Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
yokoandy

Fix Conceding

Recommended Posts

yokoandy

I understand that conceding is a part of the game, and this isn't about trying to remove the function. However, I do think something needs to be done about people that concede repeatedly. I fell like 1 of 2 things should be explored.

 

1. If your opponent concedes, the winning player receives the maximum amount of coins for the match. This way the winning player doesn't lose coins simply because they had a good draw.

 

2. My preferred choice: concedes should be tracked, and you should be able to avoid people who concede habitually. If someone has 100 loses, and 65 of them are concedes, I should be able to avoid playing with that person.

 

I did a quick search for other topics about conceding, and mostly saw ones that talked about eliminating it, or letting the player finish the turn. If this is a repeat post, please forgive me.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XK920XK

1. If your opponent concedes, the winning player receives the maximum amount of coins for the match. This way the winning player doesn't lose coins simply because they had a good draw.

 

you dont lose any coins when someone concedes. Your win counts towards the daily ladder the exact same as a normal win.

 

2. My preferred choice: concedes should be tracked, and you should be able to avoid people who concede habitually. If someone has 100 loses, and 65 of them are concedes, I should be able to avoid playing with that person. 

 

this will only encourage people to concede because they know they will have a higher chance to player against high conceders in turn making their games much faster and easier to climb the ladder.

 

 

like it or not, conceding is just part of the game in irl and online, ive honestly cant recall a game where 2 players actually finish out a game in real life.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mod_GuruLot

Hello Trainers,

 

Personally, I think that XK920XK is right.

 

I'm not sure what can be done to make everybody happy but I definitely go ahead and forward it to the development team so that they can review it further.

 

Thank you for sharing your feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Felidae_

There are a million good reasons for conceding a match. Punishing people for doing it would be a terrible idea and go completely against the spirit of TPCI.

 

The only issue that has been constantly brought up is the problem of finishing the 16 K.O. challenge and on that end I can understand a lot of frustration that player experience. Other than that I'd dread the idea of players being forced to sit through a lost match, in order to avoid any forms of punishment for conceding. That isn't pleasant for either player and quite honestly your arguments completely miss the point.

Edited by Felidae_
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Otakutron

XK920XK, I do remember regularly finishing games at League and at sanctioned tournaments but I also haven't been able to participate in either for over a decade.  Back then, whether playing with my friends, playing at League, playing at a tournament, or playing online via Apprentice or chat rooms, it was just considered common courtesy to finish what you started.  Indeed, that extends to most sports and gaming; there were exceptions, but quitting without a good reason was seen as poor character and sometimes even against the actual rules.

 

No, that doesn't mean I agree with yokoandy's suggestions.  Just pointing out that if you were able to go to League and rarely ever finished a game, it wasn't a universal experience.  Maybe what I experienced was the exception back then, maybe times have just changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GR0

It's very true way too many people concede way too early. I'm quite sick of people who concede as soon as you get 1 good Pokemon out or KO 1 good Pokemon. What's the fun in battling someone who only wants to play a battle where they dominate 100% of the duel rather than a good back-and-forth? What's the fun in battling someone who builds a one-trick pony deck rather than a deck that can make comebacks, because "meh, I'll just concede and start a new battle"?

 

But unfortunately, the reality is that any solution to this would have really big drawbacks.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Felidae_

No, that doesn't mean I agree with yokoandy's suggestions.  Just pointing out that if you were able to go to League and rarely ever finished a game, it wasn't a universal experience.  Maybe what I experienced was the exception back then, maybe times have just changed.

So, in a BO3 setting with a limited round time you'd rather sit through a lost game1 and then have little to no time to finish the other games, rather than being able to play game 2 and 3?

 

However, I'd agree with you for the second / third game:as long as there is any chance I rarely see players quit in IRL tournaments.

 

It's very true way too many people concede way too early. I'm quite sick of people who concede as soon as you get 1 good Pokemon out or KO 1 good Pokemon. What's the fun in battling someone who only wants to play a battle where they dominate 100% of the duel rather than a good back-and-forth? What's the fun in battling someone who builds a one-trick pony deck rather than a deck that can make comebacks, because "meh, I'll just concede and start a new battle"?

 

But unfortunately, the reality is that any solution to this would have really big drawbacks.

