ANSWERED:Can We Please Have Prizes Available in the Market

[HeatherMarie]

Yeah, multiscrollers will cheat the system regardless of what Prizes do, how they are obtained, or even if we have Prizes at all. I mean, multi-scrolling didn't stop when we no longer had raffles for a long while, and Prizes certainly aren't the only reason multi-scrollers exist. I'd really hate any good suggestion to be passed over just because of the potential of people playing against the rules, when that happens regardless. 

 

I personally don't understand why/how people can think the current system is okay when the bare facts are laid out: The current system will take *over 50 years* for every active player to obtain *one* CB Prize, and that doesn't take into account multiple wins that we already know happen. I've said it before, if CB Prizes were this limited-edition special thing that happened a couple times for a few lucky players and then never again, it would be a completely different conversation. But now that we have raffles and winners every single month, that changes things. If they are going to be continually available, ie not just something that was available in the past, then they should be *realistically* available. Which they aren't. 

 

The rarest-of-the-rare used to be CB Golds, but even with them you could trade for them, and now we have the Market where you can save up to buy them. Even Neglecteds seem to be less unobtainable then CB Prizes. *Everything* in this game is obtainable in multiple ways (catching, trading, buying) *except* for CB Prizes. With the itty bitty number that win each month against the comparatively humongous userbase, it's just not fun. It's not exciting. It's not interesting. And for those of us who will never win, it's not fair. Yeah, I know, 'RNG is fair', but 'random' isn't always the best way to do things. And when the 'random' method we currently have will continue to exclude the *vast* majority of the userbase for years to come, then no, I don't think that's fair at all.

Edited August 28, 2018 by HeatherMarie

[Fuzzbucket]

I couldn't have said it better myself. And didn't.

[osmarks]

Does the 50 years estimate consider new players joining and taking up raffle slots?

Regardless of whether it does or not, it's still pretty bad.

 

Anyway, TJ09 has decided to change the raffles up a bit so it's harder to enter.

This will not help.

Now, yes, people will have to actively work towards a prize a bit - I consider this a good thing. They seem, though, to be completely arbitrary goals - collect dragons of a certain body type, element, biome. The thing with the Market is that its shards are already a pretty good proxy for amount-of-play, but these goals will force people to adjust their playstyles a lot to remain competitive. Lineage builders wanting a prize will now have to gather random CBs (TJ09 stated in the News thread that you'd have to collect CBs for at least the biome one - on a related note, remember how an argument against prizes in market is "TJ09 does not treat CBs specially"?), and people will, generally, have to collect dragons they don't actually want to remain competitive. The true winners will be people who already have prizes (or other valuable dragons, or the ability to catch rares very well) to trade for large packs of those specific dragons, and those who are willing to massively adjust their playstyles. Isn't the point of the raffles to give everyone a relatively equal chance (not that I agree with that much)? And for all that, there'll still be that same incredibly low amount of winners and same mostly-broken method of randomly handing them out.

 

TL;DR: the arbitrary challenges will just favor those who already have prizes and valuable stuff, disrupt play and be annoying, and not fix the core 60 dragons/month issue.

 

RE multiscrollers: really, who cares? Most DC mechanics are affected by them, including the raffle, market and cave.

Edited August 28, 2018 by osmarks

[Fuzzbucket]

Actually I'm not sure quite what TJ meant there. We shall have to wait and see - but whatever - it does not address the underlying issue - FAR too many players with no hope of ever getting a CB prize.

[osmarks]

8 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Actually I'm not sure quite what TJ meant there. We shall have to wait and see - but whatever - it does not address the underlying issue - FAR too many players with no hope of ever getting a CB prize.

Also, those that do will end up probably destroying a lot of their playstyle to complete arbitrary challenges each month. If the numbers are low, though, it may not be too awful. Though still bad, because again, 60 people a month is not a lot.

[HeatherMarie]

I'm just really really hoping the number remains low enough that we won't have to destroy our specific playstyles *too* much (3 a month is a lot easier then 10 a month, even if you don't normally collect CBs, for instance...). But yes, even *more* hoops to jump through to even be allowed to *enter* the raffle definitely isn't helping the feelings of unfairness and complete unobtainability. 

