Artifact - It is Luna Monday, my dudes

---

• It is Luna Monday, my dudes
• Valve if you are reading this, please save ABL
• My perspective on the whole Artifact's release
• 10 things that Artifact needed to succeed
• This week on r/CustomArtifact
• The Long Haul: An Artifact Podcast // Community Round Table
• Since most of you are probably just lurking the subreddit instead of playing this, would you play it if it was released on mobile now?

It is Luna Monday, my dudes Posted: 06 May 2019 06:00 AM PDT submitted by /u/28064212va [link] [comments]

Valve if you are reading this, please save ABL Posted: 06 May 2019 02:16 AM PDT Give the 2k prizes a month instead of Opsy. It's the minimum you could do for your last remaining fans of the game. So many volunteers are working so hard to keep this game going. They deserve to be shown a bit of appreciation by giving them a hand to keep this going. You had no problem throwing 10k at tournaments at the beta left and right. Please do the right thing now. It's peanuts for you but will mean the world for us. ABL is the last good thing this game has going for it. submitted by /u/BenRedTV [link] [comments]

My perspective on the whole Artifact's release Posted: 06 May 2019 04:27 AM PDT Let's start with a quick presentation. I am one of the few Artifact players left. I've not partecipated to the beta or the "prerelease" period. I have 281 hours of gameplay. I've played mainly Prize Phantom Draft and gained 50 $ in doing so with a 60% winrate. I started looking into Artifact as soon as it was announced at TI8, because I am a long time Dota fan, I play Magic the Gathering (Mainly Modern and Pauper) and I don't really like the whole F2P economy of games like Hearthstone, MTGA and League of Legends, because I don't like to invest my time in getting to play the way I want to play and I also don't have much money and I don't like to spend them in getting a probability of earning a discount on my time investment. With this out of the way I will give you my perspective on the whole Artifact release.Let's start way back with the announcement at TI8. Even this back the game was already pretty bad received, because the Valve outside of Dota was already sick of the attenction that the mothership gives to the IP and wanted something fresh and new from them (and Half Life 3 of course). The dota playerbase was not entusiast either, because the majority of players that like Mobas are not that into card games I would guess... They like fast paced action games afterall. Mobas are a lot more like fighting games then strategy games on the surface level. Fast forward to PAX EAST 2018. The press gets to play a few games, we get some footage and the man himself, Gabe Newell gives a long speach on the overall philosophy of the game. The atmosphere is a lot more chill and hyped at this time, probably because the people that gets to see this is people that it's really interested in the game, so much so that they go to look for this kinda obscure type of news (afterall it was a press conference) Fast forward again to PAX WEST 2018 (after 6 long months... I was hyped beyond any reasonable level at this time). At this time streamers start to talk about the game really in depth. We get a proper spoiler season and we are really close to release. This period was great as far as hype, but it created a whole new afflux of bad atmosphere, because people wanted to play the game and explore it by themself... Instead they started to realize that there was a bunch of elite people that already played the game for an year or so and they had an "advantage" over the average player as far as competitive (one of the major selling point of the game). I my self was a bit pissed of too, but I kept it cool and waited. Around this time we finally had a complete picture of what Artifact would be and it's here that I've created my idea of the overall perception of the game that holds true to this time and I've found confirmed by a bunch of studies that people has done on the demographic of the game. In short this game is made for me... Probably too much, because there are not that many people like me in the world. Let's be a little bit more clear: Let's say I am an: Dota 2 Player: I obviusly look into Artifact, because it is a game that shares the lore with the game I love and I expect it too be as close as possible to the original. I expect a f2p game, because Dota 2 is probably the only one true f2p game in the world. I expect a game that has everything relevant to the competitive unlocked from the start. I expect the game share some mechanics with the original, so much so that I can feel like I am playing dota. Magic Player: I obviusly look into Artifact, because it's a game designed by Richard Garfield and I would like to have a digital card game to play, because I find HS too casual and Gwent too strange (around this time MTGA wasn't a big thing). I would like to have a digital card game similar to Magic in general, because as much as Dota player I am very passionate about the game I play. I don't mind paying stuff as far as I enjoy it. Hearthstone Player: I obviusly look into Artifact, because people always complain about HS being too much casual and I would like to have another DTCG that gives me a more competitive gameplay. I would like it to be F2p ofc, because I come from a F2P game and I don't expect to pay for something slightly different from what I already have. Now... It's pretty clear that Artifact is not made