 

 

Because frankly there is no punishment for loosing a game. If they'd replace the stupid reward ladder with a ranked system (insert any other TCG/ CCG here) a lose would actually matter and players were inclined to try overcoming a deficit, rather than to outright concede every time.

 

I still can't wrap my head around the idea how utterly meaningless your w/l record is in this game, unless you care about a hidden rating.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RobRatt

like it or not, conceding is just part of the game in irl and online, ive honestly cant recall a game where 2 players actually finish out a game in real life.

^^ If you're playing with your little brother at home, maybe this is the case?  But not in most IRL situations.

 

 

In real-life tournaments, or even prereleases, especially if they're single games, no one just "up and quits" like they do in this Online game.  Many real-life tournaments include airfare, hotel, rental cars, etc.  It's disingenuous to suggest that it's normal to walk away from the table as soon as your opponent gets 3 Energy on his main attacker.

 

Even in League, after you've driven across town, most players will get down to the last Prize before they say, "Okay, you got it.  Good game."

 

From playing in the real world experience, I used to think it was terrible for players to quit so easily.  It is poor sportsmanship in any real-life game.  Can you picture playing Cribbage, and have your opponent walk off in a huff because you were 10 points ahead?  Or playing Monopoly with your family, that someone pouts off because another player purchased a hotel on Boardwalk?

 

I've gotten used to it in PTCGO.  A win is a win.  And like @Felidae_ said, there's just no incentive in this virtual video game.  Personally, I'm one of those who sticks around until you've thoroughly trounced  my deck.  Actually, I can't even begin to count the number of comeback games I've won, and certain decks even expect to get behind early game while you're setting up.

 

The biggest problem we've got with this virtual game is communication.  Everybody would be a lot happier, and even more friendly if they'd give us a way to bow out gracefully.  Having only 4 options for canned chat is ridiculous.

 

@Staff, maybe??

 

...GTG.  Cya later.

...Thanks for the game.

...I give up.  Good game.

Edited by RobRatt
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Otakutron

So, in a BO3 setting with a limited round time you'd rather sit through a lost game1 and then have little to no time to finish the other games, rather than being able to play game 2 and 3?

 

Like I said, this was over a decade ago, before best-of-three was the norm.  Best-of-three was more common in casual play with friends - where the only time limit was whenever someone had to head home - than at League or in tournament play. XD

 

Sorry for the confusion... though I did stress

 

...but I also haven't been able to participate in either for over a decade.

 

so I didn't so much leave it out as fail to make it clear. ;) I'd originally had a post about three times as long as the one above, because I was going to stress how abnormal it was back then by pointing out how scooping did you no good back then unless you needed a break between rounds, and likely did you more harm by denying you useful real-game experience.

Edited by Otakutron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakura150612

@Rob unfortunately, communication seems to be a subject that is considered to be dead and over by the PTCGO team. Their numbers appeared to have shown that most players didn't use the chat at all, while among the minority that did had a lot of toxic players that only used it to flame. We don't have access to their internal information so all we can do is take their word for it. At the very least, I trust Samhayne's words and I think he was exactly right when he said that the trolls won, as sad as it is to admit that.

 

As to why the canned chat has not seen any improvements or additions in over 2 years, I don't know. At this point I can only conclude that they simply don't care. I can't imagine it being all that hard to add 3 or 4 more preconstructed text lines, and yet all we ever heard after the countless thread made regarding the chat, all we have ever heard is "we have forewarded your suggentions to the dev team" without any further news years after they were made. Now, I don't blame the mods for leaving us with just that message we've heard a million times already because that's basically all that they can do. In the end, the powers that be can ignore our suggestion all they want no matter how many times the mods send them our messages. Just throwing that disclaimer in case anyone thought that that's where I was heading.

 

Honestly, they may just have decided that the chat is a pain to deal with and not worth messing around with. They received massive backlash for the elimination of the chat here in the forums. But on the other hand, we have people who are afraid of the "well played" textbox being used sarcastically to bm... so people will find a way of taking offense at anything. Perhaps from their point of view, there is almost zero gain from fiddling with the chat options any further, while every single new textbox they include could mean a potential problem with people who think they're being used in an offensive manner. I find it completely riddiculous that this is actually a concern and potentially a reason as to why the chat has been abandoned, but that might just be how the cookie crumbles.

