PDA

View Full Version : Full arena clear - gold win seems excessive



CrystalShard
02-07-2015, 01:57 AM
Hey Hexers,

I just cleared Arena with one loss (which Mr. Hogarth kindly cancelled, so I had lost one game but was at 0/3 strikes). In the end, I received a lot of fine loot and ... 113.900 gold. Seems a bit excessive (I heard something about 16k before), so I thought I'd report it here. Maybe it's for testing purposes, but I'd rather let you know.

Fun games :-)

ProfTroy
02-07-2015, 10:11 AM
If you got 113,000 gold - you beat Uruunaaz the dragon in your arena run.

Stok3d
02-07-2015, 10:19 AM
Honestly, I was expecting a full clear to give maybe 3-5k Gold for 6hours work. The true value in arena should be the equipment and not the gold. If gold is being given out at such levels, PvP ppl will become self-sufficient and never need to purchase gold to roll their chests. If this were to happen, the entire F2P model is in jeopardy. It really is in the best interest of the F2P model to minimize gold loot drops as much as possible.


Luckily this is simply a test server and the values are likely just arbitrary. Those type of tweaks are likely to come right before official release. IMO, it's much wiser to give us ample gold during the test server so we may have gold to roll all the chests after spending the thousands of dollars in plat being handed out.

TLDR: I wouldn't worry about it. These amounts handed out in the test server mean nothing and need to be excessively high for fun/testing.

Gwaer
02-07-2015, 10:28 AM
Yea, if you got 100k+ You got lucky and encountered Urunaaz who seems pretty rare. But they also said that gold is more or less placeholder, these aren't the final amounts we'll be getting.

Mr.Funsocks
02-07-2015, 02:26 PM
100 000 gold in 6 hours doesn't seem that excessive as a rare-reward... Chests won't be the only gold sinks eventually. What's the usual gold win for a full arena victory?

CrystalShard
02-07-2015, 02:32 PM
Just to confirm: yes, Uruunaz was the second-to-last guy in tier 4. Wow, so I got super lucky. Thanks for the heads-up :-)

Salverus
02-07-2015, 02:37 PM
its only a test server, so it doesnt matter much.

Mr.Funsocks
02-07-2015, 02:40 PM
its only a test server, so it doesnt matter much.

Yes but the point of the test server is to determine if it will be good on the live server...

wolzarg
02-07-2015, 02:43 PM
Again lotto bursts of gold are fine regardless this was one such occasion with a extra hard rare boss with bonus gold. 16k seems perfectly fine for a clear if not even on the low side.

Axle
02-07-2015, 02:50 PM
What's the Uruunaz encounter like? Do tell.

CrystalShard
02-07-2015, 03:10 PM
TBH, I muddled through with my aggro deck, burning creatures left and right and swinging right through his lifegain stuff. He played Starving Liches (two or three of them), a Corrupt Harvester, a Life Siphon and maybe Paladin of the Necropolis? Not sure about the last one.

Uruunaz had a lot of health (30 IIRC) and kept piling it up with his lifegain shenanigans. Sorry that I don't remember his Champion power, it had to do something with lifedrain as well.

Overall, the hardest fight in Tier 4, harder than the boss.

bootlace
02-07-2015, 03:22 PM
100 000 gold in 6 hours doesn't seem that excessive as a rare-reward... Chests won't be the only gold sinks eventually. What's the usual gold win for a full arena victory?

6 hours? I finished in 1.5

CrystalShard
02-07-2015, 03:41 PM
BTW bootlace, I loved your blog entry about "TCG + Equipment = ???" on your site, that was a damn good read :-)

israel.kendall
02-07-2015, 03:49 PM
I'm still not going to farm gold. That statement about PvP players just getting the gold themselves applies to some, but many of us would rather just sell some cards for gold than spend 6 hours farming it. Gold will still have value in my opinion.

bootlace
02-07-2015, 04:08 PM
BTW bootlace, I loved your blog entry about "TCG + Equipment = ???" on your site, that was a damn good read :-)

Thanks CrystalShard, that's awesome to hear.

YourOpponent
02-07-2015, 09:05 PM
Yeah I can consistently get 19-1 in 2 hours...if being careful probably a full clear with 2.5 hours Max, but I didn't really fine tune my deck too much due to server lag and work. Still though 8K/hour isn't that bad and goes back to what they said around Kickstarter times that PvE would have gold being able to be farmed at a rate comparable too what you could get when PvP had gold earnable...based on averages I'd say that's about right if not slightly more than normal with the Urunaaz fight being an excellent wondering monster to help simulate the gold amount from scheduled tournaments.

purpenflurb
02-08-2015, 12:51 AM
Honestly, I was expecting a full clear to give maybe 3-5k Gold for 6hours work. The true value in arena should be the equipment and not the gold. If gold is being given out at such levels, PvP ppl will become self-sufficient and never need to purchase gold to roll their chests. If this were to happen, the entire F2P model is in jeopardy. It really is in the best interest of the F2P model to minimize gold loot drops as much as possible.


