Concerning transparency on player costs/expected values

[GeorgeSkywalker]

This is a continuation of the recent thread that was locked. See link below for original thread.

Personally I don't think MA need to add any more info than they have already done e.g. looter levels, efficiency. As from these we can get an idea of costs involved and most people by now know it's a good idea to improve efficiency and looter levels to reduce costs to play.

Having said that I would like MA to be more transparent about things that we don't know and have no idea about. Specifically will our data used in loot algorithms be transferred over to unreal engine? For example loot algorithm may record number of each mob killed and use that in its loot calculations. Now if that info is not carried over to the new engine some players may loose significantly. Also we have no idea if such info is reset periodically anyway, which I think is unlikely but we do have to bear that in mind. I realise this is a difficult topic for MA to discuss as they may not want to divulge any info on anything related to loot. I think they can do both e.g. they could say something like, "all historical data on players is transferred to a new engine. Furthermore for continuity such data is never reset or lost under any circumstances". That's if they do indeed do that, if not then I expect they may stay silent. Now if they stay silent we should presume such data is not preserved.

It would be interesting to know what they did in the past? was such data preserved when we changed engines or went from loot 1 to loot 2? So for older players who have played since beginning has their data been preserved?

The original thread was:
https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...ent-with-player-costs-expected-values.295070/

 

[jetsina]

Thanks George. I was reading the original, that was locked due to OP request and not anything about behaviours.
I would welcome more transparency, but it has more to do with the ongoing drop availability and frequency concerning loot quality for me.
Thoughts about the bonus shrap towards the end of the last thread were interesting. Trying to work out 'transparency' for ourselves is a worthwhile practice I think

 

[GeorgeSkywalker]

bump for transparency on preservation of our historical data

 

[Crabby]

Personally I don't think MA need to add any more info than they have already done e.g. looter levels, efficiency. As from these we can get an idea of costs involved and most people by now know it's a good idea to improve efficiency and looter levels to reduce costs to play.

Everything we to know is already well documented, anything else are baseless theories made by people (loot theories). I don't think MA should have to waste their time responding to that. They won't stop until they get the answer they want to hear. And what they want to hear is that they are the victim of a unfair game mechanic. Its crazy to me that some people will invent, or latch onto a theory that can't be proven, just to have something to blame other than themselves for their losses indefinitely.

MA has given a sufficient amount of information for the sake of transparency, and it is smart of them to not cave into further requests. If you noticed a lot of these 'requests' for transparency are really just mindless accusations of unfair treatment. Not saying yours is, yours seems like a genuine curiosity, but it is still on the make believe side of the spectrum. It also resembles something that MA has already debunked, but...

I'm not really understanding what you mean by historical data, but in the case of an mmo transitioning engine, it isn't necessary to change the database. A data base is all it is, that same information can be accessed and changed through a variety of different ways. It isn't restricted to, in this situation cryengine.

 

[GeorgeSkywalker]

I'm not really understanding what you mean by historical data, but in the case of an mmo transitioning engine, it isn't necessary to change the database. A data base is all it is, that same information can be accessed and changed through a variety of different ways. It isn't restricted to, in this situation cryengine.

That database that may hold data about us related to in game activities and certain data that may be needed for loot algorithm is what I'm talking about by historical data. Note I'm not saying the loot algorithm needs any data to be stored about us, only in the case that it may need it. Ideally it should cover from the beginning of Project Entropia to the present. Technically it may be easy to use or transfer this data whatever engine is used however we don't know anything about it.

There are other reasons apart from technical that may mean MindArk decide to destroy/erase our data or simply start fresh and just discard the old data e.g. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In order to comply with GDPR they may even change the loot algorithm. We have zero information on such matters so all this is just hypothetical thinking. However, some of it based on real events e.g. I remember a player asked MA about all the info they store about him under his GDPR rights and got no reply. Maybe MA didn't want to reveal any data related to the loot algorithm again speculating. How do MA plan to comply with GDPR in the future when we are using Unreal Engine? We don't know their thinking on such matters...

