat a dungeon, raid boss, little brother? I doubt it, build a better deck. Or again if it's that required there are a whole bunch of things Cryptozoic could do to remedy it other than dumping a bunch of them out there.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 04:23 PM
But again, you are making assumptions based off the real world, non-digital TCG's. In real life, you don't just destroy cards to get new cards, you don't have players just leave and have their cards vanish permanently (usually people sell them), and thats only the things we currently know about. And rare cards will always be rare, and commons will be common, so all older sets will slowly phase out by themselves, becoming rarer - or at least having the same level of rarity.

Newer sets are meant to be just that - new, and exciting. The old sets do not detract from that. As for value, PvE will always have a place for the older sets, keeping them at a stable value...

It is MMO as much as it is TCG. Try looking at the big picture, and not at the TCG formats in the real world.

Kami
05-10-2013, 04:25 PM
But again, you are making assumptions based off the real world, non-digital TCG's. In real life, you don't just destroy cards to get new cards, you don't have players just leave and have their cards vanish permanently (usually people sell them), and thats only the things we currently know about. And rare cards will always be rare, and commons will be common, so all older sets will slowly phase out by themselves, becoming rarer - or at least having the same level of rarity.

Newer sets are meant to be just that - new, and exciting. The old sets do not detract from that. As for value, PvE will always have a place for the older sets, keeping them at a stable value...

It is MMO as much as it is TCG. Try looking at the big picture, and not at the TCG formats in the real world.

I'll have to disagree again here. In the 'real world' as you put it, I'm sitting on an original Alpha Black Lotus, Time Walk, and several other extraordinarily rare cards and I'm no longer part of the MTG scene for the most part. So yes, for all intents and purposes, those cards have vanished permanently.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 04:32 PM
And how does that benefit the playerbase? It benefits you, but no-one else. That is the whole point, I still haven't seen a solid argument that makes even the slightest bit of sense from the side advocating set removal. Sure, the cards that exist still exist, but what was the reason for removing them in the first place?

I see people wanting them to be rare and limited, but only for what feels like selfish reasons.

Benefits to keeping the sets? Not only could you play unlimited, but you could easily have tournaments for cycled blocks, drafts, and all sorts of things. New players wont be punished IF they are interested in old cards, old players aren't punished if they prefer the old sets more... I see more and more reasons to keep sets, and less and less reasons to cut them.

And don't harp on and on about exclusive cards and economy, you only have examples that have all followed the same method, and none that have followed this new method. You cannot predict anything, and you could easily decide at a much later date to remove things, because all those problems you were worried about did actually arise.

Daer
05-10-2013, 04:34 PM
And it is also a TCG as much as an MMO, card value matters.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 04:36 PM
And rare cards will always be rare, and commons will be common, so all older sets will slowly phase out by themselves, becoming rarer - or at least having the same level of rarity.

How will Rare cards remain Rare if they remain available indefinitely? Lets say a Rare card exists in Set 1 that is worth $20 after a year. Are you saying that you think that card will remain at that same price 1, 5, even 10 years down the line? People will draft and buy boosters and eventually a card where only 1,000 copies exist, now 10,000 copies exist. The price will go down if the packs remain in print indefinitely.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 04:37 PM
And how does that benefit the playerbase? It benefits you, but no-one else. That is the whole point, I still haven't seen a solid argument that makes even the slightest bit of sense from the side advocating set removal. Sure, the cards that exist still exist, but what was the reason for removing them in the first place?

And don't harp on and on about exclusive cards and economy, you only have examples that have all followed the same method, and none that have followed this new method. You cannot predict anything, and you could easily decide at a much later date to remove things, because all those problems you were worried about did actually arise.

So what would you like to talk about?

Storm_Fireblade
05-10-2013, 04:42 PM
I still have to agree with Xenavire here. It is understandable, that people want their cards to be of value and I admit, that I do so myself. I love having exclusive things, so its not that I can't see benefits in cutting sets at a certain point. But keeping those indefinitively opens up for new, promising things as well.

Unlimited Tournaments stay open for everyone to participate in, no matter when you joined the game, because all cards somehow stay available. Same goes for cycled sets with drafts etc. Older sets will be ignored more and more due to a lot of people focusing on newer sets and limited tournaments, so you cards will stay rare anyway. Some people might continue to buy old boosters, which is additional money for Cryptozoic to make the game even better, while you aren't blocked from trading your own cards to newcomers not willing to rely on the chances of boosters.

I really cannot see that many arguments to take older sets out of the shop and make them "out of print".

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 04:44 PM
But what about player inflation? This is an MMO, and MMO's are typically a bigger draw than a hobby shop etc. In the first few months we might be in the thousands of players, but what if it balloons up to a million or more, active players? 10,00 rares, at 4 per playset, a tiny % of people will have it.

Factor in that cards get trophies and achievements and all sorts of powerups and changes, older ones will still have a higher inherent value than a freshly pulled one.

And what would I like to talk about? How about inventive ways to keep the number of cards low, and the price up, without resorting to removing sets? Or things that can be done with legacy cards, to keep them valid and useful?

I have heard only naysayers, you could try putting some of that energy into thinking of possible benefits, and while you might not change your standpoint, you might see where other people might have an issue with it.

EDIT: Sorry, not only naysayers, but mostly.

Storm_Fireblade
05-10-2013, 04:44 PM
How will Rare cards remain Rare if they remain available indefinitely? Lets say a Rare card exists in Set 1 that is worth $20 after a year. Are you saying that you think that card will remain at that same price 1, 5, even 10 years down the line? People will draft and buy boosters and eventually a card where only 1,000 copies exist, now 10,000 copies exist. The price will go down if the packs remain in print indefinitely.

But here you are simply guessing the outcome for years to come. Someone could easily argue similar and say that many of the 1.000 copies from year one will be included in inactive accounts, thereby being "taken out of the game", so that the overall value of the card remains the same :)

Fireblast
05-10-2013, 04:52 PM
In 5 years there will be 15 sets, without rotation and cuts, new players will be lost and buy the wrong boosters, yelling at CZE and quitting.
Rotation and cuts are required to prevent powercreeping (which is a big issue in wowtcg nowadays), MTG had entire blocks of "worst" cards, draft & constructed were still challenging...

~

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 04:55 PM
There may be ways to combat power creep (it is digital after all) and since PvP will be block based, they can keep blocks at around the same power level if they want to - the power creep will likely only occur in PvE, which can be fixed with tougher challenges.

As for new players buying old sets, a simple warning to say it is not a current competetive set should be enough, and asking guild members or in public channels would quickly inform them on what is a better choice.

It might be a little daunting, but better daunting with freedom than limited and small in my opinion.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 05:00 PM
It's not a prediction to say that the rarity of cards from earlier Sets will drop drastically over time if they remain indefinitely. If we are at disagreements over that, then there is no more point in discussing it for me.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 05:05 PM
You are ignoring some things that are making this unlike a real life TCG - until we know for sure how the card destroying will work, we don't know how it will effect the cards in circulation. It might nullify excess completely - time will tell.

There are other potential ways to make cards slowly become rarer - we just have to see what they have to show us. But I still don't think rarity will drop as more players join, that just sounds backwards. I think the demand would increase - and that would give the cards more value, regardless of haw rare they happened to be at the time.

Storm_Fireblade
05-10-2013, 05:07 PM
You are ignoring some things that are making this unlike a real life TCG - until we know for sure how the card destroying will work, we don't know how it will effect the cards in circulation. It might nullify excess completely - time will tell.

There are other potential ways to make cards slowly become rarer - we just have to see what they have to show us. But I still don't think rarity will drop as more players join, that just sounds backwards. I think the demand would increase - and that would give the cards more value, regardless of haw rare they happened to be at the time.