Luckily this is simply a test server and the values are likely just arbitrary. Those type of tweaks are likely to come right before official release. IMO, it's much wiser to give us ample gold during the test server so we may have gold to roll all the chests after spending the thousands of dollars in plat being handed out.

TLDR: I wouldn't worry about it. These amounts handed out in the test server mean nothing and need to be excessively high for fun/testing.

I have to say... that sounds terrible. I thought these gold drops were at a fairly reasonable level, once I found out that you can rarely get a lot. My hope for PvE was that I would be able to work to win enough gold to roll my legendary chests. If it takes 30 hours of work to roll a single legendary chest, and even 8-9 to roll a single rare? If there is anything exclusive to primals, it would be pushed far out of reach for people who don't spend a lot of money on the game.

There is plenty of room to add uses for gold to keep it in demand, I'm more worried about average equipment rewards losing value because there isn't any real reason to have more than 1 of each. I would also keep in mind that current clear times are likely far quicker than they will end up being, and getting full runs will be MUCH harder. I have had plenty of situations where I was positive that if my opponent was playing his hand semi-competently I would have been absolutely crushed instead of winning. I suspect that a full arena clear will be hard to pull off consistently once it is all together.

Gwaer
02-08-2015, 01:12 AM
I understand where stok3d is coming from. If every pvper can just run a dungeon and roll their chests easily it disincentivizes the trade between the people paying for Plat and people earning gold. liquidity between those two groups is the crux of the business model. People willing to grind pay their way by selling what those of us with less frugality want. It's a careful balance though. 3k definitely seems too low to me per run. It has to be worth if for the grinders. The chance of a windfall beating a rare boss with a huge payout helps.

Ultimately they need to pick a place on the slider that is slightly less gold than the average Pvp player would willingly farm and would rather just trade cards/Plat for instead. I'm sure they'll work it out. My advice is to start out paying less than you think you want to. It's always better to increase the payouts than decrease it.


The equation definitely changes if more gold sinks that Pvp players really are interested in show up.

Ertzi
02-08-2015, 01:35 AM
Just to chime in, I'm in the camp that even 16k is way too little for a full Arena run. I don't have time to grind the Arena for hours every day. I also don't have so many extra cards that I would be willing to sell them for gold just yet. I really hope they increase the gold amount from Arena. Just my two cents.

OR we get way more gold for playing the dungeons themselves. That works too.

Myrgard
02-08-2015, 03:39 AM
Don't you guys forget the A.I. at the moment is very weak to say the least, and that if gold is taken out of PvP and the only gold amount is from the arena with 16k i think the value is actually going to be higher that it is right now because many PvP players are not into PvE that much but will still want to roll their chests, so F2P players will get more out of their time(and i think it will be a really F2P experience).

I think CZE might just hit the sweetspot if gold steps out of tournies and go only for arena and PvE dungeons,

Keep with the great work and sorry for my english ;)

Yoss
02-08-2015, 09:08 PM
Lower gold payouts would mean the gold is worth more. Anyone trying to help out the F2P crowd should be voting for LOWER gold payouts. The PvP gold sink (Wheels) can be considered a fixed flow of demand for the purposes of this discussion. When less gold is coming in, that gold is going to satisfy a smaller percentage of the demand. The worst case scenario would be if the gold flowing in outpaces the Wheels demand sink. In that case, you end up with a bunch of worthless gold floating around that no one wants.

So again, less is more when it comes to gold payouts.

Parzival
02-08-2015, 10:33 PM
I agree with Yoss, PvE gold farming should be grindy to give gold value, for those who don't have the time but the money they can sell cards for gold to roll chests.

I wonder if DC rolls twice on Uruunaaz :cool:

Raith
02-09-2015, 11:47 AM
If gold is too grindy, spinning chests above uncommon will just not be a viable option. That doesn't seem like fun. Given the benefits of spinning a rare plus chest are only marginally better (upgrade for better chest loot) than a common chest, they will just get opened without spinning.

The wheel of fate will also not be the only gold sink like it is now.

Gwaer
02-09-2015, 12:08 PM
Depends on the rarity of primal chests, and their value. If it is good enough then it will make sense to roll the rare+ just for the primal chance, even if gold is extremely grindy. There are quite a few moving parts in the gold payouts, that's for certain.

israel.kendall
02-09-2015, 12:14 PM
They talk like the rarity of the contents in the chest will be high incentive for rolling them if even for upgrades.

