Vroengard's ideas regarding Siege's betterment.

    • Vroengard's ideas regarding Siege's betterment.

      This is gonna be a somewhat long post. You have been warned.

      First of all, I would like to set the premise of this post. Many players (and even some who are now done with the game) have accused the playerbase and especially the ones more critical towards Hex and HXE that they (the latter) are all words, can't know anything that is going on behind the scenes and, most importantly, that they don't do anything themselves to help the game. That always hit me as weird. It's a tiny minority that has the time, resources and creativity to put into the game for the others' enjoyment.

      What's left for the rest to do? Just put money into the game and offer their opinions at this forum. I've spent my fair bit in the game over the years, relatively to my salary. And yes, I've become very reluctant as of late to continue doing so. However I've mostly focused on small posts criticizing and offering opinion on what I think is being done wrong. Well, this is my detailed post on how I think Siege can be much better (which isn't that hard to be honest, with the state it is right now) or even perfected.

      First of all, step 0, the following two things must be addressed for anything else to work. I think they are of the outmost importance. I can't find another way to work without those two. Unless those happen, Siege will forever be a flawed product:

      0a) ATTACKERS MUST BE ALLOWED TO USE IMMORTAL CARDS, PvE CARDS AND EQUIPMENT
      0b) AI MUST IMPROVE

      I've offered my opinion regarding how PS4 has hurdled a bunch of things that could have been done. HXE will forever trip themselves in trying to keep the two clients not too far apart. Enough is enough.