with any of those archetype of players specifically in mind. It's clear because Artifact has stuff that makes everyone of those archetypes unhappy. I don't want to list all the things that don't appeal to every single category, like the fact that Dota players would like that heroes should be balanced and stronger or that Magic players don't like arrows and stuff like this. This is not bad game design, let's be clear. The game is well designed, but with a narrow type of person in mind. As I was saying before a person like me. A person that likes Dota lore, that has played card games, but it's open to the innovation of the genre, and that doesn't like the f2p model of HS. You can clearly see how much this is true in the review page of Artifact, because the game is super devisive. The game is super divisive, because it's made for a specific set of people, but it appeals to a wider audience, that expects a very different game. The game is also a bit too ambitious probably, because even tho I really like every aspect of it, I can see how basically anything I like is up to debate. I would say that Valve really tryed to make Artifact "the Half Life of Card Games" as Gabe said at the press conference, but that in this case it hurted the game, because it is innovative in too many things... It's innovative in the gameplay, because it adds a new level of variance by removing the players total control over what happens in the board state. This creates unique and interesting scenarios, but makes the game a lot less similar to a traditional cardgame and a lot more like an RTS in decision making. It's innovative in the buissness model, because it is the first DTCG that it's not F2P, that really focus on creating value over the assets that people buy. it's innovative in the leaderboard and competitive system, because they really tryed to not create a ladder system like HS and wanted to give communities the ability to create their own eviroment. And so on The game is well tought and well designed and you would see this if you listen to any of the devs talking about the game, because it's clear that the game is perfect as it is as far as you get what was their intention and philosophy behind... The problem is that it's not for everybody. It's not and they knew it. Richard Garfield stated it in an interview. As always Valve made a game that nobody asked for and made it as innovative and polished as they could, so you shouldn't really blame them for this if you don't like it. In the end I would also say that RNG and Price complaints are bullshit. As far as RNG is fucking illarious that humans can't really get how little they get randomness. This game is not about RNG, because you can clearly look at data about players that are clearly able to consistently win more then others. The RNG in Artifact is almost always good RNG, that players can react and plan for. It creates scenarios to be solved and also helps mitigate a lot of the bad things that you have without it. Let's pick for example Magic where there is no RNG in the board state. Well in this case the RNG of the matchup and the draws is A LOT more impactfull (especially if you throw into the equation the lands too). The thing is that people perceive it as a fair and they don't perceive fair arrow, creep spawn and unit deployment even tho they are a lot more balanced. Especially if you consider that the decks of artifact are extremelly more consistent then the one in Magic, because you have 3 copies over 40 of an effect, because you have 5 free units that comes back every other turn, because the deck is just 40 and you draw 2 each turn and because you also have an entire separate deck of 15 cards that you see basically every game in it's entirity. Price is another factually bullshit thing, because the game as a whole always costed far less then any other card game. Yeah, I get that here there are people that don't like the whole TCG genre, but the thing is that Artifact is a TCG, so it's totally pointless to criticize it for not being a LCG or whatever you like. That said the game is 20 $ and you get: 2 premade decks 10 packs 5 tickets (That if you are moderatelly good you can use to sustain infinite prize play... I did 240 hours of gameplay before running out of them with a modest 60% winrate and I would say that in the end I was unable to sustain it, because packs EV dropped too much) The ability to play forever in prizeless phantom draft/constructed and community created tournaments. ( Let's not forget that Phantom Draft is considered by far the most competitive game mode and you basically don't need anything more then the initial purchase to be able to play it) The ability to play in the time limited events like Call to Arms that give you the ability to play 10 premade decks I get that math is hard for most people, but basically the game is free to play with an entry fee. Even if you want to consider it PaytoPlay you have the ability to buy and sell singles, that gives you a lot more power over the budget you have to invest in the game. At most the game ever costed 300 $ for every single card in max copy, I would like to challenge someone to buy every single card in max copy of any other DTCG set for just 300 $ and even if you can do it you don't have the ability to resell it to get a good chunk of your investment back. Tl;Dr: A big rant over a few things. You can move on with your life. Sorry for bad english I am not mother tongue submitted by /u/Opchip [link] [comments]

