PDA

View Full Version : Why are packs in store still 200p?



mach
07-15-2014, 10:08 PM
CZE is now directly selling packs (including a primal chance) for 160p in the Constructed queue. In other words, with 7 friends (or 7 extra accounts) you can buy as many packs as you want directly from CZE for 160p each using the Constructed queues, without having to actually play any games.

So why are packs in the store still 200p? This is just taking advantage of those who don't know any better - a very player-unfriendly thing to do.

Skirovik
07-15-2014, 10:10 PM
It's a tournament. It's not meant to be a means of getting cheaper packs. Entering the event just to farm packs is gaming the system and likely won't be tolerated (if discovered).

nicosharp
07-15-2014, 10:23 PM
Time is money bro.

Werlix
07-15-2014, 10:24 PM
CZE is now directly selling packs (including a primal chance) for 160p in the Constructed queue. In other words, with 7 friends (or 7 extra accounts) you can buy as many packs as you want directly from CZE for 160p each using the Constructed queues, without having to actually play any games.

So why are packs in the store still 200p? This is just taking advantage of those who don't know any better - a very player-unfriendly thing to do.

It's to encourage people to play in the tournament queues. It's the same with draft queues too, nothing has changed.

Of course if people are gaming the system like you mention they'll probably get warned/banned. Aside from this abuse case people will buy from the store instead if they don't have a constructed deck to use or don't have a competitive one.

mach
07-15-2014, 10:42 PM
It's a tournament. It's not meant to be a means of getting cheaper packs. Entering the event just to farm packs is gaming the system and likely won't be tolerated (if discovered).

It's not meant to be, but it is. And I don't think buying packs this way even violates any rule, since it's technically an 8-way prize split.

The bottom line is that they're selling packs directly for 160p. Even if we exclude the "abuse case", they're still selling packs to some people for 160p. If they're doing that, they should sell packs to everyone at this price. Charging more to new players who have no Constructed deck and who don't know they can get cheaper packs from the AH is not a good way to attract new players.


It's to encourage people to play in the tournament queues. It's the same with draft queues too, nothing has changed.


It's not the same with draft. A 700p draft buys you 1.5 packs in the prize pool, plus the contents of 3 packs.

Fateanomaly
07-15-2014, 11:07 PM
Ya thats not right. They should put the prize back to 12packs.

sukebe
07-15-2014, 11:23 PM
I fail to see a problem here. Joining tournaments has always been a way to get cheaper packs, this changes nothing whatsoever. 8 friends joining a single tournament and actually playing it is not a problem. It will only be a problem if they all join the same 8 man and then concede to the end of the tournament. In this case they are gaming the system, which Cory has been very clear that he will not tolerate.

Even in physical card games it is rarely the best idea to buy retail packs. Even before this change packs were only 120 to 140 plat on the AH. Why is this situation really any different? Either way, people will spend more if they spend money without doing any research. That is pretty much a given in any buying situation.

Redbeastmage
07-15-2014, 11:26 PM
Tournaments have to have prizing better then retail cost or people will have no reason to enter an event rather then just play casually and buy packs. Thats how it works in basically every card shop on the planet. No different here.

nicosharp
07-15-2014, 11:31 PM
Ya thats not right. They should put the prize back to 12packs.

...
if you take retail value of packs out of the equation, you are looking at 100p drafts and 3 packs worth of cards to keep.
if you do the same for constructed, its 300p and 0 packs worth of cards to keep.

If you want to compare apples to apples:
36 packs come out of draft - 800 plat goes in. 24 of the 36 packs are part of the entry - but also part of the reward.
2400 plat goes into constructed.... 15 packs come out..

Saying that constructed values packs at 160 each, is like saying each pack won in draft is worth 386plat based on whats put in....
160 x 24 + 800 / 12

Fateanomaly
07-15-2014, 11:32 PM
I am sorry my sarcasm is not obvious.

Prodygi
07-15-2014, 11:33 PM
I'm a little bit confuse about this topic. Can anyone explain in detail?

hex_colin
07-15-2014, 11:42 PM
CZE is now directly selling packs (including a primal chance) for 160p in the Constructed queue. In other words, with 7 friends (or 7 extra accounts) you can buy as many packs as you want directly from CZE for 160p each using the Constructed queues, without having to actually play any games.

So why are packs in the store still 200p? This is just taking advantage of those who don't know any better - a very player-unfriendly thing to do.

People really will really complain about anything. :(

If you think this is a valid way of "buying" packs why don't you and your friends (or extra accounts) get working on your scheme? See how long your accounts stay active.

Skirovik
07-15-2014, 11:43 PM
At least with this recent change, I will be tempted to play 8 man constructed and I hope I'm not the only one out there who feels this way. Maybe those things can finally fire.

hex_colin
07-15-2014, 11:45 PM
At least with this recent change, I will be tempted to play 8 man constructed and I hope I'm not the only one out there who feels this way. Maybe those things can finally fire.

I'd have played irrespective of the changes to the prize support, but I'm very happy that this should entice more people into the queues. :)

Xenith
07-16-2014, 12:59 AM
People really will really complain about anything. :(

If you think this is a valid way of "buying" packs why don't you and your friends (or extra accounts) get working on your scheme? See how long your accounts stay active.

I'm wondering if this actually a bannable offense. I recall a group of streamers running a tournament amongst themselves. They definitely should be allowed to continue to do stuff like that. I would hope guilds would be allowed to do tourneys with just guildies as well. Engaging in such obvious, exploitative behavior such as forfeiting all the rounds, end tournament in 5 minutes, repeat in order to funnel packs to one account should not be allowed of course. As long as people play the games I fail to see this as an issue.

Skirovik
07-16-2014, 01:12 AM
I'm wondering if this actually a bannable offense. I recall a group of streamers running a tournament amongst themselves. They definitely should be allowed to continue to do stuff like that. I would hope guilds would be allowed to do tourneys with just guildies as well. Engaging in such obvious, exploitative behavior such as forfeiting all the rounds, end tournament in 5 minutes, repeat in order to funnel packs to one account should not be allowed of course. As long as people play the games I fail to see this as an issue.

The part I bolded is what's being inferred as the non-valid way to participate in this. I doubt anyone will have any issues if they are legitimately playing in the tournament even in the situations you described.

NightFinger
07-16-2014, 01:21 AM
I suppose they could always charge the full 200 plat cost per pack at the start of tournaments and then make per-pack refunds at the end to those who see the tourney out (or partial refund if you pull part way)

Patrigan
07-16-2014, 01:26 AM
the queues will probably eventually change so that you can't game the system. A bit like a LoL queue. You join and then get matchmade against other players.

mach
07-16-2014, 01:34 AM
People really will really complain about anything. :(

If you think this is a valid way of "buying" packs why don't you and your friends (or extra accounts) get working on your scheme? See how long your accounts stay active.

Are splits against the rules? Because what I'm proposing is just an 8-way split.

But that's not my main point. 8-way splits aside, with these changes CZE is now selling unlimited packs for 160plat to some players. This will guarantee that the price of packs is no more than this, even for future sets where there is no KS supply glut.