 

[Crabby]

That database that may hold data about us related to in game activities and certain data that may be needed for loot algorithm is what I'm talking about by historical data.

This is not a thing. It is not necessary for them to track that data for the purpose of adjusting our individual returns. I don't doubt they gather statistics that they use to make certain decisions, like any competent business. But it definetly isn't a collective effort being evaluated in real time to determine when and where you will get what in terms of loot.

A point I wanted to bring up in the old post but it was locked.. Even if MA had displayed peoples projected return% right in their face in the UI. They will still find a way to disregard that and do weird things to try and 'beat the system'. It is like, they aren't concerned about becoming more efficient, or using it as a piece of key info for their in game decisions, or a combination of those two. The concern for many still is, "what weird ass thing can I do to beat the game?" THEN they come here saying the loot is bugged... Or something along those lines. People read that. People criticize and berate staff over it, and staff have displayed a tremendous amount of leniency.

I mean if one makes outlandish moves they will get results that reflect that. And more often than not this will be their avatar...

A lot of people should be answering to themselves instead of expecting answers from MA. Now if someone wants to play a little recklessly, and is grown enough to not point fingers when things go south, that is understandable and no one can do anything but respect that because there is a level of responsibility there.

I really think the player base is passed due in abandoning these theories. I know I spent weeks reading them before I made my account, and I believed them. Players with a 10+ year history, and over 1000 posts why wouldn't I? Until months later I realized I had to throw most of what I read in the trash. It was no good. Its not as complicated as people make it out to be. Everything we need to know, we have the resources and ability to find out. But not every one will do it.

As a community a lot of us are just enabling this kinda unhealthy mind set. From this stems all the questions and distrust, accusations and rants disguised as requests for transparency.

I remember a player asked MA about all the info they store about him under his GDPR rights and got no reply.

If you are refering to this guy: https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forum/index.php?threads/why-im-not-playing.280899/#post-3769988

He has gotten replies, but he still manages to complicate that for himself so he can say the answer is unclear or not sufficient. This same behavior is seen when MA gives a statement about loot.

Essentially, it is my firm belief that most of the misunderstandings surrounded by loot is created by the players themselves.

Finally, regarding general transparency and communication. This is agitating. The community relations manager takes the initiative to spark conversation with the players with an enthusiastic approach, and look how inappropriately a lot of people conducted themselves. You can see clear as day who had positive intentions to participate, and who took the opportunity to exhibit their false sense of superiority and complain.

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...-from-the-community-relations-manager.276234/

It is disappointing to say the least, and I think a lot of people should really evaluate their attitude towards the people who develop and maintain the game they say they love, when trying to communicate. I know I've done this when the prototype of the new UI was shown. It can happen to anyone, but for a lot of people, this kinda behavior is a constant thing. To the point people will do it for things that have nothing to do with them. There is so much stuff about the future of EU to talk about with the developers, but while the community is stuck wanting to discuss made up ideas over and over again.. Or wanting to talk about how incompetent they think MA is... I don't see it happening. We are gonna have new people arriving and leaving doing the same thing, until we break the toy and we won't have any toy to play with.

 

[Deleted member 69849]

This is not a thing. It is not necessary for them to track that data for the purpose of adjusting our individual returns. I don't doubt they gather statistics that they use to make certain decisions, like any competent business. But it definetly isn't a collective effort being evaluated in real time to determine when and where you will get what in terms of loot.

A point I wanted to bring up in the old post but it was locked.. Even if MA had displayed peoples projected return% right in their face in the UI. They will still find a way to disregard that and do weird things to try and 'beat the system'. It is like, they aren't concerned about becoming more efficient, or using it as a piece of key info for their in game decisions, or a combination of those two. The concern for many still is, "what weird ass thing can I do to beat the game?" THEN they come here saying the loot is bugged... Or something along those lines. People read that. People criticize and berate staff over it, and staff have displayed a tremendous amount of leniency.

