PDA

View Full Version : Constructed Gauntlet rewards discussion



RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 06:32 AM
Hello,

I've spent a few days watching friends and streams play the constructed gauntlet. I also tried myself once just to check if my conclusion was right, and oh boy did it deliver.

Here is the problem : you pay 500p to enter a constructed gauntlet. You then play your matches until you either lose 3 times or get to 5 wins. You must use your constructed deck to join. Each time you win a match, you are rewarded a set 3 booster pack.

So, if you love playing the game, what you would naturally do is join a Constructed Gauntlet. If you win at least 3 times, you technically earn 3x s3 booster packs cheaper than AH/trade and you can then go play a Draft. That's the good part. Now the ugly part : if you lose 3 times for whatever reason (bad luck, bad deck), you basically lost 500p for no extra booster/card AND you pretty much lost so fast you didn't even get to enjoy the gauntlet at all. Even if you win twice, you would have been better off buying the boosters from market directly.

Let's compare it to Draft : you normally 3x s3 pack + 100p to enter, so given current market, that's pretty much 600p to play a draft. Now, regardless if you will win or lose, you are guaranteed the content of those 3 packs. Nice eh? But on top of it, if you manage to win, you will earn even more packs. Awesome, isn't it? And if you do a swiss draft, you even get enormous time value as even if you lose, you continue.

The same thing could be said of Sealed Gauntlet : even if you lose, you still keep 6 packs worth of cards.

So, the question is, why would anyone take the risk of going 0-3 or even 2-3 in gauntlet instead of playing Draft where both the money and time value are so much higher? Obviously, competitive players will want to face against the most powerful constructed decks to test their own. But what about the casual player that was first targeted by the new gauntlet system? I'll tell you what, he'll get crushed 0-3, earn nothing and never play again. This is even more a problem because the games are 1 match instead of best of 3, so you can't even retaliate properly. Most people going into gauntlet the first time also don't have any clue what the meta is (Quash Ridge aggro and Titania mostly). I'm not a big fan of paying tons of platinum to find out what's going on before I can even play, are you?

I've thought long and hard how this could be mitigated and thought I'd share this idea. Instead of rewarding 1 booster pack each time you win a match starting from match 1 in constructed Gauntlet, you would instead start rewarding s3 packs at the 3rd win. BUT instead, if you go 0-3, you get 2 s3 packs for your efforts.

The new reward system would look like this :

0-2 wins : 2 boosters
3rd win : 1 booster
4th win : 1 booster
5th win : 2 boosters

Rewarded boosters for 500p entry : minimum 2, maximum 6 (just like now). Only 2 boosters for losing also ensures that it is not obviously cheaper to join constructed gauntlet rather than buy 2 packs from the store. You still have to win 3 times to get better value than store and market.

I think a change along those lines would encourage more players, especially the ones with less than optimum decks, to try and enter the gauntlet. That would not fix the time value if you lose 3 times, but it would at least reward you for paying platinum. Obviously, I don't have data of how many people are playing Constructed Gauntlet all the time, but I assume it a fair guess that those going 0-3 are not coming back more than once and if they lose 0-3 again, they will definitively not come back before a long time.

I think a lot of people, me included, would love to jump in constructed gauntlet more often, but don't because of what I explained here.

TLDR : constructed gauntlet value sucks for 500p for casual players, suggestion to change it to always give 2 boosters and start rewarding extra boosters at 3rd win and later

poizonous
08-10-2015, 06:50 AM
Grr the over typical people wanting something for nothing. Zero wins in constructed should never reward a player anything. Granted i agree that the constructed gauntlet payouts need an overhaul but awarding packs for 0 wins (especially that you want them to give two packs) makes the format even more casual.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 06:54 AM
Grr the over typical people wanting something for nothing. Zero wins in constructed should never reward a player anything. Granted i agree that the constructed gauntlet payouts need an overhaul but awarding packs for 0 wins (especially that you want them to give two packs) makes the format even more casual.

I think you have a huge misconception here. You don't get something for nothing. You pay 500p to enter the constructed gauntlet.

I do not believe rewarding for 0 wins would make the gauntlet less competitive. Like I said, you still need to win 3+ times for it to be worth entering value wise. However, what I suggest makes it less aggravating to lose badly and more in line with Draft.

PureVapes
08-10-2015, 06:54 AM
Wouldn't that grossly inflate the average EV and deflate the value of packs?

poizonous
08-10-2015, 06:57 AM
What purevapes said sums it up. A lot of the reason gauntlet can run successfully is because of people going 0-3. If those people received packs than the EV gets higher

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 06:58 AM
Wouldn't that grossly inflate the average EV and deflate the value of packs?

No, it wouldn't, not any more than draft anyway. 2 Packs from store is 400p, 3 packs from market is 500p. You still pay 500p for 2 packs if you lose and winning 3+ times to start making it worthwhile is not as easy as some would like you to believe.

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 07:01 AM
It is easy for some of us. Sorry, but your idea just makes constructed gauntlet have the best EV of all the game modes. I can easily earn cheap booster now, no need for more help.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:02 AM
It is easy for some of us. Sorry, but your idea just makes constructed gauntlet have the best EV of all the game modes. I can easily earn cheap booster now, no need for more help.

