Poll: Given the many recent new additions/changes to Hex in the last weeks (Merry Melee modes, Cosmic Coins/Siege Sacks, Ladder changes), is your future outlook on Hex positive?

  • SaintVicarious wrote:

    Opalia wrote:

    Early release starts for Lotr Lcg on august 28th - Co-op comes in final release which is 3-6 months after early release or so they say.
    Last 6 months lotr have only focused in solo PvE and have changed everything all the time.

    Lotr the paper card game was a co-op game that could be played as sole.
    As we know from HEX it is hard to change a solo players game into a multi players game.

    I think lotr will face masive problem with co-op. If early release dont get very good rewiev they might newer get co-op.
    I think they should have done like the lotr card make co-op first and then single player and not single player first like hex.
    I think LOTR is looking pretty much set. There's been multiple previews of it, so there's clearly excitement. HEX raked in over $2M in its PVE-focused Kickstarter, so there's clearly a market for it. All that's left is whether FFI can get co-op working, and given that their source material already figured it out, half their work is done. All they have to do is handle PVE better than HEX, and that seems like a hilariously low bar to clear in 2018.
    Not only will co-op be easier to implement there (less complexity/number of possible card interactions) but the AI, from what I have seen in streams, is actually good and knows how to make proper decisions and play the game which will make a refreshing change. I still don't particularly like the Lolstone oval unit frames (they could still change I guess?) but it's a small price to pay for what appears to be half decent PVE. I truly believe most of the reason that PVE appears to have been abandoned (along with the stupid AI bonuses) is because of the ground breaking AI here....HXE either don't have the skills to create it or it's just not possible with the sheer number of possibilities (but what we have clearly looks like a combination of the two). Hex is much more suited to PVP where the decision making is made by a human brain rather than 4 billion lines of sloppy code that just cannot ever hope to get it right, which I hate to say as I cannot stand PVP, but in my opinion is totally true.
  • TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    Not only will co-op be easier to implement there (less complexity/number of possible card interactions) but the AI, from what I have seen in streams, is actually good and knows how to make proper decisions and play the game which will make a refreshing change. I still don't particularly like the Lolstone oval unit frames (they could still change I guess?) but it's a small price to pay for what appears to be half decent PVE. I truly believe most of the reason that PVE appears to have been abandoned (along with the stupid AI bonuses) is because of the ground breaking AI here....HXE either don't have the skills to create it or it's just not possible with the sheer number of possibilities (but what we have clearly looks like a combination of the two). Hex is much more suited to PVP where the decision making is made by a human brain rather than 4 billion lines of sloppy code that just cannot ever hope to get it right, which I hate to say as I cannot stand PVP, but in my opinion is totally true.
    I think Hex's AI isn't necessarily "dumb", just "super predictable". It's running off of some pretty obvious "if then else" lines, meaning you know if you have a Legendary with 2 Health and an Uncommon with 2 health, it will usually attack the former with Burn rather than the latter, even if that's a poor decision to make. It's not looking at a card by card basis, it's looking at basic data sets, which often (Almost always) ignores card texts that could result in it picking incorrectly.
    Never shift in to reverse without a backup plan.
  • SaintVicarious wrote:

    TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    Not only will co-op be easier to implement there (less complexity/number of possible card interactions) but the AI, from what I have seen in streams, is actually good and knows how to make proper decisions and play the game which will make a refreshing change. I still don't particularly like the Lolstone oval unit frames (they could still change I guess?) but it's a small price to pay for what appears to be half decent PVE. I truly believe most of the reason that PVE appears to have been abandoned (along with the stupid AI bonuses) is because of the ground breaking AI here....HXE either don't have the skills to create it or it's just not possible with the sheer number of possibilities (but what we have clearly looks like a combination of the two). Hex is much more suited to PVP where the decision making is made by a human brain rather than 4 billion lines of sloppy code that just cannot ever hope to get it right, which I hate to say as I cannot stand PVP, but in my opinion is totally true.
    I think Hex's AI isn't necessarily "dumb", just "super predictable". It's running off of some pretty obvious "if then else" lines, meaning you know if you have a Legendary with 2 Health and an Uncommon with 2 health, it will usually attack the former with Burn rather than the latter, even if that's a poor decision to make. It's not looking at a card by card basis, it's looking at basic data sets, which often (Almost always) ignores card texts that could result in it picking incorrectly.
    I guess it comes down to your definition of dumb, when it's holding a Sunlit Sentence with 5 resources open and it takes lethal damage instead of wiping the opponents board and living for another turn...well that's what I call Artificial Idiot. If you look at all the posts in the Siege thread that has been around for many weeks detailing all the misplays then you can kind of get a pretty good idea of how lacking the AI is. This is one of the main reasons why the PVE has been scrapped in my opinion as no matter how good the multiplayer/raiding setting/mechanics/lore/etc is, if the AI cannot play the game correctly then the only other option is for FRA 2.0 ways to 'challenge' the player (i.e some games are utterly unwinnable before the first card is played which makes for a frustrating experience).
  • TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    SaintVicarious wrote:

    Opalia wrote:

    Early release starts for Lotr Lcg on august 28th - Co-op comes in final release which is 3-6 months after early release or so they say.
    Last 6 months lotr have only focused in solo PvE and have changed everything all the time.

    Lotr the paper card game was a co-op game that could be played as sole.
    As we know from HEX it is hard to change a solo players game into a multi players game.