I mean if one makes outlandish moves they will get results that reflect that. And more often than not this will be their avatar...

A lot of people should be answering to themselves instead of expecting answers from MA. Now if someone wants to play a little recklessly, and is grown enough to not point fingers when things go south, that is understandable and no one can do anything but respect that because there is a level of responsibility there.

I really think the player base is passed due in abandoning these theories. I know I spent weeks reading them before I made my account, and I believed them. Players with a 10+ year history, and over 1000 posts why wouldn't I? Until months later I realized I had to throw most of what I read in the trash. It was no good. Its not as complicated as people make it out to be. Everything we need to know, we have the resources and ability to find out. But not every one will do it.

As a community a lot of us are just enabling this kinda unhealthy mind set. From this stems all the questions and distrust, accusations and rants disguised as requests for transparency.


If you are refering to this guy: https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forum/index.php?threads/why-im-not-playing.280899/#post-3769988

He has gotten replies, but he still manages to complicate that for himself so he can say the answer is unclear or not sufficient. This same behavior is seen when MA gives a statement about loot.

Essentially, it is my firm belief that most of the misunderstandings surrounded by loot is created by the players themselves.

Finally, regarding general transparency and communication. This is agitating. The community relations manager takes the initiative to spark conversation with the players with an enthusiastic approach, and look how inappropriately a lot of people conducted themselves. You can see clear as day who had positive intentions to participate, and took the opportunity to exhibit their false sense of superiority and complain.

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...-from-the-community-relations-manager.276234/

It is disappointing to say the least, and I think a lot of people should really evaluate their attitude towards the people who develop and maintain the game they say they love, when trying to communicate. I know I've done this when the prototype of the new UI was shown. It can happen to anyone, but for a lot of people, this kinda behavior is a constant thing. To the point people will do it for things that have nothing to do with them. There is so much stuff about the future of EU to talk about with the developers, but while the community is stuck wanting to discuss made up ideas over and over again.. Or wanting to talk about how incompetent they think MA is... I don't see it happening. We are gonna have new people arriving and leaving doing the same thing, until we break the toy and we won't have any toy to play with.

Amen, what an eloquent, post. I agree with you 100%.

I`m also a firm believer that the loot system is way simpler than people put it to be. People put so much focus on the wrong places instead of trying to reach that next level of efficiency or looter levels. Getting access to better gear means better returns, it's such a simple concept yet it is so misunderstood. Globals and HoFs can happen, they`re rare. They are just as rare after getting 5 in a row than they are when you hunt 5 hours without one.

Personal loot pools do not exist according to MA, but people on EU are quick to call them out saying its a lie; yet they provide no data. Gambler's fallacy is a powerful thing and a lot of players unfortunately fall for it every single day.

The second you start making links between different events and loot outcomes, you go back to that fallacy. The only "right" thinking to improve returns are better efficiency and looter, full stop.

From Wikipedia:

The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the incorrect belief that, if a particular event occurs more frequently than normal during the past, it is less likely to happen in the future (or vice versa), when it has otherwise been established that the probability of such events does not depend on what has happened in the past. Such events, having the quality of historical independence, are referred to as statistically independent. The fallacy is commonly associated with gambling, where it may be believed, for example, that the next dice roll is more than usually likely to be six because there have recently been fewer than the expected number of sixes.

 

[Pi-]

.

 

[ZPF]

Now if that info is not carried over to the new engine some players may loose significantly. Also we have no idea if such info is reset periodically anyway, which I think is unlikely but we do have to bear that in mind. I realise this is a difficult topic for MA to discuss as they may not want to divulge any info on anything related to loot. I think they can do both e.g. they could say something like, "all historical data on players is transferred to a new engine. Furthermore for continuity such data is never reset or lost under any circumstances". That's if they do indeed do that, if not then I expect they may stay silent. Now if they stay silent we should presume such data is not preserved.

When we switched to CryEngine they were silent. If they admit that player loot data is tracked/stored it gives a lot of ammo to conspiracy theories. Everyone will DEMAND to know why it is tracked. Big "L" for MA, as the kids say.

