Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'proposal'.
We've had lots of discussions regarding gold sinks and what to do with too much gold (this one recently) and I have a (maybe) solution. The idea is that all players could vote on something by spending gold. These votes would be mostly trivial and affect some in-game reward. For example (now that we know re-skinning is easy and we can add new promos), each month there could be a vote for a new promo. Perhaps each month someone (could be devs, or just random decision) chooses 5 cards. All players can "buy" votes by donating gold in the marketplace, and whichever card has received the most donations will get a promo release. The 2nd and 3rd place cards will stay up for votes next month, and 2 new cards will replace the 4th and 5th place card. This gold sink would be ideal because it would be completely optional, but players would also feel proud to know that they saved up a ton of gold and were able to influence the voting so that we now have a promo ice barrier or something Once a player has all upgrades, they have an easy way to spend any amount of gold that they want.
I've always been a strong proponent for rebalancing the game before release, and now that Kubik seems to be behind the idea and there is community support for it I've decided to start working on my balance proposal. First a little bit about me and whether you can trust me with regard to game balance: I was very active in Battleforge from 2009 to 2011, and I played on and off from 2012 until the shutdown. I've played on all of the (non-beta) balance patches and have watched the game's balance change and improve over the years. I've played over 3000 PvP matches in total. In 2011 I was ranked #1 for several weeks in 1v1 with my shadow/frost deck and a couple months later I held the #1 rank for a couple of weeks with my pure nature deck. This was during a time when Obesity, DeChris, MaranV, and Freemka were active. I achieved a #1 2v2 rank with two partners (IdleAltruism and Tyderianek) using nature/frost, pure nature, and pure fire decks. I owned every card with the exception of a few PvE cards and played every deck extensively except pure frost. My main decks were pure nature, shadow/frost, nature/frost, pure shadow, and pure fire. I've played my share of PvE, as you had to back in the days before battle tokens since that was the only way to upgrade cards. I could consistently beat rPvE level 10. I make strategy games as a hobby and have studied and deconstructed the balance design of Battleforge (as well as with other card games and RTS) to help me balance my own games. Some thoughts on the rebalancing process: Focus on what's being said, not on who's saying it - analyze and criticize ideas, not people. Let's not make this a popularity contest. Being good at the game doesn't necessarily mean you really understand the game. I've seen really good players make some really silly balance suggestions over the years. That said, high level players tend to have a much better understanding of the game's nuances. Being bad at the game doesn't mean your input isn't be valuable. It's possible to have a good understanding of game balance and the math behind it without having the skill or time to play at a high level (case in point, most game developers). This balance proposal will consist of two stages: Stage 1 involves solving major problems that currently exist in the game's balance; specifically bad matchups, overpowered cards, and bandits being weak overall. This stage doesn't involve that many changes, but a lot of reworks are necessary in order to fix these problems which unfortunately means that these changes are more complicated to implement. Stage 2 involves buffing and reworking weak/useless cards in order to increase the pool of useful cards and thereby increase choice and card diversity. This involves a large list of (mostly) simple changes. Note: Orbs will be denoted by color: P = Purple (shadow) R = Red (fire) G = Green (nature) B = Blue (frost) N = Neutral (any element) All changes are relative to a card's U3 stats. Stage 1: Solving Problems Note to the devs: I realize that many of these changes are more involved than just changing a few numbers, but more complicated changes really are necessary to fix the few egregious problems that still remain in the game. With the exception of Amii Monument (which I know is a longshot), I've used only mechanics and abilities that currently exist in the game. My hope is that you can find ways to use certain cards as templates (or perhaps copy/paste data) with which to implement these changes. Please let me know what currently is and isn't possible so that we can find alternative or compromises. Phase Tower The Problem: Phase tower is simply too versatile. It functions very well as a defensive tower, however its ability to be used for offense or to be moved to defend another location removes most of the counterplay against towers, which involves attacking another location while your opponent binds power in the towers. The Solution: There are perhaps some more elegant ways to rework this card, but I think a simple solution will work just fine here. We can simply increase the card's cost in order to increase the amount of power it binds and reduce its overall cost effectiveness. Reducing the range by 5m also eliminates a design oversight that allows it to outrange things like Mark of the Keeper. Decrease