I totally agree with this, yeah. Thats the main reasons, why I wouldn't back a decision to copy the "cutting sets" of current TCGs.

nearlysober
05-10-2013, 05:09 PM
If the intent is to make this a collectable trading card game, then things need to be collectable and desirable... and that means at some point they have to stop being created.

At some point they should just say "printing is done" and they have a "backlog" of boosters sitting on shelves... just like you occasionally find old packs in hobby shops today. Or people could hoard them and sell them on the AH... just like people can do on eBay.

I think you're really really really really over estimating the desire for people 3 years from now to get set 1 cards that are no longer eligible for play in competitive formats.

I don't own any MTG cards... but if I decided I wanted to play tomorrow I wouldn't go around scrounging for 10 year old cards to start my collection... I'd buy into the current block. Maybe over a few years of playing I'd pick up random cards at hobby shops or eBay to make fun Unlimited decks... but that is part of the collecting and trading aspect of a collectable trading card game.

It is core to the concept. I wouldn't expect to walk up to WotC and say "Print me up one Black Lotus please!"

But, this game will have an advantage being digital. Say for example, you wanted to have a "just for fun" duel with a friend using unlimited blocks. Maybe the game could introduce a system where you could "check out" retired cards you are missing to create a deck... the card doesn't stay in your collection after the duel and it cannot be used in tourneys or PVE content, it bascially be like you taking a physical card and writing "This is card X" on it. Not legal for any real play, but for fun against friends? Sure.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 05:18 PM
You are underestimating the lure of seeing what a game started as. Had I unlimited resources, I would consider getting every card in MTG, including all reprints, just to go around building decks and generally enjoying myself.

And you know what? If the set is there, new players can actually collect the cards too, it wont be exclusive to older players. A collection is a collection, right? The older players would still have their set be worth more, had they actually used it when it was new (all those card upgrades and the double back features?)

I mean, if I were to play from day one and continue for years, my cards would rack up all sorts of cool things that new players wont be able to get anyway, driving up the price of my cards. If they want to collect something old, they could buy my cool card with all the bells and whistles, and I could use my profits to get into new sets, and buy up a new copy of the card I just sold, so my collection is still complete.

And that is just another example of how it could be a benefit to keep it around.

nearlysober
05-10-2013, 05:36 PM
What successful TCG out there prints cards ad infinitum?
Maybe there is one... I really don't know a lot about other sets. But I doubt it.

And it's not just because of the cost of printing and risk that they won't sell. It's because they move on and it creates demand in secondary markets. They may offer "classics" or "reprints" occassionally... HEX can do that too.

It's nice that you want everyone to have everything and we can all be equal and no one will have a rare card that someone else is jealous about... but that's not how most collectors think.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 05:39 PM
What successful TCG out there prints cards ad infinitum?
Maybe there is one... I really don't know a lot about other sets. But I doubt it.

And it's not just because of the cost of printing and risk that they won't sell. It's because they move on and it creates demand in secondary markets. They may offer "classics" or "reprints" occassionally... HEX can do that too.

It's part of the culture, part of the drive to collect, core to the experience.

I support the availability of staples for new players to promote the growth of the player base but I don't think making old sets available forever is the answer. There are plenty of other ways to do it.

CZE isn't brand new at TCGs. I'm sure they'll be able to handle it. Though I do wish we had a better idea of their views on the matter.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 05:41 PM
Ah, but by the very nature of real life TCG's, it is to push the new set, and to cut production costs - that is why the older sets are cycled out. It encourages people to move onto the next set, buying new cards, and has nothing to do with the secondary market (they make no money from secondary markets, so they just dont care.)

However, because of block cycling, Hex can have the same exact effect, and because it costs nothing to keep those cards in production, leaving the cards in circulation, and actively promoting their use, is a money maker for the Hex Devs. Add in they get a cut of everything in the secondary market, the more cards changing hands, the better.

Digital makes a world of difference.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 05:44 PM
Ah, but by the very nature of real life TCG's, it is to push the new set, and to cut production costs - that is why the older sets are cycled out. It encourages people to move onto the next set, buying new cards, and has nothing to do with the secondary market (they make no money from secondary markets, so they just dont care.)

However, because of block cycling, Hex can have the same exact effect, and because it costs nothing to keep those cards in production, leaving the cards in circulation, and actively promoting their use, is a money maker for the Hex Devs. Add in they get a cut of everything in the secondary market, the more cards changing hands, the better.

Digital makes a world of difference.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

Keeping the sets in-print doesn't cost CZE any money but it may have a cost. A TCG has never been able to do this before on a large scale. Its hard to say what will happen.

EDIT: also they mak not make money from the secondary market but a healthy secondary market is important for the growth and maintenance of a community.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 05:52 PM
But the intended design for that market was trading, not buying - the players changed the dynamic, not the TCG makers.

Not a big difference there, but basically, once the cards are out of the hands of the TCG creators hands and the money is in there pocket, they want to move onto the next set, to rinse and repeat. The community chooses what to do with those cards.

It does help, and hex has the benefit of the devs gaining some of that action, funding new sets and other improvements. (So do the old sets, so which do you want to bank on producing more revenue for the devs? Which is better to sacrifice?)

Aisriyth
05-10-2013, 08:00 PM
I'd rather not see phasing out of old sets. Rather not see any splitting of gameplay either i.e. standard/modern/legacy

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:07 PM
Sadly splitting has to happen at some level, or the potential for game breaking combos awill arise, not to mention it will force a nasty power creep (look at Yugioh as proof, they kept everything legal at first, then slapped big bans all over the place.)

Cycling blocks and letting people play unlimited at any time casually, and sometimes in tournaments is actually nicely done, and should give everyone a go at playing their favourite style.

Aisriyth
05-10-2013, 08:11 PM
Sadly plitting has to happen at some level, or the potential for game breaking combos awill arise, not to mention it will force a nasty power creep (look at Yugioh as proof, they kept everything legal at first, then slapped big bans all over the place.)

Cycling blocks and letting people play unlimited at any time casually, and sometimes in tournaments is actually nicely done, and should give everyone a go at playing their favourite style. I'd agree but at the same time those cards aren't out of print and easily obtainable for new players. Ban listing is very likely going to happen at some point anyways. Ideally it wouldn't but stuff happens :/

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:14 PM
Yeah, I hope the bans are rare, or the cards get errata'd. But the 'current' PvP will always be balanced, so let the other players who aren't so hardcore have their fun.

Aisriyth
05-10-2013, 08:23 PM
With the ability to rewrite card text i'd hope bans would be virtually non existant. :/

Devaux
05-10-2013, 08:40 PM
Changing the text on a card is the last thing we would want to do via errata, but it is an option on the table. Players will be chasing, purchasing, and will become attached to certain cards. Changing those cards is a terrible option. However, the overall health of the game for everyone is priority #1. Banning is also something on the table, but again, not something we would ever want to do. These would be on a case-by-case basis. Our priority is to make sure the balance of the game is tested a TON so we don't have to do either of these things and you have a sweet gameplay experience.

/relevant

I hope they don't just errata cards to balance.

The changes that can be made are not as granular as in other games and in TCGs changing just one or two numbers by just a bit can entirely change what a card is and how it behaves in an environment. Generally, I'd rather see a card banned rather than watch as they try to balance it until its unrecognizable.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 08:42 PM
Imagine paying X amount of money for a great board wipe card, only to have the casting cost changed and basically ruining the value of the card.

Aisriyth
05-10-2013, 08:43 PM
/relevant

I hope they don't just errata cards to balance.