As for the people saying that MA doesn't use this info in the loot algo at all, this is NOT the same as saying "There is no personal loot pool". That was an intentionally vague statement by MA that means nothing unless they define what "Personal loot pool" means. They have never provided a definition.

We know that PED spent to kill a mob directly affects your loot. Just like PED spent per drop in mining directly affects claim size. Is this not "tracking"? Is this not "personal"? What should we call it then?

The game clearly cares about how much PED you are spending. We just don't know how much it cares over long periods of time, or if this value can "reset" like OP is suggesting.

 

[The Great Adventurer]

As for the people saying that MA doesn't use this info in the loot algo at all, this is NOT the same as saying "There is no personal loot pool". That was an intentionally vague statement by MA that means nothing unless they define what "Personal loot pool" means. They have never provided a definition.

Now take into account the "happy hour" type events that ruin players faith in the in game loot system, this shows they are keeping track and decide when to let it rain(Indisputable).

The loot algorithm is slot-machine-like in nature with added variables such as skills, eff, qr, depth, area, etc to the mix to allow you to influence your odds on whatever slot you're pulling. A portion of the rake is redistributed to a loot pool for hofs and the rest is fed to MA for cost of running platform. How much of that rake you give to MA is your decision based on the variables you have control over. They also offer rakeback systems in the forms of deeds. If you were to max out all the potential rakeback systems and you maxed out your skills and gear stats you find yourself in a position of profit over the system, not directly, but indirectly.

As an example; if you were theoretically maxed on skills and gear stats and had enough investment in deeds to cover the % you lose to the system rake and you're activity is in the area of your deeds, you'll technically be in TT profit.

The "personal loot pool" in any way how they would describe it doesn't exist. That doesn't mean they can't control when the overall loot pool that we all pay into for hofs is emptied or used, hence the happy hours. It's a game and part of the game is timing. You know only certain loot drops at times (like a wave) so that is already built into the system too, they are simply increasing the payout % of that wave at that time.

Just like a slot machine, the system will average itself to whatever the rake % is that is has been set over the long run. The law of large numbers. Your personal loot return % if graphed would look like a sine wave that crosses above and below your carved out % based on your avatar, skills, gear and choices. You can be in profits, you can be in loss but eventually once the turnover get big enough, you'll see it start to settle to a % on avg.

Yes, I wrote that as a statement of fact as I honestly doubt it's any more complicated than this. It just seems more complicated because...ENTROPY.

A lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder.

"a marketplace where entropy reigns supreme"

 

[Simpleton]

How much of that rake you give to MA is your decision based on the variables you have control over.

Just like a slot machine, the system will average itself to whatever the rake % is that is has been set over the long run.

So, uh, could you clarify whether there is a system decided rake or a player decided rake? It seems unclear.

 

[The Great Adventurer]

So, uh, could you clarify whether there is a system decided rake or a player decided rake? It seems unclear.

Your personal loot return % if graphed would look like a sine wave that crosses above and below your carved out % based on your avatar, skills, gear and choices.

Just read. It's dynamic!

(of a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, or progress.

"a dynamic economy"

 

[Simpleton]

Just read. It's a dynamic!

I read what you had to say, and for a long time I had the same idea of such simplicity, but it just does not make sense from various perspectives. The dynamicness for instance could not be explained the way you portray it, also the actual rake by MA cant properly be explained either.

Also, in the original thread by Jhereg, I sensed a certain level of "this doesnt make sense, something is missing here". So I made an effort to explain in great detail what I have come to realize about the tt returns, which I will not be doing again btw. It may be a "baseless theory", but at least I could mathematically display the effects of all the various variables, including the dynamic and anyone can compare that to the official returns published by MA to see if there can be any truth to it. I did it because I don't think MA will publish such information.

 

[The Great Adventurer]

I read what you had to say, and for a long time I had the same idea of such simplicity, but it just does not make sense from various perspectives. The dynamicness for instance could not be explained the way you portray it, also the actual rake by MA cant properly be explained either.

