TCG Article Discussion

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1131310 — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:39:54 GMT

Ok, I thought I'd put this in here since it sort of regards set size. It's more in regards to component sizes (i.e. how many abilities, how many weapons, ect.)

Here's the set list in numbers. If it says nothing, then we (players) don't know for certain what they are. Though some of them, it may seem obvious what it is, you still never know. The list is just to show what we do know, then speculate.

1-16 Heroes
17
18-31 Druid Abilities (14)
32-37
38-40 Hunter Abilities (2)
41-51
52-59 Mage Abilities (8)
60-72
73 Paladin Abilities (1)
74-79
80-89 Priest Abilities (10)
90-96
97-105 Rogue Abilities (9)
106-109 Shaman Abilities (4)
110-119
120-129 Warlock Abilities (10)
130-134
135-141 Warrior Abilities (7)
142-168
169 Abilities (1)
170-174
175-221 Alliance Allies (47)
222-231
232-275 Horde Allies (44)
276-277
278-279 Neutral Allies (2)
280-282
283-303 Armor (21)
304-308
309 Item (1)
310
311-336 Weapons (26)
337-340
341-361 Quests (21)

At first, I figured it come to 15 Abilities for each class, but either I screwed up the math, or something, but it didn't come out even. I'm thinking probably 50 Allies for each Faction, maybe 20-25 for Neutral.

Feel free to speculate, and correct any of my math if it is wrong =)

p.s. The (#) show the minimum based on which have been revealed. Let me know if I missed something.

p.p.s It's interesting to note, Pets are, for listing purposes, included with their respective class' abilities (i.e. Fury is listed under Hunter Abilities, not Neutral Allies).

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1120992 — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 07:37:35 GMT

For a collector, only wanting one of each who doesn't want to play, it's an expensive problem, I agree.

But for a casual player it's no big deal. Because this is one of the only card games I have seen so far, where powerful cards are evenly created among common/uncommon/rare/epic. In fact I am sure you can build powerful decks without any epic at all (maybe even without rares). So player with less money can win, too. That's rare in the CCG world and I love it! ; )

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1136729 — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 06:24:34 GMT

I've been monitoring this forum with interest, I've been trying to work out what I need to buy to get a set of the initial release, HoA.

I've been a collector of cards for many years and this is one set that's excited me but the more I read the more deflated I'm getting.

It appears that this game for a colloctor is just going to be a massive money sink, I'll have to spend obscene amounts of money to try and complete a set and probably never achieve my goal. The break down of rares, epics and legendarys is just crazy and for this reason I think I will not even start to collect.

To complete a set of cards should be achievable and not cost $1000's, I feel sorry for the people who are getting caught up in the excitement of this release and not stepping back and seeing what they maybe getting involved in.

Read carefully, work out what you will need to buy to achieve your requirements and make sure it's acceptable to you before you even purchase your first packet, don't just jump on the band wagon blindlessly because of the success of WoW.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1103381 — Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:50:23 GMT

Two things to keep in mind:

First, most people don't get into a game buy buying 4 copies of every single card... yeah, you'd need an awful lot of cards to get that far into it. But with 1 starter per player, (or, with the free downloadable demo decks) you can try it out and see if you enjoy the game.

Second is, Vs. System is an established game with an existing initial set plus expansions, 4 sets per year, and with more cards coming out every 3 months. Warcarft is expected to have 3 sets per year, and this initial set is probably going to be the biggest one - we want to make sure you have enough cards to play with, and to show off the depth of game play.

You have a lot of room to explore! Have fun with it.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1126836 — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:45:16 GMT

Borrowing some of the calculations from above.
Assuming no repeats in your packs
To get a playset of commons requires: (114 * 4)/10 = 45.6 packs (1.9 boxes)
To get a playset of uncommons requires: (99 * 4)/3 = 132 packs (5.5 boxes)

Rares needs to take into account of epics as there is no gurantee of a rare in a pack as it could be an epic.
110 rares ---> 110 booster to get a specific one
twice as hard for epic ----> 220 booster to get a specific epic
22 epics / 220 = 1/10 (so ~ one epic in every 10th booster)
So in 110 packs on average there is 99 rares and 11 epics
So you'll need roughly 122 packs to get 110 rares and 12 epics