Lukezors
02-09-2015, 12:21 PM
I feel 16k for a full clear will definitely be on the low side once the AI is improved and the wins don't come so easily. I don't think making gold payouts so low that rolling your chests will be frustrating and grindy is a good idea.

I don't think we should encourage a model that wants players to grind small amounts of gold so that they can squeeze the most free stuff out of the game without paying a dime. I prefer a model of making the game fun with reasonable gold payouts, and it can be more/different fun if you put money in. I don't think paying players should have to rely on f2p players for anything. I don't feel like paying players should need to support f2p either, they should be able to get decent cards as rewards.

israel.kendall
02-09-2015, 12:31 PM
No one has to rely on f2p players for anything. You can always go get the gold yourself if you are so inclined.

Yoss
02-09-2015, 01:16 PM
If gold is too grindy, spinning chests above uncommon will just not be a viable option. That doesn't seem like fun. Given the benefits of spinning a rare plus chest are only marginally better (upgrade for better chest loot) than a common chest, they will just get opened without spinning.

The wheel of fate will also not be the only gold sink like it is now.

You need to define what you mean by "viable", because from where I sit, I don't see how that word applies to what your'e saying.

If a player (like yourself perhaps) does not think a spin is worth the cost, that player should (and most likely will) sell/trade the unspun chest to another player who DOES think a spin is worth the cost, in proper exchange for whatever you both consider reasonable compensation (perhaps a spun chest of same rarity, plus some gold).

Raith
02-09-2015, 04:09 PM
You need to define what you mean by "viable", because from where I sit, I don't see how that word applies to what your'e saying.

It's a wide spectrum. If the rate of gold gained is incredibly low at 1,000 per hour then the legendary chests are unlikely to be spun versus the extreme of let's 30,000 gold per hour and then it's an easy choice to spin. Somewhere in that range is a sweet spot for that choice. I have no idea exactly what that number should be. Spinning a legendary chest for 30k gold right now gives the same chance at sleeves, AA, cards etc. as a common chest plus the better upgrade reward to primal. However, if you get all the sleeves, AA cards, etc. from common and uncommon chests you are only rolling legendary ones for the upgrade chance. So the gold spent to spin times the chance to upgrade should be roughly equivalent in value difference between a legendary and primal chest. Gwaer nailed it when he said it depends what's in the chests.

Of course, you could always trade away the spin risk for a fixed cost. However, I like to spin and would rather not have to "grind" 30 hours to spin a legendary chest or buy the equivalent of 30 hours of gold from someone else to do it. Anyways, there are too many unknowns to really know how it will work out in practice.

Gwaer
02-09-2015, 06:37 PM
more likely, no matter the rate of gold earning, some people will still buy unspun chests, and pay plat to a large swath of people earning gold in order to spin them, the higher the cost of that gold conversion the less people would be doing it, but I guarantee there are at least 5 people who will spin chests until they have everything no matter how much plat they have to give to people for their gold.

Yoss
02-09-2015, 07:03 PM
I guarantee there are at least 5 people who will spin chests until they have everything no matter how much plat they have to give to people for their gold.

I back that guarantee, and it's why I hope the cumulative gold faucets are strictly less than the cumulative gold sinks. I want the "free" currency to actually mean something.

nicosharp
02-09-2015, 07:32 PM
I'm fine with whatever the reward is. Honestly, time=money will balance out to what ever people are willing to pay for it.

Games like League of legends have fixed rates, as you can see what IP is worth based on how much RP it takes to buy something.
Those games set those bars.
Here the playerbase gets to set the bar.
Ultimately, the average f2p player should not be able to convert their gold into more than 20 cents per hour. The last time I did the math for League of Legends, you only make about 2 - 10 cents per hour - depending on perks/frequency luck/etc.

Chark
02-09-2015, 11:17 PM
It's a wide spectrum. If the rate of gold gained is incredibly low at 1,000 per hour then the legendary chests are unlikely to be spun versus the extreme of let's 30,000 gold per hour and then it's an easy choice to spin. Somewhere in that range is a sweet spot for that choice. I have no idea exactly what that number should be.

Here in lies the problem. There's also the additional variable of the rate of gold gained per hour is different for different types of players. It's likely that an experienced player with a good deck will go twice or thrice as fast as a new player through arena (at least that was the case in my limited tests). So balancing this thing is not easy. In the end I will likely err on the side of caution and give less gold per hour to account for variable rates of clearance and to keep the value of gold up.


I back that guarantee, and it's why I hope the cumulative gold faucets are strictly less than the cumulative gold sinks. I want the "free" currency to actually mean something.

It doesn't quite work that way. If the faucets are less than sinks, then it becomes more lucrative for people to spend time on getting more gold (even if it's just to sell to those who demand it and are willing to pay plat). Those actions increase the faucet rates past the sinks rates. I think there are way more people who are interested in supplying gold and don't value their time, compared to the people who demand gold and are willing to pay plat for it.

