ANSWERED:Suggestions to improve the raffle

[DarkEternity]

The way I see it, TJ is kinda screwed whatever he does because just for example:

- Implement multiclutches: Some people don't want multiclutches

- State how many entries they were: Support proof to be used in the arguments of those wanting more winners

etc.

 

(IMHO, it would be better if the raffle had not been implemented.

 

However, I think that if the prize winners were increased so that everyone was a winner, the rarest prize would be the CB alt coloured Spriters alt so that the economy is based around that instead and the whole process would start again. )

[Fuzzbucket]

In here, you can play in the euromillion lottery twice a week, not once a year

And the odds are JUST as bad EVERY time you play.

[LaHaine]

And the odds are JUST as bad EVERY time you play.

Yes! But it doesn't mean I have to agree with it and doesn't mean it's acceptable or a legit comparison in other situations

[EscapistLore]

Its difficult to say numbers without TJ confirming them. I think though, that speculation is the best we have, bad idea or not.

 

I think, no matter what amount of entries there are, the amount of prizes is too low. And don't get me wrong. I'm grateful for all the work TJ and everyone does to set this up. But I think it can be better.

 

How the winners were picked was fair. I find it a bit unfair, however, that something is so out of reach.

 

Huh.. Multiple raffles. If we had one every few months, I think it'd definitely shift the attitude towards a more positive environment.

[Guillotine]

(IMHO, it would be better if the raffle had not been implemented.

 

However, I think that if the prize winners were increased so that everyone was a winner, the rarest prize would be the CB alt coloured Spriters alt so that the economy is based around that instead and the whole process would start again. )

We aren't asking for everyone to be a winner, we just want the trade market to be less utterly screwed up by the prizes. And even if we did, Spriter Alts being in short supply hasn't screwed up the trade markets for Holidays, even the ones with only one breeding Alt, so I don't see why it would completely break the trade markets for Prizes worse then they're already broken.

[Fuzzbucket]

We aren't asking for everyone to be a winner, we just want the trade market to be less utterly screwed up by the prizes. And even if we did, Spriter Alts being in short supply hasn't screwed up the trade markets for Holidays, even the ones with only one breeding Alt, so I don't see why it would completely break the trade markets for Prizes worse then they're already broken.

Trade Market. Ugh.

 

I so HATE that concept.

 

Back to my massive white lineage....

 

But returns to say what is spoiling the game is the trade market itself, and the way (some) people play it (like greedy stockmarket speculators) NOT the prizes. High prices make for misery in real life too.

Edited January 12, 2014 by fuzzbucket

[Guillotine]

You may hate it, but it still exists and as-is it negatively affects anyone who for one reason or another cannot catch or breed what they need. We can't change human nature (and good luck trying in a game entirely about getting shinies), but we sure as hell can make the precipitating circumstances aggravate it less, and changing the raffle would help that.

[Fuzzbucket]

You may hate it, but it still exists and as-is it negatively affects anyone who for one reason or another cannot catch or breed what they need. We can't change human nature (and good luck trying in a game entirely about getting shinies), but we sure as hell can make the precipitating circumstances aggravate it less, and changing the raffle would help that.

What game is entirely about getting shinies ? Not mine

[Kelkelen]

We can't change human nature (and good luck trying in a game entirely about getting shinies), but we sure as hell can make the precipitating circumstances aggravate it less, and changing the raffle would help that.

Which is totally fine. I think it's fine to request more prizes/winners, if that's what you want. Good arguments are being made for it; I think it sounds like a very good idea, as it would lessen the rarity and make trading for shorter-gens possible for more people.

 

I just don't see any reason for players to be angry or complaining or bandying about the word "unfair," whether they mean the raffle itself, or the result it has on the game's trading trends. At that point, it just starts to sound like sore losing, and I don't expect TJ, the winners, et al. to take kindly to people approaching them with grievances of ill-use rather than polite requests.

