Any plans regarding the number of runes?

Hello, I'm a returning player who used to play this game for a year or two several years ago.

I am very excited to see that the game is under new management, and that the mess of champion design is being worked on. But another issue that I have with the game, is that the number of runes (and packs to choose from) is simply too large. SoE used to sell old packs with useless runes as well as new packs for similar price, and many runes were simply unusable - I have close to 500 runes, but I still had trouble making a new deck, seeing just how many new (and superior) runes were already in the game.

I suppose the real question is, are there any plans on removing-revamping redundant runes? Many of them fit into the same niche, and the learning curve is stupidly steep even for someone like me, who loves learning new mechanics. I saw a lot of redundancy (and chaos) in the old rune design.

Best of luck with the revamp,

Marcin

 

As far as I know the probability for runes getting deleted is zero. Still, your useless runes might become more useful in the future when more balance patches are done.

 

The idea of the revamp is to create more balance between all the runes, theoretically making most runes usable and allowing more variety in battle-groups. Even if some runes are similar or redundant, it will hopefully mean that choice between two runes won't come down to "auto-include vs shoebox" but instead it the choice will be "I like this rune vs doesn't fit my theme" (ideally).

While that seems to be the goal, obviously the world isn't perfect and likely there will still be shoebox and auto-include, the idea is to move closer to a balanced game and simply reduce power level gaps and efficiency gaps between old and new runes.

 

I'm here to say I support the idea of runes getting deleted.

 

I wouldn't mind something along the lines of: "The last X expansions will be unavailable for play (essentially banning them), and we'll be re-relasing them later with tweaks as new-old expansions." People who already had these runes at the time would keep them, and they would "unlock" upon re-release.

This would keep the runes at slightly lower number while keeping it fresh. Who cares, if you don't see a new pic of it (and even that could be looked into, if necessary.) Of course it would mean additional (re)work while old-timers wouldn't spend a dime on it as they would have the stuff already.

Rune deletion is awful in general. People who spent their time to get them would leave in a heartbeat, just like that.

 

That would have no point. Whose to say what runes would be deleted? And just because one person doesn't like a rune, that doesn't mean it isn't someone else's favorite

This would be a great idea. A sort of "Pox Nor: reborn" if you will instead of revamp. It would certainly allow the revamp to be released sooner, as focus would be only on small expansions of runes instead of the entire database. Additionally (if it wouldn't cause too much rage), a few new runes could be added each time to fit with each expansion's theme in order to still encourage purchases by veterans.

I think it's a great idea, but obviously it wouldn't really be embraced by everyone, and probably loathed by some.

 

I would like if some runes were officially shoeboxed, mainly those with bad artwork and uninteresting lore, like dwarven defender or axe guard, this would include a ban from ranked play.

I think that with generous shoeboxing and a good meta report system we could actually make the real ranked rune pool much smaller, and that would help new players a lot, and it would even open some design space for new expansions.

 

I fail to see how the first sentence relates to everything else you say. The point is obvious and is the topic of the thread; there are too many runes. The point of DELETING runes, is to have less runes. THAT is a point.

 

i dont understand. Who decides what too many runes is? and you do know they are still planning to make more expansions right? so they will be adding more runes? see i mean this game is also slightly about making money so of course they will keep expanding upon it to some degree. Look at all the cards that Magic The Gathering has. and you say this game has alot? 18872 is how many cards MTG has apparently. i just googled it. Thats alot of freakin stuff and im sure some of it useless but why in the world would anyone delete it. There is NO EXCUSE for new players being that ridiculous that they cant even learn what runes do. ESPECIALLY now with the revamp which is basically going to dumb the game down so much that a ******** monkey could play it. If anything i would say we create a rotation. that would be pretty interesting i think.

 

Did you just compare a virtual TCG to a real one?

 

If they delete old runes and then release runes to fill those roles, why not just charge for the runes we already paid for every few months?

Ah, it's probably because worded like that it sounds really dumb.

Carry on.

 

Did you have a point or were you just hoping it would seem like you did by asking a question in the rhetorical sense?

 

I didn't mean it like that, but defender and axe guard are blocking us the dwarf with shield rune slot and reworking them is the same work as making a new rune that would end with bad art and bad sprite.
What I say it's assume those runes are lost, and release a new, interesting rune without feeling like those ones should have been reworked instead.
Think that officially shoeboxing doesn't change much how the game is played but you can say to a new player: "look, the game is old and it has over 2000 runes but competitive play is limited to around 800 (fictional number) so don't worry"

 

I still think the better solution would be making those runes viable in some way.

And I like the Defender and Axe Guard

The easiest solution would be updating the Art. The sprite is fine, because lets face it, a sprite's a sprite. I imagine if someone made a cool looking gratis Axe Guard artwork they might be inclined to replace the old one.

Plus for any artists, getting your artwork in a long standing game, even for free, is great for a portfolio.

On top of all that, deleting old runes sets a pretty dangerous precedent. I thought Americans would understand that concept what with their 4th Amendment being a not-so-funny joke now. (I just assume everyone who speaks English on the internet is american because England is so small and Australia is still asleep ^^)

 

yeah, spanish is my native language, but I write in english for your convenience.
I never said "erase" I said "shoebox" meaning "remove from ranked play" meaning "you can play them in other lobby" which it isn't very different than their current state.

 

Yes, but once a rune being useless is considered ok, then why rework old runes? Developers, no matter how nice or well-meaning, would much prefer to be able to ignore old content given the chance. And this would just be a big sign saying, "if it's broken or old, shoebox it and forget about it."

I would prefer it to be reworked, because there would be no reason to rework one of these shoeboxed runes.

 

And I would prefer to have less runes in official circulation to make the game more accessible.

 

They're never going to delete runes outright because people paid for them, and taking them away would end up being more of a hassle for them than the simplification is worth. I do think that Pox is at the point where it could benefit from a ranked rotation, though, which would achieve the effect of narrowing the rune pool for competitive purposes.

 

I was trying to show you the fallacy of your argument.

 

I mean, sure, you can all throw this around like it's a good idea and stuff... but really? Deleting content? Not going to happen.