RE: Season 6 Updates and Balance Changes!
With all respect, but it looks to me like the lower level accounts and the people that can't afford to build high level decks are once again punished for that.
(I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record).
I agree with @palasatenea: I think it is more important to tackle the bots than to reduce the reward cards, because the way things are going now there won't be a lot of lower level players left to give reward cards to. Quite some people already told me that there's no more fun in the game because of all the bots. A considerable amount of those people were thinking about leaving, even before the announcement that they would receive less rewards for the same work.
And I'm not talking about the level 1 bots that make it to the gold league. They just make it easier for a player to complete the DQs. I'm talking about the level 2 and 3 life splinter bots that are blocking the way in the silver league. It is a huge problem and it is driving people away. I see it happen every day.
Taking away existing abilities on lower level cards will limit the chances of reaching a higher league with a low level deck... again. And will make the level 2 and 3 bot problem in the silver league even bigger, because many people won't be able to get passed them at all.
I understand the number of free cards that you are giving away has an influence on the price of cards. However, I'm still waiting for the betas to go up in price.
(I'm not following up on the prices daily, so maybe it could be useful to make some of the information on price fluctuation you have public)
@cryptoeater, I assume you've taken gold cards into consideration when you calculated prices? Because a set of 5 reward cards with 2 vampires ($0.03) a genie ($0.02), a wood nymph ($0.07) and a Naga fire wizard ($0.11) is only worth $0.26... The chances of pulling an epic or legendary card are very low, definitely now all the new cards have come into play. Or maybe I'm just reading your stats wrong. In that case, would you mind explaining?
I realize I always take the time to write down the negative things, and forget to say that everything I don't mention is a positive thing. I don't want you guys to have the impression that I have a negative attitude towards SM, because I have not. :0)
I couldn't agree more @simplymike. Why can't the accounts that use them be banned? Are they owned by the big spenders? They are easy to identify and it doesn't take much work to discover the bot network they are part of. Can't that be programmed in?
Not all of us want to work our way up to Champions League. Until this season I have really enjoyed playing in Silver and working my way to Gold by the end of the season.
That wasn't the case this season as the Level 2 and 3 bots have made it practically impossible to play a Life quest when they are around. My life cards won't beat theirs so there have been many times when I've had to walk away and wait until they've moved on.
When they aren't around I've had fun but I'll doubt I'll continue to play. I'll probably wait for delegation to be set up and then let others who are more skilled than I am play with my cards.
When I started it was said that we would be able to level our cards by playing them but that also was taken off the table.
It just seems so unbalanced towards the top players. I get that they have invested the money but I don't get why solving the bot problem has to penalise the genuine lower level players.
The bots and the value of the cards are two separate problems. Wouldn't it be better to find two different solutions to them?
I agree about the average prices too. It would be more representative to use the mean amount rather than the average.
The daily quests and season rewards have been great and I'm glad I started playing right at the beginning and was able to earn some.
It's been fun seeing how games such as these get developed as well.
They can't ban players due to this being on the blockchain. Its too bad that a team or possibly a person or two has to set up those bots and ruin the fun. Try using your sneak monsters in the back when against those bots. I can't exactly remember the combo I used but sneak was the key to me beating them.
I don't get what being on the blockchain has to do with it @rentmoney. This is a business. They set the rules about everything else to do with the game. What's the difference?
Were you able to beat a level 3 bot with a level 1 summoner when both are playing life? I can beat them at times but not in that scenario and so many of them play level 1 cards in the other splinters but up the level for the life one.
Anyway. I think my main point is the fact that there appear to be 2 problems and 1 solution given.
Maybe there isn't a better solution to the bot problem, I'm not a programmer, but if I can discover these nets by hand then surely it could be done automatically and they could be blocked.
I will be interested to see what the outcome of this solution will be at the end of next season. 😁
The majority are against banning people and nuking cards. I am not one of those people. The game being on the blockchain is the reason they give for being against it.
I understand your frustration. I was simply trying to help you find a way to beat the bots. Are all your summoners / monsters at level one ?