The changes that can be made are not as granular as in other games and in TCGs changing just one or two numbers by just a bit can entirely change what a card is and how it behaves in an environment. Generally, I'd rather see a card banned rather than watch as they try to balance it until its unrecognizable.

I agree, but if a change is minor enough i rather it be that. I they can't fix the card with a small easy change then ban is the better option.


Imagine paying X amount of money for a great board wipe card, only to have the casting cost changed and basically ruining the value of the card.

No different then a ban. Spent all that money to now have an unusable or restricted card.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 08:47 PM
No different then a ban. Spent all that money to now have an unusable or restricted card.

I can still use the card with friends casually is the difference.

C-Drive
05-10-2013, 08:47 PM
Yeah, I'd rather see functional/de-powered reprints of cards needing errata or bans. The originally "printed" cards need to remain for casual play purposes. Digitally changing the card, like Devaux said, can make the card something completely different, and casual formats wouldn't benefit from having lots of powerful cards on hand that you don't typically get to use anymore.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:53 PM
The errata could be inventive, or specific. Don't want that infinite combo breaking the meta? Change the text to state it does not work infinitely, or with that other combo card.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 08:54 PM
I agree, but if a change is minor enough i rather it be that. I they can't fix the card with a small easy change then ban is the better option.



No different then a ban. Spent all that money to now have an unusable or restricted card.

I know its not entirely rational but I think its worse than a ban.

If my cool(read: powerful) card gets nerfed then its not cool anymore and I'm less likely to play it and it creates a life-long feel-bad moment. If my cool card gets banned then its still cool (in fact, its too cool) I just can't use it in this format anymore.

The subject is even touchier when you consider that I'm gonna have an alt-art, foil, extended art Extinction.

I'm not sure why I would rather my cool card get banned than nerfed. Maybe its the same reason that people feel different using an account once its been hacked. Hm.

I guess part of it is the way I'm used to TCGs being.

Also, if I log on after not reading patch notes and saw that a card was banned then I'd shrug and say "Bummer." but if I log on and get in game and see that my board wipe sucks now then I feel slighted and now I'm actually mad rather than just inconvenienced.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 08:57 PM
Exactly. And with the ability to have custom formats (like Commander for example), having a banned card isn't nearly as bad as basically ruining what the card was to fit in with the rest of the meta.

Xenavire
05-10-2013, 08:57 PM
I think bans and erratas would be reserved for truly special cases, like true meta destroying monsters of cards.

Aisriyth
05-10-2013, 08:59 PM
I know its not entirely rational but I think its worse than a ban.

If my cool(read: powerful) card gets nerfed then its not cool anymore and I'm less likely to play it and it creates a life-long feel-bad moment. If my cool card gets banned then its still cool (in fact, its too cool) I just can't use it in this format anymore.

The subject is even touchier when you consider that I'm gonna have an alt-art, foil, extended art Extinction.

I'm not sure why I would rather my cool card get banned than nerfed. Maybe its the same reason that people feel different using an account once its been hacked. Hm.

I guess part of it is the way I'm used to TCGs being. Also, if I log on after not reading patch notes and saw that a card was banned then I'd shrug and say "Bummer." but if I log on and get in game and see that my board wipe sucks now then I feel slighted and now I'm actually mad rather than just inconvenienced.
Nah, i understand. I think an errata should be used in a small cases of only minor op-ness and only a minor change. I don't want to see any mechanical change to the card at all. If to balance it would require a large change i'd rather see a ban.

Ideally, both options should be rare.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 09:06 PM
Nah, i understand. I think an errata should be used in a small cases of only minor op-ness and only a minor change. I don't want to see any mechanical change to the card at all. If to balance it would require a large change i'd rather see a ban.

Ideally, both options should be rare.

I'm glad you understand because even as I typed it I felt like an irrational moron.

Naturally nobody wants to see either but if the case is minor then usually the meta can sort that sort of stuff out with an increase in the density of decks that can deal with cards that are only slightly OP.

My philosophy is to let the meta sort things out as much as possible. But if you must intervene, then you should do so in the way that is most clear and has the least collateral damage. I think that bans accomplish this in a much better way that errata.

That may be debatable but at least you know where I'm coming from.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 09:11 PM
Do people not play MTG because sets are phased out?

A very large number of people dont play magic because sets are phased out.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 09:13 PM
A very large number of people dont play magic because sets are phased out.

The real problem is that they have a hard time growing the player base for their non-rotating formats because the staples are prohibitively expensive.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 09:16 PM
I think I have a (very obvious) solution.

A way you can phase out the older packs for sale, but STILL keep the older cards available to those who dont want to be bent over the barrel and want a chance to collect "out of print cards".

Make them all available as craft recipes. When the block rotates out of sale (So I am thinking a block that is 3 or 4 years old), every card in the set gets a crafting recipe assigned to it, and you can munch newer cards to create older cards. This means exisiting supply can dwindle if people munch/leave the game, and only those who truly want the cards will go for it and not be inconvinenced by high prices or hard to find-ness. It also keeps players playing and paying, to generate enough new cards to create the old card!

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 09:16 PM
A very large number of people dont play magic because sets are phased out.

And I also believe there are more players now than there ever were.

WWKnight
05-10-2013, 09:18 PM
And I also believe there are more players now than there ever were.

I dont know enough about that to agree or disagree, but I do know their turn-over is very high for a hobby.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 09:20 PM
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records-10000/most-played-trading-card-game/

Is the best I could find with a quick search. They apparently stopped releasing their sales records after a few years after starting.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 09:21 PM
I think I have a (very obvious) solution.

A way you can phase out the older packs for sale, but STILL keep the older cards available to those who dont want to be bent over the barrel and want a chance to collect "out of print cards".

Make them all available as craft recipes. When the block rotates out of sale (So I am thinking a block that is 3 or 4 years old), every card in the set gets a crafting recipe assigned to it, and you can munch newer cards to create older cards. This means exisiting supply can dwindle if people munch/leave the game, and only those who truly want the cards will go for it and not be inconvinenced by high prices or hard to find-ness. It also keeps players playing and paying, to generate enough new cards to create the old card!

I don't hate this solution. CZE may not like this because it gives too much control vs buying packs (I know in your proposed solution the two would not co-exist but still).

I do like the crafting related solutions because I feel like it solves a lot of concerns at the same time but its hard to say how the system would/could/should be implemented.

Shoubushi
05-10-2013, 09:37 PM
I'm now hoping that most of this speculation and guessing is put to rest with some actual news from CZE before the end of the Kickstarter. I'll admit that I thought a lot of these details were already fleshed out when deciding to plunk down the backer money for this.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-10-2013, 09:38 PM
A very large number of people dont play magic because sets are phased out.

I started MTG a little after Revised came out and stopped playing when 6th edition was released because of this. I like to collect the cards as well as play with some of my favorite decks. The hobby simply became too expensive for cards that become phased out because I was forced into buying the new expansions or stop playing. I am dead set against phasing out or "out-of-print" cards when it is all digital and the cost of printing is not a reason to do so. All it does is drive up the cost of older cards. It also makes those blocks obsolete when in the digital world you can still hold tournaments with older blocks.

Devaux
05-10-2013, 09:43 PM
I started MTG a little after Revised came out and stopped playing when 6th edition was released because of this. I like to collect the cards as well as play with some of my favorite decks. The hobby simply became too expensive for cards that become phased out because I was forced into buying the new expansions or stop playing. I am dead set against phasing out or "out-of-print" cards when it is all digital and the cost of printing is not a reason to do so. All it does is drive up the cost of older cards. It also makes those blocks obsolete when in the digital world you can still hold tournaments with older blocks.