attack range by 5m. Increase cost by 10. Treespirit (Green) The Problem: Treespirit is really the last remaining blatantly OP card in PvP. It's stats are simply too high for its cost and the fact that it's an M counter creates massive problems for most T1 colors due to hurricane limiting the usage of S units. The Solution: By reworking the card, we can both bring down its overall power level while also re-purposing it to fill some roles that nature T1 really needs filled. By changing the green affinity to red and giving it siege, we give nature a good counter to towers (especially phase tower) and a way to rush down instant T2 (currently many decks can rush T2 with impunity vs nature). A reduction to the unit's HP brings its stats down to be more in line with its cost. Change affinity to red. Change damage type from M to special. Change ability “Gifted Thorns” to “Infused Thorns”: Every 10 seconds, unit fires thorns in all directions that deal 120 damage to enemies within a 35m radius around it, up to 180 in total. Add ability “Siege”: Deals 100% more damage against structures. Reduce HP from 880 to 670. Increase (melee) damage from 400 to 500. Treespirit (Purple) By increasing the shadow affinity's max AoE damage while decreasing its single target damage (something that would normally be a nerf since it makes it only effective vs spam) and giving it a damage bonus vs humans, we can mitigate its weakness to ice barriers and give nature a good tool to help them deal with frost mage spam. The total damage the unit can deal is reduced, however the amount of damage that will end up hitting frost mages instead of ice barriers is significantly increased (unless the frost player spams ice barriers, in which case the nature player can just retreat and re-engage in another location). The fact that the poison damage doesn't stack also deincentivizes spamming just treespirits. Change damage type from M to special. Change ability “Tainted Thorns”: Every 10 seconds, unit fires thorns in all directions that deal 20 damage to enemies within a 35m radius around it, up to 120 in total (damage, including poison, hits up to 6 targets). The thorns are extremely toxic poisoning every enemy they come in touch with. The affected entity will then take 10 damage every second for 5 seconds. Add ability “Tainted Fury”: Deals 50% more damage against humans. Reduce HP from 880 to 670. Increase (melee) damage from 400 to 500. Nox Trooper The Problem: Nox Trooper is fine as it is, but making purple treespirit do 50% more damage to humans breaks the otherwise good shadow vs nature balance. The Solution: The solution is to change the Nox Trooper's type. Change type from human to undead. Firedancer The Problem: The ability to shoot over cliffs and walls makes Firedancer far too difficult to deal with and gives pure fire an unfair advantage on certain maps. The Solution: While the ideal solution would involve checking whether the firedancer is shooting over a cliff or a wall, I'm pretty sure there's no easy way to implement this check (correct me if I'm wrong). So alternatively, we can use a mechanic that already exists with Mortar Tower and make it so that the firedancer can only do full damage if there is a friendly unit or building near the target. A normal pure fire attack usually has enforcers, scythe fiends, or a rallying banner near the base that's being assaulted, so this change won't affect normal pure fire play very much. Cheesing with cliffs and walls, on the other hand, will become much harder to pull off and can be countered by killing any units near the building that's being attacked. This change makes firedancer about as effective as firestalker when using its regular attack. When using it's new ability, it does a little more damage than the old firedancer. Unit cost has been reduced slightly to compensate for the extra micro that will be needed to use it effectively and the fact that its ability can be interrupted once any nearby enemy forces have been destroyed. Changing the damage type to S and removing the (mostly detrimental) buggy knockback gives pure fire a semi-decent alternative S counter. Reduce cost to 60. Reduce attack damage from 100 to 70. Increase attack speed from once every 4 seconds to once every 3 seconds. Remove siege. Change damage type from special to S. Remove S knockback. Add ability “Bombard”: Activate to target an enemy structure. While attacking the targeted structure, this unit attacks three times as quickly (every second). Lasts until interrupted. Can only be used if there is a friendly unit or building near the target. (No cooldown). Magma Hurler The Problem: Pure fire has no good way to deal with the War Eagle + Skyelf Templar combo and also struggles against other L threats. The Solution: Make Magma Hurler a tier 2 pure fire unit. This gives pure fire a reliable L counter that can also hit air units. Magma Hurler at tier 3 doesn't fulfill its role very well since archers are generally not very useful at tier 3 (siege units and units that can quickly deal with threats are much preferred). Change orb requirements from NNR to RR. Increase cost to 150. Remove M knockback. Bandit Sorceress (Blue) The Problem: Bandits have little to no defensive capabilities, which makes them helpless against most attacks. The Solution: Repurpose Bandit Sorceress to make her a purely defensive unit that can protect or repair power wells and monuments. Increase cost to 80. Increase