    I think lotr will face masive problem with co-op. If early release dont get very good rewiev they might newer get co-op.
    I think they should have done like the lotr card make co-op first and then single player and not single player first like hex.
    I think LOTR is looking pretty much set. There's been multiple previews of it, so there's clearly excitement. HEX raked in over $2M in its PVE-focused Kickstarter, so there's clearly a market for it. All that's left is whether FFI can get co-op working, and given that their source material already figured it out, half their work is done. All they have to do is handle PVE better than HEX, and that seems like a hilariously low bar to clear in 2018.
    Not only will co-op be easier to implement there (less complexity/number of possible card interactions) but the AI, from what I have seen in streams, is actually good and knows how to make proper decisions and play the game which will make a refreshing change. I still don't particularly like the Lolstone oval unit frames (they could still change I guess?) but it's a small price to pay for what appears to be half decent PVE. I truly believe most of the reason that PVE appears to have been abandoned (along with the stupid AI bonuses) is because of the ground breaking AI here....HXE either don't have the skills to create it or it's just not possible with the sheer number of possibilities (but what we have clearly looks like a combination of the two). Hex is much more suited to PVP where the decision making is made by a human brain rather than 4 billion lines of sloppy code that just cannot ever hope to get it right, which I hate to say as I cannot stand PVP, but in my opinion is totally true.
    Problems with Lotr I see:

    1) It designed to mobil phones - Because of this number of unit in play at one time in very limmed -
    how to make it work along side wioth co-op I dont think thek know yet!!
    2) The game have only 40 different cards - If you unlock all cards!!
    3) All quests in game can be finished in 2 hours. If you unlock all from start by spending 50$.
    4) Graphiks look a loot like Heartstone
    5) This should have been a 1:1 conversion of a good game
    6) Board game is Co-op that can be played as single player (one play controlling all). Computer game is single players with a co-op mode.
    How will they banance all cards for 2 mode that are wery different.
    7) around 40 people come for there weekly demo of Lotr. So they have a littel bit more hype then HEX have atm.
    8 ) Collecters edision of this tiny free to play mobil game cost around 300$ for EU players incl transport and tax.
    9) Game got delayed from Q1 to Q2 to Q3...
    10) Co-op is supposed to come in Q1 2019 - I they get bad rewievs and only sell few copies of the game they migth shut down before co-op comes out!!!
    11) After HEX I dont trust game developers dreams so much - HEX might have co-op too one day but I dont beleave so before I see it!
  • SaintVicarious wrote:

    Opalia wrote:

    Early release starts for Lotr Lcg on august 28th - Co-op comes in final release which is 3-6 months after early release or so they say.
    Last 6 months lotr have only focused in solo PvE and have changed everything all the time.

    Lotr the paper card game was a co-op game that could be played as sole.
    As we know from HEX it is hard to change a solo players game into a multi players game.

    I think lotr will face masive problem with co-op. If early release dont get very good rewiev they might newer get co-op.
    I think they should have done like the lotr card make co-op first and then single player and not single player first like hex.
    I think LOTR is looking pretty much set. There's been multiple previews of it, so there's clearly excitement. HEX raked in over $2M in its PVE-focused Kickstarter, so there's clearly a market for it. All that's left is whether FFI can get co-op working, and given that their source material already figured it out, half their work is done. All they have to do is handle PVE better than HEX, and that seems like a hilariously low bar to clear in 2018.
    Sort of. It works for some people.. I found the gameplay style of the LotR paper card game absolutely and utterly wretched. It was like everything I hated about L5R rolled into a single package and magnified. Being just 'better at PvE and multiplayer' won't get everyone to jump ship. It could have the best PvE and multiplayer ever and i still won't ever touch it because i *hate* playing the damn game. Hex on the otherhand is like magic with better designers, things that take advantage of the digital medium, and until recently sets weere open playtested so more whoopsies were caught via the geek effect. Sure i wanted the multiplayer and the PVE has gotten either stale <gampaign> or awful <New coke FRA> butevery time new card come out i can fiddle and change enough stuff that it's still fun. I just hope we get all the classes and half finished bits for campaign put out for at least a month or two for me to fiddle with first if the games gonna die. Which i don't necessarily share the opinion that it is, but I can't fault people from interperating current information that way.
  • TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    SaintVicarious wrote:

    TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    Not only will co-op be easier to implement there (less complexity/number of possible card interactions) but the AI, from what I have seen in streams, is actually good and knows how to make proper decisions and play the game which will make a refreshing change. I still don't particularly like the Lolstone oval unit frames (they could still change I guess?) but it's a small price to pay for what appears to be half decent PVE. I truly believe most of the reason that PVE appears to have been abandoned (along with the stupid AI bonuses) is because of the ground breaking AI here....HXE either don't have the skills to create it or it's just not possible with the sheer number of possibilities (but what we have clearly looks like a combination of the two). Hex is much more suited to PVP where the decision making is made by a human brain rather than 4 billion lines of sloppy code that just cannot ever hope to get it right, which I hate to say as I cannot stand PVP, but in my opinion is totally true.
    I think Hex's AI isn't necessarily "dumb", just "super predictable". It's running off of some pretty obvious "if then else" lines, meaning you know if you have a Legendary with 2 Health and an Uncommon with 2 health, it will usually attack the former with Burn rather than the latter, even if that's a poor decision to make. It's not looking at a card by card basis, it's looking at basic data sets, which often (Almost always) ignores card texts that could result in it picking incorrectly.
    I guess it comes down to your definition of dumb, when it's holding a Sunlit Sentence with 5 resources open and it takes lethal damage instead of wiping the opponents board and living for another turn...well that's what I call Artificial Idiot. If you look at all the posts in the Siege thread that has been around for many weeks detailing all the misplays then you can kind of get a pretty good idea of how lacking the AI is. This is one of the main reasons why the PVE has been scrapped in my opinion as no matter how good the multiplayer/raiding setting/mechanics/lore/etc is, if the AI cannot play the game correctly then the only other option is for FRA 2.0 ways to 'challenge' the player (i.e some games are utterly unwinnable before the first card is played which makes for a frustrating experience).
    If i remember correctly the AI misplays on purpose a non-0 amount of the time to avoid constant optimum choices. It's just more noticeable with certain sequences then others.
  • VargrBoartusk wrote:

    If i remember correctly the AI misplays on purpose a non-0 amount of the time to avoid constant optimum choices. It's just more noticeable with certain sequences then others.
    Honestly, at this point this reason just sounds like it was used as a cover-up for their horrible AI programming.