So what's the point of charging 200 plat in the store and in draft queues, other than to take advantage of new players who don't know better? Do you really want every unofficial Hex guide to have at the top, in bold red letters, "NEVER BUY PACKS FROM THE STORE. NEVER BUY DRAFT ENTRIES WITH PLAT."?

I don't care what CZE wants to charge when directly selling players packs, but it should be the same no matter whether you buy them in the store, a limited event, or a constructed event.

Rokz
07-16-2014, 01:38 AM
Are splits against the rules? Because what I'm proposing is just an 8-way split.

But that's not my main point. 8-way splits aside, with these changes CZE is now selling unlimited packs for 160plat to some players. This will guarantee that the price of packs is no more than this, even for future sets where there is no KS supply glut.

So what's the point of charging 200 plat in the store and in draft queues, other than to take advantage of new players who don't know better? Do you really want every unofficial Hex guide to have at the top, in bold red letters, "NEVER BUY PACKS FROM THE STORE. NEVER BUY DRAFT ENTRIES WITH PLAT."?

I don't care what CZE wants to charge when directly selling players packs, but it should be the same no matter whether you buy them in the store, a limited event, or a constructed event.

Everyones answers went in one ear and out the other lol

sukebe hit the nail on the head 6th post in. You can't argue with that logic... Well, some still so...

nicosharp
07-16-2014, 01:45 AM
Are splits against the rules? Because what I'm proposing is just an 8-way split.
Yeah, it is called gaming the system, and if done just for packs, trust me you will eventually get caught, and you can kiss your account and everything you think you "own" on it goodbye.


But that's not my main point. 8-way splits aside, with these changes CZE is now selling unlimited packs for 160plat to some players. This will guarantee that the price of packs is no more than this, even for future sets where there is no KS supply glut. They aren't selling packs for 160 plat. They are allowing people to win packs for far less than 160 plat per pack. That has always been the case. The game is put in time = create value. Not always put in money and get = value. There will be winners and losers. There will be people that read into this a bit too much, game the system, and they go bye bye. Then you can increase pack value as you see fit with their goodies going into the aether.


So what's the point of charging 200 plat in the store and in draft queues, other than to take advantage of new players who don't know better? Do you really want every unofficial Hex guide to have at the top, in bold red letters, "NEVER BUY PACKS FROM THE STORE. NEVER BUY DRAFT ENTRIES WITH PLAT."?
Retail prices are not there to be a deterrent or make players flock to finding a way to game the system for cheaper packs. Retail prices are there to set a baseline for merchandise acquired with 0 effort/time put into it. Retail prices are also there so players that win can feel like they are getting more perceived value in comparison to what they paid.


I don't care what CZE wants to charge when directly selling players packs, but it should be the same no matter whether you buy them in the store, a limited event, or a constructed event.
So VIP should be $8 a month? Should PvE never reward anything at all? Should chests never have content? Should packs never be won from spinning chests? Should primals never procc.... Yeah, lets just all bend over so someone can get a few cents more on their kickstarter rewards rare on the AH.

Ertzi
07-16-2014, 03:14 AM
Can we please abandon these math equation approaches to the game and stop trying to squeeze every last drop of "value" out of everything, and concentrate on why we all play games in the first place. You know, having fun? I'm really amazed how many players need to do everything in exactly the most efficient way. I can't be the only one who doesn't care about how many packs some tournament gives out in winnings compared to another one, as I just play the one that I feel like at the time, but sometimes it feels that way. Every worthwhile hobby needs a bit of investment and HEX is no different. I'm really sad about the fact that fewer and fewer people can just enjoy a good game and feel like they need to argue about every little thing about it. Don't get me wrong, I will complain like no other when it comes to the huge, core issues, but I simply don't understand this obsession with "value". And believe me, I do not have a lot of money to spend on HEX.

nicosharp
07-16-2014, 03:39 AM
Can we please abandon these math equation approaches to the game and stop trying to squeeze every last drop of "value" out of everything, and concentrate on why we all play games in the first place. You know, having fun? I'm really amazed how many players need to do everything in exactly the most efficient way. I can't be the only one who doesn't care about how many packs some tournament gives out in winnings compared to another one, as I just play the one that I feel like at the time, but sometimes it feels that way. Every worthwhile hobby needs a bit of investment and HEX is no different. I'm really sad about the fact that fewer and fewer people can just enjoy a good game and feel like they need to argue about every little thing about it. Don't get me wrong, I will complain like no other when it comes to the huge, core issues, but I simply don't understand this obsession with "value". And believe me, I do not have a lot of money to spend on HEX.
I think there are a few too many of us nerds going through some culture shock with this game. As a kid my friends and I grew up collecting and trading baseball cards, which we were told by our elders to save cause they'd be worth money some day. That then turned into other hobbies that had to do with collecting. Players bought magazines like Scrye to keep up on their collection values. This TCG going 100% digital makes those old values of "collecting = future value" really hard to grasp. I feel like there is a segment of the community that are having brain aneurysms over this.

Specifically myself, and other kickstarter backers that were sold on a concept that got the collectors in us juicy wet in anticipation of what our collections would be worth some day. I am okay with it, because I am a digital gamer. I know its going to be really hard for a digital asset in todays gaming world to compete and hold value given the plethora of games available to people and the lack of barriers to enter. If any game pulls this off, for a digital TCG holding value, its going to be Hex. That does not mean creating loopholes for players to circumvent retail purchases, or that a slippery slope to increased rewards needs to be applied a collectors perceived collection value. The players that really want their collections to make them money, or be worth anything, will be the same players selling everything they can in the first two weeks of every new huge content patch.

I think people really looking into this are the same people that would Min/Max to the fullest in an MMO. They have a strong analytical sense for how the game works. Which rolls into the economy of the game. They probably have a ton of fun playing the game, given the countless combinations. For example, that streamer Kripparian is a hardcore min/maxer and made a ton of money on the diablo3 auction house before it went bellyup and now has a crazy hearthstone collection. You can tell he loves the game, but his fun is measured by how analytical he can be by breaking the game through crazy min/maxing etc.

Unhurtable
07-16-2014, 03:43 AM
I'm a little bit confuse about this topic. Can anyone explain in detail?

I'm disappointed nobody has answered this confused soul.
Constructed tournaments is the topic. Basically, 8 people pay a fee (300 plat) to enter a tournament. The fee is used to fund prizes. These prizes used to be:
Tournament Winner = 5 Booster Packs
Runner-up = 3 Booster Packs
3rd and 4th Place = 2 Booster Packs each
If you are good at math you will notice fast that its 12 packs in total. You would in that case also notice that the tournament would pay out Booster Packs at retail level (since 8x300 = 2400 = 12 * 200 = Boosters * Retail Booster Price).

Now the tournaments hands out 7 / 4 / 2 instead, leading to the tournaments essentially handing out boosters at below retail price (since 2400 / 14 = 171 plat per booster, or in the case of the more non-competitive queue 2400 / 15 = 160 plat per booster).