 

Chat shennanigans aside, I don't like the idea of punishing people for conceding. Team games are different because if you go and leave of your own accord you're leaving the rest of your team stranded. But I cannot think of a single good reason to forbid or punishing people for forefeiting a game in a 1v1 scenario. If at any point you feel like a comeback just isn't possible, why should I be forced to waste both my time and my opponent's time by waiting for the inevitable to happen? Of course not every game will be like that, but sometimes you will be placed in legitimately unwinbable situations. Sometimes you get unlucky prizes and get stuck when your opponent still has 4-5 prizes to get through, sometimes you open with a hand of all energies, evolutions or other things you can't use while your opponent gets to do a propper setup, sometimes your opponent ends up with a 2 prize lead in a situation where you don't have any disruption left to prevent them from taking prizes for 2+ turns. Getting into an habit of conceding every game that looks tough is bad, but there is nothing dishonorable or unsportmanlike in admitting when you've lost already.

 

We can't put in place a system that discriminates between legitimate and stupid reasons to concede either because it's just not practical. For one, they can't even program proper AI trainers that can somewhat emulate the behavior of human players, so there's no way they can make AI that can detect an evaluate the different circumstances under which people concede. For another, even if they could make said AI work, "legitimate reasons for conceding" is completely subjective, so they can probably expect a lot of new support tickets being sent complaining that they were unfairly punished. In the end, the only solution is to allow conceding at all circumstances, no questions asked.

 

I've said this before in a previous thread, but I don't want to be held hostage in a lost game just because some people think it's annoying for the opponent to concede. Not every game that is played to the last prize will be a neck to neck race to the finish, a lot of them will be one sided games where one player literally can't do anything for one reason or another (being item locked with nothing but items in your hand and nothing in your board that can take prizes, being special energy blocked in a deck that 100% depends on them, being stuck turn 1 after a Marshadow that only gives you 2 pairs of bricks, etc). Now Delinquent is gone, but try imagining for a second how riddiculous it would be if you were "Exodia'd" and left with a literal 1 card hand but were punished for conceding after that even though there is nothing that you can do. And what about when you're going to get donked? You know the deal, you start with a single basic Pokemon (specially if it's a non-EX/GX) and your opponent opens with Pheromosa-GX. Why should I be forced to watch my oponent play solitarie for 5 minutes without any chance of surviving the donk, when I could just concede and move on to a real game? They're just fishing for quick wins anyways, so they won't think it's unsportmanlike for me to give up. And again, the incompetent AI can't tell the difference between me conceding out of salt and me conceding because my defeat is a foregone conclusion. So punishing people for conceding also means punishing people for having bad luck and forcing them to stay in a game where nothing can be done. It's better if things are the other way around: even if you find early concedes annoying, you can at least move on quickly to the next game and possibly unto an opponent that can actually put a fight.

 

TL;DR punishing people for conceding will do more harm than good, so I dislike the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BowserLuigi

Because frankly there is no punishment for loosing a game. If they'd replace the stupid reward ladder with a ranked system (insert any other TCG/ CCG here) a lose would actually matter and players were inclined to try overcoming a deficit, rather than to outright concede every time.

Problem with a ranked system (in this game) is that it pretty much unhealthily forces players to keep on playing and playing to make sure that the ones behind them do not catch up, and they would be also inclined to flood VS with the most meta of meta decks to maximize their chances of winning, stifling any little bit of creativity and innovation they had left. AND frankly, the ones that need the rewards are those that CANNOT ever hope to achieve high ranks, while high ranked player would most probably already have whatever cards the system offers anyway.

 

And I don't think simple reward ladders are necessarily stupid. There's nothing stupid about giving the common folk (let's face it, the majority of players don't have a gazillion shiny EX/GX/SR/HR/RR) something pretty to look at. Sure it doesn't really do much to 'solve' concedes, but as mentioned many times already any attempt to fix concedes would likely result in severe consequences (e.g. removal of in-game chat presumably just because of some whiny thin-skinned people; totally no offense), so it's best to just leave the system as it is. If anything, I think ranked systems are the stupid ones here.

 

There's no punishment for conceding a game in PTCGO. There isn't one in real life either.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SandaledOtter

From playing in the real world experience, I used to think it was terrible for players to quit so easily.  It is poor sportsmanship in any real-life game.  Can you picture playing Cribbage, and have your opponent walk off in a huff because you were 10 points ahead?  Or playing Monopoly with your family, that someone pouts off because another player purchased a hotel on Boardwalk?

