The Anti-Laundering System is a Card Duplication System

[Benevolent 1]

Is there a way to mitigate the damage done by the the players which have overly abused TCALS? I mean, can these duplicate cards taken by the worst offenders be removed and placed back into the guf for redistribution? In doing so, it may dis-incentivize the next selfish manifestation from players prone to such behaviours.

I don't think you can punish players for utilizing game mechanics(accessible to everyone) to improve their deck. Plus, enforcement of this would likely be completely arbitrary, not to mention the more widespread market impacts of simply going in and deleting cards.

Most people would not consider the original April Fool's game to be particularly balanced, and there were lots of ways to manipulate the system to get a leg up on other players. There are still players who haven't really touched cards since April Fool's sitting in the top 100.

Should we punish them for playing during a time where card spawning was significantly buffed? Retroactively going in and punishing players for what effectively is/was just a valid strategy doesn't make any sense to me.

Truthfully these skills aren't all that are needed but also a willingness to violate the game's boundaries and possibly even a wish to attract undue attention.

I guess there was some polling on this subject which I didn't see or participate. Back in April '18 most of us thought of NS Cards as a temporary game for April Fools Day. Some of those inactives in the top 100 possibly weren't wishing for the Aprils Fool Day card game to be anymore than that. Maybe that's why they're inactive?

A very few players would stand to lose what many others players played hard to gain but were denied even though the intent of the game creator was for them to not be denied. Now it would seem unlikely to happen, but rightfully it would be a positive correction. Punishment is the wrong word here. Unless you would also consider that by employing these TCALS tactics of depriving the "good" cards to most of the other players as punishing them. That would imply malice towards the other players and I just don't feel that is at the bottom of it. I see it more as a correction of errors which should be righted. Potential corrections would incentivise card game players to strategize realizing the goodwill of gamesmanship is of some value versus the sole benefit of self interest. Correction creates a positive feedback loop.

[Noahs Second Country]

I don't think you can punish players for utilizing game mechanics(accessible to everyone) to improve their deck. Plus, enforcement of this would likely be completely arbitrary, not to mention the more widespread market impacts of simply going in and deleting cards.

Most people would not consider the original April Fool's game to be particularly balanced, and there were lots of ways to manipulate the system to get a leg up on other players. There are still players who haven't really touched cards since April Fool's sitting in the top 100.

Should we punish them for playing during a time where card spawning was significantly buffed? Retroactively going in and punishing players for what effectively is/was just a valid strategy doesn't make any sense to me.

Truthfully these skills aren't all that are needed but also a willingness to violate the game's boundaries and possibly even a wish to attract undue attention.

I guess there was some polling on this subject which I didn't see or participate. Back in April '18 most of us thought of NS Cards as a temporary game for April Fools Day. Some of those inactives in the top 100 possibly weren't wishing for the Aprils Fool Day card game to be anymore than that. Maybe that's why they're inactive?

A very few players would stand to lose what many others players played hard to gain but were denied even though the intent of the game creator was for them to not be denied. Now it would seem unlikely to happen, but rightfully it would be a positive correction. Punishment is the wrong word here. Unless you would also consider that by employing these TCALS tactics of depriving the "good" cards to most of the other players as punishing them. That would imply malice towards the other players and I just don't feel that is at the bottom of it. I see it more as a correction of errors which should be righted. Potential corrections would incentivise card game players to strategize realizing the goodwill of gamesmanship is of some value versus the sole benefit of self interest. Correction creates a positive feedback loop.

I think you'd be surprised to see the scope of TCALS's impact on the market.

Pull events have lead to mass sell-offs and cards changing hands many times. There is no practical way to "undo" this effect, I think you'll see in a lot of places that the profits were already made and the people losing would be the ones who bought the new supply of cards.

As for gamesmanship, pull events (even the private ones) require some level of mutual trust to run, and a very small minority of events were conducted with actual malicious intent. I also don't see how you're supposed to track the many many cards that have been spawned through TCALS, because it's not just the big ticket items that have been printed.

I don't really see how the game's boundaries are being violated by the existence and continued use of pull events to generate cards. Innovative new techniques will always emerge given time and the right circumstances. The boundaries are being pushed, yes, but they aren't being crossed or violated in any way - a pull event uses mechanics integrated within the preexisting game structure.

[Benevolent 1]

Truthfully these skills aren't all that are needed but also a willingness to violate the game's boundaries and possibly even a wish to attract undue attention.

I guess there was some polling on this subject which I didn't see or participate. Back in April '18 most of us thought of NS Cards as a temporary game for April Fools Day. Some of those inactives in the top 100 possibly weren't wishing for the Aprils Fool Day card game to be anymore than that. Maybe that's why they're inactive?