attack damage from 48 to 60. Increase HP from 520 to 660. Can now enter any friendly building, including power wells and monuments. Change “Blessed Installation”: Activate to send the unit into a friendly building. While inside the building, the unit will reduce all damage done to the building by 75%. Lasts for 30 seconds, after which the unit will exit the building with her life points restored and all buffs and debuffs removed. Costs 15. Bandit Sorceress (Red) Change affinity to green. Increase cost to 80. Increase attack damage from 48 to 60. Increase HP from 520 to 660. Can now enter any friendly building, including power wells and monuments. Change “Infused Installation” to “Gifted Installation”: Activate to send the unit into a friendly building. While inside the building, the unit will cause the building to regenerate 40 life points every second. Lasts for 30 seconds, after which the unit will exit the building with her life points restored and all buffs and debuffs removed. Costs 15. Rioter's Retreat (Blue) The Problem: Same as above, bandits lack defensive options. The Solution: Make Rioter's Retreat a better defensive tower by giving it S and M knockback and allowing it to protect or repair buildings. Reduce attack speed to once every 5 seconds. Add small and medium knockback. Change “Blessed Retreat”: Friendly units and buildings within a 25m radius around the tower take 20% less damage. Rioter's Retreat (Green) Reduce attack speed to once every 5 seconds. Add small and medium knockback. Change “Gifted Retreat”: Friendly units and buildings within a 25m radius around the tower regenerate 15 life points every second. Windhunter (both affinities) The Problem: Windhunter's ability makes it eruption fodder. The Solution: Reduce self-damage. Reduce Gifted/Tainted Sobering self damage from 300 to 250. Icefang Raptor (both affinities) The Problem: While frost's lack of swift units is a deliberate design choice, it can be unfair on certain maps where frost sometimes can't even reach their first power well before the opponent blocks it. The Solution: Give frost a semi-swift unit by making Icefang Raptor tier 1. This should help frost to secure their first power wells and should also help them deal with mortar tower. Change orb requirements from NB to B. Reduce damage from 820 to 650. Reduce HP from 895 to 715. Timeless One The Problem: Timeless One is cheap enough to be very spammable, allowing players to easily lock down any number of locations. The Solution: Increasing the cost of the unit and removing the ability cost forces players to both spend more power immediately for the first freeze (80, up from 65) and also forces them to bind more power into combat-weak units, making spamming Timeless Ones hurt a lot more. This change will reward making fewer Timeless Ones and keeping them alive so that they can use their now free ability many times. Increase cost to 80. Decrease ability cost to 0. Increase damage from 55 to 70. Stormsinger (both affinities) The Problem: Stormsinger's stats are simply too high for a tier 2 splashable ranged M unit. The Solution: Reduce Stormsinger's HP to put it more in line with other T2 ranged M units. Reduce HP from 750 to 690. Spikeroot The Problem: Pure nature lacks good ways to deal with M units - especially Burrower. The Solution: Increase Spikeroot's damage to allow nature to kill M threats more quickly and to increase Spikeroot's usage as an M counter where Deep One is often used instead. Increase spike damage from 100 to 110. Increase (melee) damage from 1200 to 1320. Creeping Paralysis The Problem: Pure nature lacks defensive capabilities and needs ways to extend their CC. The Solution: Decrease the cost of Creeping Paralysis so that it can be more effectively used to lock down attacking units in early T2 where pure nature struggles the most to stay alive. Reduce cost from 60 to 50. Increase charges from 2 to 4. Deep One (both affinities) The Problem: Deep One's stats are too high for its cost, even for a pure unit. This causes Deep One to often be used in place of proper counters (like Spikeroot and Ghostspears) because of its exceptionally high overall power level. The Solution: Reduce Deep One's HP. Damage should be left intact because pure nature needs Deep One's damage to deal with threats quickly enough. Reduce HP from 1650 to 1450. Enlightenment The Problem: Enlightenment was one of the most heavily nerfed cards in the history of the game, having its power cost increased by 90. For PvE, the card is still very useful, and actually single-handedly makes pure decks inferior in PvE, since you can just go double nature and play any cards you want with enlightenment. For PvP, on the other hand, the card is too expensive to be realistically used in most high level matches (even in 2v2). The Solution: Make enlightenment a pure nature card and reduce its cost back down to 150. This means that you actually have to make sacrifices in PvE to use this (extremely powerful) card and this creates a good reason to play pure nature in PvE. For PvP, the card is made viable again and pure nature T3 becomes a serious contender in 2v2. Change orb requirements from NGG to GGG. Reduce cost to 150. Earthshaker The Problem: A single Earthshaker can destroy three monuments. In combination with the above Enlightenment change, that means that pure nature can use this two card combo to destroy an entire base for 250 power, and this can be done every 