They've stated already that while they want to support a rotating format they also want to support a non-rotating format. Thats actually at the heart of this conflict (well it is for some people anyway, myself included).

Aisriyth
05-10-2013, 10:27 PM
Simple solution. Rotate the standard/core play stock but keep all cards 'printed'. That way new players don't need to buy every set, long time players/collectors/fans of extended can play all their cards and keep collecting.

I just really don't see a reason to stop letting people purchase older things. Can still keep current/extended formats.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 02:29 AM
If sets don't go out of print you'll have stuff like that

Set 1 : 1M cards
Set 2 : 800k cards
Set 3 : 600k cards
Set 4 : 400k cards
...

If old stuff is never out of print, it'll devaluate

Now if the game's popularity is constantly raising and we have something like that :

Set 1 : 1M cards
Set 2 : 2M cards
Set 3 : 2M cards
Set 4 : 4M cards
Set 5 : 4M cards
Set 6 : 4M cards
...

And that some set1/block1 cards are staples, they should reprint in new sets

~

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 02:36 AM
But Fireblast, people will be destroying cards to create new cards with crafting. If a set is completely unavailable to get after it rotates, those cards could actually become extinct.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 03:00 AM
But Fireblast, people will be destroying cards to create new cards with crafting. If a set is completely unavailable to get after it rotates, those cards could actually become extinct.

If the cards hold value and there is demand, who on Earth would destroy them?

~

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 03:08 AM
Because in set 1 when we all have a lot of cards, they wont be valuabel orr have demand. Open your cupboard, how many excess cards do you have from your hobbies? If you could crunch them down and turn them into something else, something new, wouldnt you?

We get that option in this game. There will not be cupboards full of excess cards sitting around and bringing value down. And if there IS, people will crunch them down into something valuable. It will correct itself!

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 03:20 AM
Because in set 1 when we all have a lot of cards, they wont be valuabel orr have demand. Open your cupboard, how many excess cards do you have from your hobbies? If you could crunch them down and turn them into something else, something new, wouldnt you?

We get that option in this game. There will not be cupboards full of excess cards sitting around and bringing value down. And if there IS, people will crunch them down into something valuable. It will correct itself!

Depending on deck/gauntlet rules I see myself having 12 of each commons/uncommons and 4 of each rare/legendary and trading the rest in the AH rather than destroying it

~

d00dz
05-11-2013, 03:48 AM
Because in set 1 when we all have a lot of cards, they wont be valuabel orr have demand. Open your cupboard, how many excess cards do you have from your hobbies? If you could crunch them down and turn them into something else, something new, wouldnt you?

We get that option in this game. There will not be cupboards full of excess cards sitting around and bringing value down. And if there IS, people will crunch them down into something valuable. It will correct itself!

I doubt cards will ever be truly be "extinct", as you say. There will always be some guys holding on to the excess commons and uncommons. Supply will diminish over time but as soon as they are cycled out, people will stop breaking them down into other cards in the hopes that their value will increase.

Old legendaries/rares will likely not be broken down for the crafting system as people will just hold on to them and I believe cycling them out will increase their demand later on, so that old players can just trade them for newer cards. This is in stark contrast to keeping them available forever then people will just be sitting on their collections since there would be an oversupply in the market and older sets will always have the least value as they would be in circulation the longest. That wouldn't really give much value to the pioneering players like us, no? :)

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 04:33 AM
This is all based on the assumption that the old set sells at the same rate, after every new set is released.

It is better to assume the desire to buy those boosters will go down - if we estimate a 20-50% decrease each block, while the sets are getting a full amount, the original sets will decline rapidly.

But, having the sets there constantly means when the supply drops too low, those boosters will suddenly have value... It will cycle in popularity.

I dont see where the issue lies in this situation.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 04:39 AM
CZE role is to :
- Keep the metagame and balance healthy (via reprints/errata)
- Make sure players' investment aren't voided (via print-out decisions)

~

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 04:47 AM
They could have reprints without removing older sets, to be honest, and the metagame is going to be 2 set blocks, old cards wont interfere in that. As for value, card destroying adds true turnover and generates a need for all cards, so older sets should remain more than rare enough in the long run, plus a collector can earn awards and upgrades to their cards, giving them greater inherent value.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 04:51 AM
If old cards are not desirable for play and are just for collectors, that's exactly when you should print them out so they have value to those who desire to sell and those who desire to collect.

And stop with the argument of destroying cards that are desired, if there is demand you don't destroy them or you're just stupid and diserve the loss.

~

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 04:58 AM
You arent looking at this the right way - destroying will be used on low demand cards, taking them out of circulation. They will become rarer as a result, making the demand higher than the supply - if there is always demand, it means the card is already very valuable.

And this is a CCG/TCG, so why make things so rare that new players could never get a complete collection? A collector wont even give it a chance if they can never get this or that card, and all sorts of different people will be trying this... You want to give reasons to stick around, not to leave.

d00dz
05-11-2013, 05:01 AM
You arent looking at this the right way - destroying will be used on low demand cards, taking them out of circulation. They will become rarer as a result, making the demand higher than the supply - if there is always demand, it means the card is already very valuable.

And this is a CCG/TCG, so why make things so rare that new players could never get a complete collection? A collector wont even give it a chance if they can never get this or that card, and all sorts of different people will be trying this... You want to give reasons to stick around, not to leave.

Being a collector as well as an avid gamer, I (and other collectors I know) am inclined to collect cards the rarer they are. If they can be obtained easily, collectors lose interest. What is the point of collecting stuff everyone else can have with little effort?

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 05:03 AM
The only real card destroying I can see happening is with commons and uncommon which will be in huge excess, nobody is going to destroy cards when they can get more value from just AH it. I'm also guessing that the card destroying feature will only be slightly better than selling to the auction house for pennies.

d00dz
05-11-2013, 05:04 AM
From all the posts in this thread, it seems that a clear majority advocate phasing out older sets with the exception of a vocal minority.

If they don't rotate out sets, then what are the value benefits of the Dragon Lord, Primal, Immortal and Producer tiers if the value of their investments (all cards from set 1) go down over time rather than up? I am of the assumption that Cryptozoic would rather reward these contributors than disappoint them.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:12 AM
Yes, I am the vocal minority, but you lot aren't even willing to give it a try and see how the economy is - you just adamantly believe it has to emulate real life TCG's, or cards will have no value, while my argument is that there has never been something like this before - we should give it a chance to work naturally instead of condemning whole sets. You do realise they can always retire them later if it goes badly, and time will fix the rest, giving you exactly what you want anyway?

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 05:16 AM
You mistake online TCG with LCG.
Life is unfair, people with more money/time/talent will have more cards than you.
Does that mean you cannot enjoy PvE, Lore, Drafting and playing constructed with budget decks? No.
Does that mean you'll not be able to have all cards in AA/EA/Foil versions ? Probably

~

d00dz
05-11-2013, 05:19 AM
Yes, I am the vocal minority, but you lot aren't even willing to give it a try and see how the economy is - you just adamantly believe it has to emulate real life TCG's, or cards will have no value, while my argument is that there has never been something like this before - we should give it a chance to work naturally instead of condemning whole sets. You do realise they can always retire them later if it goes badly, and time will fix the rest, giving you exactly what you want anyway?

Because it always boils down to economics. Supply vs demand. The results will come out as expected without needing a test run.

A similar case could be attributed to MTG, where they constantly reprint some staples. These staples are often of lower value compared to their peers in the set they were introduced in because there is sufficient supply in the market. In contrast, out-of-print cards command a premium and are highly sought after because demand outstrips the supply. The economic dynamics become fundamentally more interesting this way.

