RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

[Illmatic1909]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

It's an exercise, man. Whether I agree with someone's ideas or philosophies or not, I want to hear what they have to say and what evidence they have to support it. This is what you call critical thinking and it's what people do - often together - to improve themselves and the products and companies they're involved with. I don't know what it is that you do, but this is in my wheelhouse. I've worked for start-ups and Fortune 50 companies. I've architected and built solutions that have run hundreds of millions of dollars through them. I'm paid to solve problems, both actual and potential. So, while you seem to have tagged me as the "one dude that just loves to be wrong", I think my track record shows otherwise. My suggestion: don't immediately assume someone else is wrong just because their philosophy doesn't align with yours.

Some people use the anonymity of the internet to puff themselves up bigger than what they are. I like to use it to challenge my critical thinking skills by engaging and interacting with others. Clearly, there are others here that like to do the same and their feedback has helped change my preconceptions about what the game needs. I also appreciate Danan and Brad giving us insight into the game and into CD's corporate and development philosophies. Maybe we provide valuable feedback and suggestions or maybe we just provide noise to them. I don't know, but - to me - this is the reason that Al Gore created the internet.

Back to the actual game. Who said the best cards in the game shouldn't be difficult/costly to acquire and pro? We all agree that this game would get really stale really fast if everyone had a lineup full of HOF Pros tomorrow. Nobody here is looking to get everything for free, but the idea that, because it's no longer 1:1 we have to throw out the notion that packs have actual, real-world prices isn't true. The world is full of valuation systems that run on incomplete data. Hell, the basis of a stock market is an estimated value based primarily on public opinion. Just because we don't have all of the data and can't come up with an exact number doesn't mean we should just give up.

Note to all: quoting your credentials online is just...for lack of a better word...stupid.

[ActionJack]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

It's an exercise, man. Whether I agree with someone's ideas or philosophies or not, I want to hear what they have to say and what evidence they have to support it. This is what you call critical thinking and it's what people do - often together - to improve themselves and the products and companies they're involved with. I don't know what it is that you do, but this is in my wheelhouse. I've worked for start-ups and Fortune 50 companies. I've architected and built solutions that have run hundreds of millions of dollars through them. I'm paid to solve problems, both actual and potential. So, while you seem to have tagged me as the "one dude that just loves to be wrong", I think my track record shows otherwise. My suggestion: don't immediately assume someone else is wrong just because their philosophy doesn't align with yours.

Some people use the anonymity of the internet to puff themselves up bigger than what they are. I like to use it to challenge my critical thinking skills by engaging and interacting with others. Clearly, there are others here that like to do the same and their feedback has helped change my preconceptions about what the game needs. I also appreciate Danan and Brad giving us insight into the game and into CD's corporate and development philosophies. Maybe we provide valuable feedback and suggestions or maybe we just provide noise to them. I don't know, but - to me - this is the reason that Al Gore created the internet.

Back to the actual game. Who said the best cards in the game shouldn't be difficult/costly to acquire and pro? We all agree that this game would get really stale really fast if everyone had a lineup full of HOF Pros tomorrow. Nobody here is looking to get everything for free, but the idea that, because it's no longer 1:1 we have to throw out the notion that packs have actual, real-world prices isn't true. The world is full of valuation systems that run on incomplete data. Hell, the basis of a stock market is an estimated value based primarily on public opinion. Just because we don't have all of the data and can't come up with an exact number doesn't mean we should just give up.

I never said that we should give up on attempting to figure out the value of the cards.

What I said is that $67 is just obviously wrong. Basing an argument on a number that is obviously incorrect, is fundamentally flawed. Again, I've put $5 of real money into this game since AH came out, and I've bought upwards of 20 MVP packs (among other purchases). Do I value MVP packs at 25¢ now, because my data shows that on some rudimentary level? Of course not.

Since people are throwing around occupations, no I'm not some guy blowing smoke. I'm a financial analyst in the commercial real estate sector in NYC. This stuff definitely isn't over my head. Even with you, it's obvious that you have a grasp on this stuff.. which has been my frustration with you taking stances that you are clearly smarter than. This is also why I've said these arguments are disingenuous. You are smarter than that. Valuing a HOF pack at $67 of real money, is just clearly wrong. There are teenagers with $20 allowances buying numerous "expensive" packs in this game. I'm certain of it. We all know this.

All I'm saying is that if you want changes made, let's talk about how the game is ACTUALLY working.. not some sensational take that ignores so much of reality in order to make it.

[eVizions]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

Note to all: quoting your credentials online is just...for lack of a better word...stupid.

I don't exactly run around yelling what I do or who I do it for. It's just a little annoying having somebody give the "you're wrong for no other reason than I say you're wrong" argument and then calling me out as the guy without a clue.

