Let everyone who enters the monthly raffle win a prize.

[DragonLady86]

3 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

They are SO "valuable" that I have given away several after being offered nothing in trade - even though I have asked for prizeKIN, or "any interesting offer". (Or on one occasion, when I had a need, a 2 gen common I wanted for a lineage. I didn't get it.)

 

There is a lot of silly hype about 2 gen prizes. They used to fetch a lot. Not any more.

 

Nothing that gives us older players even more of an advantage, please.

I very much agree.

Hah, I've dumped some of Cary's to the ap because no one would take them. So "valuable". 

[Fuzzbucket]

Exactly. (wanna trade one ?!)

[Keileon]

Theoretically, a more fair variant of the Hunger Games system would be gaining one ticket per month until you win something, at which point it resets and starts over, but that's a rather convoluted solution and with the amount of players entering the raffle it probably wouldn't actually help that much. I'm not suggesting it, just taking the Hunger Games approach from a different angle.

[ScarletBounce]

3 hours ago, Jazeki said:

LOL, the whole premise of The Hunger Games should tell you that this would not be a fair system. Might as well just have another suggestion to make the raffle like Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery."

 

Morbid literature jokes aside, if you have more chances than someone else to win a prize, that isn't fair. That's an advantage. 

I dunno, i look at it as basic economics. Companies who have been standing longer have more power than the newbies

 

To make it fair, i guess one thing would as soon as the person wins, the tickets go back to 0, then the count starts over again

 

Balanced now yes?

[HeatherMarie]

4 hours ago, Jazeki said:

 

Morbid literature jokes aside, if you have more chances than someone else to win a prize, that isn't fair. That's an advantage. 

Yes.

 

56 minutes ago, MomoScarletKaulitz said:

To make it fair, i guess one thing would as soon as the person wins, the tickets go back to 0, then the count starts over again

 

Balanced now yes?

 

Well, no. While I *don't* see the raffle as 'fair', personally, giving some people extra tickets while others only get 1 ticket is definitely not balanced or fair in any sense. I've never won, and I'm one of those long-time players who enters the raffle every single month who would greatly benefit from something like that. Please no. As much as I dislike the raffle in general, right now it *is* completely balanced in that every person who enters has the exact same chance. Messing with that would significantly *unbalance* the odds and make it a lot more frustrating and unfair than it currently is. 

[Fuzzbucket]

51 minutes ago, HeatherMarie said:

Well, no. While I *don't* see the raffle as 'fair', personally, giving some people extra tickets while others only get 1 ticket is definitely not balanced or fair in any sense. I've never won, and I'm one of those long-time players who enters the raffle every single month who would greatly benefit from something like that. Please no. As much as I dislike the raffle in general, right now it *is* completely balanced in that every person who enters has the exact same chance. Messing with that would significantly *unbalance* the odds and make it a lot more frustrating and unfair than it currently is. 

 

Exactly this. Changing the parameters would immediately make it non-random and therefor unfair. A raffle is a raffle is a raffle. Everyone who enters has a ticket and hopes to win.

And there's a long post from TJ somewhere pointing out that even pulling out all past winners wouldn't significantly improve anyone's chances at all. So that's not something that will help either.

Patience is a virtue and doesn't harm anyone.

[ShorahNagi]

2 hours ago, MomoScarletKaulitz said:

 

To make it fair, i guess one thing would as soon as the person wins, the tickets go back to 0, then the count starts over again

While unlikely, a player could in theory still win multiple times even with a scaling amount of tickets per draw.

 

Say Bob has 10 tickets, and I have 4 tickets...and I in the raffle for June. I'm back to 1 ticket for July while Bob is at 11 for July...and guess what? I won for July too.

 

At the end of the day, the raffle as it stands is really the best as everyone has equal odds [a 1 in however many entrants their are]

[ScarletBounce]

Ah well, if that's how you guys prefer it.