    Programmer: Our AI sucks, how do we put it out and have less backlash about them?
    Princess: Just say it avoid constant optimum choices for reasons.
    Programmer: Genius idea!
  • Goliathus wrote:

    VargrBoartusk wrote:

    If i remember correctly the AI misplays on purpose a non-0 amount of the time to avoid constant optimum choices. It's just more noticeable with certain sequences then others.
    Honestly, at this point this reason just sounds like it was used as a cover-up for their horrible AI programming.
    Programmer: Our AI sucks, how do we put it out and have less backlash about them?
    Princess: Just say it avoid constant optimum choices for reasons.
    Programmer: Genius idea!
    This was either true at some point and no longer is / only is in very specific cases not the cases people are complaining about. Or it never was true I'm not gona bother speculating but it is not the case with the siege AI.
  • VargrBoartusk wrote:

    TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    I guess it comes down to your definition of dumb, when it's holding a Sunlit Sentence with 5 resources open and it takes lethal damage instead of wiping the opponents board and living for another turn...well that's what I call Artificial Idiot. If you look at all the posts in the Siege thread that has been around for many weeks detailing all the misplays then you can kind of get a pretty good idea of how lacking the AI is. This is one of the main reasons why the PVE has been scrapped in my opinion as no matter how good the multiplayer/raiding setting/mechanics/lore/etc is, if the AI cannot play the game correctly then the only other option is for FRA 2.0 ways to 'challenge' the player (i.e some games are utterly unwinnable before the first card is played which makes for a frustrating experience).
    If i remember correctly the AI misplays on purpose a non-0 amount of the time to avoid constant optimum choices. It's just more noticeable with certain sequences then others.
    Their intention at the beginning was to dumb down the AI to ensure the players didn't quit because it never made mistakes (and until we got Siege we didn't really know how good it was as there was no way to see an entire game played by the AI) but they were under the impression that they could create something that was actually good. I'll admit it *appeared* the AI was doing ok at some point 2-3 years in but either the card pool just got too big with way too many mechanics/decisions or Siege really shone the spotlight on the AI and it became clear just how bad it is...either way it's an albatross hanging around their necks which, along with their lack of monetizing PVE at all, means the main selling point of this game has been left to languish.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by TheBlackCrypt ().

  • Yo !

    It's quite interesting to see how the former "most friendly community" has recently turned into a ranting bunch of salty players nowadays (well, in part obviously).

    To be honest, I've never really care how good or bad the community was, but it's rather funny to find some guys (no need to give names, they've supposedly left anyway), who 3 years ago were claiming everything was beautiful in paradise land, are now the ones saying in every possible thread how bad they think things are... So what ? If you think that the boat is going to sink, just leave it and move on with your life, there's no need to tell everybody how happy you are about leaving because, well, chances are, we don't give a damn.


    As for my personal thoughts, I'll try to answer OP with those :

    1) Siege :
    - It has been cool, and a great addition... Sure some people were expecting something else, but that's always the case when something vague is promised, everybody will (for)see it the way they want, and it's going to be different in everybody's mind... So of course, when it eventually gets implemented, there have to be some sad faces, but that's fine.
    => Great new mode, might need some refinement, but that's perfectly fine.
    => Lower current activity is mainly induced by the fact that most people (ie: siege attackers) have gotten all the rewards already... So less people willing to gamble their way out of now refined decks.

    2) Tournaments are doing OK :
    - The scheduled ones are doing best... There are still some issues like the inability to do anything (minus spin chests) between rounds that are a major issue, and I am firmly convinced that a lot more players would engaged in those tournaments, if they had the possibility to do anything between rounds. (Heck, I used to play 2-3 games at a time on modo, I'd multi-queue severely if I could)
    - The on demand ones aren't doing as well, but it had to be expected, since we are very far into the 9th set, so the players already have the cards they want... In that regard, kismet drafts or some kind of event would probably incur a decent boost to limited activity before the next set's release.
    - Draft are the main issue, sure it suffers from the fact mentioned above (set 9 have been here for awhile) but there are also some other issues that are working against it, namely : the inability to find a 2-0 game in a decent amount of time, and overall poor prizing structure.
    => To fix that, I would consider dropping the X number of win required from the matchmaking, which means that everybody looking for a draft game could face anybody else looking from a draft game... That's not ideal, but at least it would definitely solve the issue with the 2-0 not finding game, while keeping the asynch draft which seems to be the best way to go these years.
    => As for the prize structure, 4-2-2-1-1-1-1-Rare-Rare-Rare-Rare with something else for the winner (like an exclusive AA) sounds acceptable, especially if it gets implemented along with the previously mentioned solution regarding matchmaking.... I was a big fan of 8-4 but well, we gotta live with our time, and the playerbase is too casual here for 8-4 to work, and it's not easily transferable to async anyway.
    => Might be an issue with split but well, the whole thing is up for debate, the one thing that is sure is that drafts could be improved and I'm just throwing random possibilities for people to think about.

    Edit : The AA for Single Night needs to be changed, that's the main incentive (apart from fun) to play it, and the Witch is getting old... Same with Arcanum vault, even though since it's free and the prizes are slightly higher, the need to AA change is not as big.

    Edit 2 : So what are we doing on Monday Night nowadays ?


    3) AH is poor but functional :
    - It's been asked for a while but it's in the work if I'm not mistaken (remember some news about it)... So we'll have to wait and see.
    - Apart from that, I don't feel like there has been a huge up trend or down trend recently, at least from the seller point of view, since I've been selling a lot of extra... From a buyer's point of view, it looks like some prices are inflated, but that's mainly due to a lack of activity due to summer (summer is always bad for TCG activity) + set 9 here for awhile, so people are putting less stuff for sale at the moment.