To get a playset of rares requires: (122 * 4) = 488 packs (20.3 boxes)
To get a playset of epics requires: (220 * 4) = 880 packs (36.6 boxes)

So to sum up for a playset of WoW:
Commons = 45.6 packs (1.9 boxes)
Uncommons = 132 packs (5.5 boxes)
Rares = 488 packs (20.3 boxes)
Epics = 880 packs (36.6 boxes)

Compare with VS for a playset of a set:
Commons = (110 * 4)/11 = 40 packs (1.6 boxes)
Uncommons = (55 * 4)/3 = 73.3 packs (3 boxes)
Rares = (55 * 4)/1 = 220 packs (9.16 boxes)

It would seem with this kind of rarity structure for WoW it would be more than twice as expensive to get into compare with VS and this is if all the epics were ignored.
If you take into account the epics as well it is 4 times as expensive!!

Relying on the singles market is not an answer to this problem as the rarities will drive those prices up proportionally because of limited supply.

It would be very interesting to see how the market reacts to this type of rarity distribution.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1126832 — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 15:42:31 GMT

1119529:
110 rares ---> 110 booster to get a specific one
twice as hard for epic ----> 220 booster to get a specific epic
22 epics / 220 = 1/10 (so ~ one epic in every 10th booster)

Actually, it would take more than 110 boosters to get those 110 Rares. Why? Because 1 in 10 of those boosters would have an epic instead, by your math. So, 121 boosters to get all 110 rares.

But, that's in a vacuum where there's only 1 of each rare out there. To get a specific one, you'd have to throw in all the doubles that would happen in 121 boosters to the mix, and then add in the 1 in 10 chance for those doubles being epics instead, and then there's the chance of getting a third of each other rare in all of that.

In other words, you may NEVER actually get that one rare you want.

The TCG Singles market will be VERY happy about World of Warcraft TCG. ;)

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1114141 — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:25:26 GMT

1103381:
Because the hero cards are double-sided, we printed them on their own form, so they are dropped into packs completely independently of the rest of the cards.

In reference to: I'm a bit concerned about the line about a hero counting as an uncommon... can you please confirm that heroes are NOT on the same print run as the other uncommons (that you can't calculate the other uncommons based on what hero is the pack). Its probably just me thinking evil things... but people can do far more in drafts with far less information.

Well, thanks for answering that question. ;)

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1103381 — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:08:02 GMT

Because the hero cards are double-sided, we printed them on their own form, so they are dropped into packs completely independently of the rest of the cards.

In reference to: I'm a bit concerned about the line about a hero counting as an uncommon... can you please confirm that heroes are NOT on the same print run as the other uncommons (that you can't calculate the other uncommons based on what hero is the pack). Its probably just me thinking evil things... but people can do far more in drafts with far less information.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

904443 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:28:21 GMT

I'm obviously not Jeff Donais, but I'd suggest not to despair: WoW, as I already said, is developped by the same people who gave us Squadron Supreme in VS System: a deck with almost no rares that kept shining in constructed for quite a while :)
Anyway, the game really looks very draftable, so you can have as much as fun without having to spend huge amounts of money. And after several drafts you've probably got enough cards for a decent deck or cards you won't use but can trade for something else.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1120360 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:54:07 GMT

(Some people on this forum think there should be a lower proportion of rares in the set. That would help me because I have a small budget, but I have an alternate suggestion and a question to go with it. There's a bit of discussion before I get to my question so please bear with me.)

To Jeff Donais,

As a ccg player, I'm sure you're familiar with how hard it can be to get enough of certain rares to fill out your particular deck design. If you need four copies of XXX rare, you have a challenge to get them. This challenge is utterly dependent on the structure of the rare card. Why is it rare? Is it rare because it has a good, utilitarian design that would help almost any deck? Or is it good because of an extremely potent, but specific game mechanic?

As an example of the first way a card is rare, Zapped Giants or Saltwater Snapjaw are rares that would be good and helpful in almost any deck. Everyone wants good allies that are almost invincible late game or a way to get more ability cards to their hand. However, that means that there are a LOT of players that will want 2, 3, or 4 versions of these kinds of cards for their deck. This is a huge problem. A more extreme example is the epic, Magni Bronzebeard. You probably would never need four copies, but if every alliance player wants 1 copy for their deck (how could he ever not be helpful generating 1/1 allies?) the card would be almost impossible to trade for.

