I've only replied with my opinions and to the knobs who thought their opinions of my opinions were necessary.
1. Nope 2. I feel certain scenarios are unfair, despite my level of play. 3. Maybe for playing, not for winning. 4. Gold / Shards 5. Maybe some mechanic that devaluates the ammount of gold/shards you can earn per match, to avoid massive farmers / exploiters, while not affecting average players. 6. No, non-tradable content isn't good for the game.
After a certain ammount of times you earn them, the next price will be reduced to 90%, the next one to 80%, etc. Not a strict limiter but a degrading one.
I like this idea, not to limit it to the extent that a player can't earn decent returns from their favourite game type, but something that encourages people to expose themselves to PvP now and then. It would also help with the other danger of boosting gold gain on PvP, which is that people who play a lot wouldn't need to pay for anything.
1. No 2. I prefer PvE because I don't get slaughtered in less than 10 rounds. I also haven't played this game in weeks because of the lack of updates, boredom, and school 3. No 4. Gold or tokens 5. No because the rate of gold you can get in a day isn't that much. 6. Yes to avoid people just fighting their alts all day.
1) Sometimes, but not terribly often. Maybe a few games a month. Training games more often than ranked when I do play. 2) I'm more interested in collecting and enjoying myself than playing against others. I find parts of the community to be at turns intimidating and unfriendly and it doesn't exactly encourage me to play. When I do play ranked, I tend to lose spectacularly because I don't play strong/meta/trick decks and that's not really fun. 3) Possibly. It would depend on the rewards and what it took to get them. The reward for losing (which is what I'd mostly be doing) would have to be at least somewhat enticing. 4) Runes and/or shards. 5) If the rewards were increased, then maybe. 6) Yes. There is a lot of abuse with alt accounts.
1. Do you play PvP/ranked? Very rarely 2. If you don't, why not? Takes way too long to get a match, rewards not worth it 3. If there were rewards of winning/playing a PvP match, would you play it more often? Probably 4.What would you like the reward to be? 2x the gold reward of single player 5. Should there be a cap on how much rewards you can get a day? Not unless a problem presents itself 6. If the reward would be a rune, should it be non-tradeable? No
The results are very interesting. It seems more players are indeed PvE rather than PvP players, either that or it just seems that way. The more vocal players seem to be PvP, though. I do think they need to add something new to PvP next as the long-term success of this game will be based on the game as a whole, which includes PvE and PvP. We had wonderful positive additions to PvE with Skirmishes and rune rewards. We now need incentive for PvE players to move to PvP, if they so choose. However, there should never be a requirement for a player to play PvP, and vice versa. Even with greater rewards I do not think I will play PvP. Rewards need to be even for both PvP and PvE. They should be treated as equal in all regards.
Yes, more people are playing pve than pvp. Just look at how many are in each lobby whenever you log on. And it's also important to remember that most of the forum's most vocal people don't actually play. Regarding rewards, you can't have the rewards be equal. If the rewards are equal, then few people bother playing pvp as adding in a core rune if you win a pvp match isn't going to change anything. If few people bother playing pvp, then it takes forever to get a match and you match up against someone way above/below your level. If it takes forever to get a match and the match ups are unbalanced, people stop playing pvp. If people stop playing pvp this game dies because very few people will dump $100+ on a new expansion release so they can beat the AI in new and creative ways.
One solution for the PvP that I had mentioned before is to have an option to only play vs your own rank, for example Rare League vs Rare League, Non-ranked vs Non-ranked, etc. This would only work if we could queue for the PvP match requested and remain queued while playing single-play, such as dailies, campaigns, skirmishes and tutorials, then when a match is found for your PvP queue it would give you an option to abort the current game or save for later. Of course the standard option to play vs anyone would still be in effect if you do not choose the "vs. Ranked" option.
Because PvE isnt affected by map or rune imbalance. It isn't affected by the horrendous experience PvP is right now.
It's not just that PvE is taking away from PvP, I am seeing more casual and training games being played rather than ranked. As of this second there are seven casual games being played and three training games, as opposed to seven ranked. There are over a hundred PvEs going on though. Not entirely sure what conclusion to draw from this, my guess would be that it is in part due to the natural progression of all the newbies, a scary unbalanced meta game, but also lack of incentive to get stuck in with the veterans.
I agree, Its hard to tell whether its new players trying to learn the game or the lack of incentive, or even a bit of both.
That's a fair assessment but I'd say, more accurately, if they dip their toes into the cold and uninviting waters of ranked play they probably just think to themselves, "why am I doing this?" Amd go back to single player. That's all well and good but single player will lose its allure before long and those negative experiences in ranked is probably what causes them to seek other games. I've done the same thing with some Korean grinders. Play until I can't solo and can't pvp because you are not competitive without massive playtime or dollars in the item mall. Them i just go away and find another. A couple of those I really really liked but now, 5 years removed, I can't even recall their name. One of them was Alaya or something like that. Another one I played a wizard and found ways to solo bosses and kite/kill many mobs at once where a group would typically kill one at a time. Before they fixed it I maxed out.
"Nobody is playing ranked." As others have said multiple times it's probably due to the fact that PvP hasn't gotten anything new. It's been MONTHS since DoW worked.
1. Yes 2. On a side note, I find single player to be boring 3.The gold I get when I win is good 4.Maybe tokens would be cool, more gold 5. NO, but diminishing returns might be in order
As I have stated before, the new players will need to play single player to build up their inventory and learn skills before they can jump to PvP. The PvP players need to be patient and wait for them. However, PvP does need more incentive, but until DOG figures out a way to match players evenly there will be problems. To me, that's the most important change they need to make. The easiest is greater rewards, and is important as well, but until a better matchup system is added, there will be issues. Nobody want to play a game where they get trounced every single time. We need a matchup system that allows the player the option to play someone their own rank, even though they will wait longer for a match. It is just an option, though. If they do not want to wait they can choose to play whoever is up next. The longer wait times will be less of an issue if they add a queuing system so they can play single-player games until a match is found, then give them the option to abort or save their game and jump into the PvP match. Do you think DOG has the ability to make something like this, or if it is a possibility for this game?
