I can sense your fingers tingling to call me libtard or snowflake, but bare with me! In this, short, thread, I will try to explain why loss evasion is a thing and will ask you how to add this to a given computer game.
Most people hate to lose because inherently we are afraid of losing value, things, family members, lovers, keys...the list is endless. What we gained, we hate to lose, because sometimes our efforts are denied and on top of that, what follows in today's "I am winning" societies is sneer.
Just think of the last time you developed a fine board and bam Mechathun destroys your dreams, your number is diminished, 30 mins of close evaluation, card reading, keeping your ae are denied, nill and void.
How do you feel? Happy?
Property is a defining aspect of an proprietor society and is associated with success and positive traits. Taking this away, takes away self esteem and sometimes reason. Want prove? Just go to youtube and watch gamer rage videos.
These people are angry, yes, we should deride them, mock them, feel superior? Well, for my part, this is not a desirable reaction. So, I am asking myself and you:
What could be the alternative?
Tell me, how you would design a game that does not punish the loser by taking away hard earned currency of any given type and does not favour the winner solely.
LOL. If you lose, you deserve to be punished. If you win, you deserve to be rewarded. I don't see any problem with that. Seriously, dude, wtf is this thread??? Are you a sore loser or what?
Thank you for your contribution, but I think that winning should be a part of the game, but, I would like to reward the whole process of the game and not the win alone. Thus, both players are rewarded and the winner still gains more. What do you think about this idea?
Thank you for your input. I would like to avoid negativity in a game and thus would like to discard dichotomies like winner / loser, reward and punishment.
Interesting for me is the reason of your post. Why do you think that reward and punishment are warranted?
Thank you for your contribution, but I think that winning should be a part of the game, but, I would like to reward the whole process of the game and not the win alone. Thus, both players are rewarded and the winner still gains more. What do you think about this idea?
I am curious
Some quests reward you with gold even if you lose, did you forget about that?
First of all: always the remember the majority of the HS community is toxic.
However, they do have a point. If don't like ranking down and losing your stuff then you should not play games with a ranked ladder. There are plenty of games where you can enjoy PvE as well as PvP content and not care about a rank. We even has a casual mode in Hearthstone.
Interesting for me is the reason of your post. Why do you think that reward and punishment are warranted?
Because they make things more interesting. Playing a game that rewards you for winning and punishes you for losing makes everything a challenge. And games without challenges are boring as hell, at least for most people (I never understood some of my high-school friends having fun playing single-player shooters in god mode :/).
The OP has a fair point, that I find myself involved with, since I NEVER try to grind on ladder for many ranks, despite my positive winrate. And mind me, I am not saying I could smash the ladder, I am just saying I have what it takes to climb a handful more ranks than where I usually stop each month.
Why? Because losing stars means wasting time and effort to me. Or, the feeling of it: your effort and time should be measured on average wr, not in the single game, I know. So, it is a distortion of perception ofc, but that's what happens in my mind, and it triggers frustration, more than satisfaction. It's not a very common thing I guess, but it affects many players regardless.
In the end, I think the single game cannot be changed. If you lose a 20-mins game, you lose, and you can do nothing about it. In part, it's also a philosophical thing: you can't always get a reward. Sometimes you lose (in life as well) and you should learn to accept someone else getting the reward while you get nothing.
HOWEVER, we could reason on how ladder works, and how stars and ranks are rewarded. I do not think there is a perfect system, but I think grinding as the only way to prove your deck is good, is kinda short-sighted, and simplified. Surely it works well about generating addiction, but that is not the aim of my reasoning.
I think the best compromise about ladder would be something were defeat does not mean losing ranks. Stars maybe, but not ranks. Why? Because, (as in real life), defeat should simply imply the inherent loss of the reward of the winner, NOT ALSO A PUNISHMENT FOR DEFEAT.
Imo, a system with "save point" at EACH rank (Legend excluded ofc), but no winstreaks to compensate, would feel better. Problem is I have no idea how the HS population would distribute across the ranks with such a system, maybe it's too easy. Regardless, I think a discussion should be made by devs as well on this topic. Moving stars and stuff like they did so far may help, but without solving. They should think of an alternate system entirely.
