TOPIC: Run Profit Calculator

Endgame wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: @Matthew - I’m not surprised we have large areas of agreement. We both try to be logical. If we start from different sets of assumptions we get different conclusions, but we’re willing to discuss things rationally. I try to keep my frustration in check, but sometimes it pokes its nose out.

Matthew Hayward wrote: Did you actually fill in values to get to $100 profit on 6 tickets - or was that just an example?

Mostly a ROM example, but using your data. $3.25/TC (lowering fees for forum trades) * 23 - $58 ( Origins ticket) = about $17 profit per ticket, times 6 (player plus 5 ghosts) = $100. Ish. Not counting 10 packs, or completion buttons and tokens.

Brad, aren't we at 21 max TC and not 23?

Oops. Fair catch. I was thinking 23 two years from now with the third Nugget.

So, per ticket: minus 6.50, plus 5 for a 10-pack (discounted price), plus 1.50 for completion tokens (I think that’s reasonable: some are worth $10, some worth $1 or less).

Making those adjustments, it’s still about $100 considering everything. Two years from now, closer to $150.

It’s meant to be a Rough Order of Magnitude anyway. We can quibble about a buck or two one way or the other, but that’s missing the point.

Just cap ghosts at 14 TCs at non-GENCON conventions - problem solved.

Or, maybe cap TCs at all convention's for ghosts at ticket price divided by four, rounded down. Problem solved

Or, stop raising the max loot cap for everyone, so that farmers can’t scam a workaround. Problem REALLY solved

It might solve that problem but create new ones, like all the Token purchases that might not happen because people are at the cap

What percentage of token buyers are there that have CoA, Ring of Riches, or Charm of Good Fortune? Would TD HQ even notice a drop in TE purchases if there was a reprint or functional reprint of Ring of Riches and Charm of Good Fortune? My guess is, by the time the Platnium Nugget is OOP, it won't even be noticeable that the oldest players aren't buying the TE reprints.

I don't have the number of course, but there are a lot of CoA in circulation, and I'd think nearly all CoA owners also have the two nuggets.

If we start reprinting UR TEs, I agree that the first reprinting of RoR and CoGF will still have significant sales. Less than a brand new one, but significant. After that, I think any reprintings of those or the nuggets would have significantly reduced sales due to the quantities already in print. Plus, I think resellers would buy far fewer if they know reprints are going to be done.

Mike Steele wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: It might solve that problem but create new ones, like all the Token purchases that might not happen because people are at the cap

That is just being silly. Did people buy tokens before there were TE's? Did they buy them in the years between HoP and RoR? Between RoR and CoGF? You can debate the impact they have on sales but don't start off with saying that token purchased might not happen or I cannot take anything you say as serious.

I think you're the one being silly now. Clearly I'm not saying token sales would go to zero, but they would almost certainly go down, which would impact the TD overall revenue.

"like all the Token purchases that might not happen."
Clearly you don't know what you are saying.

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: It might solve that problem but create new ones, like all the Token purchases that might not happen because people are at the cap

That is just being silly. Did people buy tokens before there were TE's? Did they buy them in the years between HoP and RoR? Between RoR and CoGF? You can debate the impact they have on sales but don't start off with saying that token purchased might not happen or I cannot take anything you say as serious.

I think you're the one being silly now. Clearly I'm not saying token sales would go to zero, but they would almost certainly go down, which would impact the TD overall revenue.

"like all the Token purchases that might not happen."
Clearly you don't know what you are saying.

People purchasing TE URs that won't purchase them if they are already at the cap. Not people cancelling their entire token orders.

Matt’s original post was academic, he wasn’t advocating professional TD players for profit.

I do think we have a treasure enhancer problem, though. We are up to 21 draws, 23 next year. The average player will get 3 or 4. In order for Jeff to stimulate direct token sales, the percentage of UR’s, etc has to remain relatively static (and we have seen that for years). Now, the average player has almost no chance of getting a big item that would get them hooked. If your odds at Gencon (the worst odds of any con) to draw an UR are 0.5% this year, adding another 2 draws to a third to half of the players means the overall draw rate will be reduced to 0.4% or lower.