A very few players would stand to lose what many others players played hard to gain but were denied even though the intent of the game creator was for them to not be denied. Now it would seem unlikely to happen, but rightfully it would be a positive correction. Punishment is the wrong word here. Unless you would also consider that by employing these TCALS tactics of depriving the "good" cards to most of the other players as punishing them. That would imply malice towards the other players and I just don't feel that is at the bottom of it. I see it more as a correction of errors which should be righted. Potential corrections would incentivise card game players to strategize realizing the goodwill of gamesmanship is of some value versus the sole benefit of self interest. Correction creates a positive feedback loop.

I think you'd be surprised to see the scope of TCALS's impact on the market.

Pull events have lead to mass sell-offs and cards changing hands many times. There is no practical way to "undo" this effect, I think you'll see in a lot of places that the profits were already made and the people losing would be the ones who bought the new supply of cards.

As for gamesmanship, pull events (even the private ones) require some level of mutual trust to run, and a very small minority of events were conducted with actual malicious intent. I also don't see how you're supposed to track the many many cards that have been spawned through TCALS, because it's not just the big ticket items that have been printed.

I don't really see how the game's boundaries are being violated by the existence and continued use of pull events to generate cards. Innovative new techniques will always emerge given time and the right circumstances. The boundaries are being pushed, yes, but they aren't being crossed or violated in any way - a pull event uses mechanics integrated within the preexisting game structure.

Honestly I am continually surprised so any further surprise is difficult for me to detect.

Your argument is mainly about the impracticality of undoing the damage. Not that it's probably been the wrong thing for a handful of players to do repeatedly over and over and over again. This TCALS strategy borders on abusing the game since most other players have been unaware of this peculiarity. An even playing field is absolutely necessary to avoid the appearance of a rigged game. Few players want to compete in a rigged game.

You don't see boundaries being violated? Well, IMHO the only way to not see it is to not want to see it. What you call innovative new techniques may be seen as compulsive cheats to others. If boundaries can get pushed back you must understand they can be reestablished or even tightened as well. There are indeed boundaries. Perhaps they need to be spelled out in this case to the letter.

[Noahs Second Country]

I don't see the need in making a moral argument here.

What you're proposing is largely impractical, and attempts to actually implement these changes will probably cause just as much trouble as TCALS has.

That's the only point I need to make here.

[Praeceps]

Thank you actively soliciting thoughts Ballotonia—the engagement with the community is greatly appreciated.

As a player, my personal interest in Cards was from going after the hard-to-obtain cards that were prominent, those cards formerly in that status were HMS Unicorn, Pergamon, Old Tyrannia S2, NERVUN S2. Obtaining those cards was what motivated me to play the cards game. Since the aforementioned events, I have lost interest in the cards game and have been focusing more on using cards for regional development. While these events have an adverse effect on myself personally, I think they would be fine if TCALS is able to have a positive impact on the game as a whole.

Given that TCALS has essentially eliminated scarcity in the trading cards game, I do not believe that to be the case. I see three different types of cards players affected by this:

1. Deck Value Hunters: Players who are only interested in trying to have a big deck and want their deck to be the biggest. TCALS has enabled for these players to spawn at their leisure copies of high value cards to inflate their deck as long as the additional cards are hoarded and do not enter the market (and the increase in supply thus causing a decrease in price).

2. Collection Makers: Players who are attempting to make collections of a certain type, whether that is all Issue Authors or ex-GCR Delegates, etc., are now more easily able to finish their collections. This can be a double-edged sword for these players. On one hand, it is easier to complete their collections, on the other hand, there is less accomplishment from finishing a collection. I imagine that some of these players may like TCALS while others will not.

3. Scarcity Scavengers: Players, like me, who are attempting to collect those relatively famous nations which have only a few copies of their cards in existence. Speaking as one of them, I enjoyed being able to show off how my deck had all these low-owner cards of well-known nations. With the TCALS, there is essentially no more scarcity which means there are not any more cards for me to try to obtain.

It is clear that one type of card player is negatively impacted while it is more mixed for the second. I believe that the admins should try to create mechanisms which will engage all of these cards players.

The best proposal to do so is The Northern Light's suggestion to remove the bid mechanic, and simply have cards at auction have a higher chance of being pulled independent of bids placed and packs being opened. In the case of deck value hunters, the option to artificially inflate their deck is still present by inflating random cards—and of which you can see many taking a look at the top valued cards. Collection makers may have a harder time finding cards, however, a number of regions—not just The North Pacific—hold pull events as well as private individuals. The cards they seek will still become attainable over time. And of course, for players like myself, scarcity will return (or at least for season 3...).

I think this is the best change as it will re-engage players and provides for community events and collaboration between players.

Currently, pull events can be disrupted if a player is attempting to benefit from them. This puts more emphasis on the timezone where you are and provides an advantage to players who are online when not many are.

While it is unfortunate that many have already benefited from TCALS through mechanisms which may no longer be present in the future, the changes should still be made. Leaving the problem there as others have already taken advantage of it does not solve anything. The game does systematically provide advantages for nations who have been existing/around longer. Many stats increase over time through consistent issue answering, the earlier you joined the game, the more power you could have accumulated, players who were around for April Fools with cards were able to get large decks to start off with when cards were re-introduced, etc. It is entirely appropriate to make changes now to fix a sub-optimal mechanism.

