Removing the necessity for Card Farms

[Land Without Shrimp]

Wouldn't tying it to WA status just make Card Farmers start switching the same way raiders do? Sure, it would be slower than current, but I'm sure farmers would work out a system soon enough.

That's one question I attempted to address by saying there would also need to be a check for how long that nation had been in the WA and make pack generation contingent on 'this nation has been continuously in WA for "X" hours'. Not sure of what number would be sufficient but a number sufficient to deter WA-switching.

The big objection to this solution (and I admit I don't see a way past it) is that it would impact military gameplayers.

I guess I am trying to propose major changes because I just don't think the current system is sustainable. And it makes my heart sink to see the proposals to make card-generation something that happens even *faster* than currently. I do want to see the puppet-farming strategy go away. But to imagine the card-game degenerate into who can be online the most to click a button? It makes me sad. I remember when S1 first started and that's how the card game worked (remember those first few days? Unlimited card generation!!) and I remember sacrificing sleep and sacrificing life just to click a button to generate cards. It wasn't a pretty sight.

I do appreciate the engagement in this thread! And the agreement that *some* kind of change is absolutely needed.

EDIT: And Galiantus III - just saw your post - absolutely agree with all that you said! You beat me to it.

[Durm]

Tying ANYTHING to WA status is a bad idea.

[Benevolent 1]

Firstly, I believe the use of card farms should be tackled, and the discussed alteration of how card packs are generated would be beneficial in many ways. I don't believe it would be fair to restrict packs to WA members only, as there are many reasons why one would not want their nation to be a member of the WA, and this would put them at an unfair disadvantage.

To address this concern, let me state firstly that I am fully aware that tying pack generation to being a WA member is not a perfect solution! But I do believe it is a solution. If someone doesn't like the idea of the WA affecting their main, they can always use a WA puppet (one! puppet!) to draw cards.

From my perspective, there's some fundamental questions that we need to answer around cards:

1) Do we think unlimited card drawing is a good thing?
2) Do we think puppet card farming is a good thing?
3) Do we think the card game as it currently stands is something a newcomer would enjoy?

I think the answer to all 3 questions is no. It seems from the discussion so far that many people think the answer to question 1 is yes, hence the desire to tie pack generation to something such as the "Best Nations" game, which can then generate *more* cards.

I would argue this is the last thing we want to do. Besides driving the card game to a model that rewards clicks and time with shiny bank (i.e., addictive and harmful feedback cycle), an increased pack generation rate will just further inflate the card economy to unsustainable levels.

So that was why I thought a possible solution was to drive pack generation to WA-status. That is something that wouldn't add additional burden to admin and hopefully not be too much of a technical challenge. Yes, it would mean those active in S1 and S2 have an advantage to new players, but at least it would be a fresh start for S3 and over time the card game would actually be a fun
casual game again, not a game of puppets and manipulation of mechanics.

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

[Land Without Shrimp]

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

I would be totally onboard with this if this was a solution that admin would be willing to support! I think this is honestly the best way forward, but I am uncertain if it's something that could be feasibly implemented/supported by admin/moderation team.

[Fauzjhia]

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

Why not say you want a card moderator, because the player are unable to restraint themselves. and often created too many puppets. we'll have a moderator who decide how many puppets each player might have

[Galiantus III]

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

I proposed something like this a few years ago. The idea was nations would join a "central bank", the same way they do the WA: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=458519

Unfortunately, the only word I got from any site staff on this is it wouldn't be possible to implement without implementing accounts first. I'm still perplexed by this answer because we've got the WA working just fine without accounts.

[Fauzjhia]

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

I proposed something like this a few years ago. The idea was nations would join a "central bank", the same way they do the WA: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=458519

Unfortunately, the only word I got from any site staff on this is it wouldn't be possible to implement without implementing accounts first. I'm still perplexed by this answer because we've got the WA working just fine without accounts.

it mean we would have to create accounts, and require everyone to register their nations to 1 accounts, then set an arbitrary limit of nations
The idea could work. and the effect would depend on the limit.
if you kill the card farms, totally. you might create much lack on cards. given a single is very rare, for be able to get the cards you want want, one might say, card farmers do something. the problem is when they Print too many cards.