No, it would not. It would still be worse than Draft.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 07:02 AM
No, it wouldn't, not any more than draft anyway. 2 Packs from store is 400p, 3 packs from market is 500p. You still pay 500p for 2 packs if you lose and winning 3+ times to start making it worthwhile is not as easy as some would like you to believe.

You are forgetting the number of people going 0-3 are offset by the number of people going 1-3, 2-3, 3-3, etc. When you give out 2 free packs to anything less than 2-X, you are greatly increasing the total pack payout.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:03 AM
You are forgetting the number of people going 0-3 are offset by the number of people going 1-3, 2-3, 3-3, etc. When you give out 2 free packs to anything less than 2-X, you are greatly increasing the total pack payout.

But you pay 500p to enter, not 100p like Draft (if you have 3 packs).

I just suggested that amount, if you have a better idea or number, go ahead. My main goal is pointing out how bad Constructed Gauntlet is value wise and I believe when I criticize something, I have to offer ideas to fix it as well as for it not to simply be a baseless rant.

I understand some of you believe it is easy to get 5 wins. I know that. Most of us boasting 60$+ decks will certainly win 5x without trouble after figuring out the meta...at the expense of the poor guy trying to play with a 10$ deck.

Trying to find a way to make it less aggravating to go 0-3, whatever the mean you suggest, would go a long way making more people play that mode.

poizonous
08-10-2015, 07:06 AM
Tournaments are exactly that... tournaments. They are paid entry with the understanding that if you do poorly you lose money.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:09 AM
Tournaments are exactly that... tournaments. They are paid entry with the understanding that if you do poorly you lose money.

There is absolutely no reason to play Constructed Gauntler over Draft unless you can ensure you will always get 3+ wins which is pretty much limited to the top players who are already earning packs for cheap anyway.

I just suggested one way to mitigate the value issue. Maybe you would like to do it another way rather than shutting down the idea completely?

PureVapes
08-10-2015, 07:11 AM
I do not have the time or desire to find the average EV on current constructed gauntlet, but that's what you need if you want to make a case.

At face value, draft may look like great EV because it's 12 packs generated for 800p, but the initial investment of 24 packs at store value dilutes that from the seller's perspective and they still make their money at closer to 180p per pack.

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 07:12 AM
There is absolutely no reason to play Constructed Gauntler over Draft unless you can ensure you will always get 3+ wins which is pretty much limited to the top players who are already earning packs for cheap anyway.

No. Average player has 50% winrate (in most cases he is also facing another average player). So now most of the time the player will have his 3 wins to get some profit. If lucky he will get 5 wins and earn a lot, if not he will lose some. Your idea makes that loss almost non existent clearly making gauntlet te best EV

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:13 AM
I do not have the time or desire to find the average EV on current constructed gauntlet, but that's what you need if you want to make a case.

At face value, draft may look like great EV because it's 12 packs generated for 800p, but the initial investment of 24 packs at store value dilutes that from the seller's perspective and they still make their money at closer to 180p per pack.

Maybe someone at HexEnt would share the data for both modes and tell us how they see them currently.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 07:15 AM
But you pay 500p to enter, not 100p like Draft (if you have 3 packs).

I just suggested that amount, if you have a better idea or number, go ahead. My main goal is pointing out how bad Constructed Gauntlet is value wise and I believe when I criticize something, I have to offer ideas to fix it as well as for it not to simply be a baseless rant.

I understand some of you believe it is easy to get 5 wins. I know that. Most of us boasting 60$+ decks will certainly win 5x without trouble after figuring out the meta...at the expense of the poor guy trying to play with a 10$ deck.

Trying to find a way to make it less aggravating to go 0-3, whatever the mean you suggest, would go a long way making more people play that mode.

I think the problem is that the payout is a little too good - rather than sitting in a queue waiting for it to fire, people can jump into gauntlet, rack up a few wins, and do it again, all in less time than a couple of rounds in the normal queues. Add in the chance to bring sweeper decks (decks that win Bo1 consistently even though B03 they would likely fail) and people are just cashing in constantly, and having fun doing it.

But that makes it a hostile environment for new players. I think actually lowering the pack payout would make those high end players go back to the queues for the most part, since that is where the better EV would be, and newer players would have a fighting chance to actually get a payout.

On the other hand, would new players be interested in that EV? My gut says probably not, but they also aren't going to be keen on going 0-3 vs Quash decks.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:16 AM
No. Average player has 50% winrate (in most cases he is also facing another average player). So now most of the time the player will have his 3 wins to get some profit. If lucky he will get 5 wins and earn a lot, if not he will lose some. Your idea makes that loss almost non existent clearly making gauntlet te best EV

Not with 500p to enter. Giving 2 packs for losing is pretty much equivalent to the Draft, you lose 100p compared to store if you can't win.

We could also play with entry price instead of the rewards too. I just suggested one thing, maybe you can come up with something better.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:21 AM
I think the problem is that the payout is a little too good - rather than sitting in a queue waiting for it to fire, people can jump into gauntlet, rack up a few wins, and do it again, all in less time than a couple of rounds in the normal queues. Add in the chance to bring sweeper decks (decks that win Bo1 consistently even though B03 they would likely fail) and people are just cashing in constantly, and having fun doing it.

