Jump to content
Pokemonfan13

ANSWERED:Suggestions to improve the raffle

Recommended Posts

Actually there is only one suggest that has been updated until now.

In my opinion Sheriziya summarized well the current sistuation and the current questions.

She has been explicit and clear. I think that Sheriziya has taken over all existing observations and that we should open a topic (like TJ prefer) starting from her proposal, which seeks to satisfy the greatest number of people.

 

Her last update: (that I BEG you to read carefully since I think that it's the only valid way to improve better the situation and make all this complaining stop)

http://forums.dragcave.net/index.php?showt...dpost&p=8001153

 

I think that the only valid alternative to her suggestion is an amount of possibilities to get an egg from CB prizes. Anyway even this aspect has been treated on her suggest.

 

So if TJ is reading this is strongly hope he could consider even Sheriziya's suggestion. Thanks. smile.gif

As he said we have to focus on a valid argument and not run in circles.

This is a democracy I suppose, we have to do some compromises because will NEVER find a solution good for EVERYBODY.

Sherizya changed his original suggestion, added new things, made comprimises and she always cared about other's objections, so the actual suggestion who she's doing is the best we have done in 57-58 pages, in my opinion.

Edited by Naruhina_94

Share this post


Link to post
Actually there is only one suggest that has been updated until now.

In my opinion Sheriziya summarized well the current sistuation and the current questions.

She has been explicit and clear. I think that Sheriziya has taken over all existing observations and that we should open a topic (like TJ prefer) starting from her proposal, which seeks to satisfy the greatest number of people.

 

Her last update: (that I BEG you to read carefully since I think that it's the only valid way to improve better the situation and make all this complaining stop)

http://forums.dragcave.net/index.php?showt...147301&st=1060#

 

I think that the only valid alternative to her suggestion is an amount of possibilities to get an egg from CB prizes. Anyway even this aspect has been treated on her suggest.

 

So if TJ is reading this is strongly hope he could consider even Sheriziya's suggestion. Thanks. smile.gif

As he said we have to focus on a valid argument and not run in circles.

This is a democracy I suppose, we have to do some compromises because will NEVER find a solution good for EVERYBODY.

Sherizya changed his original suggestion, added new things, made comprimises and she always cared about other's objections, so the actual suggestion who she's doing is the best we have done in 57-58 pages, in my opinion.

I agree, the OP has done a great job of compiling (and updating) their suggestions. It isn't their fault that this thread has devolved from its original purpose. Which I can't and won't blame, because I can get why there's hurt feelings all around.

 

My suggestion is to.. just look over the original suggestions. And decide which you believe will work best given that your site has a HUGE userbase (of almost 67, 000 users with registered forum accounts alone! nevermind those who have not~) and which would be the best compromise.

 

The good of the many should be strongly considered, I think.

Share this post


Link to post

What I'm missing in that suggestion list is excluding former raffle winners from the Prize drawing. There's rt least one person who won two CB prize dragons in 2 following years. I'd find it fairer when this could not happen

Share this post


Link to post
Trying to get into RNG discussion is going in a direction that is both unnecessary and irrelevant, for a few reasons:

 

1. A few of the posts I'm reading contain clear falsities that indicate that the poster probably doesn't understand the subject they're trying to talk about.

 

2. There should never be a case where getting into technical details about the site is necessary to have a fruitful discussion in suggestions. You shouldn't need to care about implementation details, just the high level goal.

 

3. There haven't even been enough raffle drawings for any sort of statistically-significant conclusions about their randomness. Trying to blame the RNG is barking up the wrong tree.

 

I think this thread has become more of a "raffle venting thread." Part of that is the vagueness of the core subject--"improve the raffle." There's no direct suggestion there, and unfortunately, there's too many people with too many ideas for the discussion to come to meaningful conclusions. Ideas get suggested and then buried by more suggestions, and then the same idea comes up again from another person. It might be better to instead try a strategy of creating one thread for each concrete suggestion for the raffle, so that discussion can be better followed. Sure, it'll result in a lot of threads, but I think things might end up being much more organized that way.

I am honestly surprised this post didn't accompany a thread closure. Personally, I think it should have done.

Share this post


Link to post
What I'm missing in that suggestion list is excluding former raffle winners from the Prize drawing. There's rt least one person who won two CB prize dragons in 2 following years. I'd find it fairer when this could not happen

As would I.