[Benevolent 1]

I don't see the need in making a moral argument here.

What you're proposing is largely impractical, and attempts to actually implement these changes will probably cause just as much trouble as TCALS has.

That's the only point I need to make here.

Removing cards from the worse offenders decks and placing them back into the guf for random redistribution to some degree may be impractical but it also may not be. I do not know. There's only a couple players that have overly abused this, with you being one. Your opinions have a self serving ring to them and wasn't it the over use of a completely self serving game tactic that amplified this entire problem into a major cause of player angst? In the future, let's not encourage card players to be motivated by unbridled greed, running totally roughshod over the vast majority of others without a care. That would be good for the game and improve the players themselves.

Thank you actively soliciting thoughts Ballotonia—the engagement with the community is greatly appreciated.

As a player, my personal interest in Cards was from going after the hard-to-obtain cards that were prominent, those cards formerly in that status were HMS Unicorn, Pergamon, Old Tyrannia S2, NERVUN S2. Obtaining those cards was what motivated me to play the cards game. Since the aforementioned events, I have lost interest in the cards game and have been focusing more on using cards for regional development. While these events have an adverse effect on myself personally, I think they would be fine if TCALS is able to have a positive impact on the game as a whole.

Given that TCALS has essentially eliminated scarcity in the trading cards game, I do not believe that to be the case. I see three different types of cards players affected by this:

1. Deck Value Hunters: Players who are only interested in trying to have a big deck and want their deck to be the biggest. TCALS has enabled for these players to spawn at their leisure copies of high value cards to inflate their deck as long as the additional cards are hoarded and do not enter the market (and the increase in supply thus causing a decrease in price).

2. Collection Makers: Players who are attempting to make collections of a certain type, whether that is all Issue Authors or ex-GCR Delegates, etc., are now more easily able to finish their collections. This can be a double-edged sword for these players. On one hand, it is easier to complete their collections, on the other hand, there is less accomplishment from finishing a collection. I imagine that some of these players may like TCALS while others will not.

3. Scarcity Scavengers: Players, like me, who are attempting to collect those relatively famous nations which have only a few copies of their cards in existence. Speaking as one of them, I enjoyed being able to show off how my deck had all these low-owner cards of well-known nations. With the TCALS, there is essentially no more scarcity which means there are not any more cards for me to try to obtain.

It is clear that one type of card player is negatively impacted while it is more mixed for the second. I believe that the admins should try to create mechanisms which will engage all of these cards players.

The best proposal to do so is The Northern Light's suggestion to remove the bid mechanic, and simply have cards at auction have a higher chance of being pulled independent of bids placed and packs being opened. In the case of deck value hunters, the option to artificially inflate their deck is still present by inflating random cards—and of which you can see many taking a look at the top valued cards. Collection makers may have a harder time finding cards, however, a number of regions—not just The North Pacific—hold pull events as well as private individuals. The cards they seek will still become attainable over time. And of course, for players like myself, scarcity will return (or at least for season 3...).

I think this is the best change as it will re-engage players and provides for community events and collaboration between players.

Currently, pull events can be disrupted if a player is attempting to benefit from them. This puts more emphasis on the timezone where you are and provides an advantage to players who are online when not many are.

While it is unfortunate that many have already benefited from TCALS through mechanisms which may no longer be present in the future, the changes should still be made. Leaving the problem there as others have already taken advantage of it does not solve anything. The game does systematically provide advantages for nations who have been existing/around longer. Many stats increase over time through consistent issue answering, the earlier you joined the game, the more power you could have accumulated, players who were around for April Fools with cards were able to get large decks to start off with when cards were re-introduced, etc. It is entirely appropriate to make changes now to fix a sub-optimal mechanism.

Well said, and I agree. The fix would hopefully be as comprehensive as mechanically possible.

[Recuecn]

I hadn't noticed Ballo's post, sadly! But here's my thoughts:

I've been a TCALS apologist, since it makes it possible for people to complete collections that otherwise could have been all but impossible. On the other hand, as we've figured out the mechanics of the system more, I don't like that it's a zero-sum thing (one person pulling a card shouldn't make someone else less likely to pull a card). I've been in pull events where when I saw a pull, I stopped opening and waited for more bids—and that seems silly. I like that the card game doesn't have to be a competition against other people, it can be what you want it to be, and having TCALS work in a zero-sum manner that way goes against that spirit.

I think r3n's suggestion that there could be a flat probability increase of pulling a card while it's at auction, open to anyone, not affected by pulls or bids, makes sense as a default option. There's probably a more creative way to do it though. Ransium's "no tcals but more cte pulls" would also have a similar effect, but I don't like that as much because as I've said before, I think pull events really bring the card community together by creating events and things to do together, rather than having the game be entirely isolated.