But that makes it a hostile environment for new players. I think actually lowering the pack payout would make those high end players go back to the queues for the most part, since that is where the better EV would be, and newer players would have a fighting chance to actually get a payout.

On the other hand, would new players be interested in that EV? My gut says probably not, but they also aren't going to be keen on going 0-3 vs Quash decks.

I don't think there is an easy solution indeed, but not talking about it would feel equally wrong when we all know there is room for improvement concerning the Constructed Gauntlet.

To be honest, that's the only mode I have a serious gripe with and it's because a few people told me about their issues with it that I went ahead and checked it out.

In my opinon, it can't stay exactly as is and something should be tweaked slightly to improve the quality of life of less fortunate players wanting a go at a tournament. I believe most players want to play with their cards, not just draft or sealed, but currently a lot of them must feel heavily punished for even daring to join the constructed gauntlet.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 07:25 AM
I don't think there is an easy solution indeed, but not talking about it would feel equally wrong when we all know there is room for improvement concerning the Constructed Gauntlet.

About the only thing I could suggest would be adding a 'casual' gauntlet - 1 pack payout for entry, and 1 pack for every 2 wins, with an extra if you hit 5 wins. Maximum payout is 4 packs per player, but the minimum is 1 to offset the entry fee. No competitive player would give it the time of day, and the entry fee could be tweaked to be just perfect for the overall payout.

Other than that, I don't think there is any chance of fixing the inherent issues with the current system.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:27 AM
About the only thing I could suggest would be adding a 'casual' gauntlet - 1 pack payout for entry, and 1 pack for every 2 wins, with an extra if you hit 5 wins. Maximum payout is 4 packs per player, but the minimum is 1 to offset the entry fee. No competitive player would give it the time of day, and the entry fee could be tweaked to be just perfect for the overall payout.

Other than that, I don't think there is any chance of fixing the inherent issues with the current system.

That's what I thought at first, but I thought it was too compliacted and required a new game mode when we don't really want to split the community even more across different modes. I think a newbie should face a very competitive deck sometimes to show how their deck could be improved.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 07:29 AM
That's what I thought at first, but I thought it was too compliacted and required a new game mode when we don't really want to split the community even more across different modes. I think a newbie should face a very competitive deck sometimes to show how their deck could be improved.

I have been in the queue myself with my very successful blood cup deck, only to be utterly destroyed by quash after quash. There is nothing to be learned from that except 'play aggro'.

As I said, it is a hostile environment for anyone who is new.

Falaris
08-10-2015, 07:35 AM
$10 decks shouldn't be competitive in pvp. Play Arena, play proving grounds to put better cards in your decks. PvE is supposed to be the f2p aspect of this game.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 07:42 AM
$10 decks shouldn't be competitive in pvp. Play Arena, play proving grounds to put better cards in your decks. PvE is supposed to be the f2p aspect of this game.

This has absolutely nothing to do with deck cost or the status of free to play or paid player - this is about this mode being intended for a certain audience (ranging from new players to players without enough time to play standard tournaments) and it being overrun with high level players because the EV is so good, but that in turns makes it tough for the intended audience to even participate, let alone get any prizes.

I mean, it is great that there is a popular constructed mode, but less great that the intended audience is being driven away by people essentially cashing in.

(I mean, I am not blaming anyone here, but it isn't ideal for everyone.)

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 07:59 AM
I mean, it is great that there is a popular constructed mode, but less great that the intended audience is being driven away by people essentially cashing in.

(I mean, I am not blaming anyone here, but it isn't ideal for everyone.)

Yep exactly. The mode has ended up being swarmed with nothing, but easy cash in Titania and Quash decks. It's a nightmare for anyone not with a highly competitive mind and, ironically, a lot of time and money dedicated to finding out and countering the meta.

From what HexEnt told us about the mode when they introduced it, that's really not what they intended it to become.

Maybe the solution could come from a matchmaking keeping track of win/loss records on your decks and matching you more fairly.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 08:02 AM
From what HexEnt told us about the mode when they introduced it, that's really not what they intended it to become.

The upside though is that its been a roaring success, which in turn is pretty good for the game in the short term. :p

Malakili
08-10-2015, 08:05 AM
When you're playing a mode for prizes, people are going to bring their best decks. This is true if you show up at your local game shop Friday night or if you are playing the constructed gauntlet. There really isn't much more to say about it. I guess giving people a pack just for playing might get more people involved, but at the end of the day you're still getting hammered if you bring a non-competitive deck to a competitive environment.

What Hex needs to figure out is a way to foster communities of people who are more interested in playing something equivalent to "kitchen table" hex. A separate room of the proving grounds called "just for fun" or "trying things out" etc, would probably do a lot more than changing the constructed gauntlet.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 08:07 AM
Xen, because its Bo1, its never going to a robust meta.

Given popularity of convo packs, I would love to see a Rock league gauntlet that gave out rock packs. To get new players started in low powered format with lower cost and prizes. Right now making the jump out of F2A to constructed is a huge investment and have smaller stepping stones would mean a lot.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 08:11 AM
Xen, because its Bo1, its never going to a robust meta.

Given popularity of convo packs, I would love to see a Rock league gauntlet that gave out rock packs. To get new players started in low powered format with lower cost and prizes. Right now making the jump out of F2A to constructed is a huge investment and have smaller stepping stones would mean a lot.