 

(

)

[Saami]

I've been a member of Dragon Cave for a long time. Maybe not the most active member, because I freely admit that I'd forgotten about the game for months (read: years) at a time, so maybe my opinion doesn't hold that much weight. I think this is the longest I've played the game since joining in October of 2008. I don't think I was ever around for a raffle before this year, because when I came back in August, I had no idea what a tinsel or shimmer even was.

 

But, I was quick to learn and quick to realize what kind of changes having them around had introduced to the community at large. Trading had changed to such a substantial degree, that the things I have on my scroll that would've fetched me at least what I was looking for say 3 or 4 years ago doesn't actually get me anything today. And you know, I get that. Inflation and all that. But it's to such a high degree, that it's hard to keep up with or negotiate in.

 

I stuck around for the raffle, because it was my first and I was kind of excited at the thought that I might win something. I didn't, of course. I wasn't surprised at that and not even really all that broken up over it. I didn't even want the prize for the sake of winning. I'd wanted it to have some leverage to at least get the eggs I was hoping to trade for.

 

So I guess, ultimately, what my suggestion is, is to increase the raffles so more people would have a chance of winning or multi-clutching so the 2nd gens are not worth so much on the trade market. They've got a stranglehold on nearly everything trading and it's difficult enough to get bites for other things around here these days.

 

I'm trying really hard to be bitter about that (the sky high inflation, not the not winning thing), because hey, it is ultimately a game and it should be fun! But after all this time, it's getting really difficult not to be.

[diaveborn]

You may hate it, but it still exists and as-is it negatively affects anyone who for one reason or another cannot catch or breed what they need.

Does "it" mean the trade market?

 

I would consider myself not able to catch rare cbs or breed things to trade for them but I also don't consider myself negatively affected, because although I'd really love to have certain things on my scroll (for example caveborn coppers, as a stupid health-related thing left me unable to catch when they were first released) I find it okay to have things I'm not able to get yet and maybe not ever.

 

Just, if I get your meaning correctly, not *everyone* is negatively affected, but I know that probably doesn't negate what you're trying to say anyway.

[Princess_Pinkie]

I've been a member of Dragon Cave for a long time. Maybe not the most active member, because I freely admit that I'd forgotten about the game for months (read: years) at a time, so maybe my opinion doesn't hold that much weight. I think this is the longest I've played the game since joining in October of 2008. I don't think I was ever around for a raffle before this year, because when I came back in August, I had no idea what a tinsel or shimmer even was.

 

But, I was quick to learn and quick to realize what kind of changes having them around had introduced to the community at large. Trading had changed to such a substantial degree, that the things I have on my scroll that would've fetched me at least what I was looking for say 3 or 4 years ago doesn't actually get me anything today. And you know, I get that. Inflation and all that. But it's to such a high degree, that it's hard to keep up with or negotiate in.

 

I stuck around for the raffle, because it was my first and I was kind of excited at the thought that I might win something. I didn't, of course. I wasn't surprised at that and not even really all that broken up over it. I didn't even want the prize for the sake of winning. I'd wanted it to have some leverage to at least get the eggs I was hoping to trade for.

 

So I guess, ultimately, what my suggestion is, is to increase the raffles so more people would have a chance of winning or multi-clutching so the 2nd gens are not worth so much on the trade market. They've got a stranglehold on nearly everything trading and it's difficult enough to get bites for other things around here these days.

 

I'm trying really hard to be bitter about that (the sky high inflation, not the not winning thing), because hey, it is ultimately a game and it should be fun! But after all this time, it's getting really difficult not to be.

i agree with all of this. i really, really support multiclutching or even just more prizes in general. trade inflation is making this game increasingly more annoying rather than any kind of enjoyable.

[Fuzzbucket]

i agree with all of this. i really, really support multiclutching or even just more prizes in general. trade inflation is making this game increasingly more annoying rather than any kind of enjoyable.

Looking at your signature - isn't making offers like that exactly the kind of thing that LEADS to such inflation ?