Don't get me wrong, I want gold to have value, but it may be a losing battle, since time is fairly cheap for a large category of players and sinks can't really be compulsory.



Games like League of legends have fixed rates, as you can see what IP is worth based on how much RP it takes to buy something...The last time I did the math for League of Legends, you only make about 2 - 10 cents per hour - depending on perks/frequency luck/etc.

LoL (and HS) is a bit easier to balance these rates, because in either game you can't trade the currency. In our game you can trade it for other commodities. Imagine what would happen if you amassed all of the IP you would ever want in LoL. Excess IP would just be meaningless as you accumulate it. For us, excess gold on your account is never meaningless, since you can convert it into platinum.

nicosharp
02-10-2015, 01:22 AM
LoL (and HS) is a bit easier to balance these rates, because in either game you can't trade the currency. In our game you can trade it for other commodities. Imagine what would happen if you amassed all of the IP you would ever want in LoL. Excess IP would just be meaningless as you accumulate it. For us, excess gold on your account is never meaningless, since you can convert it into platinum.
With that said, you probably don't want to give the f2p community anyway to make more than 2cents per hour based on perceived conversion rates on gold drops alone. Its a tough job, as all the loot is a factor, not just the gold, even including all gold sinks and the % chance of rewards for them that sell for plat.

If gold is say, 250 to 1plat (based on these calculations), the average f2p player should not be able to earn more than 500 gold on average per hour.

I may agree that this might be a losing battle. The true value is going to be what is prompting individuals to purchase plat for them. Will items that used to sell for 50,000 gold, eventually only be sold for 200,000 gold? Is that inflation, with no easier way to earn gold, the breaking point to get people to then purchase plat to buy said items instead? What I am trying to say is, no matter how many sinks you put in the game, the game will experience some form of inflation until there is some balance, and players determine a true plat to gold conversion rate.

At the end of the day, someone has to buy the plat, and someone has to buy the PvP cards. The value is what they make of their money spent. F2P prosperity will ultimately be governed by those spending money.

Edit - I just want to add that loot tables should be very rare for legendary drops. / primal drops.
If there is only a 2% chance to get a legendary drop and 0.2% chance to get a primal drop on a perfect 20/20 run on the final boss, that will create more room for value than a consistently high gold drop rate in the dungeons, and make both replayability and farming the content more about the drops and less about the gold to plat conversion rate and gold sinks.

negativeZer0
02-10-2015, 07:35 AM
If gold is say, 250 to 1plat (based on these calculations), the average f2p player should not be able to earn more than 500 gold on average per hour.

So 60 hours to spin a legendary chest ONE time? 17 hours to spin a rare chest ONE TIME.

Even at 120,000 in a complete run at 4 hours (I'm guessing this would be around pique efficiency)
That's an 30,000/ hour or the ability to spin a single legendary chest once.
Don't forget that every spin is not a guaranteed win, you may get absolutely nothing for that spin and have to spin a second or even third time. However even with the necessity of spinning chests more than once 1/hour for a legendary spin is too efficient.

Based on the above I think somewhere around 10k-15k gold / hour should be the pique efficiency (finely tuned deck running through the given challenge in the best time possible) and balance backwards from there. This should be pure gold won and NOT count other rewards. Also keep in mind this is the top tier content, the hardest dungeon or arena with the most efficient deck to beat the challenges. only 1-3% of the player base will be hitting the max most will fall short of this.

Raith
02-10-2015, 08:26 AM
I guarantee there are at least 5 people who will spin chests until they have everything no matter how much plat they have to give to people for their gold.

I don't doubt it. But does that lead to a healthy and sustainable economy?


What I am trying to say is, no matter how many sinks you put in the game, the game will experience some form of inflation until there is some balance, and players determine a true plat to gold conversion rate.

It's seems very likely. Even if gold earned per hour of play is less than what is currently earned from tourneys, there will be far more people earning gold in PvE. Tournaments limit the gold flow due to blocks of time necessary and cost of entry. PvE will not have those restrictions and gold supply will increase.

Lukezors
02-10-2015, 09:28 AM
So 60 hours to spin a legendary chest ONE time? 17 hours to spin a rare chest ONE TIME.

Even at 120,000 in a complete run at 4 hours (I'm guessing this would be around pique efficiency)
That's an 30,000/ hour or the ability to spin a single legendary chest once.
Don't forget that every spin is not a guaranteed win, you may get absolutely nothing for that spin and have to spin a second or even third time. However even with the necessity of spinning chests more than once 1/hour for a legendary spin is too efficient.