[ActionJack]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

I don't exactly run around yelling what I do or who I do it for. It's just a little annoying having somebody give the "you're wrong for no other reason than I say you're wrong" argument and then calling me out as the guy without a clue.

I've explained why you're wrong, and, again, I honestly don't even think you believe the stuff you're saying. There is NO WAY you HONESTLY believe a HOF pack to be valued at $67.

Edit- and if you DO believe a HOF pack is worth $67 based on the basic, contextually devoid math used to come up with that number, then you HAVE to also believe that CD gives us money in numerous ways.

They give us $6.70 for a season win, and every time we just happen to pull a sellable card, they've"given" us some more money. Setting up a system in which we are guaranteed cards at the highest level, when we used to have no safeguard against playing with no payoff, in perpetuity, is them "giving" us money. The Auction House itself, is them giving us money, because it transformed our goods from being absolutely worthless, to valuable commodities.

If you hold fast to the $67 valuation, you MUST acknowledge that CD gives us a pretty large percentage of that money in various ways, and has allowed for us to supplement most or all of that cost, by selling goods that were literally worthless just weeks ago. How can you divorce these ideas from one another?

[eVizions]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

I never said that we should give up on attempting to figure out the value of the cards.

What I said is that $67 is just obviously wrong. Basing an argument on a number that is obviously incorrect, is fundamentally flawed. Again, I've put $5 of real money into this game since AH came out, and I've bought upwards of 20 MVP packs (among other purchases). Do I value MVP packs at 25¢ now, because my data shows that on some rudimentary level? Of course not.

Since people are throwing around occupations, no I'm not some guy blowing smoke. I'm a financial analyst in the commercial real estate sector in NYC. This stuff definitely isn't over my head. Even with you, it's obvious that you have a grasp on this stuff.. which has been my frustration with you taking stances that you are clearly smarter than. This is also why I've said these arguments are disingenuous. You are smarter than that. Valuing a HOF pack at $67 of real money, is just clearly wrong. There are teenagers with $20 allowances buying numerous "expensive" packs in this game. I'm certain of it. We all know this.

All I'm saying is that if you want changes made, let's talk about how the game is ACTUALLY working.. not some sensational take that ignores so much of reality in order to make it.

I agree with you like 90-95% of what you're saying. There are plenty of free (or close) players that are rolling around with multiple HOFers. They aren't paying $67 out of their pocket. I get that and I totally agree with you. But my point is that the game doesn't give away many credits, right? So the majority of those credits that they use to purchase those packs have to come from somebody who actually paid for them. I am a contributor. I haven't bought a pack directly in awhile, but I've dumped money into the game for either RCs or the AH. For RCs, that money that I spent immediately is removed from the economy. The money that I've put into AH was possibly used to fund those HOF packs that somebody else bought. I think we're both on the same page up to this point?

Here's where I think we differ (correct me if I'm wrong). The majority of the money that I put in usually will never get past that person that I bought a card from off AH. 30% is taken off the top from what he/she sold their card to me for. If they then use those credits for hot streaks or pack purchases of unsellable cards, those credits have now been completely removed from the economy. If they use them to buy something else, another 30% of the remaining credits are removed. The credits are not recycled throughout the economy very much, which is why everything is dry. There is no resale value of purchased cards. A virtual economy needs credits flowing through it. People need to freely buy and sell things, which you can't do when the majority of currency is leaving the economy as fast as it comes in.

So my 2 questions for you are: 1) do you agree with the second paragraph, and 2) if so, how do you fix it? My point has always been that if I want a HOF player which, to this point, is the best tier in the game, I either need to a) buy one directly (the $67 argument), b) save up credits from seasons and Daily Rewards, which isn't feasible, or c) try to grind and sell things in an auction house that doesn't promote a high rate of trade. If they want to leave the cost of packs where they are, I'm completely fine with that, but then loosen the grip on the rest of the model to allow us ways to get there. The middle class is vital to a system like this and I think CD is trying to rely completely on the big spenders to support the model.

[eVizions]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

I've explained why you're wrong, and, again, I honestly don't even think you believe the stuff you're saying. There is NO WAY you HONESTLY believe a HOF pack to be valued at $67.

Edit- and if you DO believe a HOF pack is worth $67 based on the basic, contextually devoid math used to come up with that number, then you HAVE to also believe that CD gives us money in numerous ways.

They give us $6.70 for a season win, and every time we just happen to pull a sellable card, they've"given" us some more money. Setting up a system in which we are guaranteed cards at the highest level, when we used to have no safeguard against playing with no payoff, in perpetuity, is them "giving" us money. The Auction House itself, is them giving us money, because it transformed our goods from being absolutely worthless, to valuable commodities.