I am well aware that Bo1 means a certain type of deck will thrive (I said as much in a previous post) but the issue is that the mode is essentially prohibitive for casual or new players.

I like the rock deck idea, but HexEnt has been very careful to not create official support for any new formats just yet. So I don't see this happening for quite a while.

Malakili
08-10-2015, 08:22 AM
I like the rock deck idea, but HexEnt has been very careful to not create official support for any new formats just yet. So I don't see this happening for quite a while.

Do we know why? I think support for multiple formats is going to be absolutely vital, especially as soon we have our first "rotation" of sets.

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 08:31 AM
But you pay 500p to enter, not 100p like Draft (if you have 3 packs).

I just suggested that amount, if you have a better idea or number, go ahead. My main goal is pointing out how bad Constructed Gauntlet is value wise and I believe when I criticize something, I have to offer ideas to fix it as well as for it not to simply be a baseless rant.

I understand some of you believe it is easy to get 5 wins. I know that. Most of us boasting 60$+ decks will certainly win 5x without trouble after figuring out the meta...at the expense of the poor guy trying to play with a 10$ deck.

Trying to find a way to make it less aggravating to go 0-3, whatever the mean you suggest, would go a long way making more people play that mode.

You haven't done the actual math. If you did, you would discover that the value is very similar in any of the formats, including constructed gauntlet.

Prizes pool in draft is smaller. You pay for the packs you play with, you do not get those for free.

The way these things work is that the cost (plat) is converted into prize (packs). A similar amount of plat is taken out as a fee from any of the formats.

Some formats might be more or less rewarding to different winrates (for example swiss draft for a low winrate player) - but they all have similar overall rewards.



edit:

The tournament has real money value. You are going to encounter serious players. That's how it is and how it will be.

Vorpal
08-10-2015, 08:47 AM
There is absolutely no reason to play Constructed Gauntler over Draft

People who enjoy constructed and do not enjoy draft will be happy to play constructed over draft.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 08:51 AM
I am well aware that Bo1 means a certain type of deck will thrive (I said as much in a previous post) but the issue is that the mode is essentially prohibitive for casual or new players.

I like the rock deck idea, but HexEnt has been very careful to not create official support for any new formats just yet. So I don't see this happening for quite a while.That would require engineering time which is in short supple. Look how long it took from when to Cory mentioned async was in development to when we got it. 8 months.

Altima
08-10-2015, 08:52 AM
That is why no one play construct gauntlet unless they have a full luxury deck that can beat everyone else.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 08:55 AM
That is why no one play construct gauntlet unless they have a full luxury deck that can beat everyone else.Seems more like: no one play construct gauntlet unless they have a full luxury deck that can coin-flip with the other luxury decks.

Altima
08-10-2015, 09:01 AM
Seems more like: no one play construct gauntlet unless they have a full luxury deck that can coin-flip with the other luxury decks.

That's what I'm trying to say. Thank you for correction.

poizonous
08-10-2015, 09:04 AM
the key change that needs to be made is making the games Bo3. Bo3 means that quash decks will thrive 1/2 as much since 90% of answers to quash are sideboard material

Malakili
08-10-2015, 09:09 AM
Can we stop using the term "luxury deck" like it actually means something?

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 09:10 AM
You haven't done the actual math. If you did, you would discover that the value is very similar in any of the formats, including constructed gauntlet.

Prizes pool in draft is smaller. You pay for the packs you play with, you do not get those for free.

I did the maths or I wouldn't have posted why constructed gauntlet reward system is horrible for less than optimum decks, bad luck or disconnects.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 09:11 AM
the key change that needs to be made is making the games Bo3. Bo3 means that quash decks will thrive 1/2 as much since 90% of answers to quash are sideboard material

Yes, but the goal of gauntlet was to make it faster. I wholeheartily agree with Bo3 because it would fix the time value issue, but then one game will take much longer which was what HexEnt was trying to avoid. However, I disagree with them on this. It would still be much, much faster than any swiss or comp draft since you can play one Bo3 game here and there.

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 09:26 AM
I did the maths or I wouldn't have posted why constructed gauntlet reward system is horrible for less than optimum decks, bad luck or disconnects.

I didn't see any reasoning as to why it's worse if you get disconnected in constructed gauntlet than if you get disconnected in constructed sealed or even competitive draft.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 09:32 AM
I didn't see any reasoning as to why it's worse if you get disconnected in constructed gauntlet than if you get disconnected in constructed sealed or even competitive draft.

Because it's Bo1 for starters. And in the case of SG, even if you disconnect 5x and go 0 win, your net direct loss is only 200p worth prior to cards value. That's already much more acceptable than 500p, although I think it should be 100p like Draft.

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 09:46 AM
Because it's Bo1 for starters. And in the case of SG, even if you disconnect 5x and go 0 win, your net direct loss is only 200p worth prior to cards value. That's already much more acceptable than 500p, although I think it should be 100p like Draft.

Competitive draft is bo1 match. So if you get disconnected and lose, it's actually probably worse than if you get disconnected and lose 1 game of constructed gauntlet, since in constructed gauntlet you have 2 more tries.