Based on the above I think somewhere around 10k-15k gold / hour should be the pique efficiency (finely tuned deck running through the given challenge in the best time possible) and balance backwards from there. This should be pure gold won and NOT count other rewards. Also keep in mind this is the top tier content, the hardest dungeon or arena with the most efficient deck to beat the challenges. only 1-3% of the player base will be hitting the max most will fall short of this.

Agree with you 100%. I don't want fun sacrificed in the name of gold being valuable. I don't want to feel like I need to spend *more* real money(to get gold) just to spin my chests just because I don't have tons of free time. Earning the gold to spin common to rare chests should take a trivial amount of time imo.

Lawlschool
02-10-2015, 09:48 AM
Something y'all seem to be unintentionally forgetting is the necessity of a PvE gold-based economy. Using gold to spin chests isn't the sole purpose of gold, it's also there to facilitate the f2p PvE economy. Basically, we want gold to be scare enough for it to have value for those looking to convert it to plat / PvP cards, but not so scarce that it's immediately gobbled up by PvP players trying to spin chests, preventing any sort of gold-based PvE economy from emerging.

Though I suppose you could argue against the necessity of a gold-based PvE economy, and look at gold as just a way for f2p players to trade time for plat, with plat as the currency of choice on the AH for both PvP and PvE. This would likely require an easy way to convert Gold to Plat, however.

jonsnow2000
02-10-2015, 10:21 AM
Would it be a solution if HexEnt offered a way to spend a higher gold amount to get a guaranteed upgrade for chests? That way you could give the grinders something to work for and they have the guarantee that they reach their goal, instead of the bitter disappointment when they finally scrape 30k together and flush it down the toilet in another failed spin.

Gwaer
02-10-2015, 11:54 AM
The rate of gold can increase later, once we have more sinks. It might need to be quite low to begin with, it can be ratcheted up more easily than down.

nicosharp
02-10-2015, 01:52 PM
So 60 hours to spin a legendary chest ONE time? 17 hours to spin a rare chest ONE TIME.

Even at 120,000 in a complete run at 4 hours (I'm guessing this would be around pique efficiency)
That's an 30,000/ hour or the ability to spin a single legendary chest once.
Don't forget that every spin is not a guaranteed win, you may get absolutely nothing for that spin and have to spin a second or even third time. However even with the necessity of spinning chests more than once 1/hour for a legendary spin is too efficient.

Based on the above I think somewhere around 10k-15k gold / hour should be the pique efficiency (finely tuned deck running through the given challenge in the best time possible) and balance backwards from there. This should be pure gold won and NOT count other rewards. Also keep in mind this is the top tier content, the hardest dungeon or arena with the most efficient deck to beat the challenges. only 1-3% of the player base will be hitting the max most will fall short of this.
You have a good point, but also towards the end hit the other extreme end of the spectrum. Spinning rare and legendary chests should require a considerable amount of time sunk into the game to achieve it, but 60 hours for 1 spin, when there is a chance you will have to reroll, is ridiculous.

However.... If we want gold to have value, you will want to base the economic need of PvP players spinning chests to be at about 5-10% of the playerbase, with the other 90-95% being f2p.

Looking at gold as a commodity, its more about how much value f2p players get for trading it away. Not how little you get for your time invested in PvE and what that looks like when you use your easy to acquire gold sinks.

With that said - where is the happy medium? Would it be fair to allow a player to spin 1 common chest per hour? Is it fair to only look at chest spin gambling as the only gold sink?

Initially, Chark and crew need to come up with the formula of what they want the plat to gold conversion rate to be hypothetically, and allow rewards that reflect that rate. Gold farming needs to be hard enough so that paying players heavily consider just trading for gold rather than grinding for legendary chest spins.

KingGabriel
02-10-2015, 03:35 PM
As far as I'm concerned, cut, raise and balance all you need Chark. Beware of recommendations that may hold a vested interest from either camp.

Yoss
02-10-2015, 03:48 PM
It doesn't quite work that way. If the faucets are less than sinks, then it becomes more lucrative for people to spend time on getting more gold (even if it's just to sell to those who demand it and are willing to pay plat). Those actions increase the faucet rates past the sinks rates. I think there are way more people who are interested in supplying gold and don't value their time, compared to the people who demand gold and are willing to pay plat for it.

Don't get me wrong, I want gold to have value, but it may be a losing battle, since time is fairly cheap for a large category of players and sinks can't really be compulsory.

Always great to hear from you, Alex. :)

You're right about the faucets not being static, of course, and neither are the sinks. Both have infinite theoretical supply. (Faucet side, players can run Arena an unlimited number of hours. Sink side, players can buy/open an unlimited number of packs to produce unspun chests.) Though of course, as you say, there are lots of "free hours" out there just waiting to turn on the faucet, while there's significantly less $US being held back to buy extra packs (chests).