    4) Communication is lackluster :
    - Well I've been saying it for a very long time now, so I am not expecting it to change overnight... Either way, communication is critical to a game's success, because it enforces support from the players (yes, it does, public opinion is quite easy to manipulate).
    - I think that in order to move forward Hex has no choice but to put in place something in that department, in order to better manage that part of the business.
    => It's not a luxury, it's a necessity, because at the end of the day, it is better for any company to produce sub par product but have great support from its customers, than produce wonderful content and have no support from its customers....
    => A great product doesn't guarantee great sales, but happy customers does.


    5) Doombringer Limited format :
    => I've been quite surprised to see a few critics here and there, I'm assuming people are just grumpy about other subject, so they vent on it as well... They might lose more games than usual as well since it's more complexe, that's often a reason why people dislike certain format, but well, should be part of the equation right ?
    But honestly, this has been one of the best if not the best limited I've experienced in Hex... Making trishards decks the main option in limited is very tricky with how the threshold system works, but they did a great job, and it turns out to provide are a large amount of possibilities at every event.
    => A bit more complex than usual, sure, thanks... I'm perfectly happy to have many options at my disposal, that's much better than having to choose between the same 2-3 champions / strategies.


    6) Cosmic Coins / Siege Sacks :
    - I've been touching on siege sacks in the first point, so I won't comeback... But Cosmic Coins have been a wonderful addition to the game... People tend to forget that it was a request from the community that Hex has implemented, so yeah, they are listening and some ideas get implemented. Since the introduction of the ladder it has always felt poorly to play constructed when in high ladder, because of the lack of incentives to do so... But now it no longer is the case, there are some pretty good rewards to be gained while playtesting, and that's a huge plus.


    7) Playstation :
    - While I can't talk about the game from their perspective, from a PC player's perspective, the influx of new players has been welcome... Well there's always the issue about rudeness / sore losers that tend to be a bit more frequent with them, that's definitely something that has been common in TCG for almost 3 decades... It's a bit sad that we can't talk to them, but maybe that will be a feature in the months to come...
    - Either way, I'm glad we've got a new influx of players from here, and I'm sure there could be more to come if the marketing expenses get directed a bit in this way (plus, they are putting in more cash for Hex than the average player, so that's an important customer base to focus on).
    - Side note : I know the meme is that the PS players always come up with a 86 cards deck mill strategy, but I've faced some who were playing much better than most people on the forum... Which is not too hard I'd argue, but still (yeah, taunting a bit, 'cause why not :)).


    8) Overall view : Hold.
    - While there are still some critical changes to go through for the Hex team (Communication, Playerbase, and even Esport needs to be addressed) I think that they are on a hex path to getting there... By hex path I mean slooooowly but surely. They do listen to feedback, obviously they have a limited budget, limited time and a limited team, so they are not able to implement everything that is a great idea... But even if the times are not the best, with the summer arriving and the set9 getting older and older, we shall see a revive in activity in september, if not before depending on set10's release...

    As for next year, I'm sure they have plenty of plan, but even the grumpiest kids will agree : we can't wait to here about it !


    Cheers !

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Wuggalix ().

  • @Wuggalix nice post. I'm also going around talking about the game's problems but I've never once said I'd leave the game or boast about it (or trash talk it outside of our inner circles). I'd like your comments on the following things left out from your post, though

    1) Siege:
    - Don't you think that the restrictions put on Attackers is a big problem (Standard-only deck)? Makes the mode expensive both because Standard cards are more expensive than Immortal and PvE cards and because you need to change decks according to rotations.
    - Don't you think that the A.I. failings, which are many and gamebreaking (i.e. AI failing to pick correct thresholds and AI refusing to play certain cards) basically breaks the mode?
    - What is your opinion on the reason Siege was introduced? Don't you think that Siege was implemented to cover the need for an infinite PvE mode? If yes, don't you think that making players pay for every interaction is a bad idea?

    2) Tournaments:
    - Don't you think that HXE giving out more platinum than it makes from players is problematic? (kind of a rhetorical question, of course it's problematic. With 51 people joining last week's Bash, HXE removed 35,700 from the economy and jsut by counting the 4 players that got 4 wins and ignoring everyone else who got a price, they are in the red, giving those 4 players a total of 40,000 platinum).
    - Don't you think that when only 3-5 people join Singles tournament there's an issue? Or the VIP sometimes not firing at all?

    3) Auction House:
    - AH changes were discussed 3 years ago. How much longer would you suggest people have to wait before they start getting suspicions that changes might not come?

    6) Cosmic Coins / Siege Sacks
    - What's your opinion about the un-trade-ability of the Siege Sacks' rewards?
    - Don't you think both CC and SS rewards would be better off all being chosen by the player at whatever price instead of being random?

    7) Playstation (for that one you seem to be ignoring a lot of things)
    - Apart from low non-Cosmic Constructed queue waiting time reduction, the Playstation release didn't do much after the first 2-3 weeks from the release in each region. Word of mouth is that the majority of Playstation players avoid paying for stuff. This trend can also be observed from Playstation streamers. Since they were given a semi-decent deck to play Constructed with, many stuck with it. Their Limited presence is also quite ... limited. All in all, the Playstation audience just didn't bring enough money to HXE, which, in the end, is the sole reason such a move was made (a company must get money to continue existing).

    8) No comment on opinion.
  • Thanks for the follow up, I'll try to answer as many points as I can.

    Vroengard wrote:

    1) Siege:
    - Don't you think that the restrictions put on Attackers is a big problem (Standard-only deck)? Makes the mode expensive both because Standard cards are more expensive than Immortal and PvE cards and because you need to change decks according to rotations.
    - Don't you think that the A.I. failings, which are many and gamebreaking (i.e. AI failing to pick correct thresholds and AI refusing to play certain cards) basically breaks the mode?
    - What is your opinion on the reason Siege was introduced? Don't you think that Siege was implemented to cover the need for an infinite PvE mode? If yes, don't you think that making players pay for every interaction is a bad idea?