...Or chess? :)

 

Yes, players in Monopoly will concede. If you're playing with your family, they WILL walk off, or worse, when things aren't going their way. Which is one reason it's an awful game, but that's beside the point.

 

A real world concede in a 1v1 game is generally more polite than what you describe, and it does happen. Here, our ability to communicate has been severely restricted, so the best we can do is say "well played."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Otakutron
Posted (edited)

...Or chess? :)

 

Yes, players in Monopoly will concede. If you're playing with your family, they WILL walk off, or worse, when things aren't going their way. Which is one reason it's an awful game, but that's beside the point.

 

A real world concede in a 1v1 game is generally more polite than what you describe, and it does happen. Here, our ability to communicate has been severely restricted, so the best we can do is say "well played."

 

The argument isn't - or at least shouldn't - be that no one ever concedes in one versus one sports or games.  The argument is that, at least until quite frequently, it was frowned upon except in certain situations.  The examples may ultimately prove the rules, because of the common factor:

 

Time.

 

Chess.  Monopoly.  Risk.  Even when it things are not so obviously one-sided that it would require a combination of bad luck and bad plays for the situation to change, it can still take several turns and much time for the game to resolve.  Chess is especially peculiar because you are not allowed to intentionally move your King into a square where he is in check.  It may also be the game that popularized the idea of the gaming clock. I don't just mean a normal, shared timer but the kind where each player is allowed a fixed amount of time to play, and their timer only counts down during their own turn.

 

This does not appear to be the case in games where a winner can be determined in a clear and concise manner... and you're not dealing with issues like "We were only playing Monopoly because my little brother insisted we play it and my Mom made us." ;) Yes, a cherry-picked example, but only to highlight a more general point: where concessions are more acceptable, how often is it for a reason?  We've got games that could otherwise be long and drawn out, and we've got games that are happening due to outside pressure.

 

Getting back to playing for rewards in the Pokémon TCG... are rapid-fire concessions allowed at League nowadays?  Maybe they are, and if so, then that is another reason players such as myself will have to just get used to this, or at least focus on changing acceptable gaming etiquette and netiquette before changing how something like the PTCGO handles the situation. ;)  If things haven't changed that much, though... actually, still probably best to focus on establishing acceptable gaming etiquette and netiquette.  If more like 80% of players were strongly opposed to rapid-fire concessions - and yes, I'm singling those out - then there's a better chance we can find an answer to it that most find acceptable.

Edited by Otakutron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Felidae_

 

 

 

Problem with a ranked system (in this game) is that it pretty much unhealthily forces players to keep on playing and playing to make sure that the ones behind them do not catch up, and they would be also inclined to flood VS with the most meta of meta decks to maximize their chances of winning, stifling any little bit of creativity and innovation they had left. AND frankly, the ones that need the rewards are those that CANNOT ever hope to achieve high ranks, while high ranked player would most probably already have whatever cards the system offers anyway.

 

 

 

And I don't think simple reward ladders are necessarily stupid. There's nothing stupid about giving the common folk (let's face it, the majority of players don't have a gazillion shiny EX/GX/SR/HR/RR) something pretty to look at. Sure it doesn't really do much to 'solve' concedes, but as mentioned many times already any attempt to fix concedes would likely result in severe consequences (e.g. removal of in-game chat presumably just because of some whiny thin-skinned people; totally no offense), so it's best to just leave the system as it is. If anything, I think ranked systems are the stupid ones here.

 

 

 

There's no punishment for conceding a game in PTCGO. There isn't one in real life either.

Now wait just a minute, because we are talking about two completely different things here:

 

 

 

It goes without saying that the implementation of a ranked system would also introduce a revamped monthly reward ladder structure.

 

As of right now the current structure has several problems:

  •  

    it forces you to grind quite substantially to reach 2K (at least if you have an occupation and play other games as well)

  •  

    the 2K reward is often times lacklustre and due to the reward structure itself you'll have long periods of time without getting any rewards

  •  

    due to any setback after a lose (excluding your streak bonus points) the system highly encourages risky all in decks, conceding as early as possible and generally playing only to grind as fast as possible

  •  

    Those that like to grin also lack any kind of motivation once they reached the end of the ladder

 

 

That being said, it also can't be neglected that the system, in theory, gives everyone a fair chance to reach the end of the reward ladder, no matter how strong they are.