Even still, the "free hours" are not limitless. For a given player base size (which you as a dev should know), there are at most 24 hours per day per player of grinding possible, and you can safely cut that in half (at least) for a tighter bound. Another thing you know as a dev is how fast your player base is consuming packs and creating the associated gold demand. It will be pretty "hand wavy" in terms of accuracy, but you can get a rough idea of how much gold flow your pack consumption can cover and from there, divide your gold sink down by an order of magnitude (or more!). As someone else already said, it's much much easier, from a PR standpoint, to increase gold drops later than it is to cut them back.

Zophie
02-10-2015, 04:30 PM
As far as I'm concerned, cut, raise and balance all you need Chark. Beware of recommendations that may hold a vested interest from either camp.

Agreed, as long as I get the majority of KG's gold I'm happy with whatever Chark ends up setting the amounts at, I think that's fair.

BenRGamer
02-12-2015, 09:24 AM
I think what HexEnt needs to do is make a specific option in the Auction House to sell gold for plat and vice versa so they can keep a closer eye on it than simply listing items in gold and re-selling them in plat. Like the Gem Exchange bit in Guild Wars 2 as an example.

Yoss
02-12-2015, 02:48 PM
I think what HexEnt needs to do is make a specific option in the Auction House to sell gold for plat and vice versa so they can keep a closer eye on it than simply listing items in gold and re-selling them in plat. Like the Gem Exchange bit in Guild Wars 2 as an example.

I agree, though Chark has explicitly come out and said that he likes the added layer of abstraction between the currencies. He didn't say why.

KingGabriel
02-12-2015, 03:15 PM
I agree, though Chark has explicitly come out and said that he likes the added layer of abstraction between the currencies. He didn't say why.

I'd imagine to encourage trade between pve and pvp focused players who might not otherwise interact.

Zophie
02-12-2015, 03:21 PM
I think what HexEnt needs to do is make a specific option in the Auction House to sell gold for plat and vice versa so they can keep a closer eye on it than simply listing items in gold and re-selling them in plat. Like the Gem Exchange bit in Guild Wars 2 as an example.

The difference in GW2 is that Gems aren't used as a currency anywhere except for Cash Shop services. People can set the value of the Gems through the gold/gems exchange available easily because of this. However in Hex both Plat and Gold are used in the open Auction House, so the value of the Plat is determined by the worth people place on items up for sale on the AH while considering the value of similarly priced items in the Cash Shop and what they value their time as in Gold.


I agree, though Chark has explicitly come out and said that he likes the added layer of abstraction between the currencies. He didn't say why.

I'm no economics expert, but here is my not-so-eloquent take on this:

If a Gold/Plat exchange were added to all this then it would actually add a market value variable that may directly compete with established values of individual sales. Basically there needs to be some kind of abstraction here, because if a gold to plat exchange is created then people will always have one place to go to see what the exchange rate currently is. At that point they would then have to consider how to sell/buy every single item based on not only what all other items are priced at, but also where the exchange rate is sitting. This would just over complicate things too much for the general market, and it could end up being harmful to the health of the overall economy by adding too many sources for the appraisal of what different items' values are.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Hex wants to encourage more items being bought/sold with both currencies to help establish the value of each items, if an exchange is added then many people might simply skip the sales altogether and go straight to the exchange, which reduces their interactions with individual the Auctions. I kind of think of it as crowdsourcing in a way, we want as many people making these value assessments on individual items as often as possible to maintain a strong economy.

Now, I could be totally off the mark with all this, but I think these might be some of the reasons why abstraction is good.


I'd imagine to encourage trade between pve and pvp focused players who might not otherwise interact.

Bingo.

israel.kendall
02-12-2015, 03:21 PM
I'd imagine to encourage trade between pve and pvp focused players who might not otherwise interact.

They secretly want us all to do maths and use those calculator thingies on your computers. This is why I prefer to trade in anti-inflationary currencies, such as DSC.

Yoss
02-12-2015, 06:19 PM
I'm no economics expert, but here is my not-so-eloquent take on this. Now, I could be totally off the mark with all this, but I think these might be some of the reasons why abstraction is good.

If a Gold/Plat exchange were added to all this then it would actually add a market value variable that may directly compete with established values of individual sales. Basically there needs to be some kind of abstraction here, because if a gold to plat exchange is created then people will always have one place to go to see what the exchange rate currently is. At that point they would then have to consider how to sell/buy every single item based on not only what all other items are priced at, but also where the exchange rate is sitting. This would just over complicate things too much for the general market, and it could end up being harmful to the health of the overall economy by adding too many sources for the appraisal of what different items' values are.
I don't understand. Having more data available will somehow ruin the market? So, things like hexsales.net or hexprice.com are detrimental to the economy? What?