And what you're saying about sealed gauntlet makes no sense. If you are only worried about what you could potentially lose if you get disconnected why not just play in the proving grounds or arena or against friends. Well w/e, play what you want. But "what you could lose if you get disconnected" has nothing to do with the value of the tournament.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 10:30 AM
The EV seems off Ramza. I would do the math, but maybe Yoss will show up and do it instead. I don't think they can reward that many packs, and if the true value is calculated, this should be a higher EV than competitive draft, which is not going to happen.

I think we need to wait until they release the roadmap for the $100,000 tournament, if that roadmap still exisits, and come out with it soon. That will effect the perception of these types of tournaments, and casual ladder for all players.

Yoss
08-10-2015, 10:35 AM
I do not have the time or desire to find the average EV on current constructed gauntlet, but that's what you need if you want to make a case.
Here you go:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=43641&page=2&p=497278&viewfull=1#post497278

CG pays out at 175p per pack on average (and that obviously includes a Primal roll). CG is slightly worse than 8-man Constructed for EV. If the OP would like to do math for his suggestion, just plug the new payout numbers in to my math linked above.

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 11:12 AM
Well we are just adding 2 packs for 0-3 and additional pack for 1-3 so 54 more packs. 366+ 54 = 420 (blaze it). 420 packs per 128 players... we have 152plat per pack.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 11:15 AM
Well we are just adding 2 packs for 0-3 and additional pack for 1-3 so 54 more packs. 366+ 54 = 420 (blaze it). 420 packs per 128 players... we have 152plat per pack.

+1 for blaze it comment.

Biz
08-10-2015, 12:12 PM
This has absolutely nothing to do with deck cost or the status of free to play or paid player - this is about this mode being intended for a certain audience (ranging from new players to players without enough time to play standard tournaments) and it being overrun with high level players because the EV is so good, but that in turns makes it tough for the intended audience to even participate, let alone get any prizes.

I mean, it is great that there is a popular constructed mode, but less great that the intended audience is being driven away by people essentially cashing in.

(I mean, I am not blaming anyone here, but it isn't ideal for everyone.)

standard tournaments are flawed because only a small fraction of that time investment actually involves playing hex, even if they fired regularly

people will play gauntlet because it involves more playing and less waiting, regardless of deck cost or skill level

the whole concept of elimination tournaments being the default mode of an online luck-based game is kind of silly, but that's another topic

hammer
08-10-2015, 12:30 PM
I have decided not to respond due to likelihood of my response leading to a warning for CoC infringement :p

Yoss
08-10-2015, 12:41 PM
Also relevant (from the same thread I linked above):

Comparisons:

8-man Constructed pays at 160p per pack
Gauntlet Constructed pays at 175p per pack

8-man Sealed pays at ~116p per pack-worth-of-cards-and-chest
Gauntlet Sealed pays at ~120p per pack-worth-of-cards-and-chest
Note: Sealed calculation assumes an AH price of 165p per pack used as entry.

So the 8-man queues are better in both cases, but not massively better.

I'd say dropping the effective price per pack down to 152p (per the math in post 45 here) is going too far. You need to keep the total payout at or below 400 packs per 128 players. That means you have at most 34 extra prize packs to place in the plinko. For example, you could boost 4-3 up to 5 packs, 5-1 up to 7 packs, and 5-0 up to 8 packs, which would insert 33 more prize packs per 128 entries and bring you very close to the 160p mark.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 12:52 PM
Okay, using Yoss' table, I get 152p per pack for 128 players when applying my idea. I had theorized 160p using my head only, so I wasn't that far off by myself.


Also relevant (from the same thread I linked above):


I'd say dropping the effective price per pack down to 152p (per the math in post 45 here) is going too far. You need to keep the total payout at or below 400 packs per 128 players. That means you have at most 34 extra prize packs to place in the plinko. For example, you could boost 4-3 up to 5 packs, 5-1 up to 7 packs, and 5-0 up to 8 packs, which would insert 33 more prize packs per 128 entries and bring you very close to the 160p mark.

I don't see why we should not go down to 152p per pack. As you pointed out yourself, 8-man constructed is at 160p per pack on a Bo3 basis which means higher time value associated with playing it.

For a Bo1 system, rewarding 152p per pack does not feel exceptionnal to me and still lower than I'd like for the amount I have to pay upfront for the seemingly short experience.

Falaris
08-10-2015, 12:56 PM
Okay, using Yoss' table, I get 159p per pack for 128 players when applying my idea. I had theorized 160p using my head only, so I wasn't that far off by myself.

Tournaments are meant for competitive players. There are plenty of casual outlets in this game already. You getting more for free diminishes the value of the gains for the competitive players.

Yoss
08-10-2015, 12:59 PM
The new reward system would look like this :

0-2 wins : 2 boosters
3rd win : 1 booster
4th win : 1 booster
5th win : 1 booster
6th win : 2 boosters

Please clarify the above. I would like to check your math but I can't because I do not understand what you're proposing. There is no 6th win. Please post your payout proposal in this form (ranking: payout):

Current payout for CG
0-3: 0
1-3: 1
2-3: 2
3-3: 3
4-3: 4
5-2: 6
5-1: 6
5-0: 6

Yoss
08-10-2015, 01:00 PM
Tournaments are meant for competitive players. There are plenty of casual outlets in this game already. You getting more for free diminishes the value of the gains for the competitive players.