This upsets people because they feel that the constructed tournaments should not be a way to get packs for lower than retail price (as you would get that on average unless everyone else are better than you) and/or that this will ultimately lower the value of their boosters.


Are splits against the rules? Because what I'm proposing is just an 8-way split.

But that's not my main point. 8-way splits aside, with these changes CZE is now selling unlimited packs for 160plat to some players. This will guarantee that the price of packs is no more than this, even for future sets where there is no KS supply glut.

I don't see a problem with this.



So what's the point of charging 200 plat in the store and in draft queues, other than to take advantage of new players who don't know better? Do you really want every unofficial Hex guide to have at the top, in bold red letters, "NEVER BUY PACKS FROM THE STORE. NEVER BUY DRAFT ENTRIES WITH PLAT."?
Okay lets get one thing out of the bag before we continue. Even without this change using "buy draft entry with plat" would never have been a good option for a couple of reasons. One being that you lose the chance of getting primals.

Now lets get on to something that actually matters. There will still be incentives to buy packs from store since some people will not be able to compete in constructed to earn value from it. For some people, it will look like a very good idea to pay 300 plat to get boosters for an average of 171 / 160 plat, but for some players (players that might get 1 win on average, 2 if they are lucky) they are looking at a booster price of over 200 plat by playing constructed.

Not to mention that the first boosters generated in a new set will most likely either go to Drafts (where the payout of boosters is even better on a plat basis if we remove booster entry fee from the equation) or they will be opened to give the winners a possible advantage with the new cards.

Lastly, tell me what happens when a new block arrives and the only way to generate those block boosters through tournaments is by playing with cards from that block?


Can we please abandon these math equation approaches to the game and stop trying to squeeze every last drop of "value" out of everything, and concentrate on why we all play games in the first place. You know, having fun? I'm really amazed how many players need to do everything in exactly the most efficient way. I can't be the only one who doesn't care about how many packs some tournament gives out in winnings compared to another one, as I just play the one that I feel like at the time, but sometimes it feels that way. Every worthwhile hobby needs a bit of investment and HEX is no different. I'm really sad about the fact that fewer and fewer people can just enjoy a good game and feel like they need to argue about every little thing about it. Don't get me wrong, I will complain like no other when it comes to the huge, core issues, but I simply don't understand this obsession with "value". And believe me, I do not have a lot of money to spend on HEX.

Peoples invested money is at stake here. Of course there is going to be a lot of discussion about the value of their investment.

Pheelon
07-16-2014, 03:57 AM
Okay lets get one thing out of the bag before we continue. Even without this change using "buy draft entry with plat" would never have been a good option for a couple of reasons. One being that you lose the chance of getting primals.
actually thats wrong if you "buy in" with plat only you essentially buy the packs from the store at start (incl. Primal chance).

Has been confirmed as well (by HEXRex or HEXChark - not sure atm wich).

mach
07-16-2014, 04:07 AM
Yeah, it is called gaming the system, and if done just for packs, trust me you will eventually get caught, and you can kiss your account and everything you think you "own" on it goodbye.


Are they really going to be banning people for splitting? That's going to upset a lot of people.



They aren't selling packs for 160 plat. They are allowing people to win packs for far less than 160 plat per pack. That has always been the case.


They are selling packs to the Constructed table at 160p each, which are then distributed according to the tournament results. This was not the case previously.



Retail prices are not there to be a deterrent or make players flock to finding a way to game the system for cheaper packs. Retail prices are there to set a baseline for merchandise acquired with 0 effort/time put into it. Retail prices are also there so players that win can feel like they are getting more perceived value in comparison to what they paid.


So put a "200 plat" sticker on the packs. But don't actually try to get people who don't know better to pay that. Because they will find out eventually. Learning that you've been taken advantage of does not make people want to become repeat customers.




Okay lets get one thing out of the bag before we continue. Even without this change using "buy draft entry with plat" would never have been a good option for a couple of reasons. One being that you lose the chance of getting primals.


If you do, that's a bug. They've said that you're still supposed to get a primal chance.



Now lets get on to something that actually matters. There will still be incentives to buy packs from store since some people will not be able to compete in constructed to earn value from it. For some people, it will look like a very good idea to pay 300 plat to get boosters for an average of 171 / 160 plat, but for some players (players that might get 1 win on average, 2 if they are lucky) they are looking at a booster price of over 200 plat by playing constructed.


If you're not able to compete in Constructed, you should be buying them on the AH from the people who are competing in Constructed. Because these people are buying them for 160p, you are guaranteed a cheaper rate than the store.



Not to mention that the first boosters generated in a new set will most likely either go to Drafts (where the payout of boosters is even better on a plat basis if we remove booster entry fee from the equation) or they will be opened to give the winners a possible advantage with the new cards.


The payout is not better in Draft. The payout depends on pack contents value, but a booster market value of 200p is perfectly compatible with draft payouts.



Lastly, tell me what happens when a new block arrives and the only way to generate those block boosters through tournaments is by playing with cards from that block?


I don't seeing them doing that. Once the new block comes, I expect new block boosters to be prizes for all types of tournaments.

Pheelon
07-16-2014, 04:11 AM
Are they really going to be banning people for splitting? That's going to upset a lot of people.


if you mean you actually play the tournament "for fun" and afterward split the packs (once trading is implemented) - i don't think thats a problem. (or even just splitting them in finals)

if however you start a tourney and all instantly concede to get to the packs - well that would abusing the system.

Prodygi
07-16-2014, 04:16 AM
snip

Thanks.


Can we please abandon these math equation approaches to the game and stop trying to squeeze every last drop of "value" out of everything, and concentrate on why we all play games in the first place.

I think alot of gamers are used to playing games for free. But Hex right now is pretty much P2P.
I think the obsession over value comes from people not wanting to spend more money than they should every time they wish to play. Look at the response for the 128man tournament. And then compare it to how often drafts(best value) are firing. People are just not used to paying($X/Y hr) so often for a game.

mach
07-16-2014, 04:19 AM
if you mean you actually play the tournament "for fun" and afterward split the packs (once trading is implemented) - i don't think thats a problem. (or even just splitting them in finals)

if however you start a tourney and all instantly concede to get to the packs - well that would abusing the system.

The classic split is in the last round of an event. The loser of the coin flip instantly concedes and the players split the prizes. So if the line you draw is whether people are playing or not, it seems this kind of split would be "abusing the system" as well.

I don't think 8-way splits will actually happen though. If pack prices are above $1.6, Constructed queues will just become more popular (since they're profitable with a 50% win rate) until they drop to $1.6.

Xtopher
07-16-2014, 05:38 AM
This was a problem on MTGO at one point. One or more players were entering constructed queues with 8 accounts and scooping packs at a discount and then reselling them. The guy was stupid, though, and the accounts were all the same name with a different number tacked onto the end. Basically player1, player2, etc. The MTGO solution was to make it against the rules to enter an event with more than one account (it fell under the definition of collusion) AND to reduce prizes so this couldn't be abused even if someone wanted to.