Kami
05-11-2013, 05:22 AM
The thing is... with something like this, it will make or break the economy and hence the player base. This is probably the main reason Cryptozoic has not weighed in on this thread to any meaningful degree.

Let's say they took a risk and went against the norm of the traditional TCG with phasing out - in other words, what if the player base and economy tanked because of that decision to not phase anything out in the long-run? It'd be incredibly difficult to fix.

TCGs only survive on momentum. If less players, less interest, then it's a self-replicating cycle.

The inverse is true though, if a ton of players want everything available always, then phasing out alienate that player base and the same result would occur.

However, considering the majority is leaning towards the phasing out idea, I'm curious as to what Cryptozoic will actually do.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:23 AM
Fireblast, your comment is null and void, long time supporters and people with money will always be at am advantage (I mean money needs to be spent to get boosters, etc)

All the things you mentioned would happen either method, so it is somewhat of a moot point. If it becomes 5% easier to complete a collection, that isn't a noticeable change. If it is 50% or more, the set will probably be forced into retirement already.

Retiring sets shouldn't be a foregone conclusion though. It can and will be fixed if there are issues.

EDIT: But everyone here is a hardcore TCG enthusiast, and we know hardcore people usually end up the vocal minority in MMO's. Just because the majority advocates something when the community is small, it doesn't mean that wont change as the community grows.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 05:29 AM
This is a TCG and not a LCG.
Cards have to be hard to get, while keeping in mind that there should be enough supply for tournaments to be balanced

~

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:38 AM
That argument holds no water when there are features that permanently remove cards. Would you set fire to a Black Lotus? No, but what if it was more common, and a potential reward waited for you? Maybe. That is already a huge change.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 05:38 AM
I still think I discovered the solution that would keep everyone happy.

If you phased out the sale of older packs, just put the content of those packs into the crafting section. My only concern is taking away the availablity of the cards for future generations. This way all cards will remain available, although depending on the rarity of the card, they may be so much trouble it'd just be easier to sell an arm and a leg to outright buy it.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 05:41 AM
From all the posts in this thread, it seems that a clear majority advocate phasing out older sets with the exception of a vocal minority.

If they don't rotate out sets, then what are the value benefits of the Dragon Lord, Primal, Immortal and Producer tiers if the value of their investments (all cards from set 1) go down over time rather than up? I am of the assumption that Cryptozoic would rather reward these contributors than disappoint them.

Actually, I think you will find an even split. Just there is a louder camp in the phase out party who keep repeating themselves.

d00dz
05-11-2013, 05:42 AM
That argument holds no water when there are features that permanently remove cards. Would you set fire to a Black Lotus? No, but what if it was more common, and a potential reward waited for you? Maybe. That is already a huge change.

Noone in his right mind will destroy a powerful rare. For that matter, I anticipate that only commons and uncommons will be destroyed for the most part and supplies of commons won't really matter all that much. Its the rares and legendaries that will be valuable down the line.

Kami
05-11-2013, 05:45 AM
I still think I discovered the solution that would keep everyone happy.

If you phased out the sale of older packs, just put the content of those packs into the crafting section. My only concern is taking away the availablity of the cards for future generations. This way all cards will remain available, although depending on the rarity of the card, they may be so much trouble it'd just be easier to sell an arm and a leg to outright buy it.

This is actually very similar to what I had suggested earlier on in the thread. I was only vocal for phasing out the sale of legacy packs. That was it.

I have no issues with cards remaining in circulation, cards being earned through PvE or other events, cards being crafted, cards being traded/bought from AH or other players. I just wanted to see the main source limited. People will be earning large amounts of Gold over time so the ability to buy packs is nigh on infinite if they don't do a stop-sell.

Who knows? It could even turn into events. "For this week only, if you missed out on <x> then you have a chance to earn/buy one now!"

And because this is digital, there is not cost to them to ever 'reprint' in the future. Additionally because each card has it's own Card ID ("CID"), collector's will know which cards are original/older or not anyway - assuming we are able to view the date of cards and such data.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:54 AM
What if the reward was potentially better than the rare? Even if that was only for PvE players, it would happen. How often could be an issue, but should a rare become more common, it would become more attractive.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 06:05 AM
If those older sets can still be used in PvE and the occasional tournament why not keep selling them. The sales will decrease as new and shinier sets come out but there will always be those who might prefer playing an older set or are still trying to get a complete collection.

For those advocating for phasing out to increase the value of your rare cards you are basically limiting your collectors to those with huge holes in their pockets. I'm a collector but I won't spend a ton of money for a digital card.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 06:05 AM
Rares will be crunched for crafting. Otherwise, whats the point of a crafting system if you dont have to track down rare and valauble ingredients?

Perhaps YOU wont be destroying any rares, but I intend on going for the full experience. Different strokes for different folks :)

Kami
05-11-2013, 06:08 AM
For those of us advocating the phasing out of legacy packs from the store, we are not saying you will not have other means to obtain it. Perhaps through PvE 'loot', trading, crafting, etc.

If you can't afford the price of a card, then you play until you earn it. It's not like the only method would be to shell out some absurd amount of money.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 06:11 AM
For those of us advocating the phasing out of legacy packs from the store, we are not saying you will not have other means to obtain it. Perhaps through PvE 'loot', trading, crafting, etc.

If you can't afford the price of a card, then you play until you earn it. It's not like the only method would be to shell out some absurd amount of money.

That's a decent compromise. I would still want to see older block tournaments, not just legacy tournaments, for the older cards. This idea would limit those tournaments mostly to older players since newer players are unlikely to go grind PvE for all the cards they would need for a deck.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 06:13 AM
But why remove the packs if you can farm it? I think that would devalue it faster, since no-one would need to buy them off the AH. Leaving the packs for sale also lets the devs earn money for new sets, you are suggesting that they give up a potential money maker and instead making it free.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 06:13 AM
As I have said from the very start, I have a lot of money invested, I have a lot of time to invest. I will not ever miss out on any cards. So on a personal level, I could go either way. My biggest concern is for the community as a whole, ensuring that all cards will be available for a REASONABLE price, be it platnium, gold, crafting ingredients, time spent raiding... etc etc.

If the majority vote is to phase the cards out from packs after a period of time (although I do believe they should still hang around for at least a block after they are no longer "standard") then I wont fight it. As long as there are still methods to obtain every card. And im not talking about a silver platter "click here for epic loots". IM happy to have to destroy a lot of current cards to build up old out of print cards. Just as long as the option is there, Im happy.

ShaolinRaven
05-11-2013, 06:14 AM
I don't think the base set should be retired especially since Hex is all online and you can update the base set by just adding in older expansion cards if you want to increase the base set spread down the road, but I would like expansions to be phased out after a bit. It opens up the newer expansions to a wider use range and individual cards from the phased out expansions can always be added into the base set with different art should the devs want to.

Devaux
05-11-2013, 06:41 AM
If sets don't go out of print you'll have stuff like that

Set 1 : 1M cards
Set 2 : 800k cards
Set 3 : 600k cards
Set 4 : 400k cards
...

If old stuff is never out of print, it'll devaluate

Now if the game's popularity is constantly raising and we have something like that :

Set 1 : 1M cards
Set 2 : 2M cards
Set 3 : 2M cards
Set 4 : 4M cards
Set 5 : 4M cards
Set 6 : 4M cards
...

And that some set1/block1 cards are staples, they should reprint in new sets

~

That still doesn't mean they'll devalue. Your estimations make no reference to the potentially growing community. At launch supply will surge but you'll still see singles appreciate in value.

That and between the existence of a crafting system and the constant price of a booster individual cards will have a floor on their price.


Because it always boils down to economics. Supply vs demand. The results will come out as expected without needing a test run.