Another thing to keep in mind is that Hex wants to encourage more items being bought/sold with both currencies to help establish the value of each items, if an exchange is added then many people might simply skip the sales altogether and go straight to the exchange, which reduces their interactions with individual the Auctions. I kind of think of it as crowdsourcing in a way, we want as many people making these value assessments on individual items as often as possible to maintain a strong economy.
There are a certain number of players interacting with any given commodity over any given time interval (listing, buying, bidding, browsing). Some number of those players are only doing so as a clunky means to exchange gold for plat or vice versa. If CurEx were available, those players would no longer interact with the given commodity and would instead just trade directly with each other. The trade volume of the commodity would therefore decrease to its natural market level where only those actually interested in it would interact. (So far, this is just a restatement of the quote above.) I don't see how that's a bad thing. What's bad is illustrated below by example.

Use case for consideration: Joe and Mike are PvP players with deep pockets (lots of plat). Each has 4 hours per day to play Hex, prefers to draft as much as possible, and likes spinning the Wheels of Fate after each draft. Neither earns enough gold on his own play time to spin as much as he'd like (since he only plays Draft), so they want to trade plat for gold. The current system sucks for Joe and Mike; there is no easy way for them to reach their goal. Instead, each has to choose whether to go play another draft and miss out on spinning chests or spend hours and hours and hours tediously spamming trade chat and/or using proxy barter on the AH to get his plat:gold conversion done. So maybe instead of playing 7 drafts a week, Joe plays 4 drafts a week and then wastes the other three days fumbling with the clunky Hex market. Hex just lost 3 drafts per week of sales, ouch. Meanwhile, Mike plays his 7 drafts a week and just avoids interaction with the market completely; it's too painful. Hex didn't lose any sales from Mike, but the economy is going to suffer the loss of his supply and that will ripple out by creating higher prices and higher barrier to entry for all players. Higher barrier means more players will decide it's too high. Again Hex loses out, this time on player base size. Players like Joe and Mike (and many others besides) would gain great benefit from having an efficient currency exchange.


I'd imagine to encourage trade between pve and pvp focused players who might not otherwise interact.

On the contrary, having a CurEx would provide a consolidation point for where PvE and PvP cross over. It would emphasize the intereaction and encourage it through increased efficiency. Mike would have a way to quickly dump his plat into the eager hands of the PvE crowd rather than just sitting on it. Higher market efficiency lowers player cost and thus encourages more players to join the market.

Off topic, but a similar argument can be made for other efficiency upgrades. For example, if we could list identical items 10 or 100 at a time (just from a UI standpoint, the listings would still be as singles), then people might actually bother listing their commons in gold for a fraction of a cent each, and then the new players would have a much better shot at actually getting their first toe hold into the low end of the market.

Zophie
02-12-2015, 06:36 PM
I don't understand. Having more data available will somehow ruin the market? So, things like hexsales.net or hexprice.com are detrimental to the economy? What?

More data available isn't the concern, but rather that the values of item sales will compete with the exchange rate of the CurEx. That said, I have no idea if it would actually affect the health of the economy in a positive or negative manner, but it's something to consider.


<everything else>

Good points all around, thanks. I don't mean to sound like CurEx is necessarily bad, I'm just speculating on what variables would need to be considered and what the possible ramifications of having more/less abstraction would be. Good topic!

nicosharp
02-12-2015, 06:54 PM
There is only 1 thing I dislike about the CurEx system. If the game provides us the controls to quickly convert, inflation happens at a much faster rate. This is easily seen in GW2. Also, anything that is found to be short term "exploitable" in terms of PvE farming will drastically and permanently effect the economy, and really only hurt those players that were not "in on it".

I'd much prefer that the Gold to Plat ratio be player defined. Yes, it's an unnecessary gate to easy access, but it's one that directly helps the economy, and persuades some players to spend their gold, rather than take a zero effort transaction to f2p currency.


Edit - I say the above, knowing at the end of the day, despite the enticing gold sinks, more players will be trading gold for plat, because that is the f2p gateway.

BenRGamer
02-12-2015, 07:00 PM
I'd much prefer that the Gold to Plat ratio be player defined. Yes, it's an unnecessary gate to easy access, but it's one that directly helps the economy, and persuades some players to spend their gold, rather than take a zero effort transaction to f2p currency.

How is it not player defined if players are putting up X plat for sale at X gold price per plat?

nicosharp
02-12-2015, 07:03 PM
How is it not player defined if players are putting up X plat for sale at X gold price per plat?
Oh, maybe I was misunderstanding the system. I was using GW2's built in transactions from gold to gems - determined by GW2, as a baseline. I'd still rather see exchanges tied to cards and items, not currency - but some of my reasoning is a bit self-fulfilling tbh. People are already doing these exchanges, so I guess it doesn't hurt to give them a tool to make this easier. Of course, Hex Ent. Can benefit by taking a %.

funktion
02-12-2015, 07:18 PM
Just to chime in, I'm in the camp that even 16k is way too little for a full Arena run. I don't have time to grind the Arena for hours every day. I also don't have so many extra cards that I would be willing to sell them for gold just yet. I really hope they increase the gold amount from Arena. Just my two cents.