Prize support on MTGO has been so poor for most of the history of the game, it was always my policy to never, ever suggest prizes be lowered there, so I find it difficult to suggest that now. I'm just going to try not to care and go about my business.

Ertzi
07-16-2014, 05:59 AM
Fair enough. Thanks for the in-depth answer, nicosharp. That was fascinating to read. I guess I'm just wired differently, even though I do love min/maxing in MMOs/RPGs. I'm some kind of a weird hybrid I guess, with my Excel sheets of cards and AH analyses (even read Scrye back in the day to check MtG prices), but still only being interested in having a good collection myself and enjoying the game. I know I will lose a ton of money playing this game and I'm still happy doing it.

Sorry about constantly derailing the topic, I won't do it after this post, but I would love to know how many people currently in HEX are in it with an end game to actually make profit with their collection. The entire idea is alien to me, but strangely appealing as well, as I too am very analytical. Is that often possible in games where you collect stuff? Actually having more real money than before you started playing a game? Maybe I should start studying this "meta game" :D But isn't it exhausting though, always paying so much attention to every little detail? Can you even "chain" games by the way, meaning that you sell your collection in another game and buy a good starting collection with the money in a different game? In that case, how do you know when to cash in? See, this is my analytical side coming to the surface. Maybe I'm doing this all wrong :cool:

I think the difference is that for me HEX is like any other computer game that I play (which I do for pure enjoyment) - the only difference being it takes real money to play - and many others treat HEX almost like an investment.

*shrugs* I might never fully understand this type of gaming.

Lawlschool
07-16-2014, 06:23 AM
Time is money bro.

Exactly. I feel like this is too often lost on people. If you want to eek out maximum value, you have to sink in time as well as money.

What if you want to bulk buy a ton of packs? I'd much rather drop $100 to get 50 set 2 packs all at once instead of sitting around in constructed queues trying to "buy" packs for cheap.

HexEnt isn't tricking anyone here, they're not intentionally taking advantage of noobs who "don't know better," 200p packs are just a more time-efficient way of getting packs. Undoubtedly some noobs will buy packs from the store not realizing that it's "better value" to buy and open packs through tournaments, but I don't really see how that's a problem. I'm not going to suggest to new players that they hop right in to a Swiss Draft and waste a couple hours getting facerolled. Makes way more sense to say "Hey, drop $10 or $20 on 5 or 10 packs, dick around with those for awhile, and once you're comfortable and familiar with the system maybe try some tournies."

As to the whole "prize splitting" thing, I can't imagine it's as big of a deal as Mach wants it to be. 8 people colluding to all forfeit first round and split packs? Bad. 8 friends agreeing that at the end of the tourney they'll share the packs? Seems fine. Will there be grey areas and fringe cases? Undoubtedly, and I'm sure Cory et al will handle things reasonably, but I think if you have to argue why what you're doing isn't gaming the system, it probably is gaming the system.

TJTaylor
07-16-2014, 07:22 AM
How do 8 people profit from splitting 15 packs? Good luck selling those two packs they each get (except that one dude, poor guy) for more than you spent in entry fees.

zadies
07-16-2014, 07:35 AM
Constructed is supposed to be where packs come from to fund draft in a working tournament system... given constructed ques weren't firing previously, not sure if the are now, it was the right decesion to change the prize structure.

They are still more expensive then they had been selling for on the ah... direct purchase is there for the convinece factor not becuase anyone ever thought they were the best way to buy them.

Having everyone play in drafts becuase it had the best ev was not health for the game.

Malicus
07-16-2014, 07:37 AM
While a chance at a primal is great the AH is almost always going to be the cheapest location for new packs and that is the real trap for newer players, I didn't realise that I could buy packs from bots when I started on MtGO and I was pretty annoyed when I realised after spending hundreds of dollars on packs from the store.

Given that even Hex sells packs for platinum (as opposed to MtGO which sells packs for $USD) letting people know before paying retail that there may be packs available on the AH minus the Primal chance for cheaper is something I would support and goes further to addressing the only real issue around the 200 retail trap.

Personally I wish they had put primals inside of packs though to make the value of a pack more consistent and to encourage more opening.

bootlace
07-16-2014, 08:17 AM
Assuming collusion is against the ToS (which it should be), packs are only 160p for an average level competitive constructed player. You'd assume people entering these tournaments are no chumps. So not only would you have to spend a ton of money putting together a competitive deck (strongest decks run Angel of Dawn/Vampire King which are ~80 bucks for a playset) but you'd also have to be a pretty good player to be 'average' amongst these constructed players.

So in short: no, packs are not suddenly worth 160plat max to anyone (especially not the beginners who some say are being 'tricked' into buying more expensive packs...are you kidding, they would get slaughtered if they entered this tournament!)

People have to earn those 160 packs, and so I don't see anything wrong with a little incentive/get a little reward for being average amongst serious constructed players.

Unhurtable
07-16-2014, 10:42 AM
actually thats wrong if you "buy in" with plat only you essentially buy the packs from the store at start (incl. Primal chance).

Has been confirmed as well (by HEXRex or HEXChark - not sure atm wich).


If you do, that's a bug. They've said that you're still supposed to get a primal chance.

Did not know this to be honest, but that both makes sense and doesn't at the same time so I'm not going to complain.



If you're not able to compete in Constructed, you should be buying them on the AH from the people who are competing in Constructed. Because these people are buying them for 160p, you are guaranteed a cheaper rate than the store.

"Packs from the AH are cheaper than packs from the store."
I'm not missing something am I?



The payout is not better in Draft. The payout depends on pack contents value, but a booster market value of 200p is perfectly compatible with draft payouts.



(where the payout of boosters is even better on a plat basis if we remove booster entry fee from the equation)

800 plat for 12 packs = 66 plat per pack
Current constructed prize:
Competitive = 14 packs for 2400 plat = 171 plat per pack
Casual = 15 packs for 2400 = 160 plat per pack
Payout, based on plat entry fee, is much lower in draft compared to constructed. You are, in these cases, essentially buying boosters for 66 plat a piece because those boosters would be will be opened one way or another.



I don't seeing them doing that. Once the new block comes, I expect new block boosters to be prizes for all types of tournaments.

Thats a really nice way of answering the question that I asked. I guess I should've said "what if" but I assumed you would think it was a hypothetical.

Yoss
07-16-2014, 10:46 AM
Constructed is supposed to be where packs come from to fund draft in a working tournament system... given constructed ques weren't firing previously, not sure if the are now, it was the right decesion to change the prize structure.

They are still more expensive then they had been selling for on the ah... direct purchase is there for the convinece factor not becuase anyone ever thought they were the best way to buy them.

Having everyone play in drafts becuase it had the best ev was not health for the game.
Finally, a sane dissent from the OP! I totally agree with this for Set 1 only. If we were to let Set 1 settle out to equilibrium (which according to Cory would mean the game is dead, thus Set 2 coming so soon), we'd see everyone continue focus on Limited due to low pack costs leading eventually to the KS boosters drying up and pack prices headed up on the AH to a point where the original (totally reasonable) Constructed fee+prize structure would work (people would start to see it as a good value proposition in addition to just fun).