I think part of the reason I'm hesitant to say that a flat probability increase is the best solution is because part of the fun of TCALS is the mystery. We haven't entirely figured out all the math behind it, and if we knew exactly how it worked, it wouldn't be as exciting. Having a system that's a bit opaque makes it more interesting and gives us the fun of wondering about the mechanics and trying to work them out for ourselves. (So maybe when the mechanic is changed, don't announce at first what option was decided on? Maybe that's a bad idea though, idk.)

Anyway, my suggestion would be that the probability is affected by rarity: not common, rare, legendary, but the actual scarcity of the cards. This could be the number of copies that exist, or even better, the number of owners. If TCALS is meant to make it harder to get away with big transfers, then it should kick in when someone is auctioning a card that only they own, but disregard a card like Testlandia that everybody already has and only wants for MV. I think this would help with the original 'anti-laundering' intent of TCALS, but still make people like me happy, who are trying to find more rare cards. It probably still wouldn't please Praetor.

[The Northern Light]

I think r3n's suggestion that there could be a flat probability increase of pulling a card while it's at auction, open to anyone, not affected by pulls or bids, makes sense as a default option. There's probably a more creative way to do it though. Ransium's "no tcals but more cte pulls" would also have a similar effect, but I don't like that as much because as I've said before, I think pull events really bring the card community together by creating events and things to do together, rather than having the game be entirely isolated.

I think part of the reason I'm hesitant to say that a flat probability increase is the best solution is because part of the fun of TCALS is the mystery. We haven't entirely figured out all the math behind it, and if we knew exactly how it worked, it wouldn't be as exciting. Having a system that's a bit opaque makes it more interesting and gives us the fun of wondering about the mechanics and trying to work them out for ourselves. (So maybe when the mechanic is changed, don't announce at first what option was decided on? Maybe that's a bad idea though, idk.)

Anyway, my suggestion would be that the probability is affected by rarity: not common, rare, legendary, but the actual scarcity of the cards. This could be the number of copies that exist, or even better, the number of owners. If TCALS is meant to make it harder to get away with big transfers, then it should kick in when someone is auctioning a card that only they own, but disregard a card like Testlandia that everybody already has and only wants for MV. I think this would help with the original 'anti-laundering' intent of TCALS, but still make people like me happy, who are trying to find more rare cards. It probably still wouldn't please Praetor.

I should clarify that I have no issue with the pull odds being subject to some modifiers, provided they are not as easy to manipulate as the bids. For example, increasing the pull odds as a function of, say, the ratio of (auction price) / (junk value) would probably make sense. Number of copies, as you suggest, could potentially also work.

I had mentioned this in my original post, but neglected to include it under proposal (a) in my second post. I have edited my second post accordingly.

[Giovanniland]

Anyway, my suggestion would be that the probability is affected by rarity: not common, rare, legendary, but the actual scarcity of the cards. This could be the number of copies that exist, or even better, the number of owners. If TCALS is meant to make it harder to get away with big transfers, then it should kick in when someone is auctioning a card that only they own, but disregard a card like Testlandia that everybody already has and only wants for MV. I think this would help with the original 'anti-laundering' intent of TCALS, but still make people like me happy, who are trying to find more rare cards. It probably still wouldn't please Praetor.

This suggestion is certainly interesting, and it helps with the original intent of TCALS as you say. Other proposals focus too much on the pull event side, such as disabling the factor of each bid increasing a pull chance, or making packs spawn the content of when they were acquired and not open. These are fine, but they don't really help with the purpose of TCALS, preventing large farmers from transferring large amounts of bank.

The use of TCALS is so widespread that it's impossible to simply undo the damage by deleting every generated copy, and it could be unfair for some who did not use the system, but traded some of their cards for a copy of a rare card spawned by TCALS: how is it fair that they get that copy deleted? I reaffirm that undoing the damage is not an option here. And then, if we carefully analyze every single use of this mechanic, some of them were totally fair, such as Araluen and Eyreland (a CTE'd issue author card) or Akavet (a CTE'd animated flag) - both of these cards were among the last ones needed for those collections, and without this mechanic in place, they may not have been ever completed. Another example: I have myself used TCALS to generate copies of my card, but that has nothing to do with MV or DV, it's simply a personal item.

And those are just some examples that confirm TCALS is not necessarily bad for the game. Don't take me wrong though, I'm not saying it is flawless. I believe the main flaw, as stated earlier, is that it fails miserably at its original intent, which is preventing large sums of money to be transferred. The quoted proposal seems the best idea for me, because simply generating cards to increase wealth will cease to exist, and the original purpose of the mechanic will be improved. I like the idea too because those events staged to create more copies of a rare card (my two examples above) for the purpose of finishing collections (not generating wealth) will stay. So, as you print more copies of that card, the overall probability of pulling it will decrease. This helps with defeating large bank transfers too, because most of the time they're done on rare cards from CTE'd nations.