    - It's interesting you've put the cost of a standard deck in as I did not thought about it... But indeed, that's somewhat of a restriction that could be an issue for someone willing to take down a given siege, but we can also see it as a way to incentivise the players to put a bit more money, just to finish their wonderful siege attacker deck.... And in that sense, it's a great move from Hex.
    I am unsure about including Immortal cards as well, and I think this would make the attackers a bit too strong... In my opinion, when we factor in everything (AI<Human, PVE>STD, etc) the mode is currently slightly favoring defense but not by much, and that's in a vacuum, if we take a given defense, once an attacker has found out which 3 decks the defender has chosen, he/she can literally build a deck to beat this one very siege... I've done that a couple of times, it's time consuming and you are not really going to use the build elsewhere but well, if you really want to take down one defense, it's definitely feasible.

    As a side note, I think it is better if the defender is slightly favored than if the attacker is... Indeed, if the attacker tend to be favored, even marginally, that would be an incentive for people NOT to put siege defense in place... And therefore, the whole mode would not be played.

    - Regarding the AI failings, it's annoying indeed, but I would not call it gamebreaking... Watching replays help figuring out which things the AI are not handling properly, and offers us a way to fix that, but well, there's a very large amount of cards the AI can play decently, so it's not that bad.... It's like choosing 3 decks you'll give to a child and you have to take into account that this child is not going to do the best possible choice, so you have to help him/her by not giving something too complex... The challenge is not on the child, it's on us to provide something adequate.

    - I believe Siege has been introduced for 2 reasons, first, they promised the "Keeps" a long time ago, and they wanted to prove the KS that everything is better late than never, and second (most importantly potentially) I believe that they want to differentiate from the competition, and in that sense it's a success, because it does fit perfectly into the image Hex wants to show of themselves : they are innovative, and when people think TCGs have been largely overdone, they come and say hello, we've got something exciting that nobody have ever put on the market.


    Vroengard wrote:

    2) Tournaments:
    - Don't you think that HXE giving out more platinum than it makes from players is problematic? (kind of a rhetorical question, of course it's problematic. With 51 people joining last week's Bash, HXE removed 35,700 from the economy and jsut by counting the 4 players that got 4 wins and ignoring everyone else who got a price, they are in the red, giving those 4 players a total of 40,000 platinum).
    - Don't you think that when only 3-5 people join Singles tournament there's an issue? Or the VIP sometimes not firing at all?

    - Well, it is a problem and it is a great news.
    You've already pretty well explained the problem which will lead to two economical issues : Devaluation of Plat (Plat become less valuable since people can now farm it to some extent) and Inflation (price of cards getting higher since plat is farm-able).
    As for the great news, it's about Hex financial health.
    What ? Well, yes... A company that desperately needs short term revenues would do everything to make the currency worth more (so that people get an incentive to buy more plat with dollars), but a company who's looking at the long term viability of their game, they don't really care about short term gain, what they need is activity, they need their players to play the game, and play it even more... That's what those tournaments are about, getting people to play the game even more.
    What I deduce here, is that Hex is confident enough they'll get there in the short term, and they are working on their long term growth instead, by increasing players activity... As an investor, I would feel pretty confident by such a move (unless I worked in VC, 'cause VC mostly care about short term but that's another topic^^) and as a player, we should take it as a sign of healthiness, because that clearly is one.

    As for the issues, the devaluation of plat is only a temporary one, Hex still is the Central Bank here, they can make the plat worth as much, or as little as they want... Which means, that if the plat value get's too low for their convenience, they can just take a couple of measures (Existing and News Sinks / Review of Prizes / Etc) and it will go up again.
    Inflation isn't really a problem on the long term in Hex, since if the prices of cards gets too high people will just open packs and resell the content of them.... It happened previously, and might happen again, but it doesn't need to be addressed, the market will do it on it's own.

    - Singles have an issue, that's why I mentioned it in my Edit (not sure you saw it since it's been added after)... I think the format isn't that great (contrary to Fight Night that I think is even better than Standard, and nonetheless very refreshing), but it's not that bad either, so the low attendance probably comes from somewhere else... And in my opinion that somewhere else is the lackluster prize support for it.
    I mentioned the Witch (current AA reward for Singles) but a whole overview of the cost/prizes would probably boost the attendance of that event by a decent amount.

    As for VIP, it has always been an issue (to some extent)... I think it's still here because it's implemented, so they have to support it, but it definitely no longer has a great appeal to enough people. I've suggested a while ago that the tickets should be tradable, but that's only one of the several possibilities at their disposal to make it work, and the solution might very well be to rethink it entirely.
    With the devaluation of plat in action, VIP is becoming even less appealing, so I wouldn't be surprised if they take some actions towards it before the end of the year.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Wuggalix ().

  • Vroengard wrote:

    3) Auction House:
    - AH changes were discussed 3 years ago. How much longer would you suggest people have to wait before they start getting suspicions that changes might not come?

    I am not sure about the source, but I remember seeing an article mentioning it being in the work rather recently... Might be wrong though.
    Either way, I can understand the frustration, as I would myself very much love an entire revamp of the AH, but I also think that it is functional (which explains it not being very high on their priority list) and also demanding in term of work... Especially if new features are added like bid/ask etc.

    People will get suspicious anyway, no matter what a company is doing, there will always be those who praise blindly and those who think that if something great is happening it's by chance... But the truth has to be in the middle, and in any case, Cory has to assign his team to different projects, maybe the AH revamp is curently one of them, maybe not, either way, time will tell.


    Vroengard wrote:

    6) Cosmic Coins / Siege Sacks
    - What's your opinion about the un-trade-ability of the Siege Sacks' rewards?
    - Don't you think both CC and SS rewards would be better off all being chosen by the player at whatever price instead of being random?