Also, in the original thread by Jhereg, I sensed a certain level of "this doesnt make sense, something is missing here". So I made an effort to explain in great detail what I have come to realize about the tt returns, which I will not be doing again btw. It may be a "baseless theory", but at least I could mathematically display the effects of all the various variables, including the dynamic and anyone can compare that to the official returns published by MA to see if there can be any truth to it. I did it because I don't think MA will publish such information.

I disagree that it's static and with how you came to your 5% assumption. However, the rest of what you're saying fits right in with what I've said and can be calculated in the same way but with the dynamics of each avatar having a different % based on the skills, gear and choices they make in game. The way MindArk can control their rake is by controlling the rate of cycled peds. The more skills people have, the larger the potential cycle they can contribute by using more cost/hr gear, hence why there are so many ways to accelerate your skill gains nowadays. They want everyone using a Mod-Nano paying them a % of THAT cycle every hour.

 

[San]

Operational costs are constant for the most part, while income (deposits) is not. Hence the rake needed to keep the lights on must be dynamic. There certainly are checks and balances and financial instruments in place to protect against the wildest swings and to smooth known seasonal variations. But in general, this is how I always understood the "it's dynamic" boilerplate reply. Because there isn't really much more to say about it. I do wish a greater degree of transparency in some way, shape or form was possible, but the downside is in predictable player reactions. Lacking a better idea, I'd rather we focus on petitioning for more transparency in the withdrawal process for the time being. This really need not and should not be so mysterious.

 

[Simpleton]

I disagree that it's static and with how you came to your 5% assumption. However, the rest of what you're saying fits right in with what I've said and can be calculated in the same way but with the dynamics of each avatar having a different % based on the skills, gear and choices they make in game.

I would love to see some concrete examples to better understand your view and how it can be applied to the whole playerbase.

The way MindArk can control their rake is by controlling the rate of cycled peds.

I dont know what you mean by this.

They want everyone using a Mod-Nano paying them a % of THAT cycle every hour.

Sorry, I am not trying to be dense here. Could you kindly explain what you mean? There seems to be a few ways to interpret this.

Operational costs are constant for the most part, while income (deposits) is not. Hence the rake needed to keep the lights on must be dynamic.

Well, what about inflation and employee salary? I doubt that it is constant. Inflation pushes up the costs. Just recently we had this:

MindArk, the creator of Entropia Universe, today announces that the company will be issuing notices of termination to up to 25 employees, equivalent to 40% of the company's employees.

I do wish a greater degree of transparency in some way, shape or form

Same here, if MA could state clearly how the hunting rake is, whether it is dynamically changing all the time or a fixed %, it would be most welcome. Thanks
(the hunting rake, i.e. the chunk of peds that MA takes away from the hunting cycle to be distributed between themselves and the planet partners)

 

[Crabby]

Now take into account the "happy hour" type events that ruin players faith in the in game loot system, this shows they are keeping track and decide when to let it rain(Indisputable).

It is not indisputable because you say it is. This is all covered by the law of large numbers. If you are the type to envy what other people have on their plate, I can see why you come to these kinds of conclusions. Just because something is very unlikely to happen, that doesn't mean it can't happen. Try not to take it personally when someone gets something that you didn't. It is safe assume you will never be struck by lightning once in your life, yet it has happened to some individuals multiple times.

As for the people saying that MA doesn't use this info in the loot algo at all, this is NOT the same as saying "There is no personal loot pool". That was an intentionally vague statement by MA that means nothing unless they define what "Personal loot pool" means. They have never provided a definition.

We know that PED spent to kill a mob directly affects your loot. Just like PED spent per drop in mining directly affects claim size. Is this not "tracking"? Is this not "personal"? What should we call it then?

You kill a mob, you loot it, that ends the story between you and it. You are over complicating an answer that is VERY easy to understand. It is not an intentionally vague statement (you see the accusation-like undertone.... right?).