Share this post


Link to post

I am honestly surprised this post didn't accompany a thread closure.  Personally, I think it should have done.

Close doors will not open new possibilities. We have a valid suggestion to discuss, this thread should stay open, in my opinion.

 

What I'm missing in that suggestion list is excluding former raffle winners from the Prize drawing. There's rt least one person who won two CB prize dragons in 2 following years. I'd find it fairer when this could not happen

This is a very popular argoument and there are different opinions. I think the same of you, even if I think that you could win, even if only what you haven't won before. If you win a prize dragon (tinsel or shimmer) than you should be eligible only for HM, for example.

The Sheriziya suggestion also eases this thing, too, because it's not a so BIG problem if someone win twice, since there will always be the relase of the CB prizes after that and the loss of an original prize dragon will not be SO bad.

People who have won a prize should be happy for that and let to others players a greater chance of winning retiring themselves from the raffle. (they could obviously play the game anyway).

Anyway it's also true that if a person is luky he shouldn't be "punished" by that and if he/she wants to win again is a normal feeling, because winning is wonderful xd.png

I think that there is a little selfishness in everything, not just in this game. It's uor nature, it's not so wrong if we don't want to see it.

PS: I don't want to offend somebody! It's just my general opinion.

 

However I think we should focus on another argument, as I said before. The winning twice is too controversial argument to talk about it here.

Here are the current questions who we should solve, please:

 

1. Will prize dragons now actually produce more prize dragons (as in ratio questions)? I don't know. Some say they breed perfectly fine, while others say they're hard to breed. Apparently this is also dependant on the mate you choose. It seems changing a mate might actually help in getting better results. I do think, though, we have a better chance to get more prize dragons into the community.

2. Will it stop shiny hatchies from growing up through the AP? That's the big question. That will only happen if a solution for that particular problem can be found, like stated in the base of my suggestion.

3. Which prize dragon should get the coal version? Do we start with only the Shimmers, which means TJ would have to give out Coal versions with the release of the prizes this year? And then with every new prize dragon, a new coal version, like I've stated now in the suggestion? That would mean the old coal versions wouldn't be available anymore, but since it's a consolation/participation prize, I'm fine with that. Or do we start with new prize dragons, as in a new breed, especially since Marionetta doesn't allow a recolor of the Tinsels.

 

Please also read this to understand well the situation: ( http://forums.dragcave.net/index.php?showt...dpost&p=8001153 )

Edited by Naruhina_94

Share this post


Link to post
I am honestly surprised this post didn't accompany a thread closure. Personally, I think it should have done.

One idea in the thread being invalid hardly means the rest of the thread is invalid!

Share this post


Link to post
One idea in the thread being invalid hardly means the rest of the thread is invalid!

I think it's not about the validity or invalidity of certain points, but the amount of pure envy and or vitriol that is given out.

 

I agree that we are sore losers, mostly. And this thread points it out additionally in a way that stops being nice.

Share this post


Link to post
I think it's not about the validity or invalidity of certain points, but the amount of pure envy and or vitriol that is given out.

 

I agree that we are sore losers, mostly. And this thread points it out additionally in a way that stops being nice.

It certainly tilts that way every now and then, but for what it is I still think it's been pretty levelheaded and reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
One idea in the thread being invalid hardly means the rest of the thread is invalid!

And the fact that TJ had to actually read all of those posts when he cleaned them out achieved my personal goal in raising the subject.

 

Now, back to the main topic: Prizes, and the raffle.

 

I still say that the only way to actually fix the problem is to increase how CB Prizes breed, but only the CB Prizes (we don't want to be drowned in higher gen prizes, after all, and its not the high gen prizes that are driving the trade market).

 

Change how Prizes breed

- Make the CB prizes produce a large number of Prizes

-- make CB Prizes their own breed, so they produce lots of shinies?

-- Adjust prize ratios in general so they produce shinies a lot more often?

-- Have CB Prizes breed Shinies at a rate of 50%: half the time Prize, the other half is governed by the mate's ratios?

 

 

Give out a shiny Black prize to everyone who got a raffle ticket

- It gives everyone something

- Should greatly reduce the hurt feelings / feeling left out which is caused by the current raffle

 

 

As for preventing previous winners from winning again... I do support that, because the raffle does not need more drama and it *certainly* doesn't need any more anger generated over its "unfairness", perceived or actual.