Or, a different approach: we could simply leave TCALS unchanged. The fact that changing it will cement the wealth of current big farmers, because they were here to abuse the mechanic, while keeping new farmers from doing the same thing, is not good. Surely there will always be disparity, as in the real life market, but at least that way, new farmers can still possibly benefit from pull events and rise through the ranks of the card leaderboard. My opinion is that we can a) either implement the above proposal or b) not change anything.

[Ransium]

I think everyone crowing about how effective TCALS would become if card rarity were more of a factor are sorely mistaken. My transfer card (linked to in OP) has ~50 owners when all copies I have are on a single nation. I think many other well used transfer cards are similar. Lots of people for whatever reason don’t sell transfer cards they farm.

It also means that if S3 has a card like Nerv or OT and a big farmer gets their hands on it early they could effectively monopolize the card if they were smart. For example, they could hold their own person pull event at some odd hour of the night and then (if owners not copies was a factor that heavily impacted odds) distributing copies to pups. I think all your suggestions trying to keep pull events alive but trying to mitigate too much manipulation are misguided. Pull events are manipulation. It just so happens that they are publicized manipulation. Any mechanic allowing pull event manipulation of pull odds can almost certainly be exploited far more effectively by a single or small group of players privately holding pull events when others don’t dilute their odds.

[Praeceps]

While I do think mystery in how the cards system works is fun, in the long-term, I don't think designing the system with the impression that players will not figure out how it works is a good idea. There are far too many benefits to be gained by figuring out how the cards system works. Within a couple of months of public pull events beginning, the ability for odds to be increased by making more matches was noticed and then exploited. I think that any attempts to make something with the idea that players won't find out risks that players will find out and then subsequently exploit and abuse it.

Anyway, my suggestion would be that the probability is affected by rarity: not common, rare, legendary, but the actual scarcity of the cards. This could be the number of copies that exist, or even better, the number of owners. If TCALS is meant to make it harder to get away with big transfers, then it should kick in when someone is auctioning a card that only they own, but disregard a card like Testlandia that everybody already has and only wants for MV. I think this would help with the original 'anti-laundering' intent of TCALS, but still make people like me happy, who are trying to find more rare cards. It probably still wouldn't please Praetor.

I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that I wouldn't be pleased as a result of your changes. What I am advocating for is a return of scarcity. I'm not sure how your proposal for changes results in there remaining to be no scarcity.

I am concerned about exploits of your suggestion though. For example, if I had a number of copies of a transfer card, I could spread those copies out over puppets in order to prevent TCALS from triggering on my transfer card. This would then result in my bank transfers being even less risky than in the status quo.

And those are just some examples that confirm TCALS is not necessarily bad for the game. Don't take me wrong though, I'm not saying it is flawless. I believe the main flaw, as stated earlier, is that it fails miserably at its original intent, which is preventing large sums of money to be transferred. The quoted proposal seems the best idea for me, because simply generating cards to increase wealth will cease to exist, and the original purpose of the mechanic will be improved. I like the idea too because those events staged to create more copies of a rare card (my two examples above) for the purpose of finishing collections (not generating wealth) will stay. So, as you print more copies of that card, the overall probability of pulling it will decrease. This helps with defeating large bank transfers too, because most of the time they're done on rare cards from CTE'd nations.

Or, a different approach: we could simply leave TCALS unchanged. The fact that changing it will cement the wealth of current big farmers, because they were here to abuse the mechanic, while keeping new farmers from doing the same thing, is not good. Surely there will always be disparity, as in the real life market, but at least that way, new farmers can still possibly benefit from pull events and rise through the ranks of the card leaderboard. My opinion is that we can a) either implement the above proposal or b) not change anything.

I am not sure why it is presented as there being only two options for admins to consider. There are a number of options that have been advanced with different details. Obviously, I am opposed to a number of those suggestions yet I nevertheless recognize that they exist.

I don't think anyone has taken the approach that TCALS is categorically bad for the game. Rather, that there are aspects of it which result in undesired mechanism (essentially eliminating scarcity from the game).

Overall, I think that the original purpose of TCALS is failing. I have demonstrated previously how Recu's suggestion which you are seconding can remain abused. However, I really think that most strategies to make bank transfers harder are going to fail. There are too many ways to protect bank transfers from doing your bank transfers at a time few people are card farming, to having formal or informal agreements to not heist transfers. If the admins want to make it harder to do bank transfers, I don't believe just making modifications to the existing system will be sufficient.

[Racoda]

It's pretty funny how the tables have turned, and Noah is in favour of TCALS while Reçu moved to the other camp.

Your argument is mainly about the impracticality of undoing the damage. Not that it's probably been the wrong thing for a handful of players to do repeatedly over and over and over again. This TCALS strategy borders on abusing the game since most other players have been unaware of this peculiarity. An even playing field is absolutely necessary to avoid the appearance of a rigged game. Few players want to compete in a rigged game.

Agreed. An uneven playing field is the central issue here, and change without damage control is the opposite of levelling the playing field.