Same here, if MA could state clearly how the hunting rake is, whether it is dynamic or static, it would be most welcome.

If we got exactly the same % return on EVERY mob we killed, that will mean it is static. That is not the case. So we know it is dynamic. Our game play will very likely land us at an expected % depending certain variables WE control. That still leaves the door open for there to be some outliers given the random nature of loot. They know where they are raking in what. It is essential for making decisions, and if they need more revenue, changing returns isn't the only thing they can do. They can throw more events at us, they could restock vendors to incentivize us to follow through with those events. They can put new rewards for those events. Its not hard to see which approach they have taken.

Edit: Take advantage of the codex, don't only use it as an opportunity to gain more skills, but as an opportunity to learn what different mobs are dropping. Understand what % you are getting with what gear you are working with. And use what you learned from those mobs to decide what you will hunt for MU depending on what is active in the market. You can get very reliable estimates of how many units of a certain item you will get throughout a period of time.

Gambler's fallacy is a powerful thing and a lot of players unfortunately fall for it every single day.

This is a hard pill for many people to swallow, it is easier for most people want to blame external factors. Just like a lot of people won't want to admit that players' attitudes can directly contribute to the death of their own communities. This has gone way to far. People really need to take a step back to reevaluate their decisions and attitude towards the game and its developers. Then we can all start focusing on talking about what really matters.

 

[ZPF]

You kill a mob, you loot it, that ends the story between you and it.

"There is no personal loot pool" does not mean "future returns are unaffected by past returns". These are two very different statements no matter how you want to spin it.

It is not an intentionally vague statement

If they didn't want to be vague, they would have used my above statement.

 

[Gopher]

"There is no personal loot pool" does not mean "future returns are unaffected by past returns". These are two very different statements no matter how you want to spin it.



If they didn't want to be vague, they would have used my above statement.

People acting like they know exactly what MA is talking about despite there being 5+ things it could mean is the funniest stuff.

 

[Simpleton]

If we got exactly the same % return on EVERY mob we killed, that will mean it is static. That is not the case. So we know it is dynamic. Our game play will very likely land us at an expected % depending certain variables WE control. That still leaves the door open for there to be some outliers given the random nature of loot. They know where they are raking in what. It is essential for making decisions, and if they need more revenue, changing returns isn't the only thing they can do. They can throw more events at us, they could restock vendors to incentivize us to follow through with those events. They can put new rewards for those events. Its not hard to see which approach they have taken.

It is clear that we are in a disagreement on how the rake is calculated.

• My model assumes the rake is done first, before any other calculation and that results in a static %. e.g. 100 peds cycled will always result in the same rake for MA even though the tt returns can be different. That means that the rake is the same % for every participant no matter what.
• Your model assumes the rake is done after all other calculations and that results in a dynamic % based on your tt returns. That means that the rake is different for every participant, those with bad tt returns like 92% are being raked less than players with good tt returns like 98% even if both were to cycle same amount of peds. Is that considered ok/ethical?

I think we can agree that only MA can clarify how it is actually done, unless you got a solid proof.

 

[San]

Well, what about inflation and employee salary? I doubt that it is constant. Inflation pushes up the costs. Just recently we had this:

Not absolutely constant, but for the most part as said. These changes are relatively slow, equipment and staff changes are planned ahead so the financial impact doesn't come with surprises. The recent increased inflation is felt, no doubt. But all of this is less variant than the income stream. You can already notice better returns through the regular patterns of human action, like at the beginning of weekends or events when deposits roll in. Even the timezones of the largest player populations are noticeable this way. Money can be distributed when money is available.

 

[Crabby]

"There is no personal loot pool" does not mean "future returns are unaffected by past returns". These are two very different statements no matter how you want to spin it.