Thanks. I appreciate that @rentmoney. I didn't mean to sound ungrateful. 😂
Not all my summoners are level 1, in fact I have started levelling up my main account but I like playing at the lower levels.
I will be very happy if this solution gets rid of the bots but what's to stop the bot builders just building more bots?
Time will tell . . .
@rentmoney, Is it a coincidence that they are all owned by one player? I wonder if he acts alone, or it's just convenient for SM to have bots around to make up for the low number of players in the lower leagues? This guy has worked for them before, developing the marketbot and the trading bot. Ii'm not saying it is like that, but the deeper I dig, the more it looks like that
I think if SM wants bots around to keep games active then they should add some themselves. No users should be allowed to use bots to collect rewards. I don't even agree with allowing bots in the market-place.
Bots have a bad stigma. Even if a person doesn't agree with that bad stigma its still there and its not worth the headache they cause to have them around.
The founders did a great job with fighting bots when they added the changes of excluding a splinter and Mana changes so that shows they are attempting to tackle the situation.
By the way, according to matt they weren't aware that it was rondras who owned 20+ bots. I showed him and asked him if he was doing this as part of an agreement with them, because I agree that putting the bots there themselves would be a lot smarter than letting a user do it.
But he claimed they had nothing to do with it.
So I assume they are just gonna let him continue. While banning those and setting up their own would mean that a whole lot of reward cards shouldn't be distributed.
I can't even imagine how many reward cards 20 bots (level 1 to 7 ot 8) rake in in one season...
Wow ... I was unaware that someone had 20 + bots in the system.
I have to give some credit to the founders here. They have tried to fight bots and implemented great changes in the past such as Mana cap changes and splinter exclusions for battles. We have to keep in mind they are trying to fight them in ways that don't hurt their claim of SM is a decentralized game.
There is no use in mentioning the word ban as a large amount of players are against it so banning will likely never take place due to the, this is a decentralized game crowd. How-ever I think a great alternative option would be to exclude those caught using bots. So these players won't be banned but instead they can be excluded from site sponsored games and league play.
Maybe, but he's not just some player, so I don't think chances are big that there will be consequences...
I really hope you're right, @rentmoney. I really do.
Fingers crossed, the founders and team work hard so they more then anyone else want to see this game succeed.
I made a post yesterday detailing what I thought was a more fair cut back of rewards. Below is the graph ... what do you think of my suggestion ? I think 15 free cards daily is more then enough to give out to anyone and still might be on the high end. I agree with starting with 1 and I agree that some cutbacks are needed. I don't agree with how lop sided those changes are.
My system gives more to the little guy and takes away more from the top. Bringing the ratio of rewards down for the top players get from 20 - 1 to 15 - 1. Top players or champion league players also get a 30 - 1 ratio in league standings and get to fight for a top 10 league prize. With all these nice incentives for top players they don't need the daily swayed in their favor as much as it is. Something needs to be more geared towards the little guy or average player. Smaller accounts should get much less then the larger ones but not at the rate purposed.
I am of the opinion that Percentage wise lower level players should be getting more as to keep them active in the game and give them the feeling of winning. This creates positive moral and motivation for lower level players to move up the ranks and continue playing the game, which is very important for the over all health of any game and in the long run helps those of us that have invested.
I saw it yesterday, and I also saw the annoyed reactions that were posted (actually, I saw only one, because I passed by only quickly)
I'm glad to hear that at least some of the mavs are concerned about the fact that the game is way too top-heavy.
But you caught me at a wrong time. I just had a short conversation with Matt, and it became clear to me that the lower level players are the least of their concerns....
I'm going to give up the fight for equal rights or fair distribution. I'm done with it...
Now you're simply talking about opponents to your/rentmoney's plan as horrible people, which is not what's happening. Percentage-wise, the lower players already get much more than the higher players.
