|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 24, 2012 16:19:19 GMT -5
I don't think there is anything to fix, if card a has a 2/3 chance of being picked and card b has 1/3 chance of being picked, then it is random which is picked, but overall one is more common than the other. Why is this a problem?if its what th designer of the game wanted, then that's his call. It's his game, he made it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 24, 2012 16:31:58 GMT -5
Also, I personally would be upset if it is changed going forward. I have lots of cards that were bought under the old system. Changing it would mean I should be able to reset my deck, regain spent credits, and redraw all my cards to be on an even playing field with members who only bought Templar packs. It also removes the depth of strategy from the AH, as all rare cards suddenly become of equil value essentially, while right now owning 5 rare black cards is worth more than 5 green.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 24, 2012 16:33:31 GMT -5
Randomness is not defined as a 50/50 chance if there are only 2 options, it just means you can't predict with certainty what will happen in the same way as the weather is a random system, but we can still say 90% chance of rain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 24, 2012 18:38:48 GMT -5
That's a bit unfair. I have said we have to wait Marc to come back. If that's really an issue for you, we might change it. More than that, it's still random, even if the randomness is biased by one of the rule. We don't lie or anything about it. All the rare memories are way rarer than uncommon. And that itself justify plently the category. If you find another english word to describe that, fine. But AFAIK, random is the one which fit the best. So my proposal above isn't going to be acceptable then?  I hope that people understand I was being sarcastic  |
|
rl
Full Member
Posts: 320
|
Post by rl on Mar 24, 2012 18:56:31 GMT -5
Lol poor tuism, this thread got so hostile for no reason. I've never played a TCG before this one but I always thought that some cards were more rare than others anyways and I think that's cool at the end of the day that some are harder to get. Kinda harsh to jump on the devs and say they don't give a shit. It seems like they read forums and see what their players want and implement our suggestions.
Also, I got a laugh from your posts tuism, being a sarcastic guy myself haha
|
|
eev
New Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by eev on Mar 25, 2012 6:33:04 GMT -5
That's a bit unfair. I have said we have to wait Marc to come back. If that's really an issue for you, we might change it. More than that, it's still random, even if the randomness is biased by one of the rule. We don't lie or anything about it. All the rare memories are way rarer than uncommon. And that itself justify plently the category. If you find another english word to describe that, fine. But AFAIK, random is the one which fit the best. well, simple example why it seems to be important for me. you guys made very unusual and interesting tcg but it's not first tcg game. and like in many other games there are meta and deck types. also not every deck type is cup of tea of someone. so lets say someone wants to play only control type of decks. so some mana, counterspells, removal and few big creatures. so the choice would be order and crime deck. and that someone is screwed because if we take both types of boosters than getting all needed rares is harder. but someone else who wants to play other colors, like simple agro or midrange, maybe lord decks can get cards more easy to build such decks. i dont know what is exactly the formula u are using but it seems like it's tweaked too much. meaning of word random is defined, and it's not the point. also it was already pointed out that if you use such rarity system people with some tcg experience would expect it to work like it usually works. and really thanks for taking time and responding to my post there. |
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 25, 2012 6:36:46 GMT -5
Hello, I play scholar and media control decks. I also play faith and media control decks. But that's besides the point.
The point is, however, that pure random will favor order decks. Which completely screw up what ur point - it will be harder to get into various different meta games and deck types cos you'll just be getting order cards.
Before saying things like you dont know the formula but it seems too much, Please go look up existing data that The community has already out together on card counts. Rarity survey in general. The bias is not massive. We are all playing different colours.
Of course black is harder to play, there's 6 black Templar cards.
|
|
eev
New Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by eev on Mar 25, 2012 7:27:44 GMT -5
Tuismi have read enough on this page, there are enough numbers and also many posts from you where you are trying to decline what Ringel posted and that's about who should check up numbers and math before saying something. also i posted here another response only because developer answered on my post and sorry but i dont want to argue over this topic with you anymore because i dont see any sense in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 25, 2012 7:32:47 GMT -5
I agree. To disagree. The end, unless someone wants to continue |
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 25, 2012 13:19:56 GMT -5
Two things. First only I am allowed to get mad at Tuism in this thread.
Second, Tuism is correct. If the rares and uncommons were evenly distributed, beginning players with few cards would have a harder time getting out of Order.
|
|
mana
Full Member
Posts: 367
|
Post by mana on Mar 25, 2012 13:33:27 GMT -5
i too totally agree with tuism and ringel >.< well for ppl like eel there are terms and conditions. just write in your terms that random does only mean not directly controlled by anyone but doesnt mean evenly distributed. if you desperatly want crime/order (i dont see any reason for that) then wait for the auction house and get the rares this way... all i can say is i got alot of ultrarares and i didnt spend more than 50€ on the game. also when you look at them... some you dont even want to get  |
|
eev
New Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by eev on Mar 25, 2012 13:54:39 GMT -5
Ringelfirst thing is not even close to being funny. the second thing is i am just getting mad, where did i write that he is not correct about it? is my english so bad? i can write in german if it helps. but to repeat, i see why devs made that tweak. i understand that even rarity would make getting other school cards for beginning players harder. i understand that devs are not going to change it. but i dont like how the rarity system was used because i do like to play crime and order decks and the rarity system is not something new but well known. and i think there are other people who would like to play mostly these schools too. the stuff with word random in the description of boosters was just intentional overacting, i do not think it should be changed or explained. i do understand that arguing in internet is useless and is just waste of time. i do not understand why i am writing all of this here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 25, 2012 14:10:00 GMT -5
We don't know what the devs are going to do yet. They haven't taken a serious look. I don't think they really knew the consequences of their code-- that Templar Blue and Assassin Black are as rare as they are.
Will they change it? We don't know. There are arguments on either side, but the devs haven't made a statement one way or the other yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 25, 2012 22:28:45 GMT -5
Well, dang, can't believe I didn't figure this out earlier. Since the mixed packs have an even distribution of colors, all the rares should be equally likely when drawn from those packs.
Now that is peculiar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 26, 2012 0:43:27 GMT -5
Well, dang, can't believe I didn't figure this out earlier. Since the mixed packs have an even distribution of colors, all the rares should be equally likely when drawn from those packs. Now that is peculiar. that makes sense since I never saw a problem. |
|