30 seconds. This can only be countered by frost spells, and the only way all losses can be prevented is through the use of either Ward of the North, or the combination of Shield Building, Glacier Shell, and Kobold trick. Enlightenment + Earthshaker is thus almost twice as efficient as Curse Well and it has the ability to kill orbs. This makes earthshaker unhealthy for the meta because a frost orb is always required to counter it (similar to the old wildfire, though much less egregious as a T3 two card pure combo). The Solution: Reduce earthshaker's damage so that it can no longer kill wells on its own and decrease the card's cost. Reduce quake damage from 605 to 330. Reduce cost from 100 to 40. Increase charges from 2 to 5. Amii Monument The Problem: Amii Monument is basically cheating in PvE. It allows players to outright skip boss fights and other parts of PvE maps that really shouldn't be skippable (at least not via OP cards). The Solution: Change Amii Monument so that it is a tier 1 card that no longer advances the player to the next tier, but still provides access to the selected orb's element. For example, fire T1 could build Amii Monument to give them access to roots and hurricane, which could be combo'd with Mine and other things. Similarly, pure shadow could build this in tier 2 to allow them to play disenchant on their harvester. This opens up a lot of interesting possibilities and combos in both PvE and PvP, but the 100 bound power still represents a significant sacrifice that has to be made in order to build it. A lower activation cost allows players to switch between different orbs without too much cost. If this is not currently feasible to implement, the only other alternative I see is to make Amii Monument tier 4 and reduce its cost. No longer functions as a regular orb, but rather provides access to the selected orb's element without advancing tier. Change orb requirements from NNN to N. Reduce cost to 100. Reduce ability cost to 50. Reduce HP to 800. Stage 2: Buffing Weak Cards WIP
I've been away from this forum for quite a while, but I came back a couple of days ago and saw the Ardent Peak announcement which has revitalized my interest in this project. So, I've been thinking about the long debated issue of PvP upgrades and came up with the following proposal: Balancing Gold: My idea is to make upgrades work like levels in an RPG, in that each upgrade costs more than the previous one (up to a cap). Each player would have a total upgrade level based on all the upgrades on all the cards in their collection, and the higher the level, the more it costs to apply new upgrades. The purpose of this would be to make it so that PvP players and PvE speedrunners are able to get a fully functional deck fairly quickly without upgrades being a bottleneck. What makes this different from the other proposals I've seen is that it preserves (even extends) the player progression that is collecting upgrades. Since the upgrade costs ramps up with each upgrade you apply, it would still take a very long time to get all 1,617 upgrades (3 for each card in the game); thus preserving the long-lasting, difficult to achieve end game goal for PvE players and completionists. I haven't worked out a perfect formula for this, and these numbers are entirely dependent on the rate at which we get BFP and how much gold the upgrades themselves cost, but the end result should look something like this is terms of how long it takes to fully upgrade your decks: First deck takes 10 hours of play to fully upgrade Second deck takes 15 hours to fully upgrade Third deck takes 25 hours to fully upgrade Fourth deck takes 40 hours Fifth deck takes 60 hours Each 20 cards after the first 80 take 60 hours to fully upgrade (an average of 1 upgrade per hour) When you get to the point of having played 150 hours, you have five fully upgraded decks to choose from (more than most players would even regularly use); but as far as game progress goes, you've only completed 18.5% of the game as far as upgrades go (100/539 cards upgraded), and you'd still have a long way to go time-wise before getting all upgrades. I think it should be balanced so that it would take at least 1000 hours to fully upgrade every card in the game. With the rate of increase in time it takes to upgrade 20 cards I suggested above (capped at 60 hours per 20 cards), it would take 1470 hours to get all upgrades. We could adjust the hard cap to be 50 (1250 hours) or 40 (1010 hours), or whatever seems best (maybe we want to make it take 2000+ hours). We could even replace the hard cap with a soft cap that ramps up more slowly and adjust the entire curve. The idea is that this system would give players a good pace to work with. The goal would be to balance the system so that by the time most players feel like trying a new deck, they have about enough gold to fully upgrade it, but there is still a long-lasting sense of progression due to the large amount of time it would take to get enough gold to upgrade all cards. This is a way to make upgrading cards slower than collecting cards without crippling people in PvP. Balancing BFP: It is also equally important that we properly pace BFP income in order to avoid the PvP grind—you can't upgrade cards you don't own. While decks will be a lot more playable without optimal cards than they would without upgrades and charges (e.g. Witchclaws aren't that much worse than Dreadcharger, and a deck with u3 Witchclaws