Hallo,
Do we know when to expect Master Vault app to implement the "Coming soon" features to track games?
Master vault tracking ETA?
We have no ETA other than "soon".
Winter is coming!!
I think FFG should be very embarrassed, the game has been in planning for 2 years and the best we have is the ability to scan a deck in.
1 hour ago, Amanal said:Winter is coming!!
I think FFG should be very embarrassed, the game has been in planning for 2 years and the best we have is the ability to scan a deck in.
As I posted on another thread (about official judges), there is more to this puzzle than meets the eye.
25 minutes ago, Rabbitball said:As I posted on another thread (about official judges), there is more to this puzzle than meets the eye.
QuoteIf someone comes up to me and says, "I want a system that produces the following chain results for these dozen (or more) cases," I can make that happen. But at this point, I have no idea what people consider reasonable, and to be honest, I don't think the community has settled on that either. Let's get that settled first, and then we'll see how to implement it.
I would expect that if they launched the game already talking about the automated chain system is because they already have at least a draft system thought of. The chain system would have been part of the game design from a relatively early stage. Otherwise don't see why announce it so early and put a placeholder for it in the vault instead of launching it with the next expansion or whatnot.
1 minute ago, hithwen said:
I would expect that if they launched the game already talking about the automated chain system is because they already have at least a draft system thought of. The chain system would have been part of the game design from a relatively early stage. Otherwise don't see why announce it so early and put a placeholder for it in the vault instead of launching it with the next expansion or whatnot.
Just because there was a draft system doesn't mean it was any good, or that it produced realistic results. It's one of those things that sounds simpler than it is. For example, should all decks with the same record have the same chain count, or does the order of wins and losses matter? Do all decks with the same win percentage have the same chain count, or is 80-20 more significant than 8-2, and if so, how much? Should only official tournament games count, or should a game such as casual games recorded on Keyforge Compendium also count? At what point should a deck receive chains? 20 games? 10 games? 5 games but only if 5-0?
On 12/27/2018 at 2:16 PM, Rabbitball said:Just because there was a draft system doesn't mean it was any good, or that it produced realistic results. It's one of those things that sounds simpler than it is.....
The game has been in development for over 2 years, these questions may seem complicated as we have only had 6 weeks to consider them. But in 2 years and 6 weeks there should be a pretty good understanding of what is needed.
Many of the questions you ask can be resolved by using variables in any case, game wins for a chain may start at 3 but move up and down as FFG gets a handle on things. Maybe that can be modified with a +/- for having certain cards or houses in a deck. If you use variables to do the basic stuff, you can change the settings in a heartbeat.
The game in inherently imbalanced, and not having the tool that is claimed to build balance is not a good thing.
On 12/26/2018 at 10:16 PM, Rabbitball said:Should only official tournament games count, or should a game such as casual games recorded on Keyforge Compendium also count?
Well, that much at least has been decided already. Only sanctioned store events will count. Were a deck effected by casual results it would be far too easy to modify a decks rating.
Soon™
4 hours ago, xbeaker said:Well, that much at least has been decided already. Only sanctioned store events will count. Were a deck effected by casual results it would be far too easy to modify a decks rating.
I wouldn't mind if at some point you could track each independently.
As a competitive player, in a pretty competitive group of people I am not too sure any of us would take chains without some guidance.
15 hours ago, Amanal said:I wouldn't mind if at some point you could track each independently.
As a competitive player, in a pretty competitive group of people I am not too sure any of us would take chains without some guidance.
If chains can’t be removed, I’d be inclined only to start adding them if a deck had a 100% win rate, and even then, I think that’s potentially misleading if they happened to play a bunch of rubes (ie it was the players, not the decks!)
On 12/28/2018 at 1:36 AM, Amanal said:The game has been in development for over 2 years, these questions may seem complicated as we have only had 6 weeks to consider them. But in 2 years and 6 weeks there should be a pretty good understanding of what is needed.
Many of the questions you ask can be resolved by using variables in any case, game wins for a chain may start at 3 but move up and down as FFG gets a handle on things. Maybe that can be modified with a +/- for having certain cards or houses in a deck. If you use variables to do the basic stuff, you can change the settings in a heartbeat.
The game in inherently imbalanced, and not having the tool that is claimed to build balance is not a good thing.
The game has been in development for 2 years, but I doubt the chain system for balancing decks has been in development for all that long. The problem is not in the setup per se , but in getting results that aren't worse than doing nothing. Too few chains make the system a joke, while too many incentivizes playing "bad decks" that suddenly get good because their competition is overly hampered.
8 hours ago, Rabbitball said:The game has been in development for 2 years, but I doubt the chain system for balancing decks has been in development for all that long. The problem is not in the setup per se , but in getting results that aren't worse than doing nothing. Too few chains make the system a joke, while too many incentivizes playing "bad decks" that suddenly get good because their competition is overly hampered.
The app was discussed at GenCon so it has been around for a while, plus we have the chain tracker and cards with the application of chains. So I would be suspicious of the claim that chains haven't been in development for too long.
Too few chains is exactly what we have - zero is too few period.
As for a system that would incentivise playing "bad decks" I'd swap the current setup (or complete lack of any setup) for that in a heartbeat. Anyone can go to their FLGS and pick up a good number of "bad decks" for a few bucks, but those good ones could take a lot of time effort and money.
We're not after chains. We're just after a button to record wins and losses right now. Against whom, and using chains, can come later.
If you click on a deck you can record casual wins and loses now.
7 hours ago, RichardD said:We're not after chains. We're just after a button to record wins and losses right now. Against whom, and using chains, can come later.
I made up a spreadsheet for this.
10 hours ago, MrCloudy said:If you click on a deck you can record casual wins and loses now.
I know you can record in Keyforge Compendium; just recorded my info from there into the Master Vault.