What do you mean by "more for free"? CG is a paid tournament, there's nothing free about it.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 01:06 PM
Please clarify the above. I would like to check your math but I can't because I do not understand what you're proposing. There is no 6th win. Please post your payout proposal in this form (ranking: payout):

Current payout for CG
0-3: 0
1-3: 1
2-3: 2
3-3: 3
4-3: 4
5-2: 6
5-1: 6
5-0: 6

Doh, my bad, didn't notice I added a 6th win hahaha.

Suggested payout :

0-3: 2
1-3: 2
2-3: 2
3-3: 3
4-3: 4
5-2: 6
5-1: 6
5-0: 6

I get 152p per pack with your table. Had a computer crash in between reading posts, but I think 152p is correct.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 01:08 PM
Tournaments are meant for competitive players. There are plenty of casual outlets in this game already. You getting more for free diminishes the value of the gains for the competitive players.

There is nothing free from paying 500p to enter the tournament.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 01:12 PM
I don't see why we should not go down to 152p per pack. As you pointed out yourself, 8-man constructed is at 160p per pack on a Bo3 basis which means higher time value associated with playing it.
I think the idea that the time-commitment for 8-man queues is not "added value" to play it over a Gauntlet Queue, or the notion of it being a BO3. Gauntlet is lower EV because #1 - It's more RNG being BO1, and #2 - It can be played at ones Leisure. Therefore, if anything, 8-man Queues should still payout slightly better than Gauntlet Queues.

I don't mind what they set the Pack EV value to through rewards, as long as the EV is matched for all queue types. With that said, since this has been roughly set since Alpha, I don't see players getting more value than what is currently available.

Yoss
08-10-2015, 01:22 PM
Suggested payout :

0-3: 2
1-3: 2
2-3: 2
3-3: 3
4-3: 4
5-2: 6
5-1: 6
5-0: 6

I get 152p per pack with your table. Had a computer crash in between reading posts, but I think 152p is correct.
Much more readable, thanks.

I have two major problems with this proposal.
1) The payout is too good. 160p per pack is as low as it should go so that it is in alignment with the other Constructed on-demand offerings in the game; 152p is too good, but I can agree that 175p is perhaps not good enough.
2) The payout leads to bad incentives. When sitting at 0-2 there is no reward for winning your next game, so it would be tempting to quit. I would expect any proposed payout scheme to be strictly monotonically increasing with improved number of wins and monotonically nondecreasing with improved number of losses.

Given those two constraints, I think you'll find it rather hard to increase the low end payouts without also increasing the entry fee.

Falaris
08-10-2015, 01:44 PM
What do you mean by "more for free"? CG is a paid tournament, there's nothing free about it.

I was referencing more prizes without an increase in entry fee.

Khazrakh
08-10-2015, 01:54 PM
This payout feels horrible to me really - you'd get the same amount of boosters for 0, 1 and 2 wins - there'd be no sense of achievement at all for those first 2 wins.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 03:03 PM
Much more readable, thanks.

I have two major problems with this proposal.
1) The payout is too good. 160p per pack is as low as it should go so that it is in alignment with the other Constructed on-demand offerings in the game; 152p is too good, but I can agree that 175p is perhaps not good enough.
2) The payout leads to bad incentives. When sitting at 0-2 there is no reward for winning your next game, so it would be tempting to quit. I would expect any proposed payout scheme to be strictly monotonically increasing with improved number of wins and monotonically nondecreasing with improved number of losses.

Given those two constraints, I think you'll find it rather hard to increase the low end payouts without also increasing the entry fee.

I can understand 1) in regards to other constructed, but why should constructed in general reward so badly when you have to pay entry fees up front and get nothing if you lose while having to use your own cards (huge investment into the game)? Doesn't make sense to me.

As for 2), I don't think that's relevant. Being at 0-2, you still have a chance of going up to 5-2. I don't think anyone who paid an entry feee would drop without going as far as they can, especially given there is no time limit.

Honestly, we can do all the maths in the world, the only thing that matters to most players is how they feel at the end of their gauntlet run. They don't give a crap about EV and what others might be getting while they are themselves being screwed. Paying 500p to get nothing out of it is a very serious turn off we need to think very hard about. I'm sure there is a solution somewhere to lessen the burden while keeping that precious EV balanced, we just have to find it and suggest it to HexEnt.

I first believed constructed gauntlet would be the perfect stepping stone for new players to jump into (paid) PvP, but it turns out it is, counterintuitively, the worst option by far.

Once again, aside from a competitive stand point and for time constraints reason, why would anyone play CG instead of SG or Draft? Why does CG have to be the worst option by that much? Seems to me current CG is the opposite of what HexEnt intended for it. People love playing with their cards so why "punish" them for doing so. I mean Draft and Sealed are super fun, but why should they be the go to modes? The whole point of the game is collecting cards and making decks...yet the few options to use them are horrible value, at least in my mind and how I understand them :(

And don't tell these guys to test out decks in Proving Grounds... that will only get them so far before getting completely destroyed in CG.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 03:31 PM
Yoss is absolutely right about being 0-2. If you already have 2 packs, what on earth is the point of wasting time trying to get to 3 wins when you could just drop, take the 100 plat loss, and queue again? The time saved alone makes it worth re-queuing.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 03:36 PM
Yoss is absolutely right about being 0-2. If you already have 2 packs, what on earth is the point of wasting time trying to get to 3 wins when you could just drop, take the 100 plat loss, and queue again? The time saved alone makes it worth re-queuing.