[The Dragoness]

Multiscrollers can already enter the current raffle. In fact, wouldn't it be easier for them to raise three dragons a month to enter the raffle than collect x number of shards (on multiple accounts, too) to buy a CB Prize? And we can't really base every argument on "but multiscrollers" either. Yes, I'm sure there are some out there, but only TJ is capable of finding them and preventing future cases. Why should the entire userbase be limited because of a small group? 

 

Personally, I would like to see the amount of CB Prizes given out each month at least doubled and Prizes added to the market for a reasonable price. I think a year's worth of shards sounds fair, as any more than that might exclude certain playstyles and newer players. 

[Guillotine]

Yeah, over a year's worth of shards is a bit excessive and limiting. And I do agree that, whatever happens with the market, the raffle numbers should be boosted considering that for 6 different sprites (or two breeds, if you don't care about sprite count!) that cannot be obtained as CBs otherwise 60 is just far too few.

[Fuzzbucket]

1 hour ago, HeatherMarie said:

I'm just really really hoping the number remains low enough that we won't have to destroy our specific playstyles *too* much (3 a month is a lot easier then 10 a month, even if you don't normally collect CBs, for instance...). But yes, even *more* hoops to jump through to even be allowed to *enter* the raffle definitely isn't helping the feelings of unfairness and complete unobtainability. 

 

Yeah

[hazeh]

I've always sort of flip-flopped on this issue over the years. I think, currently, my preferences are thus:

 

--I like raffles. I know they're frustrating, but I think they're exciting. However, I do agree that the winning pool in comparison to the actual number of players being decided from is absurdly small. I'm definitely in favor of increasing the amount of prizes handed out each month (I also would not object to being able to "buy" extra raffle tickets either through gameplay or directly with shards). I didn't even win my prize through a raffle (he was from the tree contest) and the raffle still makes me excited. 

--I'm pretty neutral on having prizes in the market. Not because I don't have an opinion, but because I'm equally torn between saying no, I don't like that, and acknowledging that yeah, it's probably a better system overall for players to eventually get one. 

--A thought though: I've always loved prize concepts. I'd love to see MORE prize concepts. That being said, I know a lot of users really don't like that because of the exclusivity of them (which, yeah, sucks). So, to make a compromise between prizes in a raffle and prizes in the market, what about "retiring" prizes from the raffle into the market after a certain amount of time, so that a newer prize gets introduced into the raffle? Then they cycle, or whatnot. Maybe a year at a time? (i.e., "2019 Prize" is only raffle obtainable, but when 2020 rolls around, that 2019 prize is now available in the market to get purchased, while the new 2020 prize gets plunked down for the raffle). That way the prizes themselves still keep their "special" status (2019 prize raffle winners versus 2019 prize market buys are still technically different, but are CB prizes either way) and can still be obtainable in the future for users? (admittedly I did not read through this entire thread so if this is just a parroting of another idea, I apologize)

[osmarks]

I don't think "click button, maybe (probably not) get rare thing a month later" is very exciting myself. And buying extra tickets would not actually help at all. People would, again, need to adjust their playstyles somewhat to have any chance (no market egg buying, shard maximisation), and there would still be a fixed, too-small amount per month.

[olympe]

15 hours ago, Starscream said:

I wish you all good luck. May your next summons be fruitful.

 

I still think the current system is okay for prizes. What concerns me is the multi-scrollers having more opportunities to win and benefit over the honest players - I feel that can contribute the issue.

Well, they'd still have to play with all their winning scrolls in order to benefit. Because CB Prizes are untradeable.

[osmarks]

Most people have not won and will therefore not think "wow, it was totally worth the wait". Your getting one after just a year is an anomaly. And you don't "go after" prizes, you just click a button and hope each month. Now, anyway. Next month you'll have to click a button after doing ridiculous challenges, which is of course much better (that was sarcasm).

 

1%/0.5% seems high, what are your playerbase estimates?

 

Shards for more raffle tickets will just mean that people who optimize for shards will do better, but still a ridiculously tiny amount.