A similar case could be attributed to MTG, where they constantly reprint some staples. These staples are often of lower value compared to their peers in the set they were introduced in because there is sufficient supply in the market. In contrast, out-of-print cards command a premium and are highly sought after because demand outstrips the supply. The economic dynamics become fundamentally more interesting this way.

... What MTG staples are you talking about that are cheaper than the other cards?...

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 07:16 AM
Who would pay to open a booster, knowing full well the value of those cards will be next to nothing after a few blocks? A lot less people than you would if those cards could be sold for more later on down the road for other cards or boosters. Sure, people would still draft, but I don't think I'd ever buy one on a whim knowing it's basically a money sink with no yielded returns within the game or outside of it.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 07:31 AM
A lot of people. Its an odd concept, but some people come to play these games for fun, not "returns". -_-

Devaux
05-11-2013, 07:32 AM
Who would pay to open a booster, knowing full well the value of those cards will be next to nothing after a few blocks? A lot less people than you would if those cards could be sold for more later on down the road for other cards or boosters. Sure, people would still draft, but I don't think I'd ever buy one on a whim knowing it's basically a money sink with no yielded returns within the game or outside of it.

/raiseshand

I'll open boosters. I want to use the cards....

EDIT: WWKnight beat me to it.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 07:32 AM
Shoubushi has the right idea, and over time the cards become rarer - which would give those cards value, encouraging sales. It will go up and down according to trends.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 07:32 AM
A lot of people. Its an odd concept, but some people come to play these games for fun, not "returns". -_-

People invests in TCG cause it's fun but also because they think there could be some R.O.I.
Either by winning tournaments or by trading well.

~

Daer
05-11-2013, 07:32 AM
People who want to phase out sets play for fun too, we just want our collection to have value.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 07:39 AM
Sorry, I was overly snarky in my last post. My apologies Shoubushi, you didnt deserve my sarcasm.

As I said, im on the fence about the matter myself. I want everyone ot have a chance to get everything. But I also like being a special little snowflake.

Im sure there is a solution here that would keep everyone happy.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 07:40 AM
Everyone will be able to have everything, not for free tho

~

Jugan
05-11-2013, 07:41 AM
I think you have to retire sets at some point, or you put your game at risk The market will become so flooded that the cards from that set would be relatively worthless... even the chase rares would be extremely deflated. MTGO cards of the current set are extremely deflated due to huge supply. Even with the ability to convert your digital cards to paper (thus decreasing the supply), the secondary market for singles and packs are extremely deflated (www.supernovabots.com can show you all you need to know). Coupled with the fact that the cards will remain on the secondary market (the only way they disappear is if people stop playing, where on magic you can trade digital cards for real cards), you'll be left with a lot less flexibility in your marketing stragegy. People's confidence in your product will lower because they know it won't retain any sort of value in the long run. You also can't do bonus goodies people get hyped up about like throwback tournaments (i.e. old set drafts), or throwback sales (or whatever else you wanna think of).

Anyway, it's been shown empirically that secondary markets crash when there's a steady and unlimited supply of a good or service. It would actually be really interesting to see limited release sets (i.e. limited time period or limited product quantity).

And for those of you who are saying "people will still want to play and open product!"... YES, of course they will. However, there are certainly going to be people who opt not to, instead waiting for the secondary flood to kick in, because they know that those cards will be available until the end of time. I've pledged $500 already, but now I'm possibly reconsidering if sets aren't going to be retired, since I know the free packs I'm getting will basically be worthless in the long run. I'm left with a dilemma of enjoying the game or spending time trying to figure out what I have to sell in order to keep some of my investment, because I don't want to be blowing $500 on nothing. I'm definitely not going to be purchasing or opening any new product if I know the set won't be retired, I'll just wait for the market to flood in order to get it cheaper.

Kami
05-11-2013, 07:42 AM
I want everyone ot have a chance to get everything. But I also like being a special little snowflake.

Heh, this reminds me of a quote:

"You're special... just like everyone else."

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 07:45 AM
Everyone will be able to have everything, not for free tho

~

Its a great thing none of us have asked for anything for free then, isnt it?

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 07:48 AM
Jugan, cards can be destroyed here, which is not a feature of MTGO.
It will need a wait and see attitude, and the first expansion set may give us an idea how it will influence card population versus player population.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 07:51 AM
I know people want their rare out-of-print cards to be valuable, but to what end? Just so it can have the price tag? I want cards to have value because they're useful. They're not useful if you phase them out.

Devaux
05-11-2013, 07:52 AM
I know people want their rare out-of-print cards to be valuable, but to what end? Just so it can have the price tag? I want cards to have value because they're useful. They're not useful if you phase them out.

This is a fair point as we still don't know if we'll be able to redeem out Platinum for $$.

Daer
05-11-2013, 08:09 AM
I'm guessing the cards being destroyed will almost always be from whatever the current set is since they will be the cheapest cards.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 08:09 AM
Actually, that point could change the opinions of everyone here (including myself, depending on the answer.)

There is a lot we don't know yet, and plenty of time to test theories, so we should wait and see.


EDIT: Actually Daer, that implies the value of older cards would have gone up, retired packs or not, correct? Just curious what differences you see between the two with that in mind.

Daer
05-11-2013, 08:10 AM
I know people want their rare out-of-print cards to be valuable, but to what end? Just so it can have the price tag? I want cards to have value because they're useful. They're not useful if you phase them out.

So you can trade them and sell them on the auction house for current boosters, other cards you need, etc.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:19 AM
So you can trade them and sell them on the auction house for current boosters, other cards you need, etc.

Let's assume that I take my collection of cards that just got phased out and put them on the AH how well are they actually going to sell/trade? You end up with a flood of cards in the AH after a set gets phased out so players, like myself, can stay up to speed with the new block. Why not just keep those cards useful for gameplay rather than just a picture in my virtual collectors book.

Daer
05-11-2013, 08:22 AM
Because people won't put the phased out cards on the AH as soon as they are phased out, what would be the point of that? They would put up cards from several sets ago, getting return on their investment and giving new players an opportunity to get the phased out cards.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 08:39 AM
Sorry, I was overly snarky in my last post. My apologies Shoubushi, you didnt deserve my sarcasm.

It's all good brother. I appreciate the apology.


I want everyone ot have a chance to get everything. But I also like being a special little snowflake.

I'm with ya there. I don't want to phase out the products products just to screw over people who didn't have the opportunity. I know all too well the feeling of missing out on products after they became available. Hell I only started playing MTG last June, so I know exactly where the new players stand. I still feel like players, like myself, would be less frivolous with their spending if they know there is no actual return on the product in the long run.


I'm sure there is a solution here that would keep everyone happy.

I'd love a solution that everyone agrees with in the end. And I'm more open now to looking for solutions that involve allowing older cards to be obtained by other means. I just can't come up with a solution that would allow having cards available forever while still making playing both a fun experience as well as an investment.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:41 AM
Because people won't put the phased out cards on the AH as soon as they are phased out, what would be the point of that? They would put up cards from several sets ago, getting return on their investment and giving new players an opportunity to get the phased out cards.

The point would be to get rid of cards that you can no longer use to trade for new sets. Why pay money for boosters when I can just sell useless cards. Someone with endless funds are going to buy useless pixels right?

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 08:42 AM
I know people want their rare out-of-print cards to be valuable, but to what end? Just so it can have the price tag? I want cards to have value because they're useful. They're not useful if you phase them out.