10 things that Artifact needed to succeed Posted: 05 May 2019 11:15 PM PDT At least 1 year of feedback by people with experience playing card games like magic and hearthstone (streaming, tournaments, etc.) These people know the intricate components of card games like mana creep and power-rarity ratios that are necessary for a card game to be balanced and fun. Guidance by someone who has experience creating card games. Someone who has little to no experience creating rules and mechanics for card games could probably cobble together a semi playable card game, but it wouldn't be very fun or rewarding to play. A project like Artifact should have been helmed by someone who is passionate about card games and loves creating them. The right development team. By this I mean a team that isn't pressured to meet unrealistic deadlines and be forced to work on a game that they despise. The right team would have been given the necessary resources (time +money) in order to create the Artifact that perfectly represented what they envisioned. Based off of a pre existing game that is popular and has a rich pool of characters that they could be inspired by. There are tons of games out that could translate well to a card game. Designing your own characters and abilities is commendable but too time consuming. Better advertisement. You want to advertise a game like Artifact on Twitch, at esports tournaments etc. If people think that your game is gonna take off and be the next hot thing, they're going to want to be on the ground floor when it releases and capitalize on the hype. Better community engagement. Do card releases with streamers / influences who have established fanbases. People wanna see cool cards and discuss how they plan to use them in their decks. $20 buy in. Every other successful card game on the market is free to play. Why follow their footsteps when you know that people would love to spend money on such a high quality product? No cosmetics. Card backs and alternate hero art add nothing of value to the game. A million dollar tournament. The purpose of this is two-fold: one, it gets people who already purchased Artifact to play the game more, and two, it gets people to buy your game because they want to win that money. Created by a developer with a proven track record of ground breaking and genre defining games. If you create games that won hundreds of accolades and are considered to be some of the greatest games of all time, people are gonna be interested in your next project and will trust that you will make a game that lives up to your name. submitted by /u/yoyotrick [link] [comments]

This week on r/CustomArtifact Posted: 06 May 2019 11:49 AM PDT submitted by /u/JakeUbowski [link] [comments]

The Long Haul: An Artifact Podcast // Community Round Table Posted: 06 May 2019 08:48 AM PDT Episode 12 ​ Some of our distinguished discord community members join us for a round table chat focusing on the main points of the Garfield interview! ​ (01:47) General thoughts on the Garfield interview; ELO / MMR (06:32) Free to play and public MMR (08:43) RNG (12:19) Replays (22:01) Review bombing (26:51) The credit card is the strongest card (33:37) Rewards & progression (35:40) The pros & dota auto chess (38:20) The mayonese of Artifact (39:02) Balancing the game (49:26) Outside opinions on Artifact & PUBG (57:28) Imp hats (59:41) How to improve the game (1:05:53) On changing game mechanics (1:07:40) Should Garfield return? (1:11:14) What would you have asked garfield? (1:19:21) What would you change right now? (1:23:16) Closing & shout outs ​ Join the cast! We record every Sunday at 4 PM CET. Join our Discord; ask questions, join the long haul! ​ Follow and review us on all major podcast platforms! YouTube / iTunes / Spotify / Podbean / TuneIn / Stitcher / ​ Let us know what you think on Twitter too! @NineArmada @k3rrigor ​ Useful Links: Aquin´s TL;DR Garfield interview post Reynad´s Thoughts on Artifact Reddit: Review bombing Artifact Hidden Files submitted by /u/NineHDmg [link] [comments]

Since most of you are probably just lurking the subreddit instead of playing this, would you play it if it was released on mobile now? Posted: 06 May 2019 07:36 AM PDT Personally I didn't really hate the game, it was fun in some ways and I would play it on mobile when I'm in a long queue somewhere for example, the potential of it being released on mobile was the thing that got me hyped in the first place submitted by /u/Martblni [link] [comments]

You are subscribed to email updates from Artifact - The Dota Card Game. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States