That is exactly what it means. I am not spinning anything. The community is in agreement with the definition of 'personal loot pool', and MA has given an answer for what everyone referred to as "personal loot pool", at the request of the community. Now if you don't want to accept that as an answer, that is your problem and not theirs. Its really crazy the lengths you will go to convince yourself a simple and clear cut statement is anything but that, because it is not in line with what ever you probably believed since 2004. At this point you are depriving yourself of any benefit from that info. That is pitiful, real talk.

• My model assumes the rake is done first, before any other calculation and that results in a static %. e.g. 100 peds cycled will always result in the same rake for MA even though the tt returns can be different. That means that the rake is the same % for every participant no matter what.
• Your model assumes the rake is done after all other calculations and that results in a dynamic % based on your tt returns. That means that the rake is different for every participant, those with bad tt returns like 92% are being raked less than players with good tt returns like 98% even if both were to cycle same amount of peds. Is that considered ok/ethical?

Scaled down...
If I deposited for 10000 ped, and I can expect to get say 95% back as an example.
That means I can expect 9500 ped after all is said and done.
This means MA is under no obligation to pay me for those 500 peds that are gone.
They are under no obligation to pay me those 50$, they can use it to pay for maintenance, salaries, etc...

If i got 97%, they have 300. If I got 105%, they lost 500. But I'm not the only person playing and if we all play long enough it is virtually guaranteed we will end up with the expected % with our gear considered. They do eat losses here and there, just like any insurance company, and any casino. The law of large numbers will do its work.

Is it ethical for someone to make out with 98% while the next person gets 92%?? What you fail to understand is the people who can pay for this equipment, have the means of hunting in volumes much larger than you. If you got 92% in about 10K ped cycled in a certain time frame, you contributed 800 PED to MA. If someone who who invested in high level and efficient gear cycled 100K in that same time frame for a return of 98%, they contributed 2000 PED to MA's pocket. They ARE contributing more to keeping the lights on at MA so I say it is fair.

 

[Pi-]

.

 

[messi91]

The community is in agreement with the definition of 'personal loot pool

I don't agree with that term.

 

[Crabby]

@Crabby do you even understand the implications of the "happy hour" situation? Your replies indicate you do not. They turned their "take" value up for months prior to this "happy hour" (many were reporting worse returns during this time) and then changed it to guarantee profit for a certain amount of time in a specific location in game AKA they take from many and give to the few with the flick of a switch. This should never happen and has undermined the entire economy in game, for me at least.

You claim that I am upset because I was not there that cannot be farther from reality. "Its dynamic".

That is yet another made up theory.
The economy looks fine.

I don't agree with that term.

I don't either.

 

[San]

There is wishful thinking and there is reality. Any ethically motivated measure, like giving additional information, will be used by opportunists in ways that lead to undesired consequences. And strictly speaking, it's even entirely rational. It would mean leaving money on the table not to use it. Think things through, or i.o.w. be careful what you wish for. It would be nice but we don't know how to protect its intent. And there is often exaggeration in what people call ethical. Folks like to pack their own selfish desires in generalizations to remove them from criticism. Contrary to popular claims, there is no universal standard of morality. And it is utterly futile saying any of this...

As much as the silence is hated, from the developer's viewpoint it's understandable. You create something nice and then have to deal with all the crawly creepy, sometimes venomous things you attracted. Make a game where only good people can attend, anyone...?

 

[Simpleton]

Scaled down...
If I deposited for 10000 ped, and I can expect to get say 95% back as an example.
That means I can expect 9500 ped after all is said and done.
This means MA is under no obligation to pay me for those 500 peds that are gone.
They are under no obligation to pay me those 50$, they can use it to pay for maintenance, salaries, etc...

If i got 97%, they have 300. If I got 105%, they lost 500. But I'm not the only person playing and if we all play long enough it is virtually guaranteed we will end up with the expected % with our gear considered. They do eat losses here and there, just like any insurance company, and any casino. The law of large numbers will do its work.

Sounds like loot 1.0. We are now in loot 2.0. MA made loot 2.0 to guarantee that they would not lose.