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Looking at your signature - isn't making offers like that exactly the kind of thing that LEADS to such inflation ?

Inflation is happening because the breeding pool is so small. Because there's so few available, sane offers don't work, so you either offer insane things or you go without.

 

It'd be great and dandy if we could all just say "none of us will offer more than 1 CB Metal for a 2g Prize," but let's be honest--it's not going to happen. Not unless the number of prizes increase drastically, anyway.

 

Do I think 4 CB Metals for one 2g is crazy? Yes--but at the end of the day I want the 2g more than the Metals, so there you go (not that even 4 CB Metals was doing the trick, at least not for the old prize winners...)

Edited January 12, 2014 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Guillotine]

Which is totally fine.  I think it's fine to request more prizes/winners, if that's what you want.  Good arguments are being made for it; I think it sounds like a very good idea, as it would lessen the rarity and make trading for shorter-gens possible for more people. 

 

I just don't see any reason for players to be angry or complaining or bandying about the word "unfair," whether they mean the raffle itself, or the result it has on the game's trading trends.  At that point, it just starts to sound like sore losing, and I don't expect TJ, the winners, et al. to take kindly to people approaching them with grievances of ill-use rather than polite requests. 

I don't think extreme trade inflation, however unintentional, can be considered a "fair" effect of the raffles. It is entirely reasonable to view the situation as it is as entirely unfair, and implying that those who find it unfair are being irrational when it is having massive negative effects on trade is just plain rude.

 

And yes, diave, I was referring to the trade market. I wasn't aware of how extreme the inflation had gotten until older players talked about it, but I did know that having a large proportion of all trades being focused on very low-gen Prizes wasn't healthy.

[LaHaine]

Which is totally fine.  I think it's fine to request more prizes/winners, if that's what you want.  Good arguments are being made for it; I think it sounds like a very good idea, as it would lessen the rarity and make trading for shorter-gens possible for more people. 

 

I just don't see any reason for players to be angry or complaining or bandying about the word "unfair," whether they mean the raffle itself, or the result it has on the game's trading trends.  At that point, it just starts to sound like sore losing, and I don't expect TJ, the winners, et al. to take kindly to people approaching them with grievances of ill-use rather than polite requests. 

 

(

)

The problem is that the word unfair was not actively being used at all in most of the posts you will read here and the fairness aspect was already explained, it is a valid point, even if you see 10 people controling the lineages of a dragon/the "market" as fair. Nor are we angry. There is maybe one or two posts in all of this thread that you can call "angry posts". If you read all pages of this thread you will see we are being polite, we aren't jumping at anyone. We are explaining our views and suggesting ways to approach this. Sorry if all you see is sore losing, but don't judge an entire thread on a single comment made in a 25-page thread

 

edit: And don't confuse the opinions and reactions in the news thread with this thread please

Edited January 13, 2014 by LaHaine

[Nakuru]

Inflation is happening because the breeding pool is so small. Because there's so few available, sane offers don't work, so you either offer insane things or you go without.

 

It'd be great and dandy if we could all just say "none of us will offer more than 1 CB Metal for a 2g Prize," but let's be honest--it's not going to happen. Not unless the number of prizes increase drastically, anyway.

 

Do I think 4 CB Metals for one 2g is crazy? Yes--but at the end of the day I want the 2g more than the Metals, so there you go (not that even 4 CB Metals was doing the trick, at least not for the old prize winners...)

I can't be sure about 2nd gens, but when the Tinsels were first released I got two 3rd gen ones for one CB Silver.

Now, getting one 3rd gen for one CB Metal may only be possible if it's from a common lineage.

 

Even if inflation is an unavoidable phenomena (time+not enough availability+more availability of Metals and other CB rares), it's a little too much.

Edited January 13, 2014 by Nakuru

[angelicdragonpuppy]

I can't be sure about 2nd gens, but when the Tinsels were first released I got two 3rd gen ones for one CB Silver.