Since Set 2 and up will not have a KS glut to smash pack prices into the dirt, there's no need to have inflated Constructed rewards. On the other hand, as a consumer it's hard to argue with Hex cutting pack prices by 20% (which is what they just did in some sense). My main complaint is that they're doing it after we put money into collections. This could be a brilliant move on their part, but I sure hope they won't be monkeying around with the game's value proposition any more once they let in the public.



...
if you take retail value of packs out of the equation, you are looking at 100p drafts and 3 packs worth of cards to keep.
if you do the same for constructed, its 300p and 0 packs worth of cards to keep.

If you want to compare apples to apples:
36 packs come out of draft - 800 plat goes in. 24 of the 36 packs are part of the entry - but also part of the reward.
2400 plat goes into constructed.... 15 packs come out..

Saying that constructed values packs at 160 each, is like saying each pack won in draft is worth 386plat based on whats put in....
160 x 24 + 800 / 12

800 plat for 12 packs = 66 plat per pack
Current constructed prize:
Competitive = 14 packs for 2400 plat = 171 plat per pack
Casual = 15 packs for 2400 = 160 plat per pack
Payout, based on plat entry fee, is much lower in draft compared to constructed. You are, in these cases, essentially buying boosters for 66 plat a piece because those boosters would be will be opened one way or another.

That is some messed up math.

Constructed is obvious, and you got that part right. 2400p input, 15 pack output, 2400p/15 is 160p per pack. Simple.

Here's how draft works, starting with the obvious. Input is 24 (closed) packs and 800p. Output is 24 open packs and 12 closed packs. Net input is 12 packs and 800p. Net output is 24 open packs. There is a net LOSS of packs on the market, not a gain. Since the group makes a net loss of packs in draft it is nonsensical to calculate a cost to "buy" boosters through drafting, unless you're merely talking about buying pack contents, which is not the same thing (but I'll calculate that next).

If you want to know the value of the contents, then you can use the same input/output method as we did for Constructed and you get the pack contents (C) cost (12*B+800p)/24. If boosters (B) are worth 133p on the AH, then the contents cost 100p per booster if you farm them from draft. If boosters (B) are 167p, then the contents cost you 117p per booster if you farm them from draft. Notice that unless B goes rediculously low C is always lower than B; it is always more money efficient for the community as a whole to open packs in Limited. (Note that C could be lower or higher than the AH price, this calculation is just the "production cost" for someone farming wares to sell or use.)

The new truth (in addition to the above, and the topic of the OP) is that it is now (unlike before) always more money efficient for the community as a whole to buy packs only through Constructed (at 160p). Anyone who is not getting packs through Constructed should be buying on the AH rather than from Hex (VIP is the exception, obviously).


...Drafts (where the payout of boosters is even better on a plat basis if we remove booster entry fee from the equation)...
That's a rather big "if" there, to the point of making the statement foolish and useless. You have to account for all the inputs and outputs. If your point is that Limited is a great way to get singles entering the economy, then you're absolutely right! That's the function of Limited. Meanwhile, the function of Constructed is to generate packs for Limited (which is a net consumer, not producer). The two feed each other nicely.

ossuary
07-16-2014, 11:26 AM
I look forward to the price of boosters dropping on the AH, since they're now SO CHEAP to "buy" from Constructed. Maybe those mythical $1.00 boosters will finally materialize? ;)

nicosharp
07-16-2014, 11:35 AM
The math is suppose to be messed up. That is the whole point. 2400/15 is simple math. Trying to calculate the same for draft and other tournaments is based on a number of unknown factors (draft tickets/VIP packs/AH packs/gifted packs/won packs) combined with the plat entry fee, and the value of the cards you keep.

You can use any equation you want. It ultimately will boil down to 3 things:
#1) Are you gaming the system, and quitting within 20 mins to "purchase" packs with friends?
#2) Are you investing 2+ hours into a competitive mode to hopefully win a higher perceived value than what you put in?
#3) How much did you have to spend on, and how much time did you spend crafting the competitive constructed deck, to have a chance at winning packs worth more than your investment?

#1 is going to get people banned.
#2 and #3 should be factored into the 'opportunity costs' of acquiring the packs for less.


Oh, and lets add the most important #4) Are people actually playing the mode?
If not, why, and what has to be done to get them to play? hint above - lower the opportunity costs, or increase the incentives.

Turtlewing
07-16-2014, 11:56 AM
I think the answer to the title is actually: They can't lower the store price because the whole point of improving the constructed prize support was to get more people queueing for constructed (so people queuing for the cheap packs is the change working as intended). If they lowered the pack price in the store to match the new constructed prize support they'd undo that change.

Honestly I'd be that the real reason constructed isn't real big is that right now most of the people who would be entering competitive constructed queues have weekly free drafts (if you're willing to sink enough cash for a competitive deck you probably were willing to spring for at least 1 $250+ tier during the KS) and the cost benefit of a free draft is so insanely good that there's no way another format can really compete with it.

Once the playerbase expands beyond the KS backers, and the year of draft's start expiring they might be able to bring the constructed prizes back to parity with the platinum entry fee.

Gorgol
07-16-2014, 12:00 PM
Once the playerbase expands beyond the KS backers, and the year of draft's start expiring they might be able to bring the constructed prizes back to parity with the platinum entry fee.
Considering the year codes haven't expired yet, and they said they'd give us warning beforehand, then im sure a lot of the year codes haven't even been claimed yet. I know mine hasn't. I have most of set 1, why waste my year draft code on set 1 when I don't need to?

Gwaer
07-16-2014, 12:25 PM
These payouts aren't likely to stay the same indefinitely anyway, they'll change them on occasion to drive players where they want them.

Yoss
07-16-2014, 01:07 PM
Honestly I'd be that the real reason constructed isn't real big is that right now most of the people who would be entering competitive constructed queues have weekly free drafts (if you're willing to sink enough cash for a competitive deck you probably were willing to spring for at least 1 $250+ tier during the KS) and the cost benefit of a free draft is so insanely good that there's no way another format can really compete with it.
This sounds reasonable for people in general, but is not me (2x free draft per week). I will avoid all modes (other than draft) that require more than an hour block of time at a single time. In other words, I'm waiting for Asynchronous Constructed and Asynchronous Sealed. Until then, it's just Draft, PG, and AH for me.

Reminder what I mean by Asynch:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=32002

Unhurtable
07-16-2014, 01:47 PM
That is some messed up math.

Constructed is obvious, and you got that part right. 2400p input, 15 pack output, 2400p/15 is 160p per pack. Simple.

Here's how draft works, starting with the obvious. Input is 24 (closed) packs and 800p. Output is 24 open packs and 12 closed packs. Net input is 12 packs and 800p. Net output is 24 open packs. There is a net LOSS of packs on the market, not a gain. Since the group makes a net loss of packs in draft it is nonsensical to calculate a cost to "buy" boosters through drafting, unless you're merely talking about buying pack contents, which is not the same thing (but I'll calculate that next).

