Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: On Reprint URs

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #37

Beertram wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Overview of Problem

The topic of reprinting Ultrarares brings a few reasonable player perspectives into direct conflict:

  • Newer collectors want access to some of the best tokens ever printed
  • Longtime collectors don’t want to see the value of their older UR tokens drop substantially


Jeff rewards 1K orders with a tooth and 8K orders with an orb. Another option would be for Jeff to offer another token for 2K or 4K orders which could be turned-in for the choice of one of 12 older tokens which Jeff picks each year. This would allow newer players who want to support TD get more than the current PYP's. Demand would dictate how many of the older tokens would be exchanged for. There would only be small amounts of these older tokens brought back, so the value of the existing ones would not drop back down to PYP prices. Like teeth and orbs, there would probably be one in a treasure box somewhere, so anyone could possibly get one -- even if they cannot afford a 2K or 4K order. Limiting it to only a specific # of tokens (unlike the one which gives any token back to a specific year) allows Jefff to make sure he has some and keeps ones he might consider broken out of the mix.


This would limit purchasing the older URs to big token buyers, which I'm guessing is the opposite of what Jeff would like to happen when bringing back older tokens.

Maybe this is a good time to reprint Jeff's words on this reprint topic:

Thank you all for the excellent debate and suggestions. The question re-prints is a tricky one, and not something to be taken lightly. To be fair, re-prints have been a big part of TD since 2008 when I think half of the URs were re-prints. Many of the old-timey collectors benefited from the re-prints back in the day, so I hope they will give newbies a much smaller boon. At the same time, I would ask new collectors to give great respect to the veteran collectors who have been a big reason while TD has been able to evolve and greatly improve over the years. It would still be a single-dungeon event with painted plastic walls without the support of many generous veteran collectors.

It is post #97 at this link: truedungeon.com/forum?func=view&catid=581&id=202938&limit=12&start=96#203886

My reading of that is that Jeff intents to reprint URs somewhere between one and less than half of the set each year. I think further discussions and history since then seemed to place that around 4-5 a year. And that is pure reprints as have been done in the past, available for order as PYPs, not some other option similar to suggestions on this thread designed to limit availability of the reprinted UR in order to retain token secondary market value.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #38

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #39

Joshua Baessler wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.


I agree with you, I'd also be against any mechanism that makes it more difficult for new token buyers to buy reprinted Ultra-Rares in order to maintain their secondary market value. Based on the entire history of True Dungeon, anyone that buys an Ultra-Rare should be aware of the possibility (maybe even probability) that it will eventually either be reprinted if it is popular enough and/or the secondary market value climbs high enough. People are of course free to suggest ways to restrict access of reprinted Ultra-Rare tokens, but I think it has pretty close to zero percent chance of gaining traction. I fully expect around 4-5 Ultra-Rare tokens to be reprinted this year, and to be available as PYP choices as usual.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Mike Steele.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #40

I figured I would weigh in on this topic now. First I am a player (collector), second a sell/trader. I am in complete favor of reprints give a few factors are considered, which most of these are being followed today.
  1. The token has been out of print for at least 4 years but preferably longer.
  2. Not more than ~25% of tokens are reprints.
  3. It is not an overly unbalancing token (if it is a functional reprint would be preferred).
  4. It is not a TE part of some non-expiring recipe (HoP, RoR, CoGF).

Would this impact my sales - very slightly mostly because I understand tokens can be reprinted. Would it help new players yes.

So generally I would say keep it as is with minor tweaks as the ecosystem changes.

Ed
Useful Links:
TD Character Creator
Amorgen's Excel Char Gen Tool
Token DataBase
Talking TD Podcast

TD Accomplishments:
Member of the first team to survive Epic True Grind
1st Solo NM as Poly Druid
Proud member of Gas Station Sushi
Don't Nerf Our Tokens!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #41

Matthew Hayward wrote: As we begin the exciting discussion of UR reprints, I've been mulling something over that I wanted to put forward.

The below only pertains to non-URTE tokens, URTEs have their own challenges, but I don’t consider them relevant to immediate discussion as the printing schedules for URTEs is set through at least 2020. So let the remainder of this discussion refer to non-URTEs UR reprints.