      1. Giving player an incentive to play Siege

      Three pillars. i. Rewards, ii. Competition, iii. Fun

      i) Rewards
      • Siege sacks: Siege sacks are a fine addition to the reward structure. However, there are some striking problems. One is the passive generation of siege sacks. 2 Siege Sacks ("s.s." from here on) per hour is, according to players who have player much more Siege than myself, not enough. It's still too early in the implementation. I've heard that 4 thrown around so I'll accept that for now. Another thing that only popped after the currency update is the starting s.s. There must be an upper limit (cap) to this. I'd say 20 sacks for starters should be enough (a kickstart of 5 hours, if we go by the 4 s.s. per hour generation). Also, 20 s.s. starting corresponds to the 100p. entry fee of Merry Melee
      • Siege sacks purchaseables: We are sick of RNG rewards, in case you haven't noticed already. My take is this: Only the most chase of items should be behind the RNG wall. Keep the cosmetic rewards in the siege packs, but there must be utility things to obtain in straight up exchange with s.s. Mercenaries, equipment AND, here is a new idea, OLD SETS' CHESTS. You pick a Set number and the chest's rarity will use the same algorithm as if you'd opened a pack. This not only creates one more gold sink but will also improve availability of old equipment. Because, and I just checked the AH as I write this post, there are 0 chests of any rarity for sets 1, 2 and 4 from sets 3 and 5 there are only 5 pages total of common rarity chests only. Also, frankly, selling set 1 common equipment for 3$ is ridiculous.
      • Perks: [see second bullet point of "ii) Competition"]
      • Ante: [see third bullet point of "ii) Competition"]
      ii) Competition
      • Introduce a Leaderboard. It must be something that resets frequently, since the mode is, as I take it, designed to be very active and ever-changing. I think that, for starters at least, it should be introduced with a biweekly reset. Now, how would this Leaderboard work? For one, I think that it should not be split between attackers' leaderboard and defenders' leaderboard. I've thought about it and while I'd personally want it separated, I think that it'd be best for the game to have just one so, at least in this way, you reward (and therefore encourage) people to play MORE and not just set up a siege and wait. How will the scoring work? For attacking, the score should be based on the following, at a ratio I cannot even start to speculate on, that'll definitely need someone specialized on the gaming field to decide: Number of successfully beaten sieges, actual winrate percentage, hoard value gained (with Plat:Gold rate to be 1:200 since that's how the s.s. are evaluated for the corresponding hoard). I think this is the fairest it can get to close any potential loopholes such as attacking a single 1,000,000 on Monday and not touch the mode again. There could even be a gradual decay (though not too punishing) that would get lower the more games you played (i.e. at 1 game played the decay would be 20pts per day, at 10 games it would be 10pts per day, numbers totally random). As for defending, it's much simpler: number of attackers that were successfully repelled and amount of hoard successfully defended. Naturally, for a defence to be eligible to offer points it'd have to be attacked. By what number of players, that's up to you to decide (since it can be exploited by creating a Keep with a huge hoard and having someone wipe once). This will intrinsically create a situation where defenders will want to make it both strong enough to get enough defending points and still approachable entry fee-wise to encourage people to siege it.
      • And while bragging rights is cute and all, we can make it even better. For the top X, there can be perks activated until the next reset. Anything from increased s.s. passive generation, slots unlocked to use mercenaries instead of champions as defenders, percentile increase of s.s. pillaged from successfully beaten sieges, etc
      • And in order to counter competitive anxiety, a person can choose to opt-out of his siege being counted as competitive and not be taken into consideration for a leaderboard entry [can be combined with first bullet point of "iii) Fun" and "i) Player ratings" for sieges that have been highly rated as Funny/Joke and Thematic]
      • The next suggestion is a huge one, actually. I think that an option to have the defender play the defence themselves would go a long way and would appease a huge part of the playerbase that wants things like EDH and Wild West. I realize that this could be a huge topic by itself but for now I'll try to limit it to the basics. How: At any time the defender can choose to lead his Keep defence (a prompt will pop up in his screen as long as he's not in a PvP game and accepting he will drop everything he's doing in order to start the match). How often: Undecided on that part. Should this be something that's unlimited? On one hand, it will make the game more fun, for sure. On the other though, it will warp the spirit of Siege. We'd like to give players a sense of WW / EDH, not the mode itself inside Siege. It could be limited to X times per reset cycle and/or it could be tied to purchaseable perks and/or leaderboard perks. Or even monetize the whole thing, with a one-time payment in the Store to unlock the option (with or without additional limitation on the number it can be used). The attacker should, before the game starts, be warned that "The Lord themselves will lead the Defence". At that point they can up the ante (up to 100% of minimum, I'd say). More money for the company, more of a competition too. And, to make it fairer, if the Attacker manages to beat the first and then the second defence, they should be given 33% of the hoard they'd get (this is to balance the fact that the Defender will be playing 3 times with 3 different decks).
      • Perk ideas that would fit this implementation, either purchaseable with direct exchange of s.s. [see second bullet point of "i) Rewards"] such as an option for a Defender to break the Siege after his Keep 1 or Keep 2 falls by surrendering their siege sacks and keeping their monetary hoard.
      iii) Fun
      • 0-cost Sieges must be allowed as an option. A Siege with 0 hoard may passively generate Siege Sacks at a reduced rate but not count for a person's Leaderboard position. There is no reason for a mode to be completely competitive or completely casual. It can combine both simultaneously (or, rather, in tangent).
      • [see fourth bullet point of "ii)Competition] Playing against another player in a sort of-Wild West format is definitely fun.

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

    • 2. Clarity

      Three pillars: i. Player ratings, ii. Leaderboard and iii. Ease of use (QoL)

      i) Player ratings
      • This is not something novel. It has been discussed before and it has been part of other games of different genres. In short, attackers should be allowed to rate the Keeps they are attacking. And not in a 1-10 "Like" manner. I'm thinking two axis: Funny/Joke (imagine @'Blackwood''s Pappy Jasper setup) - Thematic - Competitive // Easy - Medium - Hard.
      • Regulating the rating will be close to impossible. And there're ways to twist such a feature (rating incorrectly people you don't like's Sieges). While total control voer that is probably not something that can be done, rating can be tied to an attackers' activity in such that it unlocks at X amount of wins, and is limited to Y times with every Z wins allowing 1 more (additive).
      • I also believe that a Defender should be allowed to tag their Keep as Funny/Joke, Thematic or Competitive (not self-rate, just tag). This is even worse to be open to abuse. Therefore, everything should by default be tagged as Competitive unless the defender specifies othewise and in accordance to [first bullet point of "ii) Competition"], the leaderboard could also acknowledge the top 20 or 50 best rated Funny/Joke and Thematic Sieges by allowing change of the default tag at the moment of setup (thus, even if the player decides to trick others by posting a competitive siege and tagging it Funny, they must, at some point during the previous cycle, put enough effort to make Funny sieges). Plus, if you see a Funny siege by overwhelmingly rated Hard, you're gonna be suspicious.