and full charges will destroy a deck with u1 Dreadchargers), this is still a problem and a big barrier to new players (and veterans that don't want to grind) that doesn't need to exist now that the game is not P2W. The new quest system could be the perfect solution to this problem. The idea would be to do the usual F2P thing and give new accounts a bunch of high reward quests to give them an early BFP boost (or even to give them essential cards, see below). This will help PvP'ers and speedrunners get their first decks built quickly so that they can enjoy the game. This is also a common trick to help with player retention—players are more likely to keep playing if they think they're getting a lot of rewards and making quick progress/generally doing well in the game. All quest rewards should be account bound in order to prevent multi-accounting (BFP/cards gained from quests cannot be sold, traded, or attached to mail). I know that cards can be account bound, but if that's not possible for BFP (I imagine such a thing is currently not implemented), players should be rewarded with a card of their choice (could give the player a randomly generated list of cards to choose from, maybe with a bias towards good PvP/speedrunning cards) for completing these one-time high-reward quests. Balancing Rarity & Enabling Diversity: My original thought for balancing card rarity was to remove the card charge system. The charge system serves no purpose in a true F2P game (it's purely a money grab) and it causes problems with rarity distribution (it's much harder to fully charge an UR card than a UC/C card). This can make decks such as pure shadow, pure nature, (and also pure fire due to the market not being flooded with promo Firedancers) unplayable for players until they've amassed a huge amount of BFP to buy four copies of those essential ultra rares. In the end, I realized that removing the charge system is probably unnecessary, as we can fix the problem more easily using other methods. The simpler solution is just to to greatly increase the chances of getting URs and Rs in packs. Let's think about the purpose of rarity in CCGs. Sure, it's exciting to open a pack and get a super rare card in it, but that's really not primary purpose—it's just a small side benefit. The real purpose of rarity systems is $$$. By making a few very powerful/specialized cards that are required to play certain decks, companies can get players to buy insane amounts of card packs in order to get those super rare cards—that is the real purpose of card rarity; and what EA has done with Battleforge is no different. So, if we increase the chance of getting URs, we're essentially 'unlocking' those decks that need URs to function properly—thus allowing players to play the decks they want to play and increasing the overall diversity of decks played. Otherwise we'd just see endless shadow/frost and fire/nature (which we'll see a lot of anyway, but at least this way we get some pure shadow, pure fire, and pure nature too). Another possible solution is to create four main questlines—one for each color. These questlines would be a series of quests that give players some big rewards in the form of essential PvP (and maybe speedrunning) R and UR pure cards. These quests should be fairly involved and should take a while to complete—the quest conditions should be things that make the player commit to a certain color (at least a little bit). I'm not sure what kinds of in-game stats the devs have access to, but quests like "Play X shadow cards", "Build X nature orbs", or "Upgrade a fire card to U3" would work. Here would be the total rewards that each questline should give (in no particular order): Fire: Firedancer, Juggernaut, Wildfire Nature: Parasite Swarm, Shrine of Memory, Spikeroot Shadow: Harvester, Nether Warp (B), Shadow Mage Frost: War Eagle, Area Ice Shield, Northstar (B) Players should receive four copies of each card upon completing the corresponding quest. This would give players the necessary PvP URs (and many of the Rs) needed to build a competitive PvP pure deck. Speedrunning cards could be added as well, but I'm not familiar enough with speedrunning to know what those would be. I'm aware that the rewards in the list above are not evenly balanced in terms of rarity/usefulness, but note that these cards will become nearly worthless on the AH anyway since every player gets them for free, so it doesn't really matter. Final Thoughts: As a final note regarding rewards, I would strongly urge the developers to make PvP and PvE rewards equal (per time spent playing); there's no reason for one to give more rewards than the other. I would also (less strongly) urge the developers not to have recurring PvP/PvE specific quests. While it's a good thing to have one-time quests of this type just to get people to try each mode of play, it must be realized that some people simply don't enjoy PvP, and likewise, some people just don't enjoy PvE—players shouldn't be forced to play one or the other in order to keep up in rewards. It is very important that we both prevent returning veterans from not coming back because they can't bear the though of doing all that grinding again in order to get a playable PvP deck (many people have already said they won't play the game again if they have to grind to get their decks back), as well as prevent new players from being daunted by the amount of time it takes to get the cards and upgrades to become competitive in PvP. This also applies to speedrunning in the same way, as upgrades are vital there as well. I want the playerbase to be as big as possible, and I want this game to be as good as it can possibly be. Notice that every successful F2P game has given players a very large boost in rewards when they first start playing that slowly drops off. We should do the same, as it's very important for player retention. Battleforge is also a special case, since most of the player base will have already done the grind, and many are not willing to do it all over again. Let's not make the same mistakes EA made back when they had no clue how to manage a F2P game.