    - I've been quite impressed by the Smart drops... Especially after Chest openings, and Arena/Campaign drops, it's pretty refreshing (and a great incentive) to know that you will get something you don't already have.
    I am talking about smart drop since I think it can only go with untradable items... Because well, if the items were tradable, it would be much more complex to implement and deal with (people will be reluctant to sell an item knowing that they'll have to buy it back if they ever want to play it).
    Also, it's not entirely untradable, since there are AA Eternal Seeker in the sacks, and people who've open some now have the possibility to sell their regular art ones for some decent amount of plat.... All in all, I think it was a great way to get people play the mode, while rewarding them for doing so, and in a way that is testing a totally new form of drop, that I am sure we will see elsewhere in the future.

    - Well, the way it is done for SS is to give an incentive to "grind them all"... So people have to play the mode, and that's perfectly fine, once a large enough amount of people will have completed it, we will probably see new SS sinks in the store, to give an incentive for people to play the mode again... And they have a large number of options at their disposal in that regard (AA/Cosmetics/etc).
    Also, People only playing PVP would only be interested in (at best) Seekers and AA Shards, Maybe Sleeves... Which means that they would be done with the mode much faster than how it is setup nowadays... It's cool for them, but it's not cool for the mode, and I think that the rewards' purpose are to make people playing the mode, which they do properly right now.

    As for the Cosmic Coins, I'm a bit more mixed, but I'm fine with how it's been implemented... The goal was to give an incentive (reward) for people to play the ladder once they've achieved whatever rank they wanted in Cosmic, if the coins could be exchanged for any card (from a pool), I'd argue that the rarest cards (or items) would not be worth as much since they would just require a given amount of grind... Whether this is a good thing or not is up to debate, but since the idea was to give value for the efforts, I think it's fulfilling it's purpose nicely as it is, and I think it would provide less value to the Cosmic grinders if the rewards were to be chosen.



    Vroengard wrote:

    7) Playstation (for that one you seem to be ignoring a lot of things)
    - Apart from low non-Cosmic Constructed queue waiting time reduction, the Playstation release didn't do much after the first 2-3 weeks from the release in each region. Word of mouth is that the majority of Playstation players avoid paying for stuff. This trend can also be observed from Playstation streamers. Since they were given a semi-decent deck to play Constructed with, many stuck with it. Their Limited presence is also quite ... limited. All in all, the Playstation audience just didn't bring enough money to HXE, which, in the end, is the sole reason such a move was made (a company must get money to continue existing).

    I definitely confess my ignorance regarding how it has been setup for PS players, what package/deck they get the game with and what they have to pay to get there...
    That being said, I've come against a decent aount of PS players with fully EA'd UB / UW / GW decks, and I figured that since they don't have PVE to grind currency, in order to get all that, they've either grind daily/weekly events for quite some time, or they just put a decent amount of money into plat.... Of course that's not the majority, but I thought the PS players were more likely to put some money in thanks to the lowest amount of "grindable" content at their disposal.

    It's true that their limited presence is by a large margin, lower than their constructed one, but that might also come from a lack of knowledge/understanding regarding limited... Since it's not more expensive to do an Evo than to do a Bash or an Immortal gauntlet.... So maybe this could be improved with a better introduction to those modes.
    Either way, it's a whole new market that Hex have touched, so maybe it's not driving as much revenues as they thought, maybe it is, but either way, there's a very large number of people in that market, and hex has done the largest part of the work by creating the client, so I'm pretty confident in them developing that part of their business further.



    Edit : Had to split it in two... Oh well, thanks again !

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Wuggalix ().

  • Wuggalix wrote:

    It's quite interesting to see how the former "most friendly community" has recently turned into a ranting bunch of salty players nowadays (well, in part obviously).
    This community was never really that friendly. It was always generous, but never really any more friendly than any other online community.

    For one example, I remember watching certain extremely notable people in the community(who I won't name because it's not appropriate or necessary) LITERALLY troll new players in in-game chat for asking unpopular questions and get cheered on for it by the game's 'official' representatives and the community... like 3 years ago. This community has always claimed to be friendly... and a lot of the smaller communities related to it are quite friendly(streamer communities, etc.)... but the overall community was never really any different from other communities.

    So it doesn't surprise me that when things go wrong... the community acts like any other gaming community when things go wrong: It gets salty. ;)

    Wuggalix wrote:

    => I've been quite surprised to see a few critics here and there, I'm assuming people are just grumpy about other subject, so they vent on it as well... They might lose more games than usual as well since it's more complexe, that's often a reason why people dislike certain format, but well, should be part of the equation right ?
    But honestly, this has been one of the best if not the best limited I've experienced in Hex... Making trishards decks the main option in limited is very tricky with how the threshold system works, but they did a great job, and it turns out to provide are a large amount of possibilities at every event.
    => A bit more complex than usual, sure, thanks... I'm perfectly happy to have many options at my disposal, that's much better than having to choose between the same 2-3 champions / strategies.
    To be fair, I assume this set is likely quite fun for draft. But it's the worst evo format I've seen in this game, with the possible exception of the set 5 pre-champ nerf fiesta. It's just an absolute mess. I have literally 0 motivation to even check what my evo deck is like...
    Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

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

    Wuggalix wrote:

    It's quite interesting to see how the former "most friendly community" has recently turned into a ranting bunch of salty players nowadays (well, in part obviously).
    This community was never really that friendly. It was always generous, but never really any more friendly than any other online community.
    For one example, I remember watching certain extremely notable people in the community(who I won't name because it's not appropriate or necessary) LITERALLY troll new players in in-game chat for asking unpopular questions and get cheered on for it by the game's 'official' representatives and the community... like 3 years ago. This community has always claimed to be friendly... and a lot of the smaller communities related to it are quite friendly(streamer communities, etc.)... but the overall community was never really any different from other communities.
    Some of the notable people in the community are d*ckheads(I am not a fan of some of them, just saying), but I don't think you can slam the every veteran in the society just because of a few notable veteran. I mean, people always say the forum/twitch community is just a tiny portion of the game's player base.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wolzarg wrote:

    This was either true at some point and no longer is / only is in very specific cases not the cases people are complaining about. Or it never was true I'm not gona bother speculating but it is not the case with the siege AI.