      ii) Leaderboard
      • [see first bullet point of "ii) Competition" and third bullet point of "i) Player ratings"]

      iii) Ease of use (QoL)
      • Auto-reposting Sieges with preset decks. Simple thing and one that has been much-requested by the community. Two ways to go, both can be implemented: a/ Repost this for the next x hours and/or b/ Repost this until I reach x amount of Gold/Platinum (going by this instead of "use up x currency" 'cause you're probably gonna win currency with successful defences).
      • More filter options. Especially if we go the tag system [see "i) Player ratings"] attackers should be able to quickly find a Funny/Joke or Thematic Siege. Probably have 0-cost Sieges separated too.

      3. Monetization

      Apparently a pretty important factor. This is twofold: i. Direct monetization of Siege, ii. Taxation and indirect monetization

      i) Direct monetization of Siege
      • While Siege itself should be free (duh), there are ways to go and try to directly make money out of it. I would certainly stay away from selling "buffs" to sieges [see "Perks" mentioned previously, it's 4 o'clock AM and this has taken my hours to type, give me some slack] unless they affected s.s. passive generation. However, there is an easy, low-hanging fruit: Mercenaries. Unlocking the use of 1, 2 or 3 mercenaries for Siege defenders. I do not think that every mercenary is strictly stronger than a normal champion, though on average they probably are.

      ii) Taxation and indirect monetization
      • Opening Attackers to more options will result in more trade activity.
      • Giving chests as rewards (discussed above) is a Gold sink.
      • It is also important to discourage people from posting minimum hoard Sieges. This will be harder with the introduction of a starting cap of s.s. (which should happen soon, the way the system is right now is very abusable). Leaderboards is one way to lure people to post high. Moreover, if mercenaries are allowed, you can tie use of mercenary to starting hoard, e.g. With a max of 20 s.s. at start, one would optimally start his siege at 20,000 or 100plat. A mercenary cannot be placed in a hoard less than 20,000, with any subsequent common mercenaries increasing the minimum hoard by 5,000 each (number just a placeholder). For UC mercenaries it would be 10,000 and for R mercenaries 15,000. Therefore a siege with 3 R mercenaries would have to start at 50,000 Gold (or the platinum equivalent). All numbers are placeholders. It really depends if mercenaries tend to be more competitive (ergo should be evaluated higher) or funny/joke and thematic (and evaluated lower).

      I'm sure I had 2 more ideas that I had not noted down while writing all this but I forgot them by the time I finished. Perhaps I can edit them at a later date.

      Tagging for evaluation
      @NicoSharp @Blackwood @Thrawn @CoachFliperon

      Thanks for reading. Discussion and criticism is open to all.

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

    • Pretty cool ideas!

      I wouldn't motetize siege by making mercenary use purchaseable, that makes it p2w. Mercs are just straight up better than champs.

      Chest rewards for well performing sieges are a sweet idea.

      Unfortunately, all these ideas will probably be ignored as usual by hexent since its PVE.
    • Well, I love ideas.
      I love anything really that explores changing the stupid systems in place that are suppose to motivate us to play, and apparently spend money on Siege. Painting it as a fun experience...
      Your ideas are good, and would help.

      Siege has decent framework, and that is about where the praise for the mode stops.

      PS4 players are a huge bottleneck, so half the changes both you and I want, will not happen any time soon. HXE wants to keep selling PS4 players this mode.

      Anyways, we aren't being heard, and we are wasting effort putting in our time, energy, and careful consideration from a company that so obviously wants to see us disappear, so they can take money from imaginary new blood that wants a niche competitive slot machine. I've just become a "toxic" forum community member for trying so long, likely helping with the games overall player retention, but honestly never getting traction where I was hoping I could help.