It seems on that one we'll have to agree to disagree. Different people, different mindset I guess.

Yoss
08-10-2015, 04:04 PM
I can understand 1) in regards to other constructed, but why should constructed in general reward so badly when you have to pay entry fees up front and get nothing if you lose while having to use your own cards (huge investment into the game)? Doesn't make sense to me.
What do you mean by "so badly"? Constructed pays out really well. After selling prizes on the AH, the average player comes out ahead compared to the entry fees. Winners get more, losers get less, that's how tournaments work.


As for 2), I don't think that's relevant. Being at 0-2, you still have a chance of going up to 5-2. I don't think anyone who paid an entry feee would drop without going as far as they can, especially given there is no time limit.
Perhaps. I am willing to concede that this point might just be personal preference.


Honestly, we can do all the maths in the world, the only thing that matters to most players is how they feel at the end of their gauntlet run. They don't give a crap about EV and what others might be getting while they are themselves being screwed. Paying 500p to get nothing out of it is a very serious turn off we need to think very hard about. I'm sure there is a solution somewhere to lessen the burden while keeping that precious EV balanced, we just have to find it and suggest it to HexEnt.
Good player experience is important, but so is the total market average of things. Bottom line is that HXE could give away packs for free and it wouldn't hurt their income much (they make money on entry fees moreso than pack sales), at least at first. The problem is that the cheaper packs get, the cheaper cards (and all other pack derivatives) get. In a TCG, players expect the cards to have and retain value.

For a detailed analysis, please read:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=34329&page=5&p=350702&viewfull=1#post350702
Note that there are some small errors in that post (which are later corrected if you read the rest of the thread).


I first believed constructed gauntlet would be the perfect stepping stone for new players to jump into (paid) PvP, but it turns out it is, counterintuitively, the worst option by far.

Once again, aside from a competitive stand point and for time constraints reason, why would anyone play CG instead of SG or Draft? Why does CG have to be the worst option by that much? Seems to me current CG is the opposite of what HexEnt intended for it.
I do not understand why you think CG is the worst option. It is merely different. In a simplistic way, Limited is for building your collection and is thus in some sense the early game PvP content. Constructed is the PvP end game content. Competitive Constructed is not for new players. That said, I can see some value in flattening out the CG payouts to be more casual friendly. However, if we did that, we would also need to add a Bo3 Competitive Constructed Asynchronous mode (and do away with the pointless 8-man synchronous) to make sure there is a viable PvP end game available. Many folks have already been asking for Bo3 on CG anyway, so splitting it into two could be a good option.

Bo1 Payout Change
0-3: 1
1-3: 2
2-3: 2
3-3: 4
4-3: 4
5-2: 5
5-1: 5
5-0: 5
Total: 397 (161p per pack)

Bo3 Payout
0-3: 0
1-3: 0
2-3: 1
3-3: 2
4-3: 4
5-2: 8
5-1: 10
5-0: 14
Total: 400 (160p per pack)

Jonesy
08-10-2015, 04:05 PM
but the issue is that the mode is essentially prohibitive for casual or new players.

All tournaments, by definition, are prohibitive for casual and new players.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 04:23 PM
All tournaments, by definition, are prohibitive for casual and new players.

But it shouldn't be. We should have at least 1 mode that's newbie friendly to get them to start paying $$. I think Draft could be, but it seems many don't like the stress of picking out cards when they are starting and have limited knowledge. Hence why CG seemed the better one to get there.

magic_gazz
08-10-2015, 04:28 PM
If a new player steps into a competitive format, can you tell me why they are expecting to win or get paid packs for losing?

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 04:33 PM
I do not understand why you think CG is the worst option. It is merely different. In a simplistic way, Limited is for building your collection and is thus in some sense the early game PvP content. Constructed is the PvP end game content. Competitive Constructed is not for new players. That said, I can see some value in flattening out the CG payouts to be more casual friendly. However, if we did that, we would also need to add a Bo3 Competitive Constructed Asynchronous mode (and do away with the pointless 8-man synchronous) to make sure there is a viable PvP end game available. Many folks have already been asking for Bo3 on CG anyway, so splitting it into two could be a good option.

Bo1 Payout Change
0-3: 1
1-3: 2
2-3: 2
3-3: 4
4-3: 4
5-2: 5
5-1: 5
5-0: 5
Total: 397 (161p per pack)

Bo3 Payout
0-3: 0
1-3: 0
2-3: 1
3-3: 2
4-3: 4
5-2: 8
5-1: 10
5-0: 14
Total: 400 (160p per pack)

I know what you mean and normally I would agree with you as an experienced player, but sadly, that's not how a new player thinks. For them, limited is a chore : they stress over choosing cards and they feel their knowledge is lacking to pick the good ones. And let's be honest, nobody wants to spend hours on a stream to learn before playing, even thought hat's what most of us without much money did. From what I could gather so far is that they want to play with their cards, however CG stacks odds massively against them currently, not to mention the entry price. That's a massive turn off (I'm repeating myself here, but it's what's I'm being often told).