    TheBlackCrypt wrote:

    Their intention at the beginning was to dumb down the AI to ensure the players didn't quit because it never made mistakes (and until we got Siege we didn't really know how good it was as there was no way to see an entire game played by the AI) but they were under the impression that they could create something that was actually good. I'll admit it *appeared* the AI was doing ok at some point 2-3 years in but either the card pool just got too big with way too many mechanics/decisions or Siege really shone the spotlight on the AI and it became clear just how bad it is...either way it's an albatross hanging around their necks which, along with their lack of monetizing PVE at all, means the main selling point of this game has been left to languish.
    I am under the impression that the AI doesn't just randomly do dumb moves. The campaign AI(assuming what Wolzarg said about Siege AI is true) has personality, which is used to enhance the world's roleplay-bility. For instance, Orc opponent will go incredibly offensive if you are playing Vennen or have Vennen troops and this might leads to him full swinging into a bunch of high endurance Vennen and get wiped. The "player didn't quit" is just a side bonus to this. Assuming what I said and remember is indeed true, then I guess Wolzarg is also right about the Siege AI not having this kind of flaw and will play the best moves they can think of the whole time...even though they are still horrible as an AI.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Goliathus ().

  • Wuggalix wrote:

    Yo !

    It's quite interesting to see how the former "most friendly community" has recently turned into a ranting bunch of salty players nowadays (well, in part obviously).

    To be honest, I've never really care how good or bad the community was, but it's rather funny to find some guys (no need to give names, they've supposedly left anyway), who 3 years ago were claiming everything was beautiful in paradise land, are now the ones saying in every possible thread how bad they think things are... So what ? If you think that the boat is going to sink, just leave it and move on with your life, there's no need to tell everybody how happy you are about leaving because, well, chances are, we don't give a damn.


    As for my personal thoughts, I'll try to answer OP with those :

    1) Siege :
    - It has been cool, and a great addition... Sure some people were expecting something else, but that's always the case when something vague is promised, everybody will (for)see it the way they want, and it's going to be different in everybody's mind... So of course, when it eventually gets implemented, there have to be some sad faces, but that's fine.
    => Great new mode, might need some refinement, but that's perfectly fine.
    => Lower current activity is mainly induced by the fact that most people (ie: siege attackers) have gotten all the rewards already... So less people willing to gamble their way out of now refined decks.

    2) Tournaments are doing OK :
    - The scheduled ones are doing best... There are still some issues like the inability to do anything (minus spin chests) between rounds that are a major issue, and I am firmly convinced that a lot more players would engaged in those tournaments, if they had the possibility to do anything between rounds. (Heck, I used to play 2-3 games at a time on modo, I'd multi-queue severely if I could)
    - The on demand ones aren't doing as well, but it had to be expected, since we are very far into the 9th set, so the players already have the cards they want... In that regard, kismet drafts or some kind of event would probably incur a decent boost to limited activity before the next set's release.
    - Draft are the main issue, sure it suffers from the fact mentioned above (set 9 have been here for awhile) but there are also some other issues that are working against it, namely : the inability to find a 2-0 game in a decent amount of time, and overall poor prizing structure.
    => To fix that, I would consider dropping the X number of win required from the matchmaking, which means that everybody looking for a draft game could face anybody else looking from a draft game... That's not ideal, but at least it would definitely solve the issue with the 2-0 not finding game, while keeping the asynch draft which seems to be the best way to go these years.
    => As for the prize structure, 4-2-2-1-1-1-1-Rare-Rare-Rare-Rare with something else for the winner (like an exclusive AA) sounds acceptable, especially if it gets implemented along with the previously mentioned solution regarding matchmaking.... I was a big fan of 8-4 but well, we gotta live with our time, and the playerbase is too casual here for 8-4 to work, and it's not easily transferable to async anyway.
    => Might be an issue with split but well, the whole thing is up for debate, the one thing that is sure is that drafts could be improved and I'm just throwing random possibilities for people to think about.

    Edit : The AA for Single Night needs to be changed, that's the main incentive (apart from fun) to play it, and the Witch is getting old... Same with Arcanum vault, even though since it's free and the prizes are slightly higher, the need to AA change is not as big.

    Edit 2 : So what are we doing on Monday Night nowadays ?


    3) AH is poor but functional :
    - It's been asked for a while but it's in the work if I'm not mistaken (remember some news about it)... So we'll have to wait and see.
    - Apart from that, I don't feel like there has been a huge up trend or down trend recently, at least from the seller point of view, since I've been selling a lot of extra... From a buyer's point of view, it looks like some prices are inflated, but that's mainly due to a lack of activity due to summer (summer is always bad for TCG activity) + set 9 here for awhile, so people are putting less stuff for sale at the moment.


    4) Communication is lackluster :
    - Well I've been saying it for a very long time now, so I am not expecting it to change overnight... Either way, communication is critical to a game's success, because it enforces support from the players (yes, it does, public opinion is quite easy to manipulate).
    - I think that in order to move forward Hex has no choice but to put in place something in that department, in order to better manage that part of the business.
    => It's not a luxury, it's a necessity, because at the end of the day, it is better for any company to produce sub par product but have great support from its customers, than produce wonderful content and have no support from its customers....
    => A great product doesn't guarantee great sales, but happy customers does.


    5) Doombringer Limited format :
    => I've been quite surprised to see a few critics here and there, I'm assuming people are just grumpy about other subject, so they vent on it as well... They might lose more games than usual as well since it's more complexe, that's often a reason why people dislike certain format, but well, should be part of the equation right ?
    But honestly, this has been one of the best if not the best limited I've experienced in Hex... Making trishards decks the main option in limited is very tricky with how the threshold system works, but they did a great job, and it turns out to provide are a large amount of possibilities at every event.
    => A bit more complex than usual, sure, thanks... I'm perfectly happy to have many options at my disposal, that's much better than having to choose between the same 2-3 champions / strategies.