👍👍👍
👍👍👍
Top players (Champion III and Champion II) are also going down on this. I'm a player currently residing at the lower end of Champion III and I'm perfectly fine with earning 4 less reward cards per day. These changes, even if the bot-thing was excluded, make sense to me, because:
Bronze league is more like a starter-league/learning phase. Players who can't get to Silver are players who don't yet know how the game works. Or they are just really, really bad, but then that's a different problem.
Now it's much harder for players to sustain a position in Silver I than to sustain a position in Silver III, so a difference in quest rewards between those 2 makes perfect sense. Good players will rank higher and higher, going to silver I and maybe even Gold III with just level 1 cards. Then the player can use their reward cards to go even higher than that!
Now you may say "But pizza, the higher players get way more reward cards than the lower ones! How is that fair?"
Well, my dear Mike, that's fair, since the top players have:
-Invested more
-The players at the absolute top (Champion I) are generally really skilled players. Even if you have maxed cards, it's very difficult to get there and then we're not even talking about finishing a quest there. That's much easier at the lower leagues.
-Need more reward cards to keep their decks at a reasonable level. In the lower leagues, there's limits. People don't need to buy a ton of reward cards to stick to the top of their leagues. In silver, you only need 25 commons, 11 rares, 6 epics and 3 legendaries to use MAXED cards for that league! In Champion, you need to use MUCH more!
And with those maxed cards in silver, you can easily get into Gold and start earning even more rewards to grow your deck. The bronze players don't need skill. The Silver players need a bit of skill. The gold players need either leveled cards or a good amount of skill. Diamond needs both and Champion I needs both at a very high level.
So is it fair? I say yes.
Probably more fair than you downvoting my comment, only because you disagree...
People seem to upvote comments because they agree.
So why wouldn't I downvote because I disagree?
Because it would be a lot more interesting and valuable to exchange thoughts and discuss the matter, and in the end maybe agree to disagree.
Are you aware of the consequences a downvote can have? If you do the same to others whos reputation level is lower than yours, it can have a serious influence on their rep score. Do you think it would be fair to lower someone's rep score, just because you disagree?
Indeed, I find it quite interesting and valuable to exchange thoughts and discuss the matter, and in the end maybe agree to disagree. However, people constantly upvote the comments they agree upon and I do the same, but also downvote comments I disagree upon.
And as a downvote lowers the reputation, so does an upvote make the reputation score of a user higher. Besides, my vote is really not worth a lot.
The fact that it is not worth a lot is besides the matter. For someone with a rep of 48 it could have a lot of consequences.
Normally, one downvotes a comment because it is abusive or something like that. But there are no rules, so you can do as you please.
But be careful who you downvote. If you downvote someone with a much higher vote value than you, you need to take into consideration that some people have a short temper and could destroy your rep in no time.
Just sayin'
I find the taboo of downvoting a bit stupid. Now I'm not saying I'm going to downvote every post someone makes that I disagree upon, but if I'm actively participating in a discussion and I see others upvoting posts with 'Agreement' as the sole reason, I'm going to join them, but on my way:
Upvoting comments/posts I agree upon and downvoting comments/posts I disagree upon. It's that easy, really!
If I had a higher upvote value, I would just make it a certain percentage. And believe me, even for a 48-rep, my downvotes don't mean a lot. Of course, it'll have some sort of an impact if I downvote every single post/comment they make, but I don't do that.
If someone decides to destroy my rep, I move my steemmonsters cards to an alternative account and everything I got on here. Problem fixed. If they wish to waste money on destroying my rep, I would naturally be disappointed in their behaviour, but it would not be the end of the world. If someone downvotes me with 100 SP, I'd likely not even notice.
I think, that the reduction of rewards cards is an good idea, but I cannot understand why cutting off 40% of cards for all player in bronze 1 and all silver levels and nothing for players in champion 1 and only 4% for players in champion 2. If cut away 40% for bronze 1 and all silver levels, than please also cut the "champions" for 40%.