[Frisbeeteria]

we'll have a moderator who decide how many puppets each player might have

Oh no, no way, no No NO. There will be an automated solution or there will be no solution. This is not something for an arbitrary human decision to choose.

[Benevolent 1]

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

Why not say you want a card moderator, because the player are unable to restraint themselves. and often created too many puppets. we'll have a moderator who decide how many puppets each player might have

Because... it's not one of my ideas, Fauz.

It's yours. And it sucks. Forget it.

The solution to 1), 2) & 3) is creating a reliable yet non-intrusive mechanism for tracking puppets and puppet masters. That seems to be the technical issue and it may be insurmountable. But if that could be solved each player could potentially have identical upper limits on card draws (a sane amount) which could be generated over a specified measure of time. Also limiting excess cards by restricting the number of puppet nations each puppet master owns which births a card for collection thus preventing the current avalanche of unwanted cards. Ugh, I think i just described what might be envisioned as puppet card abortions.

I proposed something like this a few years ago. The idea was nations would join a "central bank", the same way they do the WA: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=458519

Unfortunately, the only word I got from any site staff on this is it wouldn't be possible to implement without implementing accounts first. I'm still perplexed by this answer because we've got the WA working just fine without accounts.

A few years ago? Possibly your proposal arrived before it's time. Before the game degenerated to this level of suffocation. Hopefully solutions are developing on theses lines. I'm willing to wait patiently for a good solid fix.

[Fauzjhia]

no. its not my idea.

but its what I understand from our idea. its how I understand it .

[Benevolent 1]

no. its not my idea.

but its what I understand from our idea. its how I understand it .

Mmmmmmm... how's that?

[The Python]

Since this discussion came up in the NSGP Discord, what would happen if, rather than tying card packs to the best nation game, it was tied to something like the Challenge minigame? For example, every time you win a challenge you get a pack.

[Fauzjhia]

Since this discussion came up in the NSGP Discord, what would happen if, rather than tying card packs to the best nation game, it was tied to something like the Challenge minigame? For example, every time you win a challenge you get a pack.

people would just waste all their time on challenges. we are still encouraging the junkies.

Yes, i know, finding a solution IS not simple.

[Flanderlion]

Since this discussion came up in the NSGP Discord, what would happen if, rather than tying card packs to the best nation game, it was tied to something like the Challenge minigame? For example, every time you win a challenge you get a pack.

Does it not add more load per request? As it has to grab the nation, and several stats? Also just winning means you'd just compare against a lvl 1 nation continually rather than doing a 'fair fight'. Through covo about something different offsite, I spotted this post of [v]'s, which both this proposal (slightly nerfing issue rate, giving packs by WA and giving a fast generation way by using BN game), and the proposal of tying packs to challenge seems to fit - although challenge has had issues with botting in the past, I'm confident that it could be mostly solved.

Thanks for the thoughtful comments in this thread. Much appreciated. I'm not sure if we can figure out a good solution, but we're heading in a good direction.

I'd rather not decouple issues from cards, because for most players, that's working fine.

Many people who use this site by making a nation, answering issues, and never posting anywhere. Which makes them easy to overlook (and mistake for bots/puppets), but they're out there in large numbers. We shouldn't nerf their enjoyment if we can help it.

Pulling numbers from my butt for a second, I feel like we have something like 5% of issue-answering users generating 50% of relevant site load. Which isn't uncommon, in any system, but in this case, that load is almost entirely wasted, because the card-hunters don't even care about the stats, only the cards.

It's also most likely going to get worse, because script/bot activity always increases over time.

Generally I guess there are really only two ways to go:
(1) Make it more difficult/annoying/illegal to generate cards using tools & puppets. Easier said than done.
(2) Provide another way to generate cards that steers automated activity into something more useful/enjoyable. I don't know what, though, and it might be hard to find anything that wouldn't suffer under the laser-like focus of keen card-hunters.

And ideally you would probably want to do both of the above.

[One Small Island]

To address the last valid point brought up, and to steer the conversation away from "junkies" and "card addiction" which is beyond the scope of this thread...

I don't think that the 50 card limit is really going to be that much of an issue if the card game is tied to the best nation (which would still be my preference, as I was one of the few people who actually liked the event), or the challenge game (which I've never actually enjoyed that much, but would probably put some time into if cards were tied to it).

