Sealed League Costs

[ket_the_jet]

Maybe it is just my opinion, but I'd like to have a sealed league that costs [maybe] 100 and you keep the cards at the end.
-wtk

[MarcinS]

Maybe it is just my opinion, but I'd like to have a sealed league that costs [maybe] 100 and you keep the cards at the end.
-wtk

Umm, 100 and you get a total of 18 boosters (not counting any prizes)? Not going to happen.

[ket_the_jet]

Well I'm not really speculating how much the league should cost [but keep in mind there are no money prizes and you only get 50 a week]. I'm just saying it would be kind of nice to buy into a league where you kept the cards. Prize support in leagues is pretty weak anyways. There's almost no incentive to buy packs at Merchant and selling the singles back is both time consuming and not profitable.
-wtk

[MarcinS]

If the prize for entry into a sealed league, where you keep the cards, will be lower than the cost of the product given to play, you will see plenty of people joining it, but very small number of players actually playing it. That's why this prize and price model is not going to work.

If you'd want to keep the cards, with the same product given out, the league entry would have to be at least 200G.

[Arcanite]

That would be fine, How about the cost of the cards + 50G, and maybe rounded down to a round number as an option, and 50G for those who don't want them?

[FM]

The system is virtual, "value" simply does not exist. I don't see why the League could not go with MtG's formula for Pre-Releases (Sealed Events with no "Pro Tour" relations except general ranking): have a lower price than the actual product given. This attracts people. Have people be allowed to drop as soon as they get their stuff (IRL, it's actually after they open it, if they don't want to risk the pool swap that usually takes place). People who stay on the tournament until round X at least, get a rare promotional foil. Prize payout is 2 boosters for each player, divided among the top ranked players (so if you just bail, you're passing out on a great prize opportunity). And of course, IRL, there's also the costs involved in actually getting to the site, which make "staying" more appealing, but I'm sure something could be arranged, like insta-droppers forfeiting another booster to those who play out, it'd still be a "steal" for people paying less for the boosters, and it'd, again, boost the experience of those playing). And I think prize payout could involve gold as well, since it's virtual anyway.

[ket_the_jet]

you will see plenty of people joining it, but very small number of players actually playing it. That's why this prize and price model is not going to work.

I will be honest that I didn't consider that, but there should be a way to receive money without the weekly check-in. I feel like a six-year old with an allowance once a week.

GCCG's payout worked because you got something for participating and you also got something for winning. While this quickly devalued a lot of cards, the principle was fantastic [and maybe the winning payout ratio of 4:1 was a little too high].

Players should be rewarded for playing more games and players should be rewarded for playing creative--if not necessarily competitive--decks.
-wtk

[MarcinS]

you will see plenty of people joining it, but very small number of players actually playing it. That's why this prize and price model is not going to work.

I will be honest that I didn't consider that, but there should be a way to receive money without the weekly check-in. I feel like a six-year old with an allowance once a week.

GCCG's payout worked because you got something for participating and you also got something for winning. While this quickly devalued a lot of cards, the principle was fantastic [and maybe the winning payout ratio of 4:1 was a little too high].

Players should be rewarded for playing more games and players should be rewarded for playing creative--if not necessarily competitive--decks.
-wtk

I'm all for rewarding playing, but what (aside from someone just sitting there and controlling the games) will stop any two friends from creating games and conceding to each other all day?

[FM]

Basically a system telling you (as the Admin) that users X, Y and Z have played 5 games in a very short amount of time, which would prompt you to look at the replays and, if said abuse was confirmed, banning their account (and IP adress) for a week or so with a warning, with repeated ofenses being punished by loss of cards, then loss of gold (I assume cards were bought with said gold, rather than just letting it sit there stacking, although both could be removed), then permaban of account, and, as a last resort, permaban of IP adress. Seriously, if someone tries to game the system with THIS MUCH warning (and gaming a system that has no use gaming, since it's entirely virtual with no value whatsoever, unlike Magic Online, where you can make real money, and tournaments count towards your general rating), they had it coming, I'd actually be up for any punishment, like going to their houses and punching them in the face. Repeatedly.

[ket_the_jet]

There were a few problem players on GCCG that pretty quickly got uprooted. Here's my suggestion:

Don't worry about the people who spend as much time as they care to conceding games. People are always going to look to break a system.
-wtk

[MarcinS]

I do not intent to spent any time trying to chase people trying to cheat, which is a reason I'd rather create a system that is as safe from abuse as possible. If the only "loss of functionality" is that people don't get to keep cards from sealed leagues, I don't really think it's a big of a problem.

[Arcanite]

Why not make it that they have to play 2-3+ games in each series, and you get your cards at the end?

[MarcinS]

Why not make it that they have to play 2-3+ games in each series, and you get your cards at the end?

Then they will just concede after playing ring-bearer.

The bottom line is, there should be no give-aways. If you introduce them into the system, people will try to exploit it, and you'll have to have moderators who will have to be a "community police" and waste time on monitoring what is going on, bannings will be necessary, and so on. Is it really worth it? There is nothing wrong with playing sealed without keeping the cards, is there? The cost is the same as playing any other league, so it's just another format to play.

[hsiale]

There is nothing wrong with playing sealed without keeping the cards, is there?

I think there even is something wrong with keeping the cards. I'm monitoring merchant prices from time to time and I feel that prices for King block cards are way healthier than for Fellowship block - where all Cs and nearly all Us (and even some Rs) are completely worthless. King block looks better - of course good cards are more expensive and rares are more expensive, but there are close to no worthless cards (except reprints).

[ket_the_jet]

What's to stop players from creating accounts and exploiting leagues by conceding games to one singular account?

It's not like you have the most foolproof setup right now either.
-wtk