 

Since this is RNG in essence, i practically compared my proposal to a Gacha game with a pity system. I participate in said gacha game and have been both lucky and unlucky under the mechanic i mentioned. And it's all good anyway. Some noobs still end up getting the character that Veterans have to whale for and that's part of the system. Hence why i see it as balanced.

4 minutes ago, ShorahNagi said:

While unlikely, a player could in theory still win multiple times even with a scaling amount of tickets per draw.

 

Say Bob has 10 tickets, and I have 4 tickets...and I in the raffle for June. I'm back to 1 ticket for July while Bob is at 11 for July...and guess what? I won for July too.

 

At the end of the day, the raffle as it stands is really the best as everyone has equal odds [a 1 in however many entrants their are]

Yup, your example with Bob is practically in essence how i described the gacha game in analogy with my logic. That's under the circumstance that you just got SUPER lucky

 

But it doesn't discredit the incentive given to Bob for participating.

[Dohaerys]

While the ticket might sound nice, keep in mind it ends up disadvantaging new players the most. Right now, every player has an equal chance regardless of scroll age or past raffles entered. Any change that involves changing odds of winning based on past raffle history is not a good idea imo. Let's take the increasing ticket example that's been recently discussed. Who ends up with the most tickets?

1.) Old players who have not won yet (and thus have the longest possible losing streak) get the most tickets

2.) Old players who have won before, but perhaps a while ago

3.) New players who have only been around for a few raffles

 

I won the raffle in mid- 2019. With this system in place, I would have a higher chance of winning again than a new player who has never won before who joined after me. Thus you can see how the newest players become the most disadvantaged.

 

I prefer the raffle system as is: random is random, and in that way the prizes don't end up disproportionately with older players 

[Seriva Senkalora]

2 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

A raffle is a raffle is a raffle.

 

Simply repeating this, because it's true. 

Edited May 9, 2021 by Seriva Senkalora

[HeatherMarie]

Sometimes I feel like (and I'm not pointing at anyone, just saying it's a general feeling I get with raffle discussions) there is often a mentality of 'those of us who've been around longer *should* have a better chance at winning' and even sometimes negativity towards newer players who happen to get lucky on their first or second raffle. That sort of attitude/thinking would only get worse with any sort of 'extra ticket' mechanic. It would, in essence, be an attitude validated by the system, since those who have been around long enough to rack up a dozen tickets would be at a huge advantage compared to newbies who have only been around long enough to enter one or two raffles. Now, some people will say that's fair, if you put in the 'effort' of entering the raffle for months on end with no reward you should be compensated in some way, like with extra tickets. But that really is changing what the raffle *is*.

 

Right now, no matter how old your scroll is and regardless of whatever happened in past raffles, every single raffle is a clean slate. If you won the previous month? You still have the same chance as everyone else. If you've never won? Same chance. The raffle doesn't consider any other factors. And *that* is the most fair way to do things, regardless of how frustrating it can be to those of us who've entered every single month and never won. And even if you are super frustrated with the raffle and even if you really really really want to win, keeping it as fair and balanced as possible for the *whole* userbase should be priority. 

[fergalicious214]

If anything, maybe increase the number of winners each month?  I've been playing since 2008 but stopped in mid '17 and just got back.  I've never won a raffle and all of my prizes are either messy or late gens (but weirdly both of my silver westerns are descendants of Penk lol).  I've entered every raffle for the past seven months and no dice so far.

Edited May 9, 2021 by fergalicious214

[Jazeki]

Gacha games aren't designed to be fair. They're designed to make the company money. If a lucky free to play player gets what they want, great. But the "whale player" who spends more money to get that character or item is going to have many more chances at getting what they want than a user with a single lucky pull. There's a reason games only give you a finite amount of tickets/currency to start with and earn.