A majority of cards that a farmer is going to generate will be junked for bank, or sold if there's a worthwhile bid on them. Which means a majority of the time, unless there's a card which fits their collection(s) the card is just going to get scrapped. Usually this will leave plenty of room in the card-generating nations deck for new cards to spawn. It's also very unlikely (unless the card farmer just saves up all their cards until their deck is full before selling to their main) that they'll generate enough cards that the one-hour auction window will be an issue.

So each farmer will only need to have as many nations as they can reliably switch to and click the button on before whatever cool down there is on packs expires. Which, assuming a 5s cooldown on pack generation, is probably between 5 - 10 nations, possibly a few more with containers but I don't really know how those work so I can't speak to how efficiently they allow farmers to click buttons. But even if it's 20 or 30 nations that's a lot better than what the meta is now.

[The Python]

Since this discussion came up in the NSGP Discord, what would happen if, rather than tying card packs to the best nation game, it was tied to something like the Challenge minigame? For example, every time you win a challenge you get a pack.

Does it not add more load per request? As it has to grab the nation, and several stats? Also just winning means you'd just compare against a lvl 1 nation continually rather than doing a 'fair fight'. Through covo about something different offsite, I spotted this post of [v]'s, which both this proposal (slightly nerfing issue rate, giving packs by WA and giving a fast generation way by using BN game), and the proposal of tying packs to challenge seems to fit - although challenge has had issues with botting in the past, I'm confident that it could be mostly solved.

The Best Nation Game wasn't really that fun, and while using it is preferrible to issues, challenges are much more fun in my opinion, and probably better to tie to cards.

[Merni]

Does it not add more load per request? As it has to grab the nation, and several stats? Also just winning means you'd just compare against a lvl 1 nation continually rather than doing a 'fair fight'. Through covo about something different offsite, I spotted this post of [v]'s, which both this proposal (slightly nerfing issue rate, giving packs by WA and giving a fast generation way by using BN game), and the proposal of tying packs to challenge seems to fit - although challenge has had issues with botting in the past, I'm confident that it could be mostly solved.

The Best Nation Game wasn't really that fun, and while using it is preferrible to issues, challenges are much more fun in my opinion, and probably better to tie to cards.

Challenges are tied in a way to stats, though; this would not solve the skewing of issue option stats by card farmers.

[Riemstagrad]

A question:

I notice that "accounts" has been named as a possible solution for many problems in nationstates but implementing accounts is a task that goes beyond a team of voluntary admins.
That induces the following questions: How expensive is it to have this implemented? Would it perhaps be doable with a crowd-funding among NS-players? Or is it even beyond the expected return of such a crowd-funding?

How much cash can such a crowd-funding even generate? If there is only a core of a few hundred players willing to donate $ 5.00, we're not getting anywhere of course...

[Valentine Z]

Others might have talked about this idea already, so I got quite a suggestion on the top of my head, as well as borrowing a few ideas:

We can still tie the card generation to Challenges, but instead of simply generating a card per challenge done, you need to win it as well. I got a couple of modifications that I believe should help.
- The number of packs depend on the level difference, BUT your opponent must be of higher level than you, or equals. Equal level = Chance of getting 1 pack, 1 level higher = Chance of 2 packs, etc... You can't beat a Lvl 1 constantly as Lvl 60.
- You need to win the challenge, simple as that. You cannot get a pack if you lost the challenge. This also encourages non-random issue answering in order to get the stats to be higher than your rivals'.
- Suggestion to heighten the chances of getting a pack if both you and the challenger has a gold badge in that stat, since this typically (not always) means you both have been answering issues properly.
- Endless deck space in order to make use of bank solely to buy or sell cards, not to transfer and shell several hundreds for it. Either that, or rework x² to be x^1.6, for example. Lower the curve a bit.