 

Two people won twice, and a husband and wife both won. Its that sort of situation that calls into mind nepotism, favoritism, bribery, rigged drawings, and cheating. Something doesn't have to be actually going on for there to be the *perception* of it going on. And that perception is already out there. There is, literally, *nothing* TJ can do at this point to keep a lot of people from thinking he, personally, rigged the contest, human nature being what it is. Many more are also questioning the validity of the results, and suspect cheating. And that is because the odds of such a result were ludicrously low. Yes, it could happen. Theoretically. To paraphrase a saying: "You would have sworn it couldn't have happened, if it hadn't just happened".

 

The best way to stop that sort of thinking, that the results were *rigged*, is to let people win the "grand prize" only once. Otherwise, human nature will have people questioning the results. Which they already are.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Share this post


Link to post
And the fact that TJ had to actually read all of those posts when he cleaned them out achieved my personal goal in raising the subject.

 

Now, back to the main topic: Prizes, and the raffle.

 

I still say that the only way to actually fix the problem is to increase how CB Prizes breed, but only the CB Prizes (we don't want to be drowned in higher gen prizes, after all, and its not the high gen prizes that are driving the trade market).

 

Change how Prizes breed

- Make the CB prizes produce a large number of Prizes

-- make CB Prizes their own breed, so they produce lots of shinies?

-- Adjust prize ratios in general so they produce shinies a lot more often?

-- Have CB Prizes breed Shinies at a rate of 50%: half the time Prize, the other half is governed by the mate's ratios?

 

 

Give out a shiny Black prize to everyone who got a raffle ticket

- It gives everyone something

- Should greatly reduce the hurt feelings / feeling left out which is caused by the current raffle

 

 

As for preventing previous winners from winning again... I do support that, because the raffle does not need more drama and it *certainly* doesn't need any more anger generated over its "unfairness", perceived or actual.

 

Two people won twice, and a husband and wife both won. Its that sort of situation that calls into mind nepotism, favoritism, bribery, rigged drawings, and cheating. Something doesn't have to be actually going on for there to be the *perception* of it going on. And that perception is already out there. There is, literally, *nothing* TJ can do at this point to keep a lot of people from thinking he, personally, rigged the contest, human nature being what it is. Many more are also questioning the validity of the results, and suspect cheating. And that is because the odds of such a result were ludicrously low. Yes, it could happen. Theoretically. To paraphrase a saying: "You would have sworn it couldn't have happened, if it hadn't just happened".

 

The best way to stop that sort of thinking, that the results were *rigged*, is to let people win the "grand prize" only once. Otherwise, human nature will have people questioning the results. Which they already are.

 

Cheers!

C4.

I still don't like that my dragons depend on other's decisions, but I think that a little improvement it's better than nothing.

 

Change how Prizes breed

- Make the CB prizes produce a large number of Prizes

-- make CB Prizes their own breed, so they produce lots of shinies?

-- Adjust prize ratios in general so they produce shinies a lot more often?

-- Have CB Prizes breed Shinies at a rate of 50%: half the time Prize, the other half is governed by the mate's ratios?

 

 

If Sheriziya suggestion (who is the fairest for me) cannot be even considered I would opted for the first or the last of your suggestions to change the CB breed prizes.

The one who consider even the increase of CB prizes in the years.

Share this post


Link to post

And the fact that TJ had to actually read all of those posts when he cleaned them out achieved my personal goal in raising the subject.

 

Now, back to the main topic: Prizes, and the raffle.

 

I still say that the only way to actually fix the problem is to increase how CB Prizes breed, but only the CB Prizes (we don't want to be drowned in higher gen prizes, after all, and its not the high gen prizes that are driving the trade market).

 

Change how Prizes breed

- Make the CB prizes produce a large number of Prizes

-- make CB Prizes their own breed, so they produce lots of shinies?

-- Adjust prize ratios in general so they produce shinies a lot more often?

-- Have CB Prizes breed Shinies at a rate of 50%: half the time Prize, the other half is governed by the mate's ratios?

 

 

Give out a shiny Black prize to everyone who got a raffle ticket

- It gives everyone something

- Should greatly reduce the hurt feelings / feeling left out which is caused by the current raffle

 

 

As for preventing previous winners from winning again... I do support that, because the raffle does not need more drama and it *certainly* doesn't need any more anger generated over its "unfairness", perceived or actual.