Is it ethical for someone to make out with 98% while the next person gets 92%?? What you fail to understand is the people who can pay for this equipment, have the means of hunting in volumes much larger than you. If you got 92% in about 10K ped cycled in a certain time frame, you contributed 800 PED to MA. If someone who who invested in high level and efficient gear cycled 100K in that same time frame for a return of 98%, they contributed 2000 PED to MA's pocket. They ARE contributing more to keeping the lights on at MA so I say it is fair.

Do you know my gear or my financial situation? I will allow this to stay to remind everyone that we need to remain respectful towards each other and be more aware of our words we choose.

Remove looter and efficiency and I think we will see tt returns for the vast majority of players average at around 95% (this assumes a constant rake of 5%). I have already given the reasons for this in another post.

 

[jetsina]

Make a game where only good people can attend, anyone...?

I don't think 'can attend' could ever be implemented, but replaced non-gramatically with 'do attend' would be about reinforcement mechanisms for good, or at least discouraging the perceived negatives to a level that those people choose not to play over time, or stay away from certain areas.
If people put money in with the aim of making a profit, then both planned and undesirable pathways (from dev point of view) for this have to be limited to some kind of sharing of the profits made from the losers. Some level of loss can be countered by enjoyment, which is people pay for entertainment.
What I dissaprove of, though, is players losing because they are playing by the rules.
Making a game where cheating is minimised is different from a game where things are in theory transparent, but transparency would lessen the effect of selected sharing of knowledge within groups (because less knowledge would be hidden). Also, trying to keep people from finding stuff out would also be lessened if the info were more transparently available.
I'd strive to build a game more along those lines...

 

[ZPF]

That is pitiful, real talk.

Pitiful is blind faith in developers that regularly offer what amounts to zero communication and zero clarity.
But go ahead and believe whatever MA spoonfeeds you. It's a waste of time to continue this line of discussion.
I have anecdotal evidence supporting my suspicion, so I'll go ahead and rely on that over your "Just trust MA" logic.

 

[Crabby]

Sounds like loot 1.0. We are now in loot 2.0. MA made loot 2.0 to guarantee that they would not lose.

Loot 1.0 was also done through the law of large numbers. Loot 2.0 was aimed at our benefit more than anything. It made loot a lot less volatile. Even in 1.0, they were guaranteed to profit collectively. That has been a fundamental part of their income. It is possible for someone to come up big against MA even in 2.0. When amale got his ATH there is no way in hell he lost anywhere close to that kind of money, a crucial piece of evidence against 'personal loot pool' theory if MA's statement debunking it wasn't enough evidence as is (according to ZPF).

Do you know my gear or my financial situation? I will allow this to stay to remind everyone that we need to remain respectful towards each other and be more aware of our words we choose.

No, and I don't need to. I used that as a hypothetical example. You should not be offended by that AT ALL. Do not use that as a reason to deflect. It is not a good look.

Remove looter and efficiency and I think we will see tt returns for the vast majority of players average at around 95% (this assumes a constant rake of 5%). I have already given the reasons for this in another post.

And as a result make people's weapons and efficiency pointless? No. You can make do with UL weapons that arent super high efficiency. I'm sorry but your delusion is really starting to show here. If you don't like whats on your plate find a way to change that. Don't expect other people to fix your plate for you.

Pitiful is blind faith in developers that regularly offer what amounts to zero communication and zero clarity.
But go ahead and believe whatever MA spoonfeeds you. It's a waste of time to continue this line of discussion.
I have anecdotal evidence supporting my suspicion, so I'll go ahead and rely on that over your "Just trust MA" logic.

This is further evidence of my claim that you simply refuse to believe facts that go against your wrong ideas. It is a waste of time for you to continue to defend your logic. So if you want to take a step back, I am 100% okay with that. The more you talk, the more you discredit yourself. So either or is fine with me. It is just wild to me that you have been using this bone head approach since I was in the 2nd grade (given your avatar creation date). That was a long ass time ago. Its time to touch down with reality, maybe then you can lay your 'suspicions' to rest. This is a new level of delusion I have seen on this forum.