[Stromboli]

Would be interesting if we had Prizes in the market, pretty exorbitantly priced (like, still far and away the hardest dragons to get ahold of kind of price), but introduce some consolation prize to the raffle of bonus shards. Number of Prize dragons distributed is fixed, but maybe something like 5% of entrants get a purse of 500 shards, 15% get 250 shards, 30% get 100 shards. Every month half the people who enter win something. If they wanna use that bonus as savings for a super-expensive Prize, they can do that.

[HeatherMarie]

1 hour ago, hazeh said:

 

--A thought though: I've always loved prize concepts. I'd love to see MORE prize concepts. That being said, I know a lot of users really don't like that because of the exclusivity of them (which, yeah, sucks). So, to make a compromise between prizes in a raffle and prizes in the market, what about "retiring" prizes from the raffle into the market after a certain amount of time, so that a newer prize gets introduced into the raffle? Then they cycle, or whatnot. Maybe a year at a time? (i.e., "2019 Prize" is only raffle obtainable, but when 2020 rolls around, that 2019 prize is now available in the market to get purchased, while the new 2020 prize gets plunked down for the raffle). That way the prizes themselves still keep their "special" status (2019 prize raffle winners versus 2019 prize market buys are still technically different, but are CB prizes either way) and can still be obtainable in the future for users? (admittedly I did not read through this entire thread so if this is just a parroting of another idea, I apologize)

 

This is a very interesting idea and I think it would be really awesome. Winning a specific Prize in any given year would still be super-special, but they wouldn't be completely forever-unobtainable for everyone who doesn't win. I like it.

 

@Kaini The 50-year estimate comes from active-playerbase numbers that TJ himself quoted a few years back, I believe in 2014. His number was 40,000, if I remember correctly. 40,000 active users divided by the current 720 Prizes given out per year equals roughly 55.5 years for every active player to get 1 Prize. Even if the active playerbase has gone down a significant amount since that number was quoted, it's still a ridiculous length of time. If we go worse-case and assume that the active playerbase has *halved* itself, to 20,000 users, that's still over 27 years before each of those users gets 1 CB Prize. I've never done the probability math for a specific user, but I personally think looking at the userbase as a whole is a more valuable comparison then looking at how likely it is that one specific user will win.

 

[osmarks]

I think the 50 year figure is calculated wrong. It doesn't consider repeat wins. Right now, they don't happen enough to be a problem, but when, say, 99% of the active playerbase has a prize, they'll be as likely to get more as that last 1%.

[HeatherMarie]

1 minute ago, osmarks said:

I think the 50 year figure is calculated wrong. It doesn't consider repeat wins. Right now, they don't happen enough to be a problem, but when, say, 99% of the active playerbase has a prize, they'll be as likely to get more as that last 1%.

 

Exactly. If the userbase numbers are relatively similar to what TJ quoted a few years ago, 50 years is actually a very low estimate, not taking into account the repeated-wins that we know already happen.

[olympe]

Of course. You cannot calculate an end "everyone has won at least once" with repeated wins. Because probability is a *****, and it's more likely for one single person to win 12 or more times than for everyone to win once.

[HeatherMarie]

Not everyone 'needs' to win. Sure. I personally don't give a crap if I ever have a CB Prize. But I *do* care about the game and userbase as a whole. Whether or not every active user cares about winning, the fact remains that with the current raffle it will take *years* for everyone to be *able* to win, well over 10 years even if we assume the lowest reasonable number of active users. That's what it comes down to: Not who *wants* to win, not what number of users would be excited to win, but how long it would take for everyone to be *able* to win. That's what I look at when determining how fair/good/right/etc the current system is.

 

I mean, currently CB Golds in the Market cost 10.5 months worth of shards. It doesn't matter whether or not I *want* that CB Gold, I'd be *able* to get one in less then a year. The *ability* to obtain something is, imo, more important here. Users do not currently have a realistically-time-framed *ability* to win a CB Prize. The userbase in general. Not one specific person. Because one specific user winning the raffle doesn't do anything at all to help *all* the other users who don't win. That's what I want, I want a way for *all* people to have the *ability* to get a CB Prize, if they so choose. Whether by saving up shards for a year or two, or increasing raffle numbers significantly, or whatever. I do not at all think that everyone should just 'have one', any more then I think CB Golds should be dropped onto every user's scroll. But a realistic timeframe. One, two years of saving up shards. Even two or three years of raffles would be better then the tiny numbers we currently have.