Sheer grinding made of up and downs is just toxic.
Sorry, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you clamor for long, intricate Johnny matches (as many forum goers do), you will inevitably lose some of these matches and either suck it up or come here and grouse. Personally, I play aggressive decks so win or lose, it doesn't feel like a big chunk of time was invested.
Learning how to win and lose at things is a vital part of growing up. This is why my gears grind when schools at sports days reward everyone the same. Fuck that. You need to learn that you can't always win and that by learning to lose well, you'll actually learn how to improve.
If you expect to get rewarded for everything that you do, Good or Bad, you will end up an extremely maladjusted individual incapable of socialising in the normal way.
So yes. I do think that you are a bit of a leftist snowflake.
Well i would like if they changed the reward system to 3x games played and not games won. But other than that what's the point if there is no reward/loss even if it's something cosmetic like the rank number. And what's about the fear of loss? If you are afraid of the game then what about the loss in the real life? lol!
But i hope you attitute is common in the playerbase, this way my wins hurt my opponent's soul! >:D MuahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA!
Ah, btw, let's take Arena as an example of an alternate system: if you lose, you stop your climb.
In ladder, not only does your climb stop, but you also fall back in ranks/stars!
Ofc, I repeat, single games defeats cannot be changed. It's vital one learns to get no reward, while others do in your place. It is inherent to competition (and life itself).
But I think it is arguable that we should also learn to get punished for defeat. In a game supposed to be a relaxing hobby btw.
The OP has a fair point, that I find myself involved with, since I NEVER try to grind on ladder for many ranks, despite my positive winrate. And mind me, I am not saying I could smash the ladder, I am just saying I have what it takes to climb a handful more ranks than where I usually stop each month.
Why? Because losing stars means wasting time and effort to me. Or, the feeling of it: your effort and time should be measured on average wr, not in the single game, I know. So, it is a distortion of perception ofc, but that's what happens in my mind, and it triggers frustration, more than satisfaction. It's not a very common thing I guess, but it affects many players regardless.
In the end, I think the single game cannot be changed. If you lose a 20-mins game, you lose, and you can do nothing about it. In part, it's also a philosophical thing: you can't always get a reward. Sometimes you lose (in life as well) and you should learn to accept someone else getting the reward while you get nothing.
HOWEVER, we could reason on how ladder works, and how stars and ranks are rewarded. I do not think there is a perfect system, but I think grinding as the only way to prove your deck is good, is kinda short-sighted, and simplified. Surely it works well about generating addiction, but that is not the aim of my reasoning.
I think the best compromise about ladder would be something were defeat does not mean losing ranks. Stars maybe, but not ranks. Why? Because, (as in real life), defeat should simply imply the inherent loss of the reward of the winner, NOT ALSO A PUNISHMENT FOR DEFEAT.
Imo, a system with "save point" at EACH rank (Legend excluded ofc), but no winstreaks to compensate, would feel better. Problem is I have no idea how the HS population would distribute across the ranks with such a system, maybe it's too easy. Regardless, I think a discussion should be made by devs as well on this topic. Moving stars and stuff like they did so far may help, but without solving. They should think of an alternate system entirely.
Sheer grinding made of up and downs is just toxic.
It would kill the very basics how ranking works. Legend rank would be achieved with ease. Ranked systems works by awarding people for winning while the opposite happens to those who lose.
People shouldn't play ranked ladder, in any game, if they can't handle the ups and downs.
Point is, should Ladder be exactly as it is, with up and downs?
It is not true that everyone would achieve Legend: at some ranks, your wr becomes inferior to 50%, and you can't get enough stars to get to the next safe rank.
What I was suggesting was a hybrid system where you can lose stars, but not ranks.
OR: a new Tournament Mode with Arena reward system...
i think this is winning from topdecking and luck, not skill. You can be totally outplayed and still win, which is taking a lot away from the experince. Just because you copied a T1 autopilot deck does not mean you are a skillful player.
Watch WowHobbs. He gets to rank 5 often with insane himebrew decks that are vastly underpowered. THAT is skill. Playing the game YOUR way is much more satisfying. But like someone said earlier, there are people who somehow like playing single-player shooters on god-mode...