 

Two people won twice, and a husband and wife both won. Its that sort of situation that calls into mind nepotism, favoritism, bribery, rigged drawings, and cheating. Something doesn't have to be actually going on for there to be the *perception* of it going on. And that perception is already out there. There is, literally, *nothing* TJ can do at this point to keep a lot of people from thinking he, personally, rigged the contest, human nature being what it is. Many more are also questioning the validity of the results, and suspect cheating. And that is because the odds of such a result were ludicrously low. Yes, it could happen. Theoretically. To paraphrase a saying: "You would have sworn it couldn't have happened, if it hadn't just happened".

 

The best way to stop that sort of thinking, that the results were *rigged*, is to let people win the "grand prize" only once. Otherwise, human nature will have people questioning the results. Which they already are.

 

Cheers!

C4.

I genuinely dislike *any* solution focussed *only* on CB prizes. I am *already* significantly singled out because I own one, I don't think I need *more* specialness, thanks. Not to mention, making such an exception has never been TJ's MO in the past. If you want multi-clutching, make it for EVERYTHING (BSA or just re-enable the old mechanism). Done.

 

Regarding consolation prizes - Marri has shot down re-coloured Tins as consolation prizes, which would seem to have shut of *that* avenue.

 

So.... the results should be rigged to prove to people that the results are not rigged? Because that is honestly what you just said. TJ has previously said that there will be no excluding of people from events. And given that previous winners have already won again, I can't imagine he's going to change that now. What do you want him to do, take those prizes away from those people now? And as for people thinking that TJ has a vested interest in fiddling the results - I'm sorry, but what earthly reason would he have for doing such a thing? The people who won again (or had family members win) are, as far as I can tell, completely random users with no special connection to TJ. It's not like we got a suspicious crop of all the mods winning or anything. And he'd hardly rig it for two people in one household to win and then follow it up with burned scrolls. Seriously, how does that make any form of sense?

 

 

Lastly: To paraphrase a saying: "You would have sworn it couldn't have happened, if it hadn't just happened".

Share this post


Link to post
I genuinely dislike *any* solution focussed *only* on CB prizes. I am *already* significantly singled out because I own one, I don't think I need *more* specialness, thanks. Not to mention, making such an exception has never been TJ's MO in the past. If you want multi-clutching, make it for EVERYTHING (BSA or just re-enable the old mechanism). Done.

 

Regarding consolation prizes - Marri has shot down re-coloured Tins as consolation prizes, which would seem to have shut of *that* avenue.

 

So.... the results should be rigged to prove to people that the results are not rigged? Because that is honestly what you just said. TJ has previously said that there will be no excluding of people from events. And given that previous winners have already won again, I can't imagine he's going to change that now. What do you want him to do, take those prizes away from those people now? And as for people thinking that TJ has a vested interest in fiddling the results - I'm sorry, but what earthly reason would he have for doing such a thing? The people who won again (or had family members win) are, as far as I can tell, completely random users with no special connection to TJ. It's not like we got a suspicious crop of all the mods winning or anything. And he'd hardly rig it for two people in one household to win and then follow it up with burned scrolls. Seriously, how does that make any form of sense?

 

 

Lastly: To paraphrase a saying: "You would have sworn it couldn't have happened, if it hadn't just happened".

The problem is the CBs and 2nd gens, not the higher gens. Nobody seriously complains about the higher gens. There is a lot of anger over the CBs and low gens. So why do you object to Luckiest Catch breeding better?

 

And I am NOT in favor of multi-clutching some and not the others. AND I don't think multi-clutching is the answer, anyway. Multi-clutching an extrememly rare dragon = lots and lots of commons. Which does nothing to solve the root problem: uber-rare 2nd gen prizes. So please Amazon, read my post BEFORE venting spleen on it.

 

Just an FYI, I do like the idea of a multi-clutch BSA, but I doubt I'd use it on metals. *glares at Olive x Albino pair, and other Common x Commons that refuse to produce the right breed*.

 

Marri is not the only spriter, and Mysfytt has already said she'd be willing for the Shimmers. She posted. And only one prize artist needed to be amenable for it to be possible.