Overview of Problem

The topic of reprinting Ultrarares brings a few reasonable player perspectives into direct conflict:

  • Newer collectors want access to some of the best tokens ever printed
  • Longtime collectors don’t want to see the value of their older UR tokens drop substantially
This conflict primarily exists due to True Dungeon’s “Ultra Rare Value Pack” where any current or prior year ultra rare may be acquired as a purchase bonus for the $250 price tier, and the secondary market which has put around a $95 price point on reselling PyP URs.

Diagnosis

This current system ensures that any time a valuable token is reprinted its market value immediately goes to ~$95, where it stays for ~2 years, before may begin to appreciate again, if ever.

This system also inhibits secondary market appreciation of older tokens, because many buyers are aware of the potential for reprints and won’t consider buying a non-URTE for more than $200 or so.

Goals and Ideas

I’d like to discuss some ideas that achieve the goal of:

Allow new collectors access to older tokens, without periodically crashing the value of existing collections most valuable tokens.

If you don't agree with this goal, I'd also be curious to hear what you think a good goal of a reprint policy would be.

Idea 1 - UR Only Random Reprints

Tokens could be reprinted, but not available as a Ultra Rare of your choice selection for $250 at all - only as a randomly found token in 10 packs or treasure generators.

Idea 2 - UR Reprints "Cost" Multiple PyP Selections

Reprinted tokens could be set to require 2, or even 3 or 4 UR selections. For example, a reprint of Charm of Brooching could be made that requires three $250 orders worth of PyP selections in order to receive one Charm of Brooching.

Idea 3 - UR Reprints Selections are Limited to One Per 1/2/4/8k Order :

A reprinted token would still count for only one PyP selection, but buyers would be limited to one reprint selection per 1k/2k/4k/8k order. For example, Charm of Brooching could be reprinted, but no more than 1 could be selected as a UR selection per 2k order.


My Preference

To varying degrees all of these options would increase the amount of older, highly desirable UR tokens while also reducing the chance that their values would drop to ~$95 upon reprinting.

I like Idea 2 the best. It’s direct and flexible, it allows True Dungeon to adjust things easily - e.g. a reprint of Girdle of Hill Giant strength could cost 1 pick, Gloves of Glory 2, and Charm of Brooching 3.

I don’t think Idea 1 would introduce enough new supply to meet the demands of new collectors.

I think Idea 3 is interesting - but might add a bunch of complication and not really solve the problem of values of existing tokens dropping - as even with this restriction there might be enough supply to meet all demand and still crash the prices down to ~$95 for reprinted tokens.


What are your thoughts?

I've put up a poll to solicit votes towards these options, "no change", and some "none of the above" options, feel free to vote there, I'll announce the results once new submissions slow down.

www.surveymonkey.com/r/62XNRZM


Matthew, I agree with you that URTEs are a separate category, in that none of them have been reprinted so far, and won't be for at least another 10 years or so, since Jeff has set out the URTE print schedule through 2026 (although the last two URTEs in that schedule are still TBD).

"Due to many factors and the development of the "Nugget" Ioun Stones, I thought it would be best to go ahead and make these clarifications.

1) We will publish an Ioun Stone Silver Nugget (+2 Treasure Coins) in 2017, an Ioun Stone Gold Nugget (+2 Treasure Coins) in 2019, and an Ioun Stone Platinum Nugget (+2 Treasure Coins) in 2021. These three tokens will stack with each other because they have slightly different names. They will stack with the Charm of Avarice.

2) There will be no transmuted token that uses any of the three Ioun Stone Nuggets in its recipe.

3) Assuming Gen Con and TD is still around in about ten years (2026) , the Amulet of Treasure Finding will be used in a transmuted token recipe to make a better treasure-enhancing token. It will be combined with whatever TE-tokens come out in 2023 and 2025.

I know it is a bit crazy to make these pronouncements this far into the future, but it appears to be needed. Thanks for your patience and support. "

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Mike Steele.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #42

Joshua Baessler wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.

Tokens are like the stock market, some will be valuable some wont. Something you didnt think of will come out of know where
some will be reprinted(or reverse split)

it happens. I dont think it will change, with more and more cons coming into play....Cant believe I am saying this....reprints maybe a great IDEA to get new people in the game. functional or direct.
now 1-4 a year is reasonable...5-20 reprints is not

i am a collector, buyer and reseller....and I approve this message

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #43

Laz is on board with reprints. I consider this topic resolved.
You either discover a star or you don't. You arrogant punk.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #44

MasterED wrote: I figured I would weigh in on this topic now. First I am a player (collector), second a sell/trader. I am in complete favor of reprints give a few factors are considered, which most of these are being followed today.