I'm still for the "let Icarus fly close to the sun" approach instead of "move the sun away". I think duplication of legendary and high value cards will just prove how really worthless they, and chasing MV, are, and shift the focus to other cards. Only real issue is people being tricked by the oh-so-shiny rarity colour into thinking they're actually rare.

TCALS has never worked (effectively and consistently) at preventing transfers. Additionally, TCALS exacerbates DV/MV calculation issues.

Some sort of alternative for preventing the efficacy of transfers (ex. taxation) should exist as well, since that was the original point of TCALS. An added bonus of purchases being taxed is that it combats inflation and is a compulsory sink (vs. the optional deck expansions)!

As for DV, I could probably get behind Vylixan's suggestion, since it makes the benefit of inflating multiple copies of a single card much smaller (and thus inflating is more time consuming and less monopolistic). For MV, maybe exponential decay each day the card isn't traded (inflating is even more time consuming, this also prevents MV for lingering on random inflated/transfer cards).

That being said, since change has been announced anyway, if anything is implemented in order to keep a pull event mechanic, r3n's first suggestion makes most sense. Maybe rarity modifiers, because people are naturally attracted to legendaries. Ransium and Praetor correctly point out that "number of copies/number of owners" modifiers are easy to circumvent, but that only applies if TCALS is kept as the main anti-transfer system (and not as a legitimized pull events system).

tl;dr: If change is needed, TCALS as an anti-transfer system should be replaced with taxes, which also act as a sink. Maybe kept (even if changed) as a pull event mechanic.


Edit 11/07/2020: Oh, and if the current TCALS mechanism is indeed considered "unfair" and removed, do consider also removing all the cards "unfairly" spawned (from when knowledge of its mechanics was made public up to now).
It is otherwise ridiculous to think it would be possible to fairly challenge unfairly created monopolies like these, not to mention all the bank which was laundered through selling and gifting those around in order to make such removal measures harder ("it's gonna hurt the poor trader who bought it at egregious prices from the monopolist").
The ability to challenge unfairness through the same means is the primary reason TCALS has to stay, or all those duplicates (and bank) have to be removed.


Edit 12/07/2020: To expand on the previous edit:
I hate it that since TCALS will be removed, but duplicates likely won't be removed, the current DV and self collecting meta is "print as much until the admin implements changes".
I've collected loads of my own card before TCALS abuse was known, and to think that all of that is meaningless because whoever prints more copies until the announced admin bugfix, wins, leaves a really bad taste.

This thread concentrates on whether less skilled players will be equal to more skilled players. The obvious answer is no. Does TCALS amplify those inequalities? Yes. But TCALS is still fair.
The essential question is: given two equally skilled players, can they achieve the same progress in the same time? Before detailed TCALS mechanics were discovered, the answer was yes. Even after TCALS abuse was discovered, the answer was still yes.

But if we compare a player in a pre-TCALS game, who gets to keep all they've generated through TCALS, to a player in a post-TCALS game, the answer is obviously no.
TCALS removal might make the game more balanced (as in, the inequalities between smaller and bigger players will grow slower), but its removal without duplicates
removal (or similar) is unfair. Two otherwise identical players can't possibly achieve the same outcomes. This is what needs to be fixed if TCALS is fixed.

The game was never balanced. But it has always offered the same opportunities.

Of course, the ineffectiveness of preventing transfers still needs to be fixed (by other means than the current TCALS), but if the mechanic itself, which has long become something else than simply an Anti-Laundering System, is removed, the game should be kept fair.

Once the game ceases offering the same hugely profitable mechanics, to every player, without fixing the already generated profit (so that two identical players can achieve the same effects in the same time), it's broken and it's time to pack up.

I will of course participate in the stupid race to collect as many copies of myself before TCALS is removed, but I will welcome all the copies generated by TCALS being removed, in order to preserve fairness.

All the previous changes I know of in the cards game were essentially nerfs to existing players. But the removal of TCALS (without damage control) is a huge buff to existing players.

[Benevolent 1]

Here's an example of a player doing a "pull event" using the TCALS card duplication system. The card at auction being manipulated has had over 2500 bids of .01 (and still counting) after barely 2 hours. The card is a Nervun S1 which is put up by Minskiev at an ask of 600.00 Bank and all bids are by same. https://www.nationstates.net/page=deck/card=5/season=1

As of this posting 12 Nervun S1 fInds have gone primarily to the players various puppets:

10 minutes ago: Found by Tb
21 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 136
24 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 115
26 minutes ago: Found by Hillary Clinton 2016
28 minutes ago: Found by 1050322
29 minutes ago: Found by 1050321
35 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 57
37 minutes ago: Found by ----------------_-----
53 minutes ago: Found by Beans on Toast 13
56 minutes ago: Found by MSN 82
75 minutes ago: Found by Hawk14
78 minutes ago: Found by Centrist Card Farm 089

Nervun S1 had a market value of 345.00 Bank before the trade. At that rate, these twelve cards have a total Bank value of 4140.00 Bank. This is ridiculous and absurd.