[olympe]

Raffles don't magically distribute stuff to those who want it (and haven't had it yet, much less a lot of it). So, increasing the raffle numbers, even if done significantly, will not help much. It's more like a band-aid solution, just like the current raffle system is.

[purplehaze]

 

 

5 minutes ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

I mean, currently CB Golds in the Market cost 10.5 months worth of shards. It doesn't matter whether or not I *want* that CB Gold, I'd be *able* to get one in less then a year. The *ability* to obtain something is, imo, more important here. Users do not currently have a realistically-time-framed *ability* to win a CB Prize. The userbase in general. Not one specific person. Because one specific user winning the raffle doesn't do anything at all to help *all* the other users who don't win. That's what I want, I want a way for *all* people to have the *ability* to get a CB Prize, if they so choose. Whether by saving up shards for a year or two, or increasing raffle numbers significantly, or whatever. I do not at all think that everyone should just 'have one', any more then I think CB Golds should be dropped onto every user's scroll. But a realistic timeframe. One, two years of saving up shards. Even two or three years of raffles would be better then the tiny numbers we currently have.

 

Well said! 

[purplehaze]

Whether there are 40,000 players or only 10,000 does not really change the fact that any given player has a snowball's chance in you-know-where of ever winning one! Much less winning their chosen breed and color.

[HeatherMarie]

4 minutes ago, Shadowdrake said:

Having something be special for the sole reason that the majority of players will never realistically get for no fault or merit of their own is not a good idea.

 

Yes. Yes. Exactly. I personally don't understand the idea that someone would *want* something to be 'special' by way of excluding the majority of the playerbase. Or 'special' because they randomly won it through absolutely blind luck, with no real effort or work on their part. That's not 'special', that's 'elite'. That's a tiny minority having something that the majority don't, and won't. Personally I honestly don't understand why people would *want* that kind of exclusivity in an online game. But regardless, it's really not the best idea, and to that vast majority who hasn't won and won't win anytime soon it's not 'special' or fun or exciting at all, it's just frustrating.

[osmarks]

Are there any objections other than "it will be better if I obtain it entirely through random chance" or "this keeps them special" (not that I agree with either)?

[Fiona]

10 minutes ago, olympe said:

While the probability of winning does go up, it doesn't mean anything.

The probability of winning the lottery goes up with every time you enter. Doesn't mean you'll win, ever.

The probability of catching a CB gold increases with the time you spend hunting in the cave. Doesn't mean you'll ever catch one.

The probability of getting pregnant increases with every time you have ***. Some people never have children despite trying.

 

 

Define active. On an unrelated note, does anybody remember how many trees got entered into the Tree Decorating Contest? I think it's safe to assume that there are more users now than there used to be then.

 

 

And how do you think you manage to calculate this? Because it's impossible. You can give an estimate for a 50% chance, or any other kind of chance that's less than 100% - but that's still less than a safe win.

 

I crossed out the thing that is not true there. Which calls into question your whole argument, really. Your second probability is also questionable. There are too many factors, including personal choice, to say that ones chance of catching a CB gold changes with number of times you spend hunting. Your first probability is true, of course, just as hazeh said.

 

The number of players who entered the tree decoration contest was around 8000. It is not a safe assumption though that there are more active users now than there were then. In fact, you would probably be safer assuming that there are less active users now than there were then, as browser based games appear overall less popular now than they were then.

 

The answer to how hazeh calculated that is math. Statistical analysis is not something I personally can do but there's a whole college class often required for various science and math majors. I have assumed that hazeh has taken this (wildly unpopular) course and knows how to correctly compute probability.

 

hazeh, I like the idea of what you suggested earlier. I don't know if we could talk TJ into doing it but it'd be great fun for me (as a sprite artist to design and submit prize dragon concepts. )