PDA

View Full Version : Can obviously bad cards be balanced by give better crafting materials?



DanTheMeek
03-27-2014, 08:47 PM
This is probably an extremely unlikely suggestion, since if CZE is following MTGs reasoning for why they're including clearly bad cards, part of the reason is so really poor players can still have cards that even they can recognize as being bad and feel good about making that evaluation on their own with out being told it. If you give the really bad cards any other benefit, it reveals them as bad, and inherently takes away the discovery. That said, and with out really knowing HOW CZE plans to implement crafting I, I do kind of feel like the crafting system could be a perfect way to take some of the frustration out of spending real money on cards only to pull cards that were clearly designed to be unplayable in all formats. By this I mean, make cards that were intentionally designed bad, give more crafting materials then the rest.

Now, honestly, I almost feel like for some cards their "badness" is a little too obvious, that right now CZE's being a little too aggressive with just how bad they're making some of their cards. I personally feel like a vanilla need only be 1 point under curve to be clear that its bad. Cards like Bloodcrazed Zealot (5 for 5/4) or Darkspire Enforcer (3 for 3/2) are bad vanillas I can get behind. They don't have effects so unless they were above curve you probably don't want them outside limited, and they're below curve by a point, so probably not a high pick even in limited, but as a late pick in limited they're still close enough to the curve to be playable as filler, especially if you happen to be going for orcs anyway.

Cards like Zodiac Shaman (5 for 2/5) or Paladin of Nagaan (5 for 3/5 and requires not 1 but 2 white shards), however, make me die a little in side every time I see them and realize some day perhaps not that far off I'll be paying money to be handed this sort of useless junk. Chimney Imps is considered one of if not the worst magic card of all time by many players, and he's at the very least the poster child for bad cards by pretty much everyone. Yet while 5 for 1/2 is really bad, having both flying and an effect that forces the opponent to reduce the number of cards in their hand by one when he dies... I'd actually rather pull a chimney imp then a Zodiac Shaman any day of the week. Any time a player can make a statement like that and not in exaggeration or sarcasm, you might want to reconsider your balancing. Seriously, please make Zodiac Shaman 5 for 2/7 vanilla and PoN at least a 3/6...

But back on topic, whether the cards are just a little bad, or the sort of junk I wouldn't even use as filler in a sealed deck, the bite of being given such a card in exchange for real world dollars could certainly be lessened, maybe even removed, by making these cards, who by virtue of being virtual I can't even put into my the spokes of my bike tires, provide more crafting materials for sacrificing them to Kismet (or however crafting will work). The easy way to do crafting materials for cards is have them give a set material(s) based on the rarity of the card, but there's nothing that says certain cards can't be extra juicy with crafting materials. Heck, if you want to hide that the reason the card is giving more materials is because its intentionally bad, you could make that status randomly attainable by all cards, but behind the scenes fix the numbers so that the worst cards (at least the ones made purposely to be the worst) are far more likely to gain that status.

Anyway, was just a random thought I'd share. Like I said at the start, probably unlikely, but it is something Hex, by virtue of being virtual, could do to allow themselves to still make bad cards for the reasons MTG has always made bad cards, but not make them quite as depressing of a pull. Heck, once you've got play sets of all the commons, good and bad, you'd actually look forward to pulling the bad ones, since they're all being turned into crafting materials anyway, and that's something I think would be pretty unique and cool.

mach
03-27-2014, 09:00 PM
If we're comparing these to Magic, Zodiac Shaman is exactly the same as Armored Cancrix, which was reprinted in the most recent core set. I believe it saw some Limited play. So no, not as bad as Chimney Imp. In rare cases you might want to side it in.

As for it being a card you're paying money for, it's a common. Nearly all commons will be equally worthless on the secondary market. Your "real world dollars" are really being exchanged for the rare, trasure chest, and on occasion a good uncommon.

DanTheMeek
03-27-2014, 09:17 PM
If we're comparing these to Magic, Zodiac Shaman is exactly the same as Armored Cancrix, which was reprinted in the most recent core set. I believe it saw some Limited play. So no, not as bad as Chimney Imp. In rare cases you might want to side it in.

As for it being a card you're paying money for, it's a common. Nearly all commons will be equally worthless on the secondary market. Your "real world dollars" are really being exchanged for the rare, trasure chest, and on occasion a good uncommon.

Fair enough, but my point wasn't really to complain about zodiac shaman (though I do really hate how bad that card is so I stupidly let my dislike for it cloud the real message) but rather just to use it as an example of a card that in MTG would be just plain disappointing to pull, but in hex could have upside to it because of the potential that crafting could bring to bad cards. I'm not going to argue that bad cards shouldn't exist, but it would be really cool if the virtual space of hex could be leveraged to lessen the blow, maybe even turn make what is pretty much purely a negative in real life card games like MTG into a positive in Hex. If a bad common gives me as many crafting materials as an uncommon, now I don't feel jipped, I'm actually kind of awkwardly happy, cause if I'm opening pack number 80 and I've already got playsets of every common and just planned to craft them anyway, now its like I opened an extra uncommon in my pack.