Now, the second way a card justified as rare is to be extremeley potent, but specific in use such as pyroblast or flamestrike. These are fantastic cards for a mage (fire mage in the case of pyroblast) but are no help at all in building a deck for your night elf druid or orc hunter. Well, that person with the druid or hunter deck can just trade pyroblast to someone with a mage deck for a powerful druid or hunter card. That means someone playing a fire mage deck has a real chance of getting three or four pyroblasts for his deck without needing to buy several boxes of boosters. Also, the players who don't want pyroblast and get it in a pack can easily trade it for something they do want.

So we have powerful utilitarian rares that every player and collector is trying to get versus very powerful, class or deck style specific rares that some people really want 4 of but are trading material for others. There are HUGE consequences for a CCG if the designer (you!) focuses on one type or the other. I used to play Decipher's Lord of the Rings CCG. In their first few sets, they made most of their rares in the utilitarian style. This created a game culture where maybe half the rares were highly sought after cards that every player needed 4 of and the other half were seen as useless both for play and trading. In later sets, they focused on the specific use but powerful type of rare and had a much healthier trading culture. They were able to make their players happier, have a wider variety of effective strategies and play styles, and increase player trading without reducing the proportion of rares in a set or hurting the company's bottom lane.

So my question is, Has the design team for WoW CCG made a conscious decision to tend toward one type of rare or the other?

I'm sure you can tell where I think they should go.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

888826 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:08:06 GMT

A UDE employee has stated it will be 2 to 4 epics per box a few days ago.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1121007 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:37:35 GMT

1120992:
It was said "a specific epic is twice as hard to get then a specific rare"

This is my point. This is an interpritation of the actual quote

"Each epic card is roughly twice as hard to get as any specific rare card."

word for word, copied from the post it does not say 1 specific epic twice is as hard to get vs. 1 specific rare........"Each" and Any" to me is all inclusive.

Again, I am not aserting I am right, just that this what I take it to mean.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1120992 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:10:06 GMT

1119529:

Actually, it would take more than 110 boosters to get those 110 Rares. Why? Because 1 in 10 of those boosters would have an epic instead, by your math. So, 121 boosters to get all 110 rares.

But, that's in a vacuum where there's only 1 of each rare out there. To get a specific one, you'd have to throw in all the doubles that would happen in 121 boosters to the mix, and then add in the 1 in 10 chance for those doubles being epics instead, and then there's the chance of getting a third of each other rare in all of that.

In other words, you may NEVER actually get that one rare you want.

I agree on the first part. I forgot about that. But I think the "twice as hard as a specific rare" is not very exact either, so let's just say: one epic in every 11th booster! ;)

That u maybe don't get YOUR wanted rare in 122 booster is clear, but maybe you would get it after 10 booster - that's the (money removing) fun of a tcg! ^^

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1119529 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:57:30 GMT

110 rares ---> 110 booster to get a specific one
twice as hard for epic ----> 220 booster to get a specific epic
22 epics / 220 = 1/10 (so ~ one epic in every 10th booster)

Actually, it would take more than 110 boosters to get those 110 Rares. Why? Because 1 in 10 of those boosters would have an epic instead, by your math. So, 121 boosters to get all 110 rares.

But, that's in a vacuum where there's only 1 of each rare out there. To get a specific one, you'd have to throw in all the doubles that would happen in 121 boosters to the mix, and then add in the 1 in 10 chance for those doubles being epics instead, and then there's the chance of getting a third of each other rare in all of that.

In other words, you may NEVER actually get that one rare you want.

Re: World of Warcraft TCG Set Size

1119529 — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:46:22 GMT

UDE points will be reedemable for many things, most of which are physical items that are outside the MMO.

- Jeff

Leeroy Jenkins™ action figure with "Pals 4 Life" Heart tabard, removable Blackhand Doomsaw weapon, and interchangable Spaulders of Valor and Devout Mantle (for when he needs to heal), please?..Each figure would hafta come with a coupon for a free bucket of KFC, too.