Now, getting one 3rd gen for one CB Metal may only be possible if it's from a common lineage.

 

Even if inflation is an unavoidable phenomena (time+not enough availability+more availability of Metals and other CB rares), it's a little too much.

What would you suggest we do, then? Politely ask the owners to lower their prices?

[EscapistLore]

What would you suggest we do, then? Politely ask the owners to lower their prices?

Why yes. Yes we should.

 

On a more serious note, I think increasing the numbers of prizes would lower the prices, as there would be more.

 

It'll be hard to tell what the effects on the trading market will be after the amount of prize dragons has doubled. Prices might lower a bit, I guess we will have to see. Definitely a step in the right direction.

Edited January 13, 2014 by EscapistLore

[Tawanda001]

What would you suggest we do, then? Politely ask the owners to lower their prices?

I have seen several owners point out that it is not what they ask, it is what they are offered that drives the prices up.

Having watched what happened with the 2g fails, I totally believe that.

 

I started collecting a few because the prizes themselves were so far out of reach. As more and more people joined in on that the prices kept getting crazier. At first they were relatively simple to get, but as time goes on other people get more desperate or more determined to get them and they start OFFERING stuff like CB golds for prize FAILS.

I don't see how that can be put on the prize owners, that's on the bidders all the way IMO.

But is due to the scarcity of low gen prizes and even prize fails, so I would really like to see something that would up the number of offspring and curb some of the desperation.

[Syphoneira]

 

 

I'm having trouble seeing where people are finding 'rage' and 'anger' in what seems to me to be a moderate discussion - am I missing something, or is this a perceptual issue, perhaps where it's assumed that people expressing disappointment and suggesting improvements must be outraged by definition?

 

The way the raffle is organized is entirely fair, with an equal chance for everyone, and it's a great idea that ought to be a lot of fun, and in some ways certainly is.

 

It would be a lot more fun, if with the 1% odds which fuzzy - who's experienced in such matters - points out as being standard for raffles, and with better Prize dragon breeding rates, especially if multi-clutches were possible for high-gens, as well.

 

Personally, I think people seem to be simply (and typically reasonably) trying to suggest ways in which to make the raffle more fun and correct an imbalance resulting from an extreme scarcity situation which is turning a dragon collecting community (for which many of us joined) into a trading market (for which relatively fewer of us seem to have joined) in which relatively few can participate.

 

Because of this scarcity, people able to make good offers make the best ones they think they can fulfill, in order to assure themselves a place on a low-gen (and generally low-producing) list, which thereby further hikes the price people think they need to offer over that to get on a list themselves - which most couldn't even dream of ever providing to get there - setting up exactly the sort of situation we're playing DC to get away from; a two-tiered society of have and have-nots, where virtually everything winds up going to the very few at the very top.

 

Would it be a disaster if 2nd gens 'only' traded for a couple of CB Golds or Coppers, rather than scroll-fulls, or for 15 or 20 common hatchies rather than 50, because there were more CBs and 2nd gen Prizes available and producing on more people's scrolls and people weren't so desperate to try to get any low-gens at all?

 

Or would it be more fun for everyone if more people would have CBs and 2nd gens producing more often, with better breeding producing more to make more trades with different people, and with owners still winding up with great - if less previously-unheard of sized individual - trades and more people with somewhat smaller scroll-fulls gained still doing really well, while chances for everyone improved for at least decent Prize lineages?

 

A 1% win rate certainly wouldn't result in 'everyone winning' - 99% are still not winning each and every time, and it would take far more than 100 lotteries at that rate to give everyone a chance, due to individual player fluctuations and the statistical reality that even in a case of a single chance randomly repeated 100 times among a group of 100 people would not guarantee that everyone won once each over time, lol.

 

 

There would still be a continuing shortage of 2nd gens, but at least more hope for 3rds and 4ths.

 

Many people no longer want 6th or longer gen Prizes, and those without great catching ability have little chance of coming up with trades for breeding more desirable ones.