A net loss of packs that would've been opened anyway. If you can "game the system" by playing constructed 8mans and generating boosters at 160p a piece, how is that not possible with draft if a group of people (or one person with many accounts) already wants to open those packs anyway? It cannot be done infinitely, but that is not my point.

I guess sealed is a better example since there is no drafting of cards involved that skew the results of the winner (since we are talking about pack contents as well).


The new truth (in addition to the above, and the topic of the OP) is that it is now (unlike before) always more money efficient for the community as a whole to buy packs only through Constructed (at 160p). Anyone who is not getting packs through Constructed should be buying on the AH rather than from Hex (VIP is the exception, obviously).


This would be the case without this change as well, because saying that boosters would not go below retail value without this change is a brave opinion to have. Even if it was 300p for 8/4 payout, anyone who is not getting packs through constructed should still be buying on the AH rather than from Hex.

It is still very money efficient for the community as a whole to buy packs through 128-mans, even before the change occured. Since you like input/output so much let me explain it in those terms.
Lowest possible input : 16 * 500 plat = 8000 plat
Wins distribution:
1 x 4-0 @ 15 packs
4 x 3-1 @ 7 packs
6 x 2-2 @ 0 packs
4 x 1-3 @ 0 packs
1 x 0-4 @ 0 packs
Lowest possible output : ((4 * 7) + 15) boosters = 28 + 15 = 43 boosters
Final plat per booster ratio = 1:186 plat, which is right now even higher at a total of 52 boosters for a plat to booster ratio of 1:153 plat.

Does this mean the amount of boosters payed out by 128 man should also be lowered as its better for the community to go together in order to generate boosters cheaply?



That's a rather big "if" there, to the point of making the statement foolish and useless. You have to account for all the inputs and outputs. If your point is that Limited is a great way to get singles entering the economy, then you're absolutely right! That's the function of Limited. Meanwhile, the function of Constructed is to generate packs for Limited (which is a net consumer, not producer). The two feed each other nicely.

Fine, lets account for all the inputs and outputs.

Process : 1 Round of Competitive Booster Draft
Input : 100 plat and 3 closed booster packs * 8 people = 800 plat and 24 closed booster packs
Output : 12 closed booster packs and 24 open booster packs

compared to

Process : 8 People opening 3 boosters each and playing 1 round of constructed instead
Input : 24 closed booster packs and 2400 plat
Output : 15 closed booster packs and 24 open booster packs

One option has generated more value compared to other process, even though sealed is a much better example if we are talking argumentation grounds. Remember, either the boosters are opened (in which case the price of boosters goes up due to lowered supply) or the boosters remain unopened (in which case the price of boosters goes down due to lowered potential value and potentially increased supply).

If the function of constructed is to generate boosters for limited then it makes no sense to have the old 12 boosters for 2400 plat because then its not generating boosters better than retail, especially not if you factor in time as a resource of the system. Also I'm pretty sure that the function of constructed is to provide players with a competitive experience that involves the players own library of cards. This would fit how constructed can feed the supply of the limited players as the boosters are a side effect of the experience having taken place.


These payouts aren't likely to stay the same indefinitely anyway, they'll change them on occasion to drive players where they want them.

This could be the case but as everything in this game is apparently made out of clean diamonds I'm not going to hold onto this notion, although I would say its a reasonable one, even unreasonable to hold the opposite view as one change has already occurred.

Umaro
07-16-2014, 02:58 PM
Tournament prize packs at 160p a piece are only setting the standard "retail" price at 160p per pack if you value your time at literal zero.

Turtlewing
07-16-2014, 03:22 PM
Tournament prize packs at 160p a piece are only setting the standard "retail" price at 160p per pack if you value your time at literal zero.

Or if you value the experience of playing the tournament at or above the cost of your time (which you probably do if you're considering playing in a tournament).

Yoss
07-16-2014, 05:12 PM
Summary Up Front:
I'll shamelessly steal from Unhurtable, who said it well. "The function of constructed is to provide players with a competitive experience that involves the players own library of cards. This would fit how constructed can feed the supply of the limited players as the boosters are a side effect of the experience having taken place." Furthermore, that purpose is upheld in both the old prize system and the new one. There must therefore be other motives for the change. The motive has erroneously been stated as "bring it in line with Draft for value proposition to players". The remainder of the post discusses some details of why this motive is erroneous. A better motive would be "bring it in line with current AH booster pack prices", which are artificially low in Set 1 and this change will therefore lower both the cost and the value of future sets. This is perhaps not a bad thing as long as CZE is making enough money for dev time and players are satisfied with the value retention level of their goods. The game just got cheaper to play across the board!


A net loss of packs that would've been opened anyway.
Would they? Not if they were my packs. My packs pretty much open in Limited or get sold unopened on the AH. (When the market was going bonkers, I dabbled in just opening some packs to sell the contents, but quickly gave up on that idea.) More importantly, we're doing a rational-player analysis of the economy here, so you must assume "smart" players. Those players will not just rip packs (generally speaking).


If you can "game the system" by playing constructed 8mans and generating boosters at 160p a piece, how is that not possible with draft if a group of people (or one person with many accounts) already wants to open those packs anyway?

I guess sealed is a better example since there is no drafting of cards involved that skew the results of the winner (since we are talking about pack contents as well).
I'm not really sure your point here except maybe to go down the side topic of "abuse" a bit. To humor that end, yes, it's perfectly possible to "game the system", and IMO not actually a problem in either case (Constructed or Limited). Game systems should be designed with abuse in mind such that they are not abusable. The prices and prizes should be designed such that the designer assumes up front that he is creating an infinite supply at that price (because, well, he is). If that price is OK and profitable, then that's that. There should not be arbitrary rules saying that you can't drop out of tournaments or split your prizes at your own risk. That's just B.S. All of this is off topic to the main point of the thread though.


This would be the case without this change as well, because saying that boosters would not go below retail value without this change is a brave opinion to have. Even if it was 300p for 8/4 payout, anyone who is not getting packs through constructed should still be buying on the AH rather than from Hex.
I never said boosters would sell on the AH at retail; it is quite obvious that players will sell for less than the OEM. In the old case, you paid 200p/pack at the Store, or 200p/pack "at the door" for Limited, or 200p/pack for Constructed, the same across the board (VIP and special events excepted). You are right though that Constructed would still have been slightly better for some players, because they get to have some entertainment in addition to buying boosters. Now though, the infinite on-demand Constructed queue will pay out at 160p/pack, while the others all remain at 200p/pack. So now it's not just that they get to have some fun for "free" as part of buying boosters, it's that they actually pay less money. (Or you can look at it in the light of the quote at the top of this post and say that you get more stuff to sell as a byproduct of your entertainment and your "production cost" of those goods are lowered so you can lower your market price.) So I stick by the previous assertion, with added caveat for special events (like Daily):
It is now (unlike before) always more money efficient for the community as a whole to buy packs only through Constructed (at 160p). Anyone who is not getting packs through Constructed should be buying on the AH rather than from Hex (VIP and special events excepted).