I surmise 99.999% of all card players have never had that much Bank at any time.

I agree with Racoda's conclusion in the previous post:

All the previous changes I know of in the cards game were essentially nerfs to existing players. But the removal of TCALS (without damage control) is a huge buff to existing players.

There isn't a true card "game" if this continues uncorrected and without damage control.

game
/ɡām/
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games

1. a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

[Minskiev]

Edit: Sorry for addon to gravedig! Didn't realize.

Here's an example of a player doing a "pull event" using the TCALS card duplication system. The card at auction being manipulated has had over 2500 bids of .01 (and still counting) after barely 2 hours. The card is a Nervun S1 which is put up by Minskiev at an ask of 600.00 Bank and all bids are by same. https://www.nationstates.net/page=deck/card=5/season=1

As of this posting 12 Nervun S1 fInds have gone primarily to the players various puppets:

10 minutes ago: Found by Tb
21 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 136
24 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 115
26 minutes ago: Found by Hillary Clinton 2016
28 minutes ago: Found by 1050322
29 minutes ago: Found by 1050321
35 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 57
37 minutes ago: Found by ----------------_-----
53 minutes ago: Found by Beans on Toast 13
56 minutes ago: Found by MSN 82
75 minutes ago: Found by Hawk14
78 minutes ago: Found by Centrist Card Farm 089

Nervun S1 had a market value of 345.00 Bank before the trade. At that rate, these twelve cards have a total Bank value of 4140.00 Bank. This is ridiculous and absurd.

I surmise 99.999% of all card players have never had that much Bank at any time.

I agree with Racoda's conclusion in the previous post:

All the previous changes I know of in the cards game were essentially nerfs to existing players. But the removal of TCALS (without damage control) is a huge buff to existing players.

There isn't a true card "game" if this continues uncorrected and without damage control.

game
/ɡām/
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games

1. a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

12 pulls is nothing lmao

Also you realize you could've gotten an s1 nervun no? It's just a way to build your deck. Players who started early have a huge advantage, maybe we should reset cards? Nonsense.

[Benevolent 1]

Edit: Sorry for addon to gravedig! Didn't realize.

Here's an example of a player doing a "pull event" using the TCALS card duplication system. The card at auction being manipulated has had over 2500 bids of .01 (and still counting) after barely 2 hours. The card is a Nervun S1 which is put up by Minskiev at an ask of 600.00 Bank and all bids are by same. https://www.nationstates.net/page=deck/card=5/season=1

As of this posting 12 Nervun S1 fInds have gone primarily to the players various puppets:

10 minutes ago: Found by Tb
21 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 136
24 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 115
26 minutes ago: Found by Hillary Clinton 2016
28 minutes ago: Found by 1050322
29 minutes ago: Found by 1050321
35 minutes ago: Found by Gio Farm 57
37 minutes ago: Found by ----------------_-----
53 minutes ago: Found by Beans on Toast 13
56 minutes ago: Found by MSN 82
75 minutes ago: Found by Hawk14
78 minutes ago: Found by Centrist Card Farm 089

Nervun S1 had a market value of 345.00 Bank before the trade. At that rate, these twelve cards have a total Bank value of 4140.00 Bank. This is ridiculous and absurd.

I surmise 99.999% of all card players have never had that much Bank at any time.

I agree with Racoda's conclusion in the previous post:

There isn't a true card "game" if this continues uncorrected and without damage control.

game
/ɡām/
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games

1. a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

12 pulls is nothing lmao

Also you realize you could've gotten an s1 nervun no? It's just a way to build your deck. Players who started early have a huge advantage, maybe we should reset cards? Nonsense.

Players that started early had a natural advantage, what you're doing is not in the spirit of a fair game. Some players who did start early have counterfeited cards. What do you tell them? The card game has become endangered. This tactic disgusts many casual players. Players have left the game in droves.

From what i've observed watching these shenanigans, 12 pulls is a haul on an S1 duplication run. S2 pulls always yield many more, like 70 - 80. That's an enormous theft in cards and bank. It's an unethical way to build your deck. It's not a mechanic designed for this.

An honest player doesn't steal from the bank in a Monopoly Game. Nor does he steal deeds to property. And a handy get out of jail card free doesn't absolve one of that. Most people will just quit playing the game and that's what has been occurring. That's the true end result of using this tactic as your means.

[Westinor]

An honest player doesn't steal from the bank in a Monopoly Game. Nor does he steal deeds to property. And a handy get out of jail card free doesn't absolve one of that. Most people will just quit playing the game and that's what has been occurring. That's the true end result of using this tactic as your means.

Wouldn’t say this is equivalent to taking money from the bank so much as buying a hotel on the mathematically-correct tiles and profiting. It’s an exploitation, but it’s not a game cheat. Ethical or not ethical, it’s a way to play a game - what’s more is that it’s easy for anyone who wants in to take part. As a casual cards player I don’t feel particularly dissuaded from playing cards because of the TCALS aspect. The time-consuming nature of the game is more of the dissuader, and that’s just another inherently natural aspect of the game.