I can only speak from a personal experience, but I don't want my cards to gain value just because I want to know they are worth more. I am a huge advocate for trading and selling of cards in a secondary market, and would love for cards that I pulled from a Draft years ago that I never use to gain value, so I could then in return sell or trade them to buy cards that I can use currently. And the only cards that will really have any value are the cards that are useful, or are exclusive.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:44 AM
I can only speak from a personal experience, but I don't want my cards to gain value just because I want to know they are worth more. I am a huge advocate for trading and selling of cards in a secondary market, and would love for cards that I pulled from a Draft years ago that I never use to gain value, so I could then in return sell or trade them to buy cards that I can use currently. And the only cards that will really have any value are the cards that are useful, or are exclusive.

The thing is if they were useful when you opened the pack they will continue to be useful while the game exists. If they were useful to begin with then there will always be a demand for that card as long as the game continues to gain new interest.

Kami
05-11-2013, 08:46 AM
You guys have to keep in mind that even for a game like this, it will eventually peak in terms of number of players. If supply is unlimited but demand is not, that will cause problems.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 08:47 AM
The thing is if they were useful when you opened the pack they will continue to be useful while the game exists. If they were useful to begin with then there will always be a demand for that card as long as the game continues to gain new interest.

This is not entirely true. Look at how Commander affected the price of cards that were once deemed worthless or unplayable. And the opposite can happen as well when new and better cards come out with effects that fit the format better.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:47 AM
As new blocks come out the demand will change. Old blocks can still have their place and be accessible.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 08:48 AM
I agree with Mushroom_C1oud, new players are always potential buyers, no matter what the cards may be, espeically with the unusual mix of PvE to think about, and card destroying, and so much more. It is too dynamic to veiw it as a simple TCG, and I think it will take years to gauge how things should be handled, not a couple of days and a handful of people arguing in a forum. I don't mind if my values and ideas and time is invalidated at a later point, as long as there is a sufficient reason with proof to back it up.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:51 AM
This is not entirely true. Look at how Commander affected the price of cards that were once deemed worthless or unplayable.

Another reason to not have out-of-print cards.


And the opposite can happen as well when new and better cards come out with effects that fit the format better.

Tournaments can still be limited to blocks. You can still hold tournaments for older blocks on a less frequent basis to help keep interest in older blocks while at the same time increasing interest in newer blocks.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 08:55 AM
It is too dynamic to veiw it as a simple TCG, and I think it will take years to gauge how things should be handled, not a couple of days and a handful of people arguing in a forum. I don't mind if my values and ideas and time is invalidated at a later point, as long as there is a sufficient reason with proof to back it up.

While I agree that there is really no way to correctly assume how this will all play out with the fact that it is all digital, and the addition of destroying cards. I don't agree with changing a formula with how nearly every TCG has proven to work simply based on the fact that there are 2 variables that we can't completely gauge. I'm trying to come up with the best solution based on what we can best assume with the information we are given.

You are right that we don't know fully how this will all turn out, and it will take time. I don't think that waiting years for CZE to make the decision is a wise choice at all. This should already have been well thought out before they introduced it to us because IMO this "discussion" at times feels more like an "argument".

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 08:57 AM
Another reason to not have out-of-print cards.

It's not a reason at all. The whole point is there will be an endless supply of those cards available that will drive the price down.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:58 AM
While I agree that there is really no way to correctly assume how this will all play out with the fact that it is all digital, and the addition of destroying cards. I don't agree with changing a formula with how nearly every TCG has proven to work simply based on the fact that there are 2 variables that we can't completely gauge. I'm trying to come up with the best solution based on what we can best assume with the information we are given.

You are right that we don't know fully how this will all turn out, and it will take time. I don't think that waiting years for CZE to make the decision is a wise choice at all. This should already have been well thought out before they introduced it to us because IMO this "discussion" at times feels more like an "argument".

I don't think the formula works because it is the reason why I stopped playing MTG, and pretty much everyone else I know that played it. We kept a few of the decks we made to play against each other now and then, but we don't buy the new cards anymore.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 08:59 AM
It's not a reason at all. The whole point is there will be an endless supply of those cards available that will drive the price down.

Yes, bring the price down so it's for everyone not the ones with the biggest wallets.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:00 AM
I don't think the formula works because it is the reason why I stopped playing MTG, and pretty much everyone else I know that played it. We kept a few of the decks we made to play against each other now and then, but we don't buy the new cards anymore.

That is from your experience, and doesn't necessarily prove nor deny that the formula as a whole works. And with more players playing now than before, it only shows that they are doing something right.

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records-10000/most-played-trading-card-game/

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:01 AM
Yes, bring the price down so it's for everyone not the ones with the biggest wallets.

You are only looking at it from a buyers perspective. I am arguing in favor of everyones cards gaining value over time so you can spend the money on things that you will actually want to use like other rares, equipment or more boosters.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 09:13 AM
Ok. Assume it takes resources from 10 destroyed cards to make 1 new card of the same rarity. (A very simple system, but im just throwing ideas out)

If we were to agree that after 3 blocks (so first block comes out in 2014, phases out of tournament play in 2016 and stops being for sale in 2017) the packs stop selling, and are instead added to the crafting menu. For any 1 card I want, I need roughly 10 current cards to get it.

This covers all the bases. a) The initial source of the cards are gone, keeping them rare. b) In most cases, it may just be easier to find someone willing to trade, due to teh cost involved (Technically, you'd need 15 boosters to get 1 booster of the obsolete set) and c) still provides a reliable method for everyone to gain access to those cards if they chose to take it.

At no point do any of the cards become unattainable. The market retains its value. Everyone wins...? Right?

Kami
05-11-2013, 09:15 AM
It'd be funny to learn if they're having similar arguments about this situation internally. *lol*

Daer
05-11-2013, 09:16 AM
That makes the cost of old cards a fixed value. Since if you can craft an old card with 10 current cards, the value of the old card is the cost of 10 current cards.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 09:18 AM
Sorry, I missed an important part. The crafting would be random, just like a booster. So yeah, old cards would cost 10 current cards, and you arent guaranteed a particular card (just rarity). Its just like opening a booster.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:20 AM
The problem with that that I see now the crafting costs will dictate the price of cards. Example:

Card A is worth $10 when it is phased out. Crafting recipe is released and it takes 10 new specific cards (Card B - K) to make the card. Lets say that the combined cost of Card B - K is only $2. That will still drive the price down because the supply is still unlimited because the cards needed to craft are currently unlimited.

EDIT: You added the second post after my comment. ;D

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 09:22 AM
WWKnight, are you factoring in PvE cards at all, or will it be PvP for PvP and PvE for PvE?

Overall, it seems fine, but I would rather TRY non-retiring first, and that as plan B should things turn a little sour, and since you can cycle out the excess the balance would return to normal in a few months.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:23 AM
Sorry, I missed an important part. The crafting would be random, just like a booster. So yeah, old cards would cost 10 current cards, and you arent guaranteed a particular card (just rarity). Its just like opening a booster.

This is something I could possibly be in favor of, but the amount of cards should be much higher. I realize those are example numbers, but I am just stating it.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 09:25 AM
Im factoring PvE. Im factoring anythign that ever gets retired or replaced. If they update old dungeons with new cards, those cards become crafting recipes (I for one hope that never happens).

I think crafting is the key to keeping everything in the game attainable, without lowering its worth and making it negligible by handing it out on a silver platter.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:27 AM
Im factoring PvE. Im factoring anythign that ever gets retired or replaced. If they update old dungeons with new cards, those cards become crafting recipes (I for one hope that never happens).

I think crafting is the key to keeping everything in the game attainable, without lowering its worth and making it negligible by handing it out on a silver platter.