Again, it was just a thought I figured I'd share, maybe its an awful one.

Edit:

Also, just because you brought up the card which gave me an excuse to read all the amusing sarcastic comments posted for it, the award for best comment on Armored Cancrix on wizards site goes to lilwolf2005 for:

"This crab can kill Grizzly Bears and live to tell the tale. CAN YOU SAY THE SAME!?!?"

mach
03-27-2014, 09:39 PM
That would mean that CZE would need to make an official determination of which cards are bad. That's a lot of work, and will cause a lot of drama with people arguing that card should or should not be on the badlist. Plus it looks bad for them when a badlist card ends up played or a card not on the list ends up sucking.

Mejis
03-27-2014, 09:51 PM
That would mean that CZE would need to make an official determination of which cards are bad. That's a lot of work, and will cause a lot of drama with people arguing that card should or should not be on the badlist. Plus it looks bad for them when a badlist card ends up played or a card not on the list ends up sucking.

Yeah I agree with this Mach, although my MTG experience around this topic in general is very limited.

Is there not always scope for "bad" or underpowered cards to rise to popularity if someone finds some synergy down the line with e.g. the release of future sets?
I find it hard to believe that some cards are just so bad they will never be played, but as I say my experience in this area is not much at all as I only got into MTG recently.

And back to the OP, part of the fun of opening boosters is the chance that you might get something incredible. Even if I get cards I already have or I consider not great, the potential for that booster to have contained something great is what's awesome for me, regardless of outcome. But anyway, I digress.

My aim is to try to make decks using all cards from set 1 (obv not in one deck!), and so far I'm having a lot of fun doing that, but then again I haven't paid any money for the cards (well, except for the actual privilege of getting into Alpha of course).

DanTheMeek
03-27-2014, 09:54 PM
That would mean that CZE would need to make an official determination of which cards are bad. That's a lot of work, and will cause a lot of drama with people arguing that card should or should not be on the badlist. Plus it looks bad for them when a badlist card ends up played or a card not on the list ends up sucking.

Well the core concept is that there is no official announcement, this "bad list" is completely internal, and because bad cards don't always get the buff, and even good cards can get the buff, its all just odds, its impossible to say 100% whether a card is getting the boost because it was made intentionally bad and this is the compensation, or if the card just happened to be Kissed by Kismet today and thus has been really lucky in giving out extra mats. Further, while every card they intentionally made bad should get the extra odds, there's no reason they couldn't throw in a few good cards that get the extra odds too, or even make the odds on non-bad cards vary from day to day to further cloud which cards are truly on the bad list.

Regardless, some cards they think will be good will be found to be bad and yet not get the boost, and some cards they intended to be bad will turn out to be good and yet still get the boost, but I think that's all acceptable because on average I think it would still improve the perceived feeling of satisfaction a player gets from puling bad cards when they see, whether they realize its because its bad or not, when they see that card came with an increased salvage output status. Ultimately all CZE would have to admit was that bad cards had higher then average rates and nothing more and it would be up to us to speculate what they had considered bad based on how Kismet treated us. Heck CZE technically wouldn't even have to admit that much, whether we realized it or not I think just in general if any card, whether we thought it was bad or not, came with some extra status on it, we're more likely to be happy with pulling that card, and if we do think its bad, it'll probably be all the more satisfying to grind it into crafting dust, so even with out confirmation that the bad cards have a higher chance of getting this status, if they truly are behind the scenes, the result if higher player satisfaction.

At least that's the theory anyway.

mach
03-27-2014, 10:59 PM
Well the core concept is that there is no official announcement, this "bad list" is completely internal, and because bad cards don't always get the buff, and even good cards can get the buff, its all just odds, its impossible to say 100% whether a card is getting the boost because it was made intentionally bad and this is the compensation, or if the card just happened to be Kissed by Kismet today and thus has been really lucky in giving out extra mats. Further, while every card they intentionally made bad should get the extra odds, there's no reason they couldn't throw in a few good cards that get the extra odds too, or even make the odds on non-bad cards vary from day to day to further cloud which cards are truly on the bad list.


This is not something you can keep a secret unless the difference were so small that the entire thing is pointless.

funktion
03-28-2014, 12:39 AM
So far for me, out of about 20 drafts there has been only one draft where I didn't have at least 30 playables, and often times I'm closer to 40. That's pretty insane, I don't think there is much need to ratchet up either of these cards power levels. With so many cards in set 1 that are viable for play it is nice to have one or two which aren't.

There are way fewer "rubish" cards in this set than in any other tcg I've played.

Thrawn
03-28-2014, 07:57 AM
That would mean that CZE would need to make an official determination of which cards are bad. That's a lot of work, and will cause a lot of drama with people arguing that card should or should not be on the badlist. Plus it looks bad for them when a badlist card ends up played or a card not on the list ends up sucking.