Thank you sir for your response, I appreciate your 88 cents.
Maybe, just maybe, we should rethink our premise of loser is entitled to punishment and the winner takes it all, as it has proven to be a fallacy. Too many people fall short, too many are depressed and lonely, too many a soul is destroyed in Kindergarten. Life should change for all of us and not for the chosen few. Struggle is not how great things come to live, it is co-operation, sharing, kindness and the belief in altruism.
I can sense your fingers tingling to call me libtard or snowflake, but bare with me! In this, short, thread, I will try to explain why loss evasion is a thing and will ask you how to add this to a given computer game.
Most people hate to lose because inherently we are afraid of losing value, things, family members, lovers, keys...the list is endless. What we gained, we hate to lose, because sometimes our efforts are denied and on top of that, what follows in today's "I am winning" societies is sneer.
Just think of the last time you developed a fine board and bam Mechathun destroys your dreams, your number is diminished, 30 mins of close evaluation, card reading, keeping your ae are denied, nill and void.
How do you feel? Happy?
Property is a defining aspect of an proprietor society and is associated with success and positive traits. Taking this away, takes away self esteem and sometimes reason. Want prove? Just go to youtube and watch gamer rage videos.
These people are angry, yes, we should deride them, mock them, feel superior? Well, for my part, this is not a desirable reaction. So, I am asking myself and you:
What could be the alternative?
Tell me, how you would design a game that does not punish the loser by taking away hard earned currency of any given type and does not favour the winner solely.
I am curious.
<iframe src="http://gifyoutube.com/gif/ywoqQP" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="440" height="400" style="-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;-webkit-transform: scale(1);" ></iframe>
I would suggest playing a version of tic-tac-toe in which everyone starts by putting a cross in the middle.
LOL. If you lose, you deserve to be punished. If you win, you deserve to be rewarded. I don't see any problem with that. Seriously, dude, wtf is this thread??? Are you a sore loser or what?
Thank you for your contribution, but I think that winning should be a part of the game, but, I would like to reward the whole process of the game and not the win alone. Thus, both players are rewarded and the winner still gains more. What do you think about this idea?
I am curious
<iframe src="http://gifyoutube.com/gif/ywoqQP" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="440" height="400" style="-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;-webkit-transform: scale(1);" ></iframe>
Thank you for your input. I would like to avoid negativity in a game and thus would like to discard dichotomies like winner / loser, reward and punishment.
Interesting for me is the reason of your post. Why do you think that reward and punishment are warranted?
I am curious
<iframe src="http://gifyoutube.com/gif/ywoqQP" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="440" height="400" style="-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;-webkit-transform: scale(1);" ></iframe>
Some quests reward you with gold even if you lose, did you forget about that?
First of all: always the remember the majority of the HS community is toxic.
However, they do have a point. If don't like ranking down and losing your stuff then you should not play games with a ranked ladder. There are plenty of games where you can enjoy PvE as well as PvP content and not care about a rank. We even has a casual mode in Hearthstone.
Because they make things more interesting. Playing a game that rewards you for winning and punishes you for losing makes everything a challenge. And games without challenges are boring as hell, at least for most people (I never understood some of my high-school friends having fun playing single-player shooters in god mode :/).
The OP has a fair point, that I find myself involved with, since I NEVER try to grind on ladder for many ranks, despite my positive winrate. And mind me, I am not saying I could smash the ladder, I am just saying I have what it takes to climb a handful more ranks than where I usually stop each month.
Why? Because losing stars means wasting time and effort to me. Or, the feeling of it: your effort and time should be measured on average wr, not in the single game, I know. So, it is a distortion of perception ofc, but that's what happens in my mind, and it triggers frustration, more than satisfaction. It's not a very common thing I guess, but it affects many players regardless.
In the end, I think the single game cannot be changed. If you lose a 20-mins game, you lose, and you can do nothing about it. In part, it's also a philosophical thing: you can't always get a reward. Sometimes you lose (in life as well) and you should learn to accept someone else getting the reward while you get nothing.