 

 

 

Let's talk about ranked now. I chose my words poorly, because “punishing” players for a lose doesn't sound like something anyone would want :D.

 

What I meant to say is that a lose should actually matter and that progression through a ladder system has to go both ways, in order to be exciting and rewarding.

 

If you want to play a game where the only direction is moving forward than go ahead and play a single player game. There is a winner and a loser after each match and the general idea behind the game should be to try your best to win (and to have fun, just in case someone things its necessary to point this out~~). As of right now I can't help but feel that the majority of players are either bored or unsatisfied with the current system.

 

I don't want to keep rewards for the good and wealthy players, forcing casuals to grind for scraps, nothing could be further from the truth (in fact I'd be more than happy if you'd only play for prestige and some cosmetic stuff in high ranked). We need to stop thinking of the reward ladder as this pillar of the game that everything is based around. If I hear people say “I completed the reward ladder, now I don't have anything to do” it shows me that they don't enjoy the game and only play due to some sort of compulsive disorder to finish that stupid 2K mark.

 

You have been around as long as me and I honestly ask you: back in the days, when there was no reward ladder, no reward wheel and all we earned were a couple of coins after each match:

 

Why did we play? Because it was fun, no matter if the game threw free **** at us or not.

 

 

 

Last but not least I should also mention, even though I'm sick of it myself: EVERY. OTHER. ******. ONLINE. CARDGAME. HAS. A. FREAKING. LADDER. SYSTEM.

 

Every game has casuals that play for fun, pros that grind to reach the top, crazy maniacs that try out wacky ideas, grinders that don't do anything else, and every other kind of player you'll find in an online game.

 

All of those other games flourish as well and many outperform Pokemon TCGO.

 

To argue that a skill based rank system would turn out bad for the game is just ridiculous.

 

Yes, changes to the reward structure would be necessary, but just like they changed general rewards over the course of those last 5 years, so can the system change once more. Hopefully for the better and towards a game that isn't lacking 10 years behind its competitors.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BowserLuigi

^ On mobile so no quote boxes this time

 

I would like to address those 'problems' you mentioned.

 

- I won't really consider 100 points a day a particularly tall grind order. And if you have an occupation/play other games, you likely won't get very far with a revamped monthly reward ladder structure either.

 

- Why does it matter if the reward is lacklustre? The dev's intention is to just give diligent players something shiny to show off or sit in their collection gathering dust. Lots of games do stuff like that. Of course, having something like a RR Lele at the end would certainly make lots of players sit up and stare but pretty sure the devs aren't gonna do that. Also players that focus on 100 points per day wouldn't have the problem with 'long periods without rewards'. The most recent vs reward system is to discourage grinding past the point where the rewards get significantly reduced, but still gives okay-ish amounts for semi-diligent players. That's fine imo.

 

- So you want a system that discourages risky grinds, and don't want 'long periods of time without getting rewards'? So basically, everyone have at least playable decks, then they play to the point where the higherups keep pushing them down so their ELO becomes stagnant and they can't get anymore rewards anyways. And with no more rewards they will find it hard to improve their decks and advance further to get more rewards. Doesn't really solve anything imo.

 

- And that's how they chose to play the game.and it's not that the game is bad. I'm currently playing Identity V with a similar 'vs ladder structure', and has a weekly cap for points used to advance in the 'ladder'. So what happens if I reach the cap? I just take it easy. I still play but not as extensively. Same with this game (though I don't play PTCGO anymore). The daily reward ladder is incentive enough for me to keep on playing and that's how I sometimes get 3000+ VS points in the past! I know not everyone is like me but everyone plays the game differently anyway.

 

Now here's the thing with me playing for so long. Yes, I'm a long-time (now retired) player, but I'm also completely F2P. I did not spend a single cent on cards and codes (or on any F2P game for that matter) and I NEVER WILL. Back in those days the only fun I got was with theme decks. I was a master of theme vs. I advocated the use of Frost Ray as one of the most technical decks of that time and how to use the cards to win. I highlighted how good Power Relay was even though most people thought it sucks. And Plasma Shadow is absolutely sheet cuz of xyz reasons. Then I also admitted that basic orange stomps most other theme decks flat (reminder that catcher does not need a coin flip back in the day). I even had some kind soul donate me a couple of Keldeo EXes to start a (sucky) Blastoise deck, because without vs rewards I can hardly build any usable decks at all and repeated bricks just ain't fun.