 

The DC raffle may use an RNG, but it's not the same as a gacha game using an RNG. Gacha characters aren't being raffled for. They're being paid for. It just not might be the character that you want to get, but you still lose your in-game currency. Pity breaks reward the amount of summons. If you have to summon more to earn a better chance, that's not fair. If you have to spend more money to be able to summon more, that's not fair. If you can't afford to spend more, that's not fair. 

 

We really shouldn't want that to be the end goal for DC gameplay. Right now, everyone has the same monthly challenges to earn a ticket and there's no real advantage that one entrant has over the other. I'd love to have a hypothetical bowl of tickets for never winning a raffle, but I know that's not the fair thing to do. 

 

 

[Starscream]

giving everyone a raffle prize defies the purpose of a raffle.

[Arcy]

I don't think adding even more prizes would accomplish anything honestly. TJ could award 500 prizes every month and you're still not guaranteed to ever win anything because that's the nature of RNG. 

just give people an alternative to earn a prize through time and effort... like put them in the market :3

[Laugh]

Just now, Arcy said:

I don't think adding even more prizes would accomplish anything honestly. TJ could award 500 prizes every month and you're still not guaranteed to ever win anything because that's the nature of RNG. 

just give people an alternative to earn a prize through time and effort... like put them in the market :3

 

Ehhhh... I prefer more prizes being added than anything suggested by far. Market would be my 2nd option out of everything suggested, but the problem with the Market is then deciding what would be a fair amount of shards for a CB Prize. Would a bronze, silver, or gold be worth more than one or the other? It certainly is in the trading economy and definitely unequally distributed (by color) per raffle. If we were to add CB Prizes to the market then we need to take into consideration what's currently the most expensive egg on there and it's a CB Magma at 4,700 shards. 

 

I've seen a lot of people suggesting market, but I don't think anyone has proposed an idea on how much a CB Prize should be. I would say it's safe to assume that a CB Prize should cost more than anything in the market, but again, if we are to take the price of the most expensive egg, it's 47 weeks of grinding just to get 1 egg. There are only 52 weeks in a single year. 

 

[Arcy]

1 hour ago, GrimmyYA said:

 

Ehhhh... I prefer more prizes being added than anything suggested by far. Market would be my 2nd option out of everything suggested, but the problem with the Market is then deciding what would be a fair amount of shards for a CB Prize. Would a bronze, silver, or gold be worth more than one or the other? It certainly is in the trading economy and definitely unequally distributed (by color) per raffle. If we were to add CB Prizes to the market then we need to take into consideration what's currently the most expensive egg on there and it's a CB Magma at 4,700 shards. 

 

I've seen a lot of people suggesting market, but I don't think anyone has proposed an idea on how much a CB Prize should be. I would say it's safe to assume that a CB Prize should cost more than anything in the market, but again, if we are to take the price of the most expensive egg, it's 47 weeks of grinding just to get 1 egg. There are only 52 weeks in a single year. 

 

 

I was actually gonna suggest a price around there. like a static 5000 shards, scaling up or down according to rarity. I feel like a year's worth of saving is fine for a guaranteed prize egg you also get to pick the color and breed of.

 

[HeatherMarie]

2 hours ago, Arcy said:

 

I was actually gonna suggest a price around there. like a static 5000 shards, scaling up or down according to rarity. I feel like a year's worth of saving is fine for a guaranteed prize egg you also get to pick the color and breed of.

 

 

Agreed. At this point I doubt we'll ever get Prizes in the Market, but I think a full year's worth of shards would be a decent price considering their perceived value and current rarity. After all, it's still much better than what we currently have, entering the raffle for years on end with no guaranteed win.

[ShorahNagi]

20 hours ago, fergalicious214 said:

If anything, maybe increase the number of winners each month? 

The number of prizes given out does increase with the number of people entering the raffle *hunts down the relevant post*

 

 

While no one knows the exact number given out based on number of entrants...something that is confirmed is that it's never less than 60 prizes (This was the original amount given out once we got two kinds of prizes [it broke down to 30 tinsels (5 gold, 10 silver, 15 bronze) and 30 shimmers (5 gold, 10 silver, 15 bronze)] - don't know if these numbers still hold true.)