 

There is no way to prove that the results were not rigged. And IF these hadn't happened:

- One person who won last year also won again

- A second person who won last year also won again

- A husband and wife both won

 

 

Then I would be all for previous prize winners to be able to win again. One person winning twice, would make me think: "You lucky dog!". Just a husband and wife pair winning? "Those lucky dogs!". All three happening? The very FIRST thought that crossed my mind was "CHEATERS!". Actually running the math? Made me think: "CHEATERS!". It was only third that I started thinking about poorly coded random number generators, and coincidences.

 

And again: read my post. I've posted, time and again, that what's done is done, and there is nothing that can be done to fix THIS raffle. The idea is that going FORWARD, things can change.

 

And no, it doesn't make any sense that TJ intentionally rigged it. That's why I don't think he did. I think the results were accidental, on his part. But over my three decades of life, I've seen some people believe some truly outlandish (not to mention.... physically impossible) things. So, since I've already had people tell me they think there was cheating... Its a short step to "rigged". Which happens all the time, in real life. Its called "fraud" and it can include jail time. Actually, governments are well known for it. xd.png

 

Yes, Luckiest Catch was lucky. But.... How any have gone through the AP in the entire time the raffles have been around? Just once?

 

To quote another saying: Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action. Depending on how you look at it, we're into "enemy action" territory.

 

 

I think its not too much to ask that TJ does what he can to reduce the perceived unfairness in a game. Its that sort of perceived inequality that makes people *leave* games, and if he intends to do this for a living, he has to be aware of how things are perceived.

 

And every contest on the radio that I've ever heard (more than I can count comfortably, there's a different one every morning and I've listened to that station just about every day for the last decade) all say: "If you've won a prize in the last x amount of time, you can't win again". Its very common for past grand prize winners to be removed from *current* grand prize drawings.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Share this post


Link to post

Before you accuse others of not reading, perhaps you should read more carefully.

 

Nowhere did I say that I object to better breeding of prizes. Only that any solution is not solely focussed on the CB prizes. Which all but one of your "solutions" are.

 

As for the rest of it, TJ's post is right up there. *points* Perhaps go read that too?

Share this post


Link to post

@Amazon: TJ said right in this very thread that staggered multiclutching was an interesting idea. As in CBs can do up to four, 3gs two, and so forth. Which ok, doesn't affect only CBs, but still. ^^; /should not visit forums while still waking up

 

My main hopes right now are for improved breeding success (either for all Prizes, only for CBs, or some combination of the two - it would increase the amount of low gen Prizes around, which is good for everyone, and also spare winners the frustration of having a Prize that breeds poorly). I also of course like the idea of more prizes / HMs, but this seems unlikely to happen. After that, I'd be ready to consider multiclutching. I think it should either be tiered or affect all dragons with an equal low chance of success (the cave has an abundance of dragons now, this is true, but with the new style of the AP it hardly matters).

Edited by angelicdragonpuppy

Share this post


Link to post

Two people won twice, and a husband and wife both won. Its that sort of situation that calls into mind nepotism, favoritism, bribery, rigged drawings, and cheating.

Or it just calls to mind statistics and probabilities. The pool of entrants is not THAT large, and many families play the game. The odds of every winner for four years being unique and unrelated to any of the others are actually a lot smaller than you'd think.

 

It's like if you're in a large room of people, the odds that two of them have the exact same birthday are surprisingly higher than you'd think. Probabilities can be very counter-intuitive things. I don't think the gameplay policies should be based on keeping people's flawed understanding of statistics from making them annoyed.

 

Besides, even if you did make a rule that no one could win twice, how would you stop that husband and wife from both getting eggs, or one winner from convincing another one to give them their egg (this happened at least once before too)?

 

Regarding consolation prizes - Marri has shot down re-coloured Tins as consolation prizes, which would seem to have shut of *that* avenue.

 

No, not really... the shimmerscale spriter was supportive of the idea, and we'd really only need one black consolation prize to be effective. (I don't really care about a consolation prize per se, but I would dearly love a black eastern dragon, so I'll take any avenue I can get, LOL!)

Edited by tjekan

Share this post


Link to post

I genuinely dislike *any* solution focussed *only* on CB prizes.  I am *already* significantly singled out because I own one, I don't think I need *more* specialness, thanks.  Not to mention, making such an exception has never been TJ's MO in the past.  If you want multi-clutching, make it for EVERYTHING (BSA or just re-enable the old mechanism).  Done.