 

A skill-based reward system won't be a bad addition but I don't think it should come at the expense of the current system. Otherwise we'll just lose some groups of people (grinders and casuals specifically) while adding none back to replace them. Keep both in and we're cool.

 

Also, I would like to highlight that one of the most successful grind decks atm (which darkintegralgaming did on his channel) is also a very expensive Morgan Rayquaza deck, which believe it or not ACTUALLY saw tournament play at some point. Take what you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Felidae_

 

 

 

- I won't really consider 100 points a day a particularly tall grind order. And if you have an occupation/play other games, you likely won't get very far with a revamped monthly reward ladder structure either.

 

 

 

That's a fair argument. What I personally don't like about the current ladder is a certain lack of accomplishment after each milestone.

 

Let's take Hearthstone as an example: Only 0,01% players reach Legend (or was it 0,1%? IDK). Of course that usually requires more time to grind than your 2K points in Hearthstone. With that being said, every step on the way to Legends feels rewarding and thanks to fall back points on rank 20,15,10 and 5 you have goals that you can aim for no matter if you are playing casually or hardcore.

 

In Pokemon I currently lack this feeling, because the only thing that determines my progress is the amount of time I invest. Sure, if you keep your win streak going you'll reach the end in a shorter amount of time, but likewise simply grinding (and conceding once you fall slightly behind) will get you there as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Why does it matter if the reward is lacklustre? The dev's intention is to just give diligent players something shiny to show off or sit in their collection gathering dust. Lots of games do stuff like that. Of course, having something like a RR Lele at the end would certainly make lots of players sit up and stare but pretty sure the devs aren't gonna do that. Also players that focus on 100 points per day wouldn't have the problem with 'long periods without rewards'. The most recent vs reward system is to discourage grinding past the point where the rewards get significantly reduced, but still gives okay-ish amounts for semi-diligent players. That's fine imo.

 

 

 

I'd argue against that. Once you reach around 1K points it becomes a bit tedious to move forward ( at least in my opinion). It's not about the lack of rewards, but rather about the lack of an actual progression that keeps me motivated. While I can in the end only speak for myself, I can't help but feel that other players have the same issue, at least based on the comments we see here on the forums (i.e. how often did we see players complain about the “bad” FA cards in the end).

 

Heck, I'd always say that you should be grateful for free stuff f that the game hands out and PTCGO is one of the most generous games on that regard, but rewards without a challenge become meaningless after a while.

 

 

 

 

 

 

- So you want a system that discourages risky grinds, and don't want 'long periods of time without getting rewards'? So basically, everyone have at least playable decks, then they play to the point where the higherups keep pushing them down so their ELO becomes stagnant and they can't get anymore rewards anyways. And with no more rewards they will find it hard to improve their decks and advance further to get more rewards. Doesn't really solve anything imo.

 

 

 

Out of curiosity: have you actively played any other TCG/CGG? I can't think of any major title that has had any issue with their ladder system. Again, it just feels weird to argue that a system that works in every other game would somehow not work in Pokemon TCGO.

 

Also, going back to point A: Based on your previous rank you'll get placed higher on the start of the new season, so it's to so time consuming to get back to where you were last season (plus you have more tiem to spare to try and reach a higher rank. That's motivating in book).

 

 

 

 

 

 

- And that's how they chose to play the game.and it's not that the game is bad. I'm currently playing Identity V with a similar 'vs ladder structure', and has a weekly cap for points used to advance in the 'ladder'. So what happens if I reach the cap? I just take it easy. I still play but not as extensively. Same with this game (though I don't play PTCGO anymore). The daily reward ladder is incentive enough for me to keep on playing and that's how I sometimes get 3000+ VS points in the past! I know not everyone is like me but everyone plays the game differently anyway.

 

 

 

To each his own I guess :). I personally like to have a good back and forth with a skilled player, rather than grind 10 games in a row that end after 3 turns.

 

In the end fun is subjective and even an entitled *** like myself is not so arrogant to believe for one second that my way is the only way to enjoy a game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A skill-based reward system won't be a bad addition but I don't think it should come at the expense of the current system. Otherwise we'll just lose some groups of people (grinders and casuals specifically) while adding none back to replace them. Keep both in and we're cool.

 

 

 

 

 

I played F2P as well and then made a ton of packs when they rolled out the first tournaments.

