DEAR DEVS: We WANT/NEED 2v2 / co-op asap!!!

    • I would imagine this game needs to be optimized first before they can even think of adding something like 2/3v1 pve encounters or 2v2 pvp. Hex gets bogged down and crashes as it is with some of the stuff decks can turn out. Can you imagine what would happen if we got 2-4 people together in one match like that? It wouldn't end well.
    • Silvanos wrote:

      how are they going to make raid bosses be a challenge
      Their original design of the Kraken, I think, raid would be a challenge. I don't remember the particulars but something about 100+ Health and phases based on how low its health was and passive debuffs on players and, of course, infinite cards (either always creating cards or just putting everything back once the last card was buried).

      Olfff wrote:

      Well a raid boss is supposed to be insurmountable by 1 person, they are intended to be defeated by multiple players working together.
      I remember mention that it's supposed to be 3vRaidAI, but 2vRaidAI would be hard but not impossible and even 1vRaidAI would be doable, perhaps, with "The Best" deck vs that encounter and a ton of retries.
    • Eraia wrote:

      Silvanos wrote:

      when they did that in FRA2 by targeting archetypes
      The reason it's a problem in FRA2 is that you can only bring a single deck. Which means shutting down strategies just makes certain archetypes worthless. In a co-op setting you have multiple decks - 1 per person - so people can make up for each others' strengths and weaknesses... so if x opponent shuts ME down, my allies can make up for me being weak or even do things like boost my stuff so I'm not as weak.
      It doesn't make them worthless, it makes them guaranteed to take a single loss when that opponent comes up, which is probably something like half the time.

      In a coop setting, you still wouldn't want 1/3 of your team's decks to be bad in any given fight; the fight is probably balanced around the assumption that all 3 decks are doing something. Either way, you are basically arguing my point about raids, which is that they can't make them hard without them being unfair/unfun. If a raid hoses an archetype, people will just bring another archetype.
    • Silvanos wrote:

      It doesn't make them worthless, it makes them guaranteed to take a single loss when that opponent comes up, which is probably something like half the time.

      In a coop setting, you still wouldn't want 1/3 of your team's decks to be bad in any given fight; the fight is probably balanced around the assumption that all 3 decks are doing something. Either way, you are basically arguing my point about raids, which is that they can't make them hard without them being unfair/unfun. If a raid hoses an archetype, people will just bring another archetype.
      You're missing the concept... you can build around an encounter like that because you can build synergies into other decks to overcome the weakness. To use Botanist as an example... Botanist's power isn't as dangerous if my 'raid team' has a deck that is a reversion based deck and he runs purify for me. I don't have to water down my deck to revert, we still have a third deck to cover us for the first few turns in case there's aggro concerns.

      That's kind of my point. With a party based strategy, you can accommodate for the encounters you're likely to face by bringing allies who deal with the weaknesses. It's all about cleverly building your tools into places they won't be a weakness, and then working with that.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • Eraia wrote:

      Pandaemonium wrote:

      Two headed giant is much different than raids. 2hg will bring in a few players, raids will bring in a multitude.

      If I was king, I would start focusing more on the mmo aspect of the game because that is what will keep it alive in the long run.
      I see the ability to have 2v2 as a bridge step towards raids. If the tech works for 2v2, it should be able to be expanded upon to enable raids.
      But 2v2 means both 2v2 pvp and 2v2 dungeons, both of which would be really beneficial longterm.


      Silvanos wrote:

      when they did that in FRA2 by targeting archetypes
      The reason it's a problem in FRA2 is that you can only bring a single deck. Which means shutting down strategies just makes certain archetypes worthless. In a co-op setting you have multiple decks - 1 per person - so people can make up for each others' strengths and weaknesses... so if x opponent shuts ME down, my allies can make up for me being weak or even do things like boost my stuff so I'm not as weak.
      unless they very recently changed their plans they have made it clear in the past that dungeons will be solo pve content and raids will be multiplayer pve content.
    • Sukebe wrote:

      unless they very recently changed their plans they have made it clear in the past that dungeons will be solo pve content and raids will be multiplayer pve content.
      I think we can safely say that any 'plans' from the kickstarter are up for revision if it will increase the game's quality.