 

 

You accused me of supporting multi-clutching, which I don't support. Seeing as how I only made comments on breeding (and not multi-clutching), its fair to assume that you thought I supported multi-clutching. After all.... Your entire comment was about multi-clutching, something I didn't even mention.

 

Yes, my solutions focus on CB Prizes. Because its the CB Prizes that are the problem. You want better breeding for ALL prizes? Fine, I'd support that too except for one minor problem: After a massive breeding explosion, where all gen prizes breed well, we'll end up with what happened to Metals, Blacks, and Stripes: All are uber rare. Its the nature of ratios. Given the ratios of commons, the breeds might recover in time. Blacks and Stripes are coming back, after all. Even CB Metals are much easier to get now than they were a few years ago. But why take the chance, when its only the lowest gens that cause people to get up in arms?

 

The only way to make 2nd gen Prizes more available long term is to increase the breeding based on generation. Or institute a fixed ratio, across the board. Otherwise, we end up right back where we are right now: uber rare 2nd gens, because there are a ton more upteen gen Prizes than there are 2nd gen Prizes. TJ might be able to think of another way of doing it. But again: The problem is the 2nd gens, and the solution needs to stand the test of time. Ie, not be a temporary fix that a shift in the ratios kills.

 

 

Yes, I did read TJ's post. Multiple times. And my post had nothing to do with his. I'm not talking about the game mechanics: I'm talking about how people perceive the raffle.

 

And the first thought I had when I heard that TWO people won TWICE was still "CHEATERS". And I'm not the only one. In fact, everyone in chat that I've spoken to has had the same initial reaction: Cheating. Well, second. Most people's first initial reaction is: no way, you must be mistaken, two people couldn't have won legitimately twice.

 

Fact: People other than me are already questioning the results.

 

 

 

Edit:

tjekan, the husband and wife pair are now burned, so... That's highly suggestive of "cheating". And it all depends on how many actually entered the raffle. There are 1,165 people on the site at this moment in time. I think you can assume that there are more people than that who play. So... How likely is it, that between this year and last, with 1,000 or more entries into each, two people would win twice? the math was deleted, so I'm not going to repeat it. The answer is, we can't know how likely it is, because we don't know how many entered. But for it to be even a 1 in 100 shot, then a LOT fewer than 1,000 people had to have entered. TJ refuses to let us know how many tickets there were, so all we can do is speculate. But people think that a LOT of people entered, so they think the odds of winning are very low. Hence the perception of unfairness.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Edited by cyradis4

Share this post


Link to post

Also, can I just point out that the prize drawings are not supposed to be ONLY a commodity reshuffling; they're also supposed to be fun. Wouldn't it dampen the holiday cheer a little bit to tell a certain subset of people they couldn't play? Particularly since a person who already has, say, a CB holly, might be dying for a CB prize, or might be wishing they could have a CB red stripe to breed it with, or something else. I think every player should be allowed to have fun hoping and daydreaming and clicking on the "did you win" button with bated breath. :-)

Share this post


Link to post

@Tjekan: lol, I feel you. The OCD side of me is saying "all prizes get consolations or none of them do" but a very big side of me keeps squealing "black and silver shimmersss" X'D

Share this post


Link to post
@Tjekan: lol, I feel you. The OCD side of me is saying "all prizes get consolations or none of them do" but a very big side of me keeps squealing "black and silver shimmersss" X'D

Even if none of these other ideas are implemented, I still hope that a way might be found for Mysfytt to release a regular-release black and silver shimmer, maybe for the 5th anniversary prize event next winter. :-)

Share this post


Link to post

Even if none of these other ideas are implemented, I still hope that a way might be found for Mysfytt to release a regular-release black and silver shimmer, maybe for the 5th anniversary prize event next winter. :-)

tjekan: I edited in a response to the other comment, but I totally agree with this one. I get all squeely and happy at the thought of a Black shimmer.

 

And the idea was that past winners could win Honorable Mentions. They just couldn't re-win the Grand Prize: the CB Tinsels and CB Shimmers. And the raffle isn't fun, not any more. Having two people win twice in a row when there are over 2,000 active users and only previously 120 prizes just rankles.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Edited by cyradis4

Share this post


Link to post
There are 1,165 people on the site at this moment in time. I think you can assume that there are more people than that who play. So... How likely is it, that between this year and last, with 1,000 or more entries into each, two people would win twice?