It's actually a pretty nifty idea because it adds in the random "drop" factor of an MMO, as well as the randomness of getting +1 version of equipment from crafting. Nice work WWKnight, I dig the idea.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 09:30 AM
I have no interest in buying $x amount of boosters just to see them become obsolete. I could try selling or trading them on the AH for newer sets but it is a high risk vs reward. I want a game that is about strategy and depth, not money.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:33 AM
I have no interest in buying $x amount of boosters just to see them become obsolete. I could try selling or trading them on the AH for newer sets but it is a high risk vs reward. I want a game that is about strategy and depth, not money.

Obsolete only in Constructed PvP that uses modern Blocks.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 09:33 AM
I think WWKnights idea has the most potential so far, assuming things get retired or replaced.

But how about in the first set? I think crafting should have a higher chance of alt art, or even foils. Meaning you could luck into a big moneymaker, but it potentially increases the pool of potential cards by 5-6 times (there are foils and alternate arts and other special effects, so there would be a lot to choose from.)

That means the chances of getting a specific card would be really low, even from day one.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:35 AM
I think crafting should have a higher chance of alt art, or even foils. Meaning you could luck into a big moneymaker, but it potentially increases the pool of potential cards by 5-6 times (there are foils and alternate arts and other special effects, so there would be a lot to choose from.)

That means the chances of getting a specific card would be really low, even from day one.

I'm even MORE in favor of this!

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 09:36 AM
I think they have determined Full art and foils come from leveling up individual cards (which is an idea I love, btw). No idea what they have planned for crafting. :-/

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 09:38 AM
Obsolete only in Constructed PvP that uses modern Blocks.

I have nothing against Blocks, I just don't think the older blocks should get retired. And yes, I don't want to see my cards become obsolete in constructed PvP.

Hibbert
05-11-2013, 09:39 AM
I'm very much in favor of cards going out of "print". If some cards don't end up being rarer than others, then there's no real reason for this game to be a CCG, it could just be a deck building game. Rare older cards also push people towards the current block, which I think is important to keep the game fresh. Otherwise the "vintage/legacy" play formats will probably dominate, probably with the same decks(with whatever few new cards help support them).

That said, it might be fun if crafting gave you opportunities at older power cards. A "lottery" combine of a large amount of materials would be a cool way of creating a "card sink". Burn 100 cards to get a chance at a new card. 95% of the time you'd get a current set card, 4.5% of the time you'd get a common from an old set, .4% an uncommon from an old set, and .1% a rare(numbers pulled out of air, not anything I really spent time thinking about). They could even peg the win rate to the number of cards in circulation. So if too many of a certain rare left the card pool(either by being crafted or owned by non-active accounts), that card might have a slightly better chance of coming up.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 09:40 AM
I think they have determined Full art and foils come from leveling up individual cards (which is an idea I love, btw). No idea what they have planned for crafting. :-/

I think it is a great idea for removing excess cards from the game, but not for building a constructed deck from an older block.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 09:43 AM
Hey Hibbert, nice to see someone new in the dsicussion.

I still don't see a solid, gauranteed reason to remove older sets from the shop, but that is a time will tell thing. WWKnights idea feels like the best middle point if it has to be done.

I think we maybe should make a new thread for this discussion, highlighting the main points we have covered so newer people can get into the discussion with all the 'facts', and not have to read 20+ pages. We can also include the various ideas like WWKnights, and have people actively discuss them.

(I would do it myself, but I am worried my bias might taint the opening post.)

Jugan
05-11-2013, 09:43 AM
Jugan, cards can be destroyed here, which is not a feature of MTGO.


Right, but, assuming there is some kind of "exchange system" where you can exchange 10 cards of lower rarity for 1 of higher rarity, it will actually make problems worse because now you have the billions of garbage cards being converted into higher rarity cards.

So instead of a pyramid distribution of rarity, where rare cards are on the top, you'll have more of a sandwich, except the sandwich keeps growing larger at the top because cards never "exit" the sandwich; instead they just convert to a higher rarity, and when they're at the highest rarity they don't go away.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 09:45 AM
I'm very much in favor of cards going out of "print". If some cards don't end up being rarer than others, then there's no real reason for this game to be a CCG, it could just be a deck building game. Rare older cards also push people towards the current block, which I think is important to keep the game fresh. Otherwise the "vintage/legacy" play formats will probably dominate, probably with the same decks(with whatever few new cards help support them).

You can still collect the cards, it just won't be limited to those with the largest wallets. Blocks can still be kept separate. Just remember there is no physical card so if CZE ever decides to close it's doors on HEX your cards and their value is gone forever.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 09:45 AM
I'll do it, as I have sort of been neutral the whole way through. Gimme a few minutes.

Actually, crap. Its almost 3 am and I go back to work tomorrow. Well, today. If its not done in the morning when I get up, I will do it. But for the next 5 or so hours, I need sleep :-/

Goodnight Hexxers!

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 09:47 AM
Right, but, assuming there is some kind of "exchange system" where you can exchange 10 cards of lower rarity for 1 of higher rarity, it will actually make problems worse because now you have the billions of garbage cards being converted into higher rarity cards.

So instead of a pyramid distribution of rarity, where rare cards are on the top, you'll have more of a sandwich, except the sandwich keeps growing larger at the top because cards never "exit" the sandwich; instead they just convert to a higher rarity, and when they're at the highest rarity they don't go away.

You could always exchange excess high tier cards for a chance at a different high tier card.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:48 AM
The easiest solution would be along the lines of:

100 commons = 1 random common
100 uncommons = 1 random uncommon
etc

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 09:50 AM
I still don't see a solid, gauranteed reason to remove older sets from the shop

Why even bother saying this? Nothing is guaranteed obviously. Keeping them in has no guaranteed outcome either. And I have given more than enough reasons to be in favor of rotating out based off of other TCG formulas.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 09:58 AM
100 is a LOT Shoubushi, unless you can add PvE cards into the mix to get PvP cards. I think 20-25 should be about the top, OR a system where the more you give, the higher the chance of getting something decent.

And Shoubushi, I have listened to you, but this is still being handled differently than any other TCG out there, thats why I said nothing is gauranteed. We can speculate forever, but we need to wait and gather some solid proof before making any firm decisions.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 10:23 AM
It is, but you said it like "there's no good reason to phase them out" like you're implying that there's any better reason to keep them in is all I'm saying.

And 100 is just an example number I was using.

Jugan
05-11-2013, 10:30 AM
You can still collect the cards, it just won't be limited to those with the largest wallets. Blocks can still be kept separate. Just remember there is no physical card so if CZE ever decides to close it's doors on HEX your cards and their value is gone forever.

That's not necessarily true though. Your first statement completely ignores the fact that everyone will be completely worthless if product keeps being added to the market. Furthermore, even if CZE decides to close its doors, it doesn't mean that HEX will go as well. Games, including FTP MMO's get passed off to other companies all the time. There could still be tournament or casual support for hex, even if there is no R&D backing it (Versus, alteil, etc.)

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 10:49 AM
Shoubushi, in my view, at this point in time (the game not being out yet) and the predictions we can make based on the information we have been given, I firmly believe that sets do not ever need to be removed from print. HOWEVER I am not stupid enough to suggest that will remain my stance - right now it is all guesswork.

Given some time to gather evidence and some statistics, we could revisit this and make a firm decision, I just was trying to explain to people that being closed minded on the subject will only lead to bad things, either for themselves or for others.

And fair enough, 100 is a little extreme, but a good example of cost versus profit.

And Jugan, we have yet to see how destroying cards will factor in. That's a wait and see kind of topic, so no need to tell him he is 100% wrong (yet). If it turns out badly, lots of people will change their minds about the whole thing, and the scales WILL tip. It is just the nature of the proverbial beast (called uncertainty.)