      There's no reason to only have 1v1 and 3v1 pve. If they're doing 2v2 pvp, they might as well utilise that tech in pve too, unless you have a good reason other than 'kickstarter said so' why that would be bad.

      I suspect 2v2 pvp will come before raids, and thus it would make sense for them to throw together some co-op dungeon content to fill in the gap between solo pve and raids, to help bring some interaction into pve, which is sorely missing.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • Your talking on deaf ears Havoc. This game is not increasing in popularity. It is very stagnant on the player base, and frankly you have zero incentive for players to come here over MTGO if your looking for multiplayer.

      Commander, EDH, whatever you want to call it could be off the hook in this game. So many cool digital only things and it is frankly just wasted on PVE for gold farming....

      I don't see people playing EDH in MTGO for anything but FUN. Multiplayer should be the #1 priority.

      What is more important?

      New set? Nope.
      New Adventure Zone? Nope.
      New tournaments? Push of a button.
      Revamped AH and Deck builder? Possibly.
      Any other odd crap such as better chest rolling, etc? Nope.

      Multiplayer is needed in both PVE and PVP settings. Grand Prix Cleveland which was team sealed brought out people I knew haven't played in years because it was local and they went up and rolled with friends. Things like that we could do here.
    • Swigmonkey wrote:

      Your talking on deaf ears Havoc. This game is not increasing in popularity. It is very stagnant on the player base, and frankly you have zero incentive for players to come here over MTGO if your looking for multiplayer.

      Commander, EDH, whatever you want to call it could be off the hook in this game. So many cool digital only things and it is frankly just wasted on PVE for gold farming....

      I don't see people playing EDH in MTGO for anything but FUN. Multiplayer should be the #1 priority.

      What is more important?

      New set? Nope.
      New Adventure Zone? Nope.
      New tournaments? Push of a button.
      Revamped AH and Deck builder? Possibly.
      Any other odd crap such as better chest rolling, etc? Nope.

      Multiplayer is needed in both PVE and PVP settings. Grand Prix Cleveland which was team sealed brought out people I knew haven't played in years because it was local and they went up and rolled with friends. Things like that we could do here.
      I mean, personally, I disagree with your assessment. The only reason I ever recommend HEX to my friends (And brother) is because of its singleplayer. There's a billion multiplayer card games out there, you're fighting for a tiny slice of the pie there. But good singleplayer card games? I can only think of two: HEX and Sentinals of the Multiverse, of which HEX is far and away superior. At least there, they're fighting for almost the entire niche.

      Now, what I do agree with you on is the games current look at PvE as a farming tool, or a pre-requisite to simply move people over to multiplayer. I don't care about multiplayer, and like every human with a pulse, farming bores the ever-loving hell out of me. Now, multiplayer raids might dissuade that for a little while, but if we're just doing multiplayer to static content, we're going to be having the same issue as we have now, just with two people at once.
      Never shift in to reverse without a backup plan.
    • Who wants to play Sentinels by themselves...? Now Arkham Horror card game is an actual single player card game. Anyway I hope we get Raids soon. Also PVE is great lots of fun exclusive mechanics but I admit Raids will help a lot
      Lore Hound: Self Proclaimed Expert to Hex Lore (and right 80% of time with theories)
    • 2v2 and coop campaign are some of my personal most anticipated additions to HEX. Coming from MTG one of my favorite things was 4-8 man EDH. The social interaction and the room for creative deck building was an amazing Saturday night for me. I also think from a guild leaders perspective, inviting new players to the game would defiantly be more fruitful when we have a chat room of 4-8 people just playing multiplayer and chatting about the game, nerd stuff, home, etc. It would create an environment that feels inclusive.