      So, if you see future posts from me here, they will either be to sell my collection, or spout a truth cannon here. Because now, the only constructive criticism I can partake in, is finding a way to steer myself, and others away, while they continue to figure out what type of game they want to be, and how they want to cater to their imaginary playerbase of gamblers.

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

    • To offer some constructive criticism on your constructive criticism:

      Vroengard wrote:

      First of all, step 0, the following two things must be addressed for anything else to work. I think they are of the outmost importance. I can't find another way to work without those two. Unless those happen, Siege will forever be a flawed product:

      0a) ATTACKERS MUST BE ALLOWED TO USE IMMORTAL CARDS, PvE CARDS AND EQUIPMENT
      0b) AI MUST IMPROVE
      The AI should be improved from where it is now, and it is something that's been worked on(Sequencing, while not anywhere near perfect, is a lot better now than before for example) and Chris Woods will hopefully continue to work on it(I would love for the AI to learn how to choose thresholds correctly), but any progress along this line will be slow, and that's actually kind of OK by me, at least from a competitive bend. Part of the challenge of the defender is to try and make the AI behave in the correct enough manner that it can actually win a game. If the AI was perfect, it'd lead to some bigger issues.

      What attackers get to use should depend on three things: how far the AI has come, whether the current attacker card pool is good enough to compete, and whether it's a casual/fun siege or a competitive/different-type-of-fun siege.

      As far as casual/fun sieges like Blackwood's and other awesome ideas along those lines, the defender should be allowed to choose any conventional format that they will let people use against their siege, from singleton to full PVE. Basically I'm 100% for this type of thing being anything goes and the more the Siege builder can custom tailor in this mode, the better it's going to be.

      On the competitive end, on the other hand, the more cards you unlock and the smarter the AI gets, the closer we're going to drift towards the degenerate environment that lies at the far end of the spectrum. A full wild west Hex environment, when played in a cutthroat competitive way, would be a degenerate ball of un-fun. On this end I'm fine with attacker restrictions for the sake of keeping this mode as something fun to play/watch and as the AI evolves, adding immortal and some mercs to the mix(which can be implemented as siege attack champions that don't require owning the actual mercenary to dance around the PS4 issues), but as soon as we get to the point where the AI is too good and we start thinking about adding in PVE cards and equipment to the attackers, that's when the better option is probably restricting the defender's pool of cards rather than increasing the attacker's to the point where everything goes degenerate. This is all extremely hypothetical, however, and the current environment is actually in a decent place from a competitive standpoint, outside of the lack of rewards to defenders for winning...

      Vroengard wrote:

      i) Rewards
      • Siege sacks: Siege sacks are a fine addition to the reward structure. However, there are some striking problems. One is the passive generation of siege sacks. 2 Siege Sacks ("s.s." from here on) per hour is, according to players who have player much more Siege than myself, not enough. It's still too early in the implementation. I've heard that 4 thrown around so I'll accept that for now. Another thing that only popped after the currency update is the starting s.s. There must be an upper limit (cap) to this. I'd say 20 sacks for starters should be enough (a kickstart of 5 hours, if we go by the 4 s.s. per hour generation). Also, 20 s.s. starting corresponds to the 100p. entry fee of Merry Melee

      Mostly I agree with this. My one point of contention, however, is the starting sack thing. As long as a keep is allowed to start with sacks, an exploit will exist around it. One thing that could be done that isn't exploitable, however, is akin to what Transience suggested in his own thread; let the defender pay to increase the initial rate of sacks per hour, and have them go up with wins as well as per the original suggestion for that matter.

      Vroengard wrote:


      • Siege sacks purchaseables: We are sick of RNG rewards, in case you haven't noticed already. My take is this: Only the most chase of items should be behind the RNG wall. Keep the cosmetic rewards in the siege packs, but there must be utility things to obtain in straight up exchange with s.s. Mercenaries, equipment AND, here is a new idea, OLD SETS' CHESTS. You pick a Set number and the chest's rarity will use the same algorithm as if you'd opened a pack. This not only creates one more gold sink but will also improve availability of old equipment. Because, and I just checked the AH as I write this post, there are 0 chests of any rarity for sets 1, 2 and 4 from sets 3 and 5 there are only 5 pages total of common rarity chests only. Also, frankly, selling set 1 common equipment for 3$ is ridiculous.