It is still very money efficient for the community as a whole to buy packs through 128-mans, even before the change occured. Since you like input/output so much let me explain it in those terms.

*snip*
Setting aside that your payout numbers are wrong, which you can easily fix (it's 20/8), you're absolutely right! However, you need to caveat that the 128's are "special events" not on demand, and so cannot be relied upon as a backstop for supply. They'll have some effect for sure, just like VIP will, but they're not an infinite source, perhaps even negligible once we have orders of magnitude more players in the game.


Fine, lets account for all the inputs and outputs.

Process : 1 Round of Competitive Booster Draft
Input : 100 plat and 3 closed booster packs * 8 people = 800 plat and 24 closed booster packs
Output : 12 closed booster packs and 24 open booster packs

compared to

Process : 8 People opening 3 boosters each and playing 1 round of constructed instead
Input : 24 closed booster packs and 2400 plat
Output : 15 closed booster packs and 24 open booster packs

One option has generated more value compared to other process, even though sealed is a much better example if we are talking argumentation grounds. Remember, either the boosters are opened (in which case the price of boosters goes up due to lowered supply) or the boosters remain unopened (in which case the price of boosters goes down due to lowered potential value and potentially increased supply).
Your 2nd process is a straw man. If you're arguing rational-player economics (as we are, dubious though that may be), you have to assume that all players are playing smart and that means: (1) they will always open packs where value is highest, (2) they will always buy packs where they are cheapest, and (3) they will always buy items (cards, chests, whatever) where they are cheapest. The cheapest way to buy packs from the OEM is now Constructed at 160p/pack, so that's where they'll all come from (the only unlimited faucet that will actually be used). Someone playing Limited doesn't care about getting packs from any particular source, so he'll use the AH, whose price will be lower than whatever the lowest OEM source is. Similarly, someone playing Constructed doesn't care whether his cards come from ripping packs or from the AH, so he'll buy where it's cheaper, which is the AH (from the Limited players).

(And you can substitute in Sealed if you want. Now that they doubled up the fees and prizes it is comparable to Draft, though the math is slightly different. Just say Limited and you cover both.)


If the function of constructed is to generate boosters for limited then it makes no sense to have the old 12 boosters for 2400 plat because then its not generating boosters better than retail, especially not if you factor in time as a resource of the system. Also I'm pretty sure that the function of constructed is to provide players with a competitive experience that involves the players own library of cards. This would fit how constructed can feed the supply of the limited players as the boosters are a side effect of the experience having taken place.
I like the bolded portion, and it is still true in the old pricing.

Skirovik
07-16-2014, 05:18 PM
Yoss, what is OEM?

You said it a bunch of times but never explained what the acronym stands for. I would prefer you to have a first use "OEM (Open Ended Machine)" or w/e it is before you continue to use just "OEM" later in your post(s).

This goes for anyone using acronyms btw. Except for the use of CZE, which should really be changed to Hex Ent, but it's quicker to type CZE. :p

Yoss
07-16-2014, 05:19 PM
Original Equipment Manufacturer

It's become a generic term for "original source of a product". I suppose CZE would have been better.

Gwaer
07-16-2014, 05:30 PM
A) Not all players are rational or "smart" by your definition, I know several that have opened hundreds of packs... One may have even opened thousands. Heck, streamers opened tons early on, and many still do for fun on their streams. Packs get opened outside of limited.

b) your purchase of packs through constructed either require that you collude with someone or yourself, because not all players are capable of finishing high enough for the packs to come out in their favor. If you consistently finish last in constructed, you're not getting packs for cheaper than retail.

c) Pack prices are low for set one, draft is a particularly good deal, these prices bring set 1 constructed in line and make it more tempting, they still aren't firing often even now. Promoting constructed players now is the best move, so that in the future they don't have to have these kinds of payouts, IE during sets 2 and 3, if no one will play constructed, then the prizes are going to have to get even better until there is enough people who realize that they really like and enjoy constructed enough to keep it going. Currently those of us who really enjoy constructed are not being properly served, which is mostly a community problem.

mach
07-16-2014, 05:45 PM
c) Pack prices are low for set one, draft is a particularly good deal, these prices bring set 1 constructed in line and make it more tempting, they still aren't firing often even now. Promoting constructed players now is the best move, so that in the future they don't have to have these kinds of payouts, IE during sets 2 and 3, if no one will play constructed, then the prizes are going to have to get even better until there is enough people who realize that they really like and enjoy constructed enough to keep it going. Currently those of us who really enjoy constructed are not being properly served, which is mostly a community problem.

If this is a temporary measure because of Set 1, why not also lower the store price for Set 1 packs?

I don't see it as a good solution anyway. If it works and people start playing the constructed 8-mans all those extra prize packs will cause pack prices to drop further and we'll be back to square one.

I think a better solution is to make part of the Constructed prizes plat instead of packs. So the original 12 pack prize pool becomes 6 packs + 1200 plat.

Gwaer
07-16-2014, 06:02 PM
Because that doesn't drive people to constructed... Which is the whole point?

And I do not think on demand tournaments should ever pay out plat.

mach
07-16-2014, 06:08 PM
Because that doesn't drive people to constructed... Which is the whole point?


The new prize structure doesn't drive people toward Constructed and I don't think it's intended to. The intent is just to stop the low prize from driving people away from Constructed. I think that CZE is (rightly, IMO) not trying to drive people to any specific tournament type. People should play what they want.



And I do not think on demand tournaments should ever pay out plat.

Why not? Do you have another way to avoid devaluation? Plat prizes seem like the best way to ensure cards/packs maintain their value.

Yoss
07-16-2014, 09:00 PM
A) Not all players are rational or "smart" by your definition, I know several that have opened hundreds of packs... One may have even opened thousands. Heck, streamers opened tons early on, and many still do for fun on their streams. Packs get opened outside of limited.
Obviously not all market players will be rational, or rather, some small number will have alternate motives for bucking the common wisdom (like fun gimmicks for streaming).


b) your purchase of packs through constructed either require that you collude with someone or yourself, because not all players are capable of finishing high enough for the packs to come out in their favor. If you consistently finish last in constructed, you're not getting packs for cheaper than retail.
I worded my statement very carefully to be plural, not indicative of a singular individual who might, as you say, not be good enough to get the average EV. However, I worded it as plural because as a collective, we all get cheaper packs if we get them from people playing Constructed and selling. The low EV players are exactly balanced by the high EV ones so that they average out to the price of 160p/pack. As an individual thinking whether to buy through Constructed or AH, that individual should consider his EV rather than the average EV of the collective.


c) Pack prices are low for set one, draft is a particularly good deal, these prices bring set 1 constructed in line and make it more tempting, they still aren't firing often even now. Promoting constructed players now is the best move, so that in the future they don't have to have these kinds of payouts, IE during sets 2 and 3, if no one will play constructed, then the prizes are going to have to get even better until there is enough people who realize that they really like and enjoy constructed enough to keep it going. Currently those of us who really enjoy constructed are not being properly served, which is mostly a community problem.
To the bolded part, I just saw the Competitive Constructed Queue at 7/8 as I joined my draft, so they ARE firing now, and will more as word gets around perhaps. As for the rest, I agree. It is more healthy if both Constructed and Limited are both firing regularly. Dropping pack prices might end up being a great move for the game. Maybe lower pack pricing (leading to lower singles pricing) is just a good thing all around.