I can also get behind your suggested changes. They seem more balanced indeed and for Bo1 I thought something similar as did Xenavire earlier. I'm not so sure about the Bo3 payouts though unless you are matched with same score people which would mean the 5-0 would have been a win against another 4-0. It should be hard to reach for that many packs.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 04:35 PM
If a new player steps into a competitive format, can you tell me why they are expecting to win or get paid packs for losing?

Because Draft and Sealed do? And it's not written anywhere CG is highly competitive, nor was it advertised that way. It just turned out that way... It's just slamming new players into staying the hell away from any PvP at the moment and just giving high value to newbie stomping 60$+ decks.

Who wouldn't want easy 5-0, right? Besides, I don't think playing TM or Quash and seeing who gets the best draw out of the two makes it competitive. But to each its own.

Let's make something clear : as an experienced player, I agree with most here. However, talking to people, helping them and also teaching friends to play, I can only get to the conclusion we are awfully biased and living in our elitist cocoon compared to what new players are experiencing.

Right now, whenever I am asked which tournament they should play, I answer : Draft, but they don't want to, they are scared. And so they go back to arena, get bored after 2 weeks then maybe come back from time to time see if something's changed. But you'll tell me there is the proving grounds! Yep, except that's not fun either apparently because you don't get anything of value.

Simply put, a certain form of new player friendly CG could be the bridge between PvE and PvP ($$) because that's what we are lacking right now. I'm pretty much running out of ideas to keep my friends around here besides one.

HexEnt is ultra super busy with PvE campaign, so we can't suggest anything too complicated either.

magic_gazz
08-10-2015, 04:39 PM
Because Draft and Sealed do? And it's not written anywhere CG is highly competitive, nor was it advertised that way. It just turned out that way... It's just slamming new players into staying the hell away from any PvP at the moment.

If the format if not good for them, they could not play it until they are ready.

Not every event has to cater to every player.

I know I never expected to win stuff when I started playing games. Prizes are for winners.

Jonesy
08-10-2015, 04:45 PM
Tournaments are where you pay money to compete against other people, that will always be prohibitive for new and casual players, by definition. New and casual players should be participating in the free aspects of play until they decide they are ready to put some money on the line, and even then, they should expect to lose money until they become more experienced. This is the nature of tournaments...unless you're going to have a tournament where the only prize is a participation one that equals cost of entry and a virtual pat on the back for first place, but whats the point of that, its hardly different from playing in the proving grounds and buying a pack from the store.

Yoss
08-10-2015, 04:54 PM
Tournaments are where you pay money to compete against other people, that will always be prohibitive for new and casual players, by definition. New and casual players should be participating in the free aspects of play until they decide they are ready to put some money on the line, and even then, they should expect to lose money until they become more experienced. This is the nature of tournaments...unless you're going to have a tournament where the only prize is a participation one that equals cost of entry and a virtual pat on the back for first place, but whats the point of that, its hardly different from playing in the proving grounds and buying a pack from the store.
While I agree with much of what you're saying, you also should give awareness to the fact that there's middle ground between winner-takes-all and everyone-gets-same. It is a gradient or stairway from non-competitive to fully competitive and there is no clear line to draw other than the very first step away from everyone-gets-same.

Selanius
08-10-2015, 09:34 PM
What do you mean by "so badly"? Constructed pays out really well. After selling prizes on the AH, the average player comes out ahead compared to the entry fees. Winners get more, losers get less, that's how tournaments work.


Perhaps. I am willing to concede that this point might just be personal preference.


Good player experience is important, but so is the total market average of things. Bottom line is that HXE could give away packs for free and it wouldn't hurt their income much (they make money on entry fees moreso than pack sales), at least at first. The problem is that the cheaper packs get, the cheaper cards (and all other pack derivatives) get. In a TCG, players expect the cards to have and retain value.

For a detailed analysis, please read:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=34329&page=5&p=350702&viewfull=1#post350702
Note that there are some small errors in that post (which are later corrected if you read the rest of the thread).


I do not understand why you think CG is the worst option. It is merely different. In a simplistic way, Limited is for building your collection and is thus in some sense the early game PvP content. Constructed is the PvP end game content. Competitive Constructed is not for new players. That said, I can see some value in flattening out the CG payouts to be more casual friendly. However, if we did that, we would also need to add a Bo3 Competitive Constructed Asynchronous mode (and do away with the pointless 8-man synchronous) to make sure there is a viable PvP end game available. Many folks have already been asking for Bo3 on CG anyway, so splitting it into two could be a good option.

Bo1 Payout Change
0-3: 1
1-3: 2
2-3: 2
3-3: 4
4-3: 4
5-2: 5
5-1: 5
5-0: 5
Total: 397 (161p per pack)

Bo3 Payout
0-3: 0
1-3: 0
2-3: 1
3-3: 2
4-3: 4
5-2: 8
5-1: 10
5-0: 14
Total: 400 (160p per pack)

I like these structured payouts a LOT. This would get me playing more Constructed Gauntlet. I'd probably buy my 4th Walking Calamity with this.

Malicus
08-10-2015, 10:40 PM
I really like the idea of the lower curve payout Yoss has described, though having both is ideal. I really worry sometimes that people forget if they are going infinite or playing for free this is only possible at the expense of others and you crap on those players at your own risk.

Competition should mean something but you have to keep people in the game even if they are losing. It is the experience of non-winning players that is most crucial for the future of the game.