      I am on the side that this should be a high priority add to the game. Giving it something that few other Digital TCG's have. I, as always would love this addition and think it is an important addition that should have been working on introducing since alpha.

      However I know in the games current state having an extra 120 cards and two players would make little room for creating extra cards before it lags. Anyone who has created an extra 200+ cards in a match has experienced the current limits of Hex's system. We still need overhauls to reduce server load, client load, and maybe server infrastructure altogether depending on what bottle necks currently exist in the system. Depending on the future proofing in the program/programming their may be a overhaul needed in the client to support 4 player interaction at all (it's not as easy as just adding variables, camera and UI elements if someone didn't lay the groundwork for multiplayer ahead of time).

      I could be wrong but I feel like we will see an engine update before we see multiplayer. However I will always be rooting on Multiplayer support above any other major updates.
    • OzawaWanderer wrote:

      Who wants to play Sentinels by themselves...? Now Arkham Horror card game is an actual single player card game. Anyway I hope we get Raids soon. Also PVE is great lots of fun exclusive mechanics but I admit Raids will help a lot
      The PC version is set-up almost entirely as a singleplayer game... I'd personally argue it works better on its own than it does co-operatively (Mainly because if you want to make co-op work, someone essentially has to be in charge anyways). And Arkham Horror doesn't have a PC equivalent. Also I feel like you missed the entire point of my post. =/
      Never shift in to reverse without a backup plan.
    • I agree. PVE campaign as it is now is boring as hell. Introducing raids and co-op would keep me interested. I'm bad at PVP so I don't really care for it... Although 2v2 is kind of appealing...something I've love to watch, but not participate in. I think it is about time that this game became the MMO it was suppose to be and the fact that it is taking this long for them to implement it kind of pisses me off. I understand that it takes a lot of time to do this kind of thing, but I believe it should have been a high priority. There are a lot of kickstarters that promise a lot and don't deliver... I hope that isn't the case with HEX. I hate seeing disappointed players. Get your shit together HEX.
    • HellCrescent wrote:

      2v2 and coop campaign are some of my personal most anticipated additions to HEX. Coming from MTG one of my favorite things was 4-8 man EDH. The social interaction and the room for creative deck building was an amazing Saturday night for me. I also think from a guild leaders perspective, inviting new players to the game would defiantly be more fruitful when we have a chat room of 4-8 people just playing multiplayer and chatting about the game, nerd stuff, home, etc. It would create an environment that feels inclusive.

      I am on the side that this should be a high priority add to the game. Giving it something that few other Digital TCG's have. I, as always would love this addition and think it is an important addition that should have been working on introducing since alpha.

      However I know in the games current state having an extra 120 cards and two players would make little room for creating extra cards before it lags. Anyone who has created an extra 200+ cards in a match has experienced the current limits of Hex's system. We still need overhauls to reduce server load, client load, and maybe server infrastructure altogether depending on what bottle necks currently exist in the system. Depending on the future proofing in the program/programming their may be a overhaul needed in the client to support 4 player interaction at all (it's not as easy as just adding variables, camera and UI elements if someone didn't lay the groundwork for multiplayer ahead of time).

      I could be wrong but I feel like we will see an engine update before we see multiplayer. However I will always be rooting on Multiplayer support above any other major updates.


      Good points. I also would rather them finish their kickstarter promises and slow down on adding new cards. I thought they got the money to build the other parts of the game listed in the kickstarter with the KS money?
    • People should realise that $2mil is a good start but at the same time it's a drop in the ocean if you're starting from nothing. And Hex did start from nothing.

      Also KS milestones were conceptualized 5-6 years ago. The market has changed. Players have changed. It's logical that some things may not make much sense any more.
    • Ultimately, they made promises based on development that went nowhere (not their fault) and had to be rebuilt from the ground up. The major selling point for many KS backers was the idea of a TCG MMO. Obviously they marketed this as multiplayer (3-man raids) and people relied on that. We are in year 4 and still no Raids (or multiplayer outside of 1v1). Some pesants have grown restless ... others have just left.