I completely agree with that. Once again, the bigger players are treated in another way that the smaller ones
Yes it seems to me, that want reward them for buying booster packs - think it's impossible to come to champions league without buying booster packs or get cards from somewhere else (f.e. market). I just think, that they for season 4 gave normal cards as rewards and for level 5 only rewards cards - if it would be so than this would be another way for selling, because you get through rewards cards only one summoner (I think chances to get him are quite low) and so in the end you can use all rewards cards only at level 1 or you are forced to buy summoner cards, isn't it in this way ?
If I understand correctly then this is indeed the case. Because the reward cards pile up, but you need a summoner to play them. If you only have level 1 summoners in your deck you can play only level 1 reward cards, even if you have 50 of them...
Yes that's it. It's not important how many cards you have and to what level you bring them because of the summoner you can use only at level 1. I think many players will think than to buy summoner cards or booster packs. In my opinion system is that player can reach without paying money only silver level. To reach gold level or higher you should invest something and to reach champions league I think you should invest some hundreds of dollars.
actually it is quite simple:
if steemmonsters creators would like to ban bots they could do this. period.
so short term it might be economical beneficial for the creators to allow bots..
.. in the long term it will definitely destroy some (or more) of the value of their enterprise...
I am sure that they will soon come up with a solution..
and hopefully also with this strategy game... ;-)
My best guess would be that the fact that they allow them (or even own them) is because the number of players is still limited - especially on the lower levels. But in that case, they shouldn't use the bots as an excuse to lower the number of reward cards, IMO
Especially when their changes are exactly the sort that'll keep new players away. This development team seems entirely focused on pleasing the mavs, and little else. Sadly.
Glad to hear I'm not the only one who feels that way. Thanks
What happens if you can detect who is a bot and not allow them to use cards higher than level 2?
I feel like @gillianpearce, thank God I have letters that allowed me to face them, but it's too frustrating to be 5 points away from being gold and then just always get defeats for the same cards.
I'm afraid I don't get what you mean with this. Could you maybe try to explain?
I keep wondering if those bots that keep you from reaching gold ate put there by SM itself, or people related to SM, to make sure they can reduce the number of reward cards they need to send out, or maybe because there are just not enough players to kee the game going.
Or if they are placed there by people not related to SM, but then I can't think of a reason why...
I fear that you are all right.
And also I am in CL and have a pretty strong team I can understand your frustration being more or less hopelessly stuck on lower levels.. when they startet season 3 and everybody had to start at 0 all over again to get back to gold level was not a game.. it was hard work...
having said this and being frustrated about the bot situation I also have to say that I am still very very grateful towards the developers and this is still an amazing thing they built.
And I feel also that the balance changes are spot on...
And in regards to bots: I hate them nearly as much as I do with this disease called voting bots on the steem blockchain...
on the other hand there are reasons for a kind of automation for the battle system that could make sense... but as the developers have done first steps to stop bots I am sure they will solve the problem .. finally.. maybe with this google" I am not a robot" captcha or something similar... popping up randomly every 5 to 30 minutes...
I mean this would be the worst option but it would work.. I am sure they can access data where they can statistically see which account uses bots and which not...
but anyways.. I am confident they will value our feedback and think about changes..
actually looking at the traction this simple card game already has I am looking so much forward to the announced strategy game and other ideas.. and at the end this will all be financed by the selling the packs.. so seeing all the negatives and reasons for complains I am still very optimistic about steemmonsters in general.
And I also believe that our feedback will be a crucial part of the future steemmonsters success.. in hindsight...
@simplymike It would be too much work for SM to place custom bots for us hahahaha, in any case, it is better to reduce the amount of reward.
And, Yes, I'm gold, but it was just hard to get it.
I think they are people who want to have more cards to benefit later.
I was saying that, for example, suppose you are a robot, and SM detects it and, in the rules, you can not use cards that exceed level 2(only bots). Do you understand me? In this way, there will be bots to occupy the number of people missing in SM, but it will not affect you because your cards can win.
I think the idea of @solarwarrior is great, from time to time a catcha: I'm not a robot hahaha!
I love this game, it has given me different possibilities, I just want it to be very successful, even on my website I talk about them hahaha.