Edited May 10, 2021 by ShorahNagi
Typo fix

[FoxintheBox4]

Yes please.

Prizes became worthless by now with so many out there.

We are collectors and it will literally take forever this way to get every type CB 😣 Especially for those who still have 0 or 1 who doesn't even produce Shinies 🤬

[DigitalGarden]

2 hours ago, FoxintheBox said:

Yes please.

Prizes became worthless by now with so many out there.

We are collectors and it will literally take forever this way to get every type CB 😣 Especially for those who still have 0 or 1 who doesn't even produce Shinies 🤬

 

Zero shinies? RIP. My prize is so stubborn, he produced only seven tinsel babies in over a year (since Mar 05, 2020 when he grew up, 39 total offspring out of 52+ attempts, assuming I bred him pretty much every week). Do I wish he produced more? Sure, I weep over my luck. But do I wish things to be given out on a silver plate, because of bad ratios? Heck no. I don't want a consolation prize. I want to work for my goals, I want to feel accomplished; a "prize" magically popping up every month on my scroll for doing nothing won't feel like an accomplishment. Yes, we're still at mercy of rng, but I'm still happier when I get that rare drop by playing the game.

 

Still no for giving things out for free, but yes for some sort of adjustments that don't put anyone in a disadvantage. Which, at the current state of things, will be difficult to pull off.

[Ruby Eyes]

It's not for free, you still have to qualify for entering the raffle.

 

[Fuzzbucket]

40 minutes ago, Ruby Eyes said:

It's not for free, you still have to qualify for entering the raffle.

 

And that's the way it works; qualify, enter, with the same chance as everyone else, hope for the best. It's random; it's a raffle. If you enter your state's lottery you don't expect everyone to get a prize because butt-hurt. Why should this be any different ?

 

I'd be fine with an end to it and prize breeds moving to the market (at a price commensurate with their history) but not with freebies all round.

 

Mine's turned out 12 shinies in a year and a half - most of them since Valentine's; now I can't get a kin out of him, and have a list of prize-kin IOUs I thought would be so easy. Prize ownership is fine - but not the bed of roses people seem to assume.

 

As for the aim of getting a CB of all six of them - that almost certainly won't happen - RNG will just as likely get you 6 of the same one... The assumption that everyone should be able to have a CB of everything is badly flawed; it will never happen.

[Murkydepths]

On 5/10/2021 at 2:33 AM, Arcy said:

 

I was actually gonna suggest a price around there. like a static 5000 shards, scaling up or down according to rarity. I feel like a year's worth of saving is fine for a guaranteed prize egg you also get to pick the color and breed of.

 

 

This is what I want. The raffle system is just annoying at this point. If we have a raffle, it should be for stuff you can get in cave. Just let me get prizes in market now please. 

 

Although I'd like half a year price cause otherwise that's 6 years until you could get one of each ;-;

[ShorahNagi]

2 hours ago, Orchi'dea said:

Still no for giving things out for free, but yes for some sort of adjustments that don't put anyone in a disadvantage. Which, at the current state of things, will be difficult to pull off.

As a thought, what if players could choose which prize they enter for?

 

They would still need to qualify for the raffle, and still only get one entry, but they choose which prize they want to put their ticket for.

 

This in theory could improve the odds for some players [ex. If there's 15 bronze shimmers avaible to win, and only 30 people enter for them...that's a 50/50 shot at getting one*] while allowing others control over which prize they *may* get [removes the chance of ending up with a "least favorite"] and still allowing past winners a chance to get a different prize [ex. I have CB Bronze and Silver tinsel - I would love a Gold to complete the set]

 

*How many of each prize are avaible (and number of entrants per prize) would not be visible/known

 

This keeps the system the same, but allows a little flexibility without giving everyone something

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by ShorahNagi