Simple, the quality of crafting materials is increased or decreased automatically compared to how early and often a card is picked in draft and/or how often a card is played in constructed/sealed tournaments. It's not perfect, but takes care of most of it.

noragar
03-28-2014, 08:26 AM
Well the core concept is that there is no official announcement, this "bad list" is completely internal, and because bad cards don't always get the buff, and even good cards can get the buff, its all just odds, its impossible to say 100% whether a card is getting the boost because it was made intentionally bad and this is the compensation, or if the card just happened to be Kissed by Kismet today and thus has been really lucky in giving out extra mats.

So you're complaining about the fact that every once in a while the RNG will give you card in a pack that you consider "bad". How will you feel when the RNG gives you that "bad" card and also randomly decides not to give it this "crafting boost". Off to the forums to start a thread!!!

We don't even know anything about how the crafting system will be set up. I'd want to at least see it before making changes to it.

Also, if "bad" cards didn't exist, then by definition, "good" cards couldn't exist either.

Xenavire
03-28-2014, 08:40 AM
Logically, there would be crafting materials for each rarity, and not based on cards being good or bad.

Maybe seperate materials for equipment?

Also, it has never been confirmed (although often speculated) that PvP cards can be destroyed.

Showsni
03-28-2014, 08:55 AM
So far for me, out of about 20 drafts there has been only one draft where I didn't have at least 30 playables, and often times I'm closer to 40. That's pretty insane, I don't think there is much need to ratchet up either of these cards power levels. With so many cards in set 1 that are viable for play it is nice to have one or two which aren't.

There are way fewer "rubish" cards in this set than in any other tcg I've played.

This. Unless they're holding back all the really bad cards for some later update, the limited power level is pretty high. Almost too high; a few times I could probably have made two perfectly functioning decks from my draft pool... (I had to cut 4 Savage Raiders and 3 Hellhounds from a Ruby aggro deck.)

ossuary
03-28-2014, 10:00 AM
Also, it has never been confirmed (although often speculated) that PvP cards can be destroyed.

I'm pretty sure they've said you can break down any card. Why would they NOT let people remove cards from circulation? That seems silly. They want to reduce the number of cards floating around by any means necessary, especially with all these free cards forever the Pro+ players will be generating.

ossuary
03-28-2014, 10:02 AM
This. Unless they're holding back all the really bad cards for some later update, the limited power level is pretty high. Almost too high; a few times I could probably have made two perfectly functioning decks from my draft pool... (I had to cut 4 Savage Raiders and 3 Hellhounds from a Ruby aggro deck.)

No, I'd say it's extremely likely that all the "bad" cards are already in. The bad cards are the ones with no special effects at all - all the good ones take longer to get into the engine because they require special coding to make them work. There are only a handful (less than 10) cards left in the set, and I'm pretty sure we already know what all but 2 or 3 of them are, from previously spoiled cards or from people parsing the game data / files.

Xenavire
03-28-2014, 10:06 AM
I'm pretty sure they've said you can break down any card. Why would they NOT let people remove cards from circulation? That seems silly. They want to reduce the number of cards floating around by any means necessary, especially with all these free cards forever the Pro+ players will be generating.

Well, it would be a safe assumption, but they never actually came out and said 'Yes, PvP cards can be destroyed for materials just like PvE cards." I just thought it is relevant in a whole thread devoted to the idea of breaking down PvP cards.

Lonenut
03-28-2014, 11:57 AM
No, I'd say it's extremely likely that all the "bad" cards are already in. The bad cards are the ones with no special effects at all - all the good ones take longer to get into the engine because they require special coding to make them work. There are only a handful (less than 10) cards left in the set, and I'm pretty sure we already know what all but 2 or 3 of them are, from previously spoiled cards or from people parsing the game data / files.

Hey, I'll take another 3/2 for two mana with absolutely no special abilities!

Ebynfel
04-03-2014, 03:52 AM
Well, it would be a safe assumption, but they never actually came out and said 'Yes, PvP cards can be destroyed for materials just like PvE cards." I just thought it is relevant in a whole thread devoted to the idea of breaking down PvP cards.

Just an update, the live interview with Cory on 4/1, Cory noted that any card can be thrown into the void for materials.

However, very little else was said about crafting except that a legendary crafting pattern could come off a boss, and could allow you to craft an alternate art burn, and could be one of the lowest drop rates i nthe game and take huge chunks of materials. :)

Now, to the OP. I dislike the idea of any variables in crafting at all. IMO, we should know what we're getting ahead of time before we start chucking the cards away, whether they be junkbox commons or they are Legendaries. Even some Legendaries will see little actual play, and may be worth so little at auction that we may be better off breaking them for the (hopefully) massively more rare materials they should produce. This wont be an issue just at common. Take a look at Magic as an example, plenty of nearly unplayable Mythic Rares get tossed around there. I mean, they're usually really fun, casual cards, but horribly unreliable in a tourney setting. Once people make their cheap playsets, many who are looking for, say, those alternate art Burns you may be able to make, and gifting the bulk rares and legendaries to the void in much the same fashion.

But honestly, there have to be some that run on that level even at Legendary. Because who is going to void extinctions or vampire kings?