Someone else who's better at math than I am should feel free to chime in here, but the answer is, shockingly high. If there were 150 winners this year, and 1% of all players last year were winners (not the actual ratio I'm sure, but I'm picking a number just to illustrate), then wouldn't the odds of ALL 150 winners this year being nonwinners from last year be approximately 99% to the power of 150? Which is 22%. That would leave an 88% chance that SOMEone would be a repeat winner.

 

I may be doing that wrong, but I know for sure that the odds of zero improbable things happening over multiple iterations become surprisingly slim. No repeat winners over 150 separate drawings is sure to be a less likely occurence than you might guess!

Share this post


Link to post

Someone else who's better at math than I am should feel free to chime in here, but the answer is, shockingly high. If there were 150 winners this year, and 1% of all players last year were winners (not the actual ratio I'm sure, but I'm picking a number just to illustrate), then wouldn't the odds of ALL 150 winners this year being nonwinners from last year be approximately 99% to the power of 150? Which is 22%. That would leave an 88% chance that SOMEone would be a repeat winner.

 

I may be doing that wrong, but I know for sure that the odds of zero improbable things happening over multiple iterations become surprisingly slim. No repeat winners over 150 separate drawings is sure to be a less likely occurence than you might guess!

The math was posted earlier, along with a link to how to calculate it. And the answer is: its a lot lower than what you've got.

 

60 prizes / 1000 people = 0.06, or 6%

120 prizes / 1000 people = 0.12, or 12%.

 

The odds of one winning twice (two independent actions), is 0.06 x 0.12, or 0.0072, or 0.72%. The odds of two people winning twice (4 independent actions) is 0.06 x 0.12 x 0.06 x 0.12 = 0.00005184, or 0.0052%. Run a google search about probabilities and unrelated results. *shrug* like I said, it was all hear before, but got deleted.

 

Yes, it can happen. Likely? No, not unless the winner to entry ratio is a lot smaller than most people think. As the number of raffles goes up, yes the odds of there being a repeat winner, at any point, go way up. But the odds of, in this year vs last year, that two people who won last year also would win this year.... Like I said, one winner is luck. Two.... :/

 

 

Also, if you wanna keep chatting about it, PM me. No point in dragging the thread through that again.

 

And I still think the best answer is to get the CB prizes to breed lots better. tongue.gif

 

Cheers!

C4.

Edited by cyradis4

Share this post


Link to post
Because its the CB Prizes that are the problem.

Couldn't disagree more. The problem lies with people assuming that they are entitled to 2nd gens from those CBs. Newsflash - They're not. No one is, in fact, other than the owner of the CB. (Same goes for offspring from any other dragon, actually.) People can have a hope for such a thing, sure, but they are not entitled to it. An awful lot of this thread now feels like "Well if I can't have the actual prize, I'm going to try and strong-arm the system into giving me the next best thing as consolation!" There seems to be an attitude that CB owners are personally responsible for other people not winning and should "atone" for their good fortune by spreading the offspring of their prize as far as possible (ideally without ever asking anything in return), and actually, most of us do breed largely for others because a lot of owners like sharing and are not actually the awful people we're often painted to be. But we don't have to - nothing in the current game mechanics says we must share and work ourselves ragged for the masses.

Share this post


Link to post
Couldn't disagree more. The problem lies with people assuming that they are entitled to 2nd gens from those CBs. Newsflash - They're not. No one is, in fact, other than the owner of the CB. (Same goes for offspring from any other dragon, actually.) People can have a hope for such a thing, sure, but they are not entitled to it. An awful lot of this thread now feels like "Well if I can't have the actual prize, I'm going to try and strong-arm the system into giving me the next best thing as consolation!" There seems to be an attitude that CB owners are personally responsible for other people not winning and should "atone" for their good fortune by spreading the offspring of their prize as far as possible (ideally without ever asking anything in return), and actually, most of us do breed largely for others because a lot of owners like sharing and are not actually the awful people we're often painted to be. But we don't have to - nothing in the current game mechanics says we must share and work ourselves ragged for the masses.

This is indeed the PROBLEM - amazon_warrior is spot on.

 

What the solution may or may not be, and whether indeed one is possible, this is the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.