      I do like how these rewards were implemented with the smart drop system to make it not really all that rng, as long as you actually play the mode enough to get sacks on a regular basis, but I do also wish they just sold all the mechanical bits(PVE cards, equipment and mercs) in the store in a single bundle for like 500-1000 plat so the people who don't enjoy the game play of the mode, or who are willing to pay to get this stuff in advance, can grab the functional stuff and go back to the parts of Hex they actually enjoy, which may also be the casual/fun section of siege that needs implemented, or not. Not every mode is for everyone; I like siege but dislike limited for example, and that's not a problem with limited or me.

      The expensive common equipment is more a symptom of the [INSERT YOUR FAVORITE EXPLITIVE HERE] auction house, but that issue deserves it's own thread. If I could, I'd keep all my excess common equipment posted at a reasonable price all the time, but the amount of time needed to do that is beyond ridiculous.

      Vroengard wrote:

      iii) Fun

      • 0-cost Sieges must be allowed as an option. A Siege with 0 hoard may passively generate Siege Sacks at a reduced rate but not count for a person's Leaderboard position. There is no reason for a mode to be completely competitive or completely casual. It can combine both simultaneously (or, rather, in tangent).
      • [see fourth bullet point of "ii)Competition] Playing against another player in a sort of-Wild West format is definitely fun.

      I'd more like to see 0 cost being an option for both casual and competitive sieges, as I don't like the growing cost to attack pushing my minimum siege into the category of gambler's siege after enough wins. Even just keeping the cost to attack from growing would be fine for me, though unquestioningly 0 cost casual/fun sieges should be a thing.

      Vroengard wrote:


      • While Siege itself should be free (duh), there are ways to go and try to directly make money out of it. I would certainly stay away from selling "buffs" to sieges [see "Perks" mentioned previously, it's 4 o'clock AM and this has taken my hours to type, give me some slack] unless they affected s.s. passive generation. However, there is an easy, low-hanging fruit: Mercenaries. Unlocking the use of 1, 2 or 3 mercenaries for Siege defenders. I do not think that every mercenary is strictly stronger than a normal champion, though on average they probably are.

      As someone who loves mercenaries, owns all of them, and has upgraded all of them except for the two new siege ones, I can tell you that some are a bit more powerful than champions, most are a good deal more powerful but within manageable in the right environment, some are broken piles of nonsense that should never be used in a competitive nature against another human being, and some are walking salt factories that will do random things like deal 20 damage on a lucky turn for 1 charge. Any deployment of mercenaries needs to be done very carefully.

      As for the rest of it, I don't really have much objections to any of your ideas, they're all interesting and would be nice to see, but I wouldn't be sad if they were never done either to be honest. Siege is still basically an ongoing experiment and HXE has taken an approach of tweaking it over time and seeing what happens. Feedback and ideas reaches their ears, but I would never expect it to materialize as 100% built exactly to anyone's suggestions, and that would be kind of terrible. I could count on one hand the amount of people's ideas of implementation of a thing that I completely agree with, and that includes HXE, but at the end of the day they make the final call as to what they want to build for their game, and I find my fun in the things they've built, or I go somewhere else if it's not fun anymore.

      Overall I love reading constructive threads like this regardless of how much I agree with them or not and I do think they've had more of an impact on the game over the years than they get credit for. In other words(if you can't tell I'm bad at complements :/ ) good job!

      PS Siege sacks is still a bad name for the currency.
    • How to better siege:

      Step one: Douse Siege in gasoline.
      Step two: Load Siege into high speed catapult.
      Step three: Set Siege alight.
      Step four: Fire siege into the flarking sun.
      Step five: Pretend the entire thing never happened.

      Can siege be fixed? Yeah Probably. Is it worth fixing after how it put a gigantic wedge into the community? No, not at all. Kill it with fire and high speed catapults.
      -Signature deleted by Dino.- :P