 

You'll always have a progression curve for new players and I'm sure they could find a good way to integrate rewards that help new players while simultaneously implement a ladder system that is motivating throughout the entire season.

 

 

 

 

Also, I would like to highlight that one of the most successful grind decks atm (which darkintegralgaming did on his channel) is also a very expensive Morgan Rayquaza deck, which believe it or not ACTUALLY saw tournament play at some point. Take what you will.

To be honest I'm not sure what's your point there. Of course the top meta decks are also good at grinding the ladder (even though I don't think it's still tier 1 in Expanded, but I haven't played for some time now so not sure how TU has affected the expanded meta game).

 

If was pointing more towards a general attitude when it comes to the approach of the ladder that a lot of players have.

 

 

 

Last but not least: mad props for typing all of that on your phone :).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BowserLuigi

That's a fair argument. What I personally don't like about the current ladder is a certain lack of accomplishment after each milestone.

 

Let's take Hearthstone as an example: Only 0,01% players reach Legend (or was it 0,1%? IDK). Of course that usually requires more time to grind than your 2K points in Hearthstone. With that being said, every step on the way to Legends feels rewarding and thanks to fall back points on rank 20,15,10 and 5 you have goals that you can aim for no matter if you are playing casually or hardcore.

 

In Pokemon I currently lack this feeling, because the only thing that determines my progress is the amount of time I invest. Sure, if you keep your win streak going you'll reach the end in a shorter amount of time, but likewise simply grinding (and conceding once you fall slightly behind) will get you there as well.

Isn't grinding supposed to be rewarding anyways? PTCGO is supposed to be a virtual simulator of the real PTCG after all. It's not like it needs to have some super flashy high rank in which only 0.1% of players can ever hope to achieve. Then again, it's not like this is very hard to implement in this game either. Just keep the current ladder, but (if the freemium games I've played are anything to go by) assign everyone a rank based on their ELO and give some packs or stuff when they advance a rank.

 

I admit I never felt any lack of accomplishment with the current ladder so I can't see any problem with it. That's just me.

 

I'd argue against that. Once you reach around 1K points it becomes a bit tedious to move forward ( at least in my opinion). It's not about the lack of rewards, but rather about the lack of an actual progression that keeps me motivated. While I can in the end only speak for myself, I can't help but feel that other players have the same issue, at least based on the comments we see here on the forums (i.e. how often did we see players complain about the “bad” FA cards in the end).

 

Heck, I'd always say that you should be grateful for free stuff f that the game hands out and PTCGO is one of the most generous games on that regard, but rewards without a challenge become meaningless after a while.

Maybe it's because I still have a middling collection so I never felt demotivated even if the 2000 points reward is FA Hau? I actually used the daily reward ladder (not monthly) to determine when I should stop. By the time I get all the good rewards there I would have already gotten enough VS points for the day and thus the 2000 VS points come naturally. Again, just me. FA Haus don't discourage me. And if the dev really want to cater to those that aren't me (i.e. probably not), they can just slap a Lele or Rayquaza or Pikarom there and call it a day.

 

 

Out of curiosity: have you actively played any other TCG/CGG? I can't think of any major title that has had any issue with their ladder system. Again, it just feels weird to argue that a system that works in every other game would somehow not work in Pokemon TCGO.

 

Also, going back to point A: Based on your previous rank you'll get placed higher on the start of the new season, so it's to so time consuming to get back to where you were last season (plus you have more tiem to spare to try and reach a higher rank. That's motivating in book).

 

 

To each his own I guess :). I personally like to have a good back and forth with a skilled player, rather than grind 10 games in a row that end after 3 turns.

 

In the end fun is subjective and even an entitled *** like myself is not so arrogant to believe for one second that my way is the only way to enjoy a game.

I've played a few. Duel Links was my most recent one and I already quit that too. I played that a long time ago and quit, recently got back and then quit again. I tried so hard to like that game but...I just can't.... The grind is almost atrocious there. That is one game in which I felt that my progression was WAY too slow. The game gives you plenty of opportunities to earn their in-game currency but all the staples are expensive af. AND I actually think it's already generous for a F2P game (I hold F2Ps in very low regard). And it's the same with pretty much any gacha game with some seasonal ranking system. It' not an issue because every fricking game uses it. And it's not that it can't work here either. But I won't trade the current ladder for a ranked one, that's for sure.