Since two other threads have begun to get a bit derailed due to this suggestion, I thought I'd consolidate the proposal here, give pros and cons (and a poll) and discuss whether this should actually happen or not. For those of you interested in the origins of this conversation, read the threads "Starting Cards" and "Removing Upgrade System from PvP" (and I won't tell you where it happens, because those threads have some important conversations in them otherwise). A brief summary of the problem (for arguments regarding the problem see those threads): 1. PvP is not viable with the normal F2P starter cards (don't even have t1 units for shadow and fire, for instance) 2. PvP is not viable without upgrades 3. For players primarily interested in PvP (such as old BF players, or players coming from other competitive RTS games like Starcraft), an inability to acquire cards and/or upgrades in a TIMELY MANNER will cause them to stop playing BattleForge before they ever get the "real" experience, i. e. playing lvl 120 decks with all the right cards. (4). Simply giving all players good cards and upgrades would destroy vital, non-PvP aspects of BattleForge. Now, on to my proposal: Each player gets a free, random, temporary, LOCKED, COMPOSED, fully upgraded deck every two weeks. After two weeks, another random one is given out. These decks will have the following properties: COMPOSED for PvP. Decks will be modeled after top players. They will be fully, 100% competitive. I may not like the faction I have during a particular cycle, but the best player in the world at that faction would have no complaints. This may encourage me to try new decks. Since the decks are made for PvP, they will not have t4 (except, possibly, in certain decks if top players call for it). These decks will be near useless for PvE, although of course there's nothing to stop someone from using them anywhere. Locked. Cards may not be added or removed from this deck. If I want to change cards so that F1 hotkeys to scavenger instead of eruption, too bad. I can't use these cards in any other deck, and I can't add any cards to this deck. They are not modifiable at all. Random cyclic. They will cycle out (like a tome deck) every two weeks (or other determined time). Each player gets one deck, and the odds of getting all factions are equal. This encourages player to try new decks, and possibly broaden the metagame. Fully upgraded. These decks will be lvl 120. A player using one of these decks can have no complaints about losing except that he's worse than his opponent (or possibly has a bad matchup). This will allow players to immediately have fully competitive access to PvP, without affecting the market (if you want to fine-tune your deck, or be able to reliably play it, you'll need to buy and upgrade the cards yourself. In the meantime, you're exposed to a wide variety of decks, so you can see which one suits your playstyle and get a feel for how things work at U3). Possible Cons: If the decks are stale (for instance, if the composed fire-nature deck always contains mauler and I know this) an artificial metagame might develop. In that example, if I think the composed deck will mean a greater than "natural" number of maulers for me to fight, statistically, I might arrange my own deck so that it doesn't have mountaineer/ashbone, but might have Lost Reaver/Tremor instead. This con might actually be a "pro" though, if we can affect the metagame to make "lame" strategies less viable. Some players might multiaccount if they don't have access to the deck they want. This would require a lot of multiaccounting though, and I don't think it will really be a problem compared to other reasons to multiaccount. Variations All players get access to all (10?) locked, composed decks. This might be dangerous, because it may remove the need for PvP players to participate in the market at all Locked, composed decks are rentable (still 2 weeks) for a comparable price to a booster. Thus buying your own cards is a more permanent solution, but you can have good access to a faction "on demand" if you want it. Individual cards within factions are slightly randomized each time. There would still be an equal chance to get each faction, but--say within a fire-nature deck--variations exist. One might start nature, while the others start fire. Some might have sunderer, some might have mauler instead. One might have earthshaker. One might have no t3 at all. Etc. These variations of course would be subject to some "board of top PvP players" and the reason for variance would simply be so that a player doesn't know what EXACT cards he'll be facing, if he suspects he's facing a composed deck. What do you think? Should this be done? Should it be done in a different way? Comment below! (and vote!)