  1. The token has been out of print for at least 4 years but preferably longer.
  2. Not more than ~25% of tokens are reprints.
  3. It is not an overly unbalancing token (if it is a functional reprint would be preferred).
  4. It is not a TE part of some non-expiring recipe (HoP, RoR, CoGF).

Would this impact my sales - very slightly mostly because I understand tokens can be reprinted. Would it help new players yes.

So generally I would say keep it as is with minor tweaks as the ecosystem changes.

Ed


Hi Ed,

You'd have to add AoTF to #4, as it's also part of the non-expiring TE recipe.

Regarding #3, if a token is unbalancing, a functional reprint would be equally unbalancing, as it would basically be a different name on a token with the same function (like leather armor and animal hide armor). I think you're thinking more of a variation of a UR.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #45

Joshua Baessler wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.


I think my idea is fair. Include the reprinted UR's in current year Legendary transmutes. New players would still be able to acquire the UR just like they can now via $250 orders, lucky pulls from 10 packs, treasure draws, etc.
"Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view" - Obi Wan Kenobi

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #46

Rob F wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.


I think my idea is fair. Include the reprinted UR's in current year Legendary transmutes. New players would still be able to acquire the UR just like they can now via $250 orders, lucky pulls from 10 packs, treasure draws, etc.


Are you basically just wanting to extend what happened this year with the Charm of Synergy (needed for Legendary Redoubt Shield)? Or am I missing your point?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #47

Rob F wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.


I think my idea is fair. Include the reprinted UR's in current year Legendary transmutes. New players would still be able to acquire the UR just like they can now via $250 orders, lucky pulls from 10 packs, treasure draws, etc.


I agree, it has merit. Pull them out of circulation and thereby maintain or increase demand is much better than "make them pay triple because the market says it's worth $300."

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

On Reprint URs 6 years 7 months ago #48

Fiddy wrote:

Rob F wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote: If you don't want a reprint, come up with a functional replacement (Gloves of the Brute = Mithral Gauntlets) or convince everyone a reprint would be detrimental to game balance.


Neither of these solves the problem (fiscal concerns of new and existing collectors misaligned).

Creating a functional replacement craters the value of the original just as effectively as a reprint (moreso in many cases, ask anyone who owned a UR +2 weapon before the Viper Strike Fang).

Arguing that a classic token can't be reprinted due to balance reasons is I think disingenuous, if it's so bad it should be nerfed or errated. Simply keeping a broken token with those who got there first does not make for a good situation in the player base.


You're missing my point and that quote is being used out of context.

The intended point was "find another reason other than your money" to avoid reprints.

Everything you're suggesting comes across as "screw over the small collectors to protect my investment." All I'm reading is how this benefits you and other resellers.

Do you have a suggestion that is mutually beneficial?

I am aggressively against new players being charged more or having less of a chance to get a reprinted UR just because a handful of people (albeit large spenders) do not want their collection to lose value. It's wildly unfair. Tokens exist for people to play True Dungeon with. Not as an investment vehicle.

The only thing I've read anyone say that sounds even remotely fair is place UR reprints on a cycle so that everyone knows when they're coming back again. Resellers can enjoy a little appreciation for a few years and new players aren't hosed out of ever getting older tokens at a normal price.


I think my idea is fair. Include the reprinted UR's in current year Legendary transmutes. New players would still be able to acquire the UR just like they can now via $250 orders, lucky pulls from 10 packs, treasure draws, etc.


Are you basically just wanting to extend what happened this year with the Charm of Synergy (needed for Legendary Redoubt Shield)? Or am I missing your point?


Yep the CoS is a good example. New players have access to it at reasonable prices but it's value should hold a bit more since it's part of a recipe for a Token that can always be transmuted (Legendary). What's also nice is that players can use the UR reprints from any year for the Legendary which makes it more economical when looking for the ingredients. Just look at how the prices of the +2 Sacred Sling and +2 Drow Blood Mace have shot up recently.
"Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view" - Obi Wan Kenobi

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.096 seconds