[Benevolent 1]

An honest player doesn't steal from the bank in a Monopoly Game. Nor does he steal deeds to property. And a handy get out of jail card free doesn't absolve one of that. Most people will just quit playing the game and that's what has been occurring. That's the true end result of using this tactic as your means.

Wouldn’t say this is equivalent to taking money from the bank so much as buying a hotel on the mathematically-correct tiles and profiting. It’s an exploitation, but it’s not a game cheat. Ethical or not ethical, it’s a way to play a game - what’s more is that it’s easy for anyone who wants in to take part. As a casual cards player I don’t feel particularly dissuaded from playing cards because of the TCALS aspect. The time-consuming nature of the game is more of the dissuader, and that’s just another inherently natural aspect of the game.

I still contend it's taking money from the bank because many of these dupe cards get sold off for easy bank. Though it's now a little tougher since KK is out.

As for the time involved, yeah, I'd swear some of these players live here or have good reason to be here most all the time. Perhaps the card game gives them something to do during the lulls between other activities on NS.

Another thing, why draw packs and need deck space when you can print your own high value cards in an auction and get them into your deck over capacity? The Card Game obviously wasn't designed for this to be used by players as a method of card acquisition.

[Galiantus III]

Something useful about TCALS duping is that it can be used even if there's only one copy of common low-owner cards. This is good for card collectors at all levels because it means cards that would otherwise be unobtainable can be obtained by making the right deals.

[Benevolent 1]

Something useful about TCALS duping is that it can be used even if there's only one copy of common low-owner cards. This is good for card collectors at all levels because it means cards that would otherwise be unobtainable can be obtained by making the right deals.

Not a counterbalance to the much larger problem of duplicating high value cards and redeeming them for hundreds in Bank.

[Frisbeeteria]

redeeming them for hundreds in Bank.

Not that I disagree with the core premise ... but nobody is "redeeming" cards for bank. They're selling them to other players who are willing to pay high prices. If they were junking the cards, that would be "redeeming", and of such low value as to be not worth mentioning in a topic like this. They're not removing Bank as if it is a limited resource - the game routinely generates an effectively unlimited amount of bank to any card collector who wants to pursue it. I'm having trouble seeing who is harmed by this.

[The Unified Missourtama States]

I'm having trouble seeing who is harmed by this.

The best claim is that significant harm is caused to Benevolent because they buy up or heist in demand cards of which they are only one of a few owners (and usually the only owner willing to sell), so potential lost profits for them due to the creation of more new copies for anyone of these limited cards.

[Benevolent 1]

The best claim is that significant harm is caused to Benevolent because they buy up or heist in demand cards of which they are only one of a few owners (and usually the only owner willing to sell), so potential lost profits for them due to the creation of more new copies for anyone of these limited cards.

False. I drew them with Benevolent Empire nations as an early card player and have held on to them. That's because I have some foresight. Get over it.

redeeming them for hundreds in Bank.

Not that I disagree with the core premise ... but nobody is "redeeming" cards for bank. They're selling them to other players who are willing to pay high prices. If they were junking the cards, that would be "redeeming", and of such low value as to be not worth mentioning in a topic like this. They're not removing Bank as if it is a limited resource - the game routinely generates an effectively unlimited amount of bank to any card collector who wants to pursue it. I'm having trouble seeing who is harmed by this.

My sincerest apologies for vulgarizing the vernacular of the selling for Bank. I can now appreciate the nuance subtle distinction better, as the core premise still stands. Thank you for the feedback.

[Frisbeeteria]

TCALS is now disabled.

[Flanderlion]

There are a few changes in the hopper, and they'll be introduced over the next days, weeks or months. The first one is now active:

TCALS is now disabled, i.e suspiciously high bids for low-value cards no longer improve the chances of that card being generated in future packs. Previously, suspicious bids had a 0-100% chance of being flagged, depending on how suspicious they were, and pack openings had a 1% chance of pulling a flagged card that was currently at auction.

TCALS was introduced to resolve one problem, but it didn't actually resolve the problem of cash transfers ... and unintentionally created a new problem. I'm hoping this will stop the artificial generation of hard-to-find cards via the Pull Events that some players (including myself) used. We've disabled it without prior warning to avoid a rash of pull events trying to take advantage before we removed it. If you were a fan of Pull Events, sorry.

Sounds brilliant. They were great for making cards more community based, but pull events and inflation combined managed to turn valuable cards worthless and worthless cards valuable.

[Apatosaurus]

TCALS is now disabled.

I honestly disagree with this decision. As someone who has sometimes played with cards, the biggest reason I currently own 30 copies of my transfer card is because of TCALS while transferring. Furthermore, pull events were a great strategy for newcomers to cards to collect valuable cards, and were a good event in cards communities/groups. The lack of pull events would also likely cause legendary or rarer cards to be harder to buy.