OR we get way more gold for playing the dungeons themselves. That works too.

You wouldn't even be willing to sell commons? I think you will be pleasantly surprised how much the demand for them increases. Not to mention the ability to sell excess equipment from opened chests.

BenRGamer
02-12-2015, 07:20 PM
You wouldn't even be willing to sell commons? I think you will be pleasantly surprised how much the demand for them increases. Not to mention the ability to sell excess equipment from opened chests.

I've got tons of commons and I'm not willing to sell them until they spruce up the Auction UI so I don't have to list hundreds of cards individually.

Zophie
02-12-2015, 07:30 PM
I've got tons of commons and I'm not willing to sell them until they spruce up the Auction UI so I don't have to list hundreds of cards individually.

^ This. Also I'd like to see how exactly the crafting system will work and whether or not I can use them for materials.

Yoss
02-12-2015, 08:03 PM
There is only 1 thing I dislike about the CurEx system. If the game provides us the controls to quickly convert, inflation happens at a much faster rate. This is easily seen in GW2. Also, anything that is found to be short term "exploitable" in terms of PvE farming will drastically and permanently effect the economy, and really only hurt those players that were not "in on it".

I'd much prefer that the Gold to Plat ratio be player defined. Yes, it's an unnecessary gate to easy access, but it's one that directly helps the economy, and persuades some players to spend their gold, rather than take a zero effort transaction to f2p currency.


Edit - I say the above, knowing at the end of the day, despite the enticing gold sinks, more players will be trading gold for plat, because that is the f2p gateway.
Re: the bolded
Who ever said it wouldn't be player defined? I envision the ability to list a packet of 100p as an "item" using the existing AH interface, and the only option for pricing of that packet would be gold.

As for inflation, whether it happens or not has very little to do with whether there's currency exchange of one type (implicit) versus another (explicit).

EDIT:
Oh, you already changed it...

Oh, maybe I was misunderstanding the system. I was using GW2's built in transactions from gold to gems - determined by GW2, as a baseline. I'd still rather see exchanges tied to cards and items, not currency - but some of my reasoning is a bit self-fulfilling tbh. People are already doing these exchanges, so I guess it doesn't hurt to give them a tool to make this easier. Of course, Hex Ent. Can benefit by taking a %.

BenRGamer
02-12-2015, 08:05 PM
Re: the bolded
Who ever said it wouldn't be player defined?

Yeah. That's what I said.

Yoss
02-12-2015, 08:11 PM
More data available isn't the concern, but rather that the values of item sales will compete with the exchange rate of the CurEx. That said, I have no idea if it would actually affect the health of the economy in a positive or negative manner, but it's something to consider.

I'm not sure "compete" is the right word. The CurEx rate would just inform pricing ratios across all commodities, most likely such that they more accurately trend to the true exchange rate. As opposed to right now, where I can get anywhere from 100:1 to 400:1 using the various imbalances that are constantly cropping up.

Deathfog
02-13-2015, 08:07 AM
Hard to say where gold:plat will end up as the only true source is PvE and the numbers aren't fixed yet? Could be 50:1 could be 50000:1 over time.

Raith
02-13-2015, 10:07 AM
The value of gold to plat will always fluctuate which is just a function of the economy.

The currency exchange in Guild Wars 2 was cool. However, the behind the scenes adjustments made it less transparent and understandable. It worked well enough, but there were always people that hated the market manipulation (smoothing) by NCsoft.

If hex allowed a player based only currency conversion it would definitely smooth out the average plat to gold conversion rates. And definitely speed up the transactions. Although, it could still wildly fluctuate until the game/economy matures and gets more active participants (which is also happening with the current system). If it's not player based, we can probably add it to the list of recurring themes of unhappiness like the "shuffler is broken" type.

I think it's a good thing, but in the extreme, it could lead to a dominant currency such as platinum only auctions. Now everyone wanting to spend gold on the AH has to go through the conversion and then buy their card for plat. Or vice versa.

Yoss
02-13-2015, 11:05 AM
I think it's a good thing, but in the extreme, it could lead to a dominant currency such as platinum only auctions. Now everyone wanting to spend gold on the AH has to go through the conversion and then buy their card for plat. Or vice versa.

My idea for that was to force PvE stuff to list ONLY using gold prices, and PvP stuff to list ONLY using plat. Then it really does consolidate all crossover to a single place: the CurEx.