GC Prizes and Ticket Stockpiling

[Polo]

Because a number of players have now purchased either the majority or all of the GC prizes and are just amassing large numbers of tickets, we are looking at ways to reduce the number of available tickets and give players something to work towards obtaining. One of my current ideas is to introduce a limited set of weapons as event prizes, but give them a dynamic ticket price.

For a long time we've disallowed weapons from being GC prizes (or any item that harms other players. One of the main reasons for this is that weapons are much more desirable than regular items, and would therefore carry a ticket premium (eg: 100 tickets). By making weapons so expensive it would prevent new players from obtaining them for a long time, and this would give people who have hoarded tickets and can purchase the prizes easily a large advantage over them. This is why I'm considering a dynamic pricing structure, whereby prices increase depending on the number of prizes you have bought.

Consider this example: There are 10 weapons, each with a starting price of 20 tickets. After you have purchased your first weapon, the remaining nine double in price to 40 tickets. After you buy your second one the price of the remaining eight doubles to 80 tickets, and so on. The first few items, at 20 and 40 tickets will be quite easy for newer players to obtain but the later weapons, costing a lot more, will give the ticket hoarders something to work towards. Working the maths out, the 10th item would cost 10240 tickets. A new player could easily get one or two weapons, whereas a long time ticket stockpiler will have a challenge purchasing their 6th and 7th ones.

Obviously the example above isn't ideal (10240 tickets for a GC prize is a touch expensive), but I'm interested to get some player feedback on the idea of increasing ticket prices in general (eg: each time you buy a prize, the price goes up by 10 tickets). If we do choose to go with this idea I'll need to have a good think about the numbers.

Anyway, that's the basic idea. Would you enjoy the challenge of trying to get all the prizes, or would you be put off at having to spend more than 'the other guy' to buy your next one? I'll make it clear that this is just one idea; we have a number of other things planned to help fix the ticket economy.

[BlackSolider]

1.5 would be better than 2. Then again I'm not a math major so idk.

But yes, all the gc prizes we have (outside of like 4) are completely useless and just for looks. Yes, numerous people have stockpiled excessive amounts of tickets.

Both problems need to be solved at the same time, and this idea looks pretty solid. But (as far as I read) this idea implies leaving the current tickets as is. That's great and all, but we'd have a significant group of people that could all have the same items from the start. Value starts from only a few people having it, and everyone else wanting it, and therefor working to get it (think of when xbox360 or ps3 came out, you had to go to your friends house when they got one; now everyone has one and its no big deal.)

[MysticX2X]

Very nice concept as I've told you in a PM. If you can get the math down, it will probably be very useful in burning down tickets.

I honestly think Statue auctions or something could burn tickets down too....

[kia345]

If prize costs are going double like that, then that clearly means there will be more events to win. That still doesn't close the gap between "1 ticket - 10000 tickets" very quickly.

So to speed up the process of gaining tickets, while still making it challenge, winning tickets consecutively doubles as well. Not necessarily "win the first event, get one ticket, win the second, get two", but make the amount double for, say, every 3-5 events you win in a row. The ticket "multiplier" ends after you lose/fail to win/participate in an event.

[Polo]

Originally Posted by BlackSolider

But (as far as I read) this idea implies leaving the current tickets as is. That's great and all, but we'd have a significant group of people that could all have the same items from the start. Value starts from only a few people having it, and everyone else wanting it, and therefor working to get it.

Ideally I want it so that even the current 'super hoarders' could only buy 4 or 5 of the 10 items at the start, and to purchase the 6th it would take a significant amount of tickets on top (a few hundred). Maybe some people will start with 5 items (for example), but that doesn't mean they will each choose the same set of 5 as everyone else. This would mean there's always at least one item which their rival has but they don't, and would give them something to work towards. The 10th item would likely be so expensive as to be almost impossible to obtain, so the challenge of trying to obtian all 10 first could be seen as a competition in its own right.

[Rufus]

So the items are essentially going to be the same?

[BlackSolider]

Touche stormo, touche.

[Oni]

Ok Storm, after reading over your idea and thinking for a moment I have two things to say.

1. I’m glad your actually doing something, and addressing this major issue, instead of some other unnecessary assignment.

2. Your current idea seems a little extreme, and reminds me of communism. Why can’t Classic just be normal and sell items at different prices according to their worth/use? I feel like your just making a big deal out of something that isn’t a big deal. Every online multiplayer game has those items that only pros, and people who work hard for them obtain, and there is always noob’s who are not able to get them. And that is the beauty of video games. Also every other Graal server with an “economy” is like this to, and they seem to not be having problems with getting new players or player count.

So what I’m saying is, just take the normal route and just make more items, and price them according to their worth. Please don’t do anything retarded.

[MysticX2X]

The only problem I truly have with this is the idea of some items being better than others to a players perspective. Such as 4 items being the most supreme ones that the ticket hoarders won't care for the rest.

[Remonq]

what about a ticket tech tree?

[BlackSolider]

Isn't that what storm is already suggesting?

Then again, maybe we're thinking of two different things. Do explain ranger.

[xnervNATx]

Are they going to be the same prizes? LOL

[jacob_bald6225]

Originally Posted by BlackSolider

Isn't that what storm is already suggesting?

Then again, maybe we're thinking of two different things. Do explain ranger.

No it's not.

Ranger's idea is better!

Like from a strategy game:

(Civ4 example):
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/f...e_original.jpg

Basically you start with a base prize... that branches into more prizes which branch into more, like a tree.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by jacob_bald6225

Basically you start with a base prize... that branches into more prizes which branch into more, like a tree.

I really like this idea, especially if it's starting off with a few base prizes.

[maximus_asinus]

@Storm: So your idea to fix inflation is to print more tickets and raise the cost of the goods? Where have I heard that idea before?

I mean honestly, under that system, a player would most likely refuse to play events worth one or two tickets, wanting something as unreasonable as 5+ tickets for a single event because prizes are so expensive. Eventually we'd be in the same exact situation, but instead of ticket hoarders having 200 - 500 tickets, they'll have 10,000+. You're just making the problem worse in the long run.

What needs to be done is a complete ticket reset, following with new prizes and other incentives to encourage ticket spending. I know a few of the more vocal 'elitist' will be upset and will cry night and day, but you're not running for Mr. Popular, you have to satisfy the majority over those few who would complain.