And then of course, my suggestion isn't flawless. So, the flaws:
- Repeatedly challenging the same nation (even more flawed if they are an equal-level). Could make it so that you can't receive packs anymore once you have challenged that nation, BUT this would mean you will run out of nations to challenge (unless there's a cooldown to receive a pack again if you challenge the same nation say, after 7 days), AND this would bring us back to square one of puppet/farm issues because people will start making puppets to circumvent this. EDIT: Although, this is not really that much of a big deal because no one nation can absolutely be the absolute best in everything. Randomness works in/against your favor.
- Perhaps a level cap to start getting cards to prevent the flood of smaller-level farms from popping up again. "You must be at least Level 20 to start receiving cards," for instance. This means you have a bit of an uphill to start receiving cards.
- Alternatively, tie the chances of getting a pack to your nation's level. Higher levels in challenges = Higher chances.

And thank you for reading if you get this far. Again, my suggestions are not without flaw, and I'm sure it is absurd here and there, but if we are going with Challenges while encouraging gold stats, this would be it for me, personally.

[Benevolent 1]

Here's an idea I haven't seen... could we link card generation to the Trivia Challenge Game?

https://www.nationstates.net/page=trivia

It wouldn't interfere with stats. Players might learn a few things along the way. Maybe need 5 answers right at newcomer, 4 for advanced, 3 for expert to draw a pack. Or something like that.

[Haganham]

Here's an idea I haven't seen... could we link card generation to the Trivia Challenge Game?

https://www.nationstates.net/page=trivia

It wouldn't interfere with stats. Players might learn a few things along the way. Maybe need 5 answers right at newcomer, 4 for advanced, 3 for expert to draw a pack. Or something like that.

Is it okay if that throws off the stats on how many players got the question right?

[Benevolent 1]

Here's an idea I haven't seen... could we link card generation to the Trivia Challenge Game?

https://www.nationstates.net/page=trivia

It wouldn't interfere with stats. Players might learn a few things along the way. Maybe need 5 answers right at newcomer, 4 for advanced, 3 for expert to draw a pack. Or something like that.

Is it okay if that throws off the stats on how many players got the question right?

There is no perfect solution. This is a trivia challenge game. I'd venture to say it's a trivial matter.

[Frisbeeteria]

I notice that "accounts" has been named as a possible solution for many problems in nationstates but implementing accounts is a task that goes beyond a team of voluntary admins.

You've mis-read the problem. It's not about money or expertise. Accounts would impact every part of the game, from first login to final CTE. It goes way beyond cards, impacting telegrams, dossiers, premium services, the WA, dossiers, and literally every part of the game. There are major game balance aspects that need to be carefully thought out before even making a framework. Adding crowd-sourced money might be nice, but it won't begin to solve that problem. You can't just hire someone off the street to make those decisions.

[Haganham]

This is a trivia challenge game. I'd venture to say it's a trivial matter.

point haha

I notice that "accounts" has been named as a possible solution for many problems in nationstates but implementing accounts is a task that goes beyond a team of voluntary admins.

You've mis-read the problem. It's not about money or expertise. Accounts would impact every part of the game, from first login to final CTE. It goes way beyond cards, impacting telegrams, dossiers, premium services, the WA, dossiers, and literally every part of the game. There are major game balance aspects that need to be carefully thought out before even making a framework. Adding crowd-sourced money might be nice, but it won't begin to solve that problem. You can't just hire someone off the street to make those decisions.

Is it even worth suggesting it become a priority? Puppetry is affecting more then just cards. It's a problem for recruitment and the poll revamp too. And it's not like the problem is going to get smaller as we add content.

[Mancheseva City]

This seems like a good idea but still with a lot of questions

Maybe I'm way off here, but what if players had to choose one nation to card farm on, and it would only be possible to change the nation, say, once every 24 hours or a week or some other reasonable time, not too long or too short?

As for what the farming would be tied to, I'd prefer some sort of intellectual activity (or at least pseudo-intellectual). Something like answering an NS history trivia question correctly (with an unlimited card packs storage obviously)

I kind of agree with the response that there probably would be some sort of script that keeps swiping right and left on different nations while using many puppets at a time, or something similar - so the way to earn packs should be more complicated than that. However, if my idea is too complicated, the comparing nations game could work too if the first part of my suggestion is implemented

And of course issues should remain a source of packs as well, because if there's only one nation you can farm on at a time, creating puppets would probably be useless.

EDIT: oops, sorry, just saw that the trivia thing was just suggested above