HOWEVER, we could reason on how ladder works, and how stars and ranks are rewarded. I do not think there is a perfect system, but I think grinding as the only way to prove your deck is good, is kinda short-sighted, and simplified. Surely it works well about generating addiction, but that is not the aim of my reasoning.
I think the best compromise about ladder would be something were defeat does not mean losing ranks. Stars maybe, but not ranks. Why? Because, (as in real life), defeat should simply imply the inherent loss of the reward of the winner, NOT ALSO A PUNISHMENT FOR DEFEAT.
Imo, a system with "save point" at EACH rank (Legend excluded ofc), but no winstreaks to compensate, would feel better. Problem is I have no idea how the HS population would distribute across the ranks with such a system, maybe it's too easy. Regardless, I think a discussion should be made by devs as well on this topic. Moving stars and stuff like they did so far may help, but without solving. They should think of an alternate system entirely.
Sheer grinding made of up and downs is just toxic.
Oh, and sorry for being a bit harsh in my first post, I wasn't sure if you were serious or not about this. :P
Sorry, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you clamor for long, intricate Johnny matches (as many forum goers do), you will inevitably lose some of these matches and either suck it up or come here and grouse. Personally, I play aggressive decks so win or lose, it doesn't feel like a big chunk of time was invested.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
Yea lets give every football team a World Cup so no one will be sad ... boooooriiiiing ....
Learning how to win and lose at things is a vital part of growing up. This is why my gears grind when schools at sports days reward everyone the same. Fuck that. You need to learn that you can't always win and that by learning to lose well, you'll actually learn how to improve.
If you expect to get rewarded for everything that you do, Good or Bad, you will end up an extremely maladjusted individual incapable of socialising in the normal way.
So yes. I do think that you are a bit of a leftist snowflake.
4/3/19 RIP Keith Flint. 😔
Well i would like if they changed the reward system to 3x games played and not games won. But other than that what's the point if there is no reward/loss even if it's something cosmetic like the rank number. And what's about the fear of loss? If you are afraid of the game then what about the loss in the real life? lol!
But i hope you attitute is common in the playerbase, this way my wins hurt my opponent's soul! >:D MuahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA!
Ah, btw, let's take Arena as an example of an alternate system: if you lose, you stop your climb.
In ladder, not only does your climb stop, but you also fall back in ranks/stars!
Ofc, I repeat, single games defeats cannot be changed. It's vital one learns to get no reward, while others do in your place. It is inherent to competition (and life itself).
But I think it is arguable that we should also learn to get punished for defeat. In a game supposed to be a relaxing hobby btw.
It would kill the very basics how ranking works. Legend rank would be achieved with ease. Ranked systems works by awarding people for winning while the opposite happens to those who lose.
People shouldn't play ranked ladder, in any game, if they can't handle the ups and downs.
Oh c'mon dude, stop with that bullshit.
That's what I do, I play more Casual than Ladder.
Point is, should Ladder be exactly as it is, with up and downs?
It is not true that everyone would achieve Legend: at some ranks, your wr becomes inferior to 50%, and you can't get enough stars to get to the next safe rank.
What I was suggesting was a hybrid system where you can lose stars, but not ranks.
OR: a new Tournament Mode with Arena reward system...
i think this is winning from topdecking and luck, not skill. You can be totally outplayed and still win, which is taking a lot away from the experince. Just because you copied a T1 autopilot deck does not mean you are a skillful player.
Watch WowHobbs. He gets to rank 5 often with insane himebrew decks that are vastly underpowered. THAT is skill. Playing the game YOUR way is much more satisfying. But like someone said earlier, there are people who somehow like playing single-player shooters on god-mode...
Thank you sir for your response, I appreciate your 88 cents.
Maybe, just maybe, we should rethink our premise of loser is entitled to punishment and the winner takes it all, as it has proven to be a fallacy. Too many people fall short, too many are depressed and lonely, too many a soul is destroyed in Kindergarten. Life should change for all of us and not for the chosen few. Struggle is not how great things come to live, it is co-operation, sharing, kindness and the belief in altruism.
your leftist snowflake
<iframe src="http://gifyoutube.com/gif/ywoqQP" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="440" height="400" style="-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;-webkit-transform: scale(1);" ></iframe>