If you hold fast to the $67 valuation, you MUST acknowledge that CD gives us a pretty large percentage of that money in various ways, and has allowed for us to supplement most or all of that cost, by selling goods that were literally worthless just weeks ago. How can you divorce these ideas from one another?

I think this is CD's argument, which is one way to look at it, but also helps point out some of the holes. The problem I have with it is that you aren't given a sizable chunk at all. The $6.70 for a season win? That assumes that a) you are already in the highest tier, and b) you win a season. That also can only happen once every 4 days. Same with sellable cards. You're talking one or two a week, at most. While this can get me (maybe) a HOF pack every few weeks, it's not a viable way to "earn a living" in a game with such a short lifespan.

[ActionJack]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

Ok, NOW we're starting to veer back into the same discussions from weeks ago, which have nothing to do with RttC.

I'll make a couple of quick points, and that's it.

1. I don't think CD puts an enormous amount of credits into the system, but when you think about it, they do put a.... not insignificant number of credits into the system. Through seasons, there are at least tens of thousands of credits dumped in every day (maybe hundreds of thousands? Don't know how many seasons are running daily). Daily bonus is negligible (regardless of how many users there are). They could do more, obviously, but they do recognize on some level that they need to feed the beast.

2. As for your overall stance on AH, you want it to be a wide open system. I just don't think that's what CD wants, and I don't think they're necessarily wrong. You want everything to have value, so everyone can buy things, and that's that. CD wants it restricted, because they don't want people to just be able to dump money, and get every single thing they want, necessarily, regardless of how much they want to spend.

It's a difference in philosophy, and I don't think that one way is right or wrong, just a matter of preference. In this case, I'm with CD in a lot of ways. I don't believe the AH necessarily needs to be a place where everyone can get all that they want, even at fair market prices. Important point: I never liked the idea of an Auction House to begin with, as it has potential to destroy natural progression through the game (which I enjoy) without many of the risks of buying packs (dropping LARGE amounts of money, and never getting what you want).

I do totally recognize anyone's right to feel differently, as this is strictly a matter of opinion on how people want the game to go. I don't think you're wrong in having your preference.

I do think it's wrong to think that this preference is somehow fundamentally more valid than wanting to keep the game restricted in ways. You work under the assumption that things flowing more freely is unquestionably a better thing, and I don't think that's as much of a given as you do.

[eVizions]

Re: RttC re-balancing thoughts (Attn: Brad, NWGD)

Ok, NOW we're starting to veer back into the same discussions from weeks ago, which have nothing to do with RttC.

I'll make a couple of quick points, and that's it.

1. I don't think CD puts an enormous amount of credits into the system, but when you think about it, they do put a.... not insignificant number of credits into the system. Through seasons, there are at least tens of thousands of credits dumped in every day (maybe hundreds of thousands? Don't know how many seasons are running daily). Daily bonus is negligible (regardless of how many users there are). They could do more, obviously, but they do recognize on some level that they need to feed the beast.

2. As for your overall stance on AH, you want it to be a wide open system. I just don't think that's what CD wants, and I don't think they're necessarily wrong. You want everything to have value, so everyone can buy things, and that's that. CD wants it restricted, because they don't want people to just be able to dump money, and get every single thing they want, necessarily, regardless of how much they want to spend.

It's a difference in philosophy, and I don't think that one way is right or wrong, just a matter of preference. In this case, I'm with CD in a lot of ways. I don't believe the AH necessarily needs to be a place where everyone can get all that they want, even at fair market prices. Important point: I never liked the idea of an Auction House to begin with, as it has potential to destroy natural progression through the game (which I enjoy) without many of the risks of buying packs (dropping LARGE amounts of money, and never getting what you want).

I do totally recognize anyone's right to feel differently, as this is strictly a matter of opinion on how people want the game to go. I don't think you're wrong in having your preference.

I do think it's wrong to think that this preference is somehow fundamentally more valid than wanting to keep the game restricted in ways. You work under the assumption that things flowing more freely is unquestionably a better thing, and I don't think that's as much of a given as you do.

While I prefer a more open market, I'm not saying it has to be such. I would have been okay if they hadn't created the AH and we could've followed the more natural progression you talked about. I just think that if you're going to create a market, do it right. I think a more open economic system would benefit both parties. It would be a more engaging platform for the users and (I believe) would be more lucrative for CD.

You're right, it is a matter of personal opinion. I also didn't mean to make it out to be the best or only way to do it. I just see a ton of potential in this game, yet I see a community that isn't happy with how they're treated. I see improvements in the game overshadowed by head-shaking decisions. I'd like to see CD be a little less conservative and a little more... well, the opposite of whatever they've been lately. I'd like to see new ideas and initiatives. RttC, to me, is a huge success. I'd love to see some improvements, but I think it's a cool game mode that I personally enjoy more than RC.