    6) Cosmic Coins / Siege Sacks :
    - I've been touching on siege sacks in the first point, so I won't comeback... But Cosmic Coins have been a wonderful addition to the game... People tend to forget that it was a request from the community that Hex has implemented, so yeah, they are listening and some ideas get implemented. Since the introduction of the ladder it has always felt poorly to play constructed when in high ladder, because of the lack of incentives to do so... But now it no longer is the case, there are some pretty good rewards to be gained while playtesting, and that's a huge plus.


    7) Playstation :
    - While I can't talk about the game from their perspective, from a PC player's perspective, the influx of new players has been welcome... Well there's always the issue about rudeness / sore losers that tend to be a bit more frequent with them, that's definitely something that has been common in TCG for almost 3 decades... It's a bit sad that we can't talk to them, but maybe that will be a feature in the months to come...
    - Either way, I'm glad we've got a new influx of players from here, and I'm sure there could be more to come if the marketing expenses get directed a bit in this way (plus, they are putting in more cash for Hex than the average player, so that's an important customer base to focus on).
    - Side note : I know the meme is that the PS players always come up with a 86 cards deck mill strategy, but I've faced some who were playing much better than most people on the forum... Which is not too hard I'd argue, but still (yeah, taunting a bit, 'cause why not :)).


    8) Overall view : Hold.
    - While there are still some critical changes to go through for the Hex team (Communication, Playerbase, and even Esport needs to be addressed) I think that they are on a hex path to getting there... By hex path I mean slooooowly but surely. They do listen to feedback, obviously they have a limited budget, limited time and a limited team, so they are not able to implement everything that is a great idea... But even if the times are not the best, with the summer arriving and the set9 getting older and older, we shall see a revive in activity in september, if not before depending on set10's release...

    As for next year, I'm sure they have plenty of plan, but even the grumpiest kids will agree : we can't wait to here about it !


    Cheers !
    BLA ... the majority of the ppl who complain LOVE this game and their heart is bleeding when they see how hexent kills this... why should they move on from this game they still enjoy (if the games fire)...
    Austrian Kickstarter & Slacker Backer
    -=] Dont mess with the bull, you gonna get the horn [=-

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Cernz ().

  • On the comparison of TCGs and CCGs:

    LOVELAIN wrote:

    Trading sounds nice on paper until you realize most cards aren't worth much. It feels great opening a card that's worth a lot (like a Scribe of the Flayed Man or whatever), because you can exchange it for essentially whatever card you want and probably still have money left over (especially when the set is new). On the other hand, if you open a Rakaanozov the Starved, you've basically got nothing, whereas in a CCG you got a reasonable fraction of a Scribe (in Shadowverse's case, a Rakaanozov would be worth 1/3.5 of a Scribe). And we both know the game has a lot more Rakaanozovs than it has Scribes of the Flayed Man. Simultaneously, since card value in CCGs is tied directly to rarity rather than playability, any legendary that would be worth pennies in Hex can get you a rare of your choice in SV, and even a little bit of extra change. Imagine being able to turn any legendary into a Brilliant Annihilix and a Chlorophyllia. I'd much rather take that over 2-3 jackpots and 15 or so worthless legends per set.
    I played a ton of different TCGs and CCGs in my life (you can literally mention any one that has seen decent success at some point in the last 20 years execpt for Gwent and be sure that I at least tried it) and Lovelain is very right here.

    The main difference between TCGs and CCGs in terms of value (aside from the option to sell for actual real money) is that cards in CCGs will always have the same "value" unless the developers decide to change the ratio of "dust", "vials", or whatever you get per card of a certain rarity and giving out fewer "dust" or whatver per card than before is something no developer with a decent sense of self-marketing will ever do because this can backfire massively. CCGs don't need a big playerbase and that's the main economic issue of TCGs. As soon as the overall number of active players of a TCG is below a certain level, the TCG business model doesn't make any sense anymore because a) cards either have no value since nobody is playing anymore or are way too expensive because a few remaining players try to manipulate the small market and b) trading becomes more difficult because there is noone to trade with.

    Given the rather high number of CCGs, I assume that most developers nowadays don't look for the big shot but rather for a small temporary success because that's where CCGs are more profitable. The issue with Hex is that it did quite well at some point but didn't manage to convert this "success" into a playerbase where the TCG model would be better in the long run. It's fine to attempt a TCG model but you need the playerbase to support it. That's why I often mentioned the playerbase as the main problem of the game: It is way more important to the success of a TCG than to a CCG.
  • On the other hand, the more money on the line, the more competitive the game or contest. If people can't make money from selling cards or packs, those cards and packs become less appealing to them. With a game as complex as Hex, it would be problematic if it was to be less competitive because people would be less incentivized to spend hours theorycrafting and playtesting.

    Card access being slightly gated is also something that should be taken into consideration. TCGs are better at catering to Collectors and maybe whales, you know, people who'd want to feel special about having something unique. In a CCG, everyone can have everything with enough time and/or money and there are no unaccessible stuff, probably (I'm sure you could argue for a hybrid model though). Also, the fact that not everyone can have everything is also a plus for the competitive minded. It creates a second barrier to top level play, by filtering out those that are not confident or willing to invest in cards. For example, if everyone had every card, I'm sure things like Arcanum Vault, Fight Night, Singles Night would have more participants, but the level of competition would also drop.

    It's a mixed bag. I'd say that ideally you'd go for a mixed model, by allowing some of the acquisition techniques of CCG inside your TCG. Like Crafting. And generous card/pack prizes (something that Hex does incredibly well if I might add) but not overdoing it since the basic shell of your game is still a TCG.