But let's be honest, we know that bots are necessary to have enough players, but it's not good to lose with false accounts, that is, bots with level +5,4,3 cards. It's very sad.
@simplymike @marisenpai
@davemccoy
the moment they introduce google captcha I will quit instantly. Do you understand, that bots can quess it better than most players do? And I am not playing games to solve stupid captchas. There are other ways that can detect bots without hurting normal players.
@steelman, Hey, quiet friend. No one said they would do that, we do not develop SM, they are just examples and things inventing ourselves to treat a root problem. Nobody likes catchas, we all hate them in fact. The decisions made by SM are good, and we support this project because we like to play, if they decide to leave the bots Ok, after all they are people investing, we just try to be fair with smaller accounts.
@n, the captcha was only an example. Neither of us are programmers, you know. I assume there is a better way indeed - I hope there is, because i hate those captcha boxes just as much as you do. But again: it was only an example
Well unless they do it binance style they still have a damn high block success rate point taken though
ok @steelman, I defer to your knowledge and experience on the detecting bots issue. Captcha is all I know from a non-tech standpoint, thanks for the clarification.
Hi! I understand the chances of pulling one is very low, but it does happen. What expected values means is as the amount of cards you earn approaches infinity, the average value of all the cards approaches the expected value. This is very different form the median which is what you're describing above.
The median is much lower than the expected value because card prices are very positively skewed.
For example, I have had 0 legendaries this whole season and I'm earning around 20 cards per day, but today I pulled two unicorns from 20 cards. This changes my average earnings per day by a LOT but barely changes my median earnings per day at all.
When it comes to ROI and investment, we should be looking at the mean return if we're in it for the long term!
Because you took a snapshot in time your figures are already out by quite a margin. When new cards are released on the market the price is inflated. You should do your calculations based on expected value not point in time market prices.
For instance, a unicorn is worth around $4 now whereas was probably around $7-8 when you did your calculations. (And expected to drop to around $3. And Lord A is under $2.
Just changes in these two cards alone affect your pricing chart.
I could go on but I think you get the point.
Maybe you should do your calculations again with real expected market values. And if you do the calculation again in a few days time it'll be lower still.
Point in time math doesn't work for an active market place.
I think need to only pick cards that are at least a week old. The early inflation is mostly offset by then.
very true
Yes, it takes at least a week to normalize.
Good thought process, but give it a season end and then you will get the real prices... if you get a whole season then you get the season dump at the end, then you will get the most accurate pricing.
Thanks for the explanation
Thanks for the downvote, @pizzachain. You could also have replied directly to my comment, telling me you don't agree. I'm fine with agreeing on disagreeing, but I actually see no use on downvoting a comment if you don't agree, definitely if you're not leaving a direct reply...
He's a teenager @simplymike, so take that into consideration when you put it into perspective. ;)
All their changes go in this direction, so it's not surprising you keep making the same complaint.
Also, the ratio of time spent to fun is already way too high (meaning, you spend too much time for how much fun/game there is), I need to spend 2 minutes for about 10 seconds' worth of thought, on each match.
And if you're going to bring up "But you earn money doing it!" Then at that point, we're no longer in "game-fun-time" mentality, and I must evaluate whether I get paid more doing this than I'd get paid spending an equivalent amount of time working. Lemme give you a hint: No. Even if you work at McDonald's in a second-world country, the answer is still no.
Who's earning money from SM? I'm not, that's for sure. I'm not good enough at either level to win tourneys, and I see no use in selling my 70 extra vampire cards for $0.02 a piece. That would earn me a little over 2 bucks. I'd rather give them away to the people who have been restricted from growing their deck because they can't afford it, now the free booster packs are gone.
If I use the time I spend on SM on writing posts for the platform, I would be earning a lot more...
And thanks... at least someone who thinks I'm not sounding like a broken record, lol.
To be honest, I'm actually thinking of selling part of my collection, because if they keep following this trend, I'm afraid the ship will start sinking soon. I'm not planning to go down with it...