 

You'll always have a progression curve for new players and I'm sure they could find a good way to integrate rewards that help new players while simultaneously implement a ladder system that is motivating throughout the entire season.

We will see.......................

 

 

To be honest I'm not sure what's your point there. Of course the top meta decks are also good at grinding the ladder (even though I don't think it's still tier 1 in Expanded, but I haven't played for some time now so not sure how TU has affected the expanded meta game).

 

If was pointing more towards a general attitude when it comes to the approach of the ladder that a lot of players have.

So I guess I'm the only person who thinks that rapid concedes aren't a big enough problem to be worth pulling hairs out? And we still have tourneys where people aren't likely to concede (as easily). 

 

 

Last but not least: mad props for typing all of that on your phone :).

Thank you. I'm not on a phone this time obv.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Otakutron

Let's take Hearthstone as an example: Only 0,01% players reach Legend (or was it 0,1%? IDK). Of course that usually requires more time to grind than your 2K points in Hearthstone. With that being said, every step on the way to Legends feels rewarding and thanks to fall back points on rank 20,15,10 and 5 you have goals that you can aim for no matter if you are playing casually or hardcore.

Based on its success, I'm part of a fringe minority here but I really do not care for Hearthstone.  I did play it for a few months, and after I got over the initial "Wow!" factor of the bells and whistles, it got old, fast. I also found its ranking system to be highly frustrating as it was stupidly hard to grind.

 

Could that just be because I was bad at the game?  Maybe?  The thing is, even a bad player putting that much time into the PTCGO can earn better rewards than I did.  I mean, thanks to the trading system, someone can barely play the actual "card game" bits but try and build their collection. XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SuperStone

Something to consider- we could have a ranking system that is visible but not obvious.  It could be an item on the same tab as challenges/avatar/stats, so that those of us who prefer not to have our losses be stressful only have to see it when we want to, but it would still be easy to check after every match for those who care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nitron2097

I played a tournament game this morning against a Lost March deck with Blaze Ball Charizard. I went first, got the first KO, and held the advantage the whole time. It was a crazy good match. I only lost because my last Charmander was prized. Sad face for me.

 

Now there is a HUGE difference in that type of loss, and an insta-scoop because I drew a Magikarp and six energy against PikaRom. If there were some type of reward for losing a game without conceding - say a small amount of tokens - it might help ease the problem...possibly...maybe...meh.

 

As far as the reward ladder goes, something I think that can be done to improve it is the final 2000 point reward should always be meta-relevant. FA Cynthia is a lot different than FA Gladion. Or how about a RR PikaRom? It's trade-locked anyway so you can't really do anything with it besides show it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Roy_DM
Posted (edited)

Now there is a HUGE difference in that type of loss, and an insta-scoop because I drew a Magikarp and six energy against PikaRom. If there were some type of reward for losing a game without conceding - say a small amount of tokens - it might help ease the problem...possibly...maybe...meh.

Dev's cant include something like this because to concede is the solution we have for dealing with toxic winners (those that take all the time they can to deliver the final attack).

Edited by Roy_DM
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakura150612

I played a tournament game this morning against a Lost March deck with Blaze Ball Charizard. I went first, got the first KO, and held the advantage the whole time. It was a crazy good match. I only lost because my last Charmander was prized. Sad face for me.

 

Now there is a HUGE difference in that type of loss, and an insta-scoop because I drew a Magikarp and six energy against PikaRom. If there were some type of reward for losing a game without conceding - say a small amount of tokens - it might help ease the problem...possibly...maybe...meh.

 

As far as the reward ladder goes, something I think that can be done to improve it is the final 2000 point reward should always be meta-relevant. FA Cynthia is a lot different than FA Gladion. Or how about a RR PikaRom? It's trade-locked anyway so you can't really do anything with it besides show it off.

There already is a minor incentive for not insta-conceding games where you can make some progress. In games you lose, you get 1 extra VS point for each prize you took, so it's not a complete loss of time if you do lose a long game even if all you care about is completing the ladder fast.

 

Also, even if it sucks when the 2000 point reward is FA Hau or something equivalent, all the way up to ~1600 points you still get good rewards (good amount of packs and tokens). You also keep earning daily win rewards, so even if you overcap the 1600 thteshold and end up reaching 2000 anyways, it's not that you spent ~50 games only to get a bad reward; you spent those games earning a ton of daily win rewards and the FA Supporter is only a minor bonus.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...