Gwaer
07-16-2014, 09:16 PM
a) You assume it is a small number that open packs out of limited, My questioning on the matter has turned out that virtually everyone has opened packs, and at that more than 1. This "common wisdom" of yours is not as common as you let on. Especially for KS backers.

b) When we see a pack price decrease then we can talk. I very much doubt we will see one. And,

C) constructed tournaments were firing occasionally before this buff, that's why I said they still aren't firing often. That 7/8 queue was there for a very long time, It was at 7/8 longer than I've ever sat in a draft queue starting at 0.

Unhurtable
07-17-2014, 03:08 AM
Setting aside that your payout numbers are wrong, which you can easily fix (it's 20/8), you're absolutely right! However, you need to caveat that the 128's are "special events" not on demand, and so cannot be relied upon as a backstop for supply. They'll have some effect for sure, just like VIP will, but they're not an infinite source, perhaps even negligible once we have orders of magnitude more players in the game.

Well the example was with the old numbers since


It is still very money efficient for the community as a whole to buy packs through 128-mans, even before the change occured.

but I'll agree thats its a different realm of analysis since its a "special event" although I personally wouldn't be too lenient since they might not be that infrequent.



Your 2nd process is a straw man. If you're arguing rational-player economics (as we are, dubious though that may be), you have to assume that all players are playing smart and that means: (1) they will always open packs where value is highest, (2) they will always buy packs where they are cheapest, and (3) they will always buy items (cards, chests, whatever) where they are cheapest. The cheapest way to buy packs from the OEM is now Constructed at 160p/pack, so that's where they'll all come from (the only unlimited faucet that will actually be used). Someone playing Limited doesn't care about getting packs from any particular source, so he'll use the AH, whose price will be lower than whatever the lowest OEM source is. Similarly, someone playing Constructed doesn't care whether his cards come from ripping packs or from the AH, so he'll buy where it's cheaper, which is the AH (from the Limited players).


How is it a strawman? I didn't alter the message you were trying to get across by assuming you think in a certain way. I meerly demonstrated how I view the situation. In both those cases, 24 packs are opened and 8 players participate in a tournament.



I like the bolded portion, and it is still true in the old pricing.
Thing is if you look at the other threads about the topic I've defended the previous reward structure for this very reason. Its just that I don't really see this as a big problem.

Shivdaddy
07-17-2014, 06:46 AM
People really will really complain about anything. :(

If you think this is a valid way of "buying" packs why don't you and your friends (or extra accounts) get working on your scheme? See how long your accounts stay active.

Your not kidding Colin.

Turtlewing
07-17-2014, 09:30 AM
If this is a temporary measure because of Set 1, why not also lower the store price for Set 1 packs?

I don't see it as a good solution anyway. If it works and people start playing the constructed 8-mans all those extra prize packs will cause pack prices to drop further and we'll be back to square one.

I think a better solution is to make part of the Constructed prizes plat instead of packs. So the original 12 pack prize pool becomes 6 packs + 1200 plat.

Um... no.

The reason to improve constructed queue prize support above "store price" is to make people prefer entering constructed queues over buying packs from the store. It makes the average EV for the tournament positive and thus entering the tournament is more attractive (compared with buying packs and then playing in the proving grounds).

If the entry fee from a constructed queue is equal to the average payout from the tournament than if you goal is to get packs, buying them from the store is strictly superior (requires no time investment and no risk). The only way entering a tournament makes sense then is if you can do better than average (which statistically speaking is not terribly likely).

Now having a portion of the tournament reward being in platinum is not necessarily a terrible idea, but it does have it's own issues (inflation). It's a safer move to add packs, as there's less precision needed to avoid undesirable effects to the economy.

nicosharp
07-17-2014, 10:01 AM
It is important to emphasize this:
People can't install Hex, pick a starter deck, buy 300+ plat, and enter a constructed queue expecting to win.
The skin in the game in acquiring cards, learning the meta game, constructing a deck, fine-tuning the reserves, are the only things that give you an edge.
The card chasing for constructed queues is what will power a lot of interest in the AH.

mach
07-17-2014, 10:12 AM
Um... no.

The reason to improve constructed queue prize support above "store price" is to make people prefer entering constructed queues over buying packs from the store. It makes the average EV for the tournament positive and thus entering the tournament is more attractive (compared with buying packs and then playing in the proving grounds).

If the entry fee from a constructed queue is equal to the average payout from the tournament than if you goal is to get packs, buying them from the store is strictly superior (requires no time investment and no risk). The only way entering a tournament makes sense then is if you can do better than average (which statistically speaking is not terribly likely).


No, then the only way entering the tournament makes sense is if you enjoy playing competitive Constructed. That should be why people play tournaments, not just to make money.

Entering the tournament should not be a cheaper way to buy packs. Remember the discussion about quantity discounts on plat? They said they weren't going to do that because they did not want to charge more to those who can't afford to buy in bulk. The same applies here: they should not be charging more to those who can't afford a competitive Constructed deck.



Now having a portion of the tournament reward being in platinum is not necessarily a terrible idea, but it does have it's own issues (inflation). It's a safer move to add packs, as there's less precision needed to avoid undesirable effects to the economy.

I don't see how it could cause inflation, as each tournament still reduces the amount of plat in the economy.

Gwaer
07-17-2014, 11:22 AM
They actually said they weren't doing bulk discounts because it would devalue plat to less than 1USD.

Mokog
07-17-2014, 11:32 AM
I think the distinction between buy and earn should be made here. Buying packs takes existing wealth and exchanges it for a good or service. Earning is the act of creating wealth through a good or service. In tournaments you Earn your rewards and you are paid by your fellow participants for providing them a challenge. The resulting value of the pack is only a method of showing efficiency.

The feared scenario stipulates that each player is taking their platinum and buying packs with minimal effort required thus having a cheaper method of purchase. There is a missing discounted component, Risk. if everyone except the top four drop the risk is that the other 4 players who have no in hand prizes may be shirked their promised packs. They assume the risk by trusting the other 4 players. So they have some skin in the game. Then the next round fires off and though there is less risk some additional is assumed and then in the final round the person who didn't drop has the responsibility to disseminate the "excess" packs. This process may take less time than playing out the tournament but each participant is putting something on the table.

If each account is owned by a single individual the gain from the use of the system is not yet realizable in any foreseeable future. Only when platinum can be readily exchanged for currency can the slim hope of a profit be gained. The single individual still risks violating ToS as well as the use of their time for a substandard wage.

The substandard wage for 1 and the risk cost for the group of 8 are significant deterrents to most individuals. That is why no one cares beyond raising their post count :-)

Yoss
07-17-2014, 12:45 PM
That is why no one cares beyond raising their post count :-)

Gotta do something to get to 5,000. ;)