 

 

Just to mention, megamillions lotteries are designed to make huge monetary profits over prize amounts, depending on what is paid into them, so the odds of winning the big one are incredibly low.

 

Raffles typically have *donated* prizes designed to raise money for a specific cause, generally among a much smaller pool than millions of entries, so have much higher odds than megamillion lotteries.

 

So comparisons between megamillion lotteries and raffles are like comparing solid gold apples to regular oranges.

 

In this case, no money is involved, just a fun raffle among members of a group collecting virtual dragons, so prizes involving such dragons would logically be expected to have quite good odds.

 

 

And I see that many of these points have been made by others while I was typo-ing this, lol.

[TJ09]

This thread has come to revolving around discussions on win rate--which is something that will not be made public, and without that, that sort of discussion will not be meaningful.

 

Thus, your options are basically to trust me when I say that I take many factors, including the participant base, into account when doing every raffle, and move onto other potential raffle changes (if any), or you can keep discussing claims that are essentially invalid because they're based on weak assumptions. If the latter is what happens, then I'll probably close the thread, because as I said, such discussion is meaningless.

 

tl;dr: I assert that the win rate is satisfactory, you can choose whether or not to believe me.

[Syphoneira]

This thread has come to revolving around discussions on win rate--which is something that will not be made public, and without that, that sort of discussion will not be meaningful.

 

Thus, your options are basically to trust me when I say that I take many factors, including the participant base, into account when doing every raffle, and move onto other potential raffle changes (if any), or you can keep discussing claims that are essentially invalid because they're based on weak assumptions. If the latter is what happens, then I'll probably close the thread, because as I said, such discussion is meaningless.

 

tl;dr: I assert that the win rate is satisfactory, you can choose whether or not to believe me.

Hi, TJ!

 

Would it be possible to get some input into which areas/suggestions you might consider and that would potentially be fruitful for us to discuss?

 

We're working in the dark here, lol.

 

Edit: apart from the possibility of multi-clutching for ( low)-gens, edit: potentially.

Edited January 13, 2014 by Syphoneira

[angelicdragonpuppy]

This thread has come to revolving around discussions on win rate--which is something that will not be made public, and without that, that sort of discussion will not be meaningful.

 

Thus, your options are basically to trust me when I say that I take many factors, including the participant base, into account when doing every raffle, and move onto other potential raffle changes (if any), or you can keep discussing claims that are essentially invalid because they're based on weak assumptions. If the latter is what happens, then I'll probably close the thread, because as I said, such discussion is meaningless.

 

tl;dr: I assert that the win rate is satisfactory, you can choose whether or not to believe me.

I think the fact that this thread exists shows that, to many, the win rate is not satisfactory...

 

All of the other suggestions made in the first post are good, but I do think a drastic increase would be one of the best solutions. I don't need to know the exact win rates to think doubling or tripling the prize amount would be a good thing. I can tell just by the things people are offering for them that the current number is low enough to allow CB Prize owners absolute, unquestionable authority over every trade ever--including offers that would have been considered insane before the Prizes were released. Who before the Tinsels were released ever heard of something going for more than 2 CB Metals? Yet now offers of 4+ CB Metals are the norm for 2g Prizes.

 

A few more insights from you to go off would be nice as well... I realize there's a thousand topics on the forums that could use such insight, but still. Comments that just tell us the numbers are satisfactory--when, again, to many they aren't--without giving any other thoughts on the idea or what might be considered or what the goal is with the raffles don't help much. Do they bring in a lot of traffic? Would that traffic suffer if they were just a little more available, a little more prolific? X___x

Edited January 13, 2014 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Odeen]

I think the fact that this thread exists shows that, to many, the win rate is not satisfactory...

Most people want to win, so naturally when they DON'T win they're going to USUALLY think that the win rate is not satisfactory.

 

Just because everyone has a chance of winning doesn't mean that everyone should win.