Over the past 3-5 years, we have effectively made it less likely for new players to draw anything great that could excite them to start building around their shiny new UR or Relic. I don’t have the old data but I bet the odds dropped by more than half. Even for forum players not at CoA level, this means you get less out of runs.

I have two solutions, though:
1. A treasure box for players with +3 or less TE’s (thinking of this year’s relic)(I think +3 would be the max - correct me if I am wrong). This box is built with higher rates or UR+’s to be at least 50% better than what really built out players see. Essentially, this is for players in their first 1-2 years before spending much. Make drawing from that box also require successfully completing the run at normal or more (otherwise, they get our dregs box ).
2. No more new TE’s after this year. Allow the newer TE’s to be an alternative path to CoA. I know Zjeff said that wasn’t the plan but he should reconsider. Yes, it lowers the secondary market for CoA. We’d survive it. More importantly, it helps with the problem now of old guard players at power levels and TE levels most players can’t get close to without spending a lot of money. I would like to see us get to where someone playing for 5-7 years spending $1k on tokens per year plus actively trading is at 95% of the power curve of the more veteran players. Keep in mind, I am not that demographic. I have the resources to just pay secondary market rates for whatever build I want (if the tokens are available - really old items can’t seem to be found at any realistic price).

The discussion we should have is how to kerp the TE creep and power creep from impacting new and developing players.

Fred

Mike Steele wrote: People purchasing TE URs that won't purchase them if they are already at the cap. Not people cancelling their entire token orders.

That is not what you said, but I will accept it might have been what you meant. So then you agree they may buy other tokens. Like whenever we do a reprint, someone already have the token may not buy that one but may purchase a different token.

Fred K wrote: If your odds at Gencon (the worst odds of any con) to draw an UR are 0.5% this year, adding another 2 draws to a third to half of the players means the overall draw rate will be reduced to 0.4% or lower.Fred

Is it true that the chance of getting an UR is different depending on the con? Why would that be? Shouldn't the odds be the same regardless of the con (there are just more tokens being drawn at some cons compared to others)?

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: People purchasing TE URs that won't purchase them if they are already at the cap. Not people cancelling their entire token orders.

That is not what you said, but I will accept it might have been what you meant. So then you agree they may buy other tokens. Like whenever we do a reprint, someone already have the token may not buy that one but may purchase a different token.

Plus we’re operating in at least three more conversations, and a (conservatively) doubling of the player base. And people who used to play at GC are shifting some of their demand to other cons, freeing up tickets at GC (which continue to sell out.)

The game isn’t static. I would wager that token sales will continue to sell briskly, with it without stackable TEs, because the base is growing.

It’s why I hate when anyone tries to use token sales as a justification for “moar greed!” What was true three years ago is no longer reality. We just don’t know. Jeff does. Unless sales-related points come from Jeff, I ignore them completely.

John Franczyk wrote:

Fred K wrote: If your odds at Gencon (the worst odds of any con) to draw an UR are 0.5% this year, adding another 2 draws to a third to half of the players means the overall draw rate will be reduced to 0.4% or lower.Fred

Is it true that the chance of getting an UR is different depending on the con? Why would that be? Shouldn't the odds be the same regardless of the con (there are just more tokens being drawn at some cons compared to others)?

Not from that I have seen. It is about the same at Origins .33 and Gen Con .3. At GHC it was only .2 but I think that might have been because of too little data. Not sure where Fred K is getting his .5 number from.

I also question whether half or even a third of all players have UR TE. Maybe they do but it would surprise me.

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: People purchasing TE URs that won't purchase them if they are already at the cap. Not people cancelling their entire token orders.

That is not what you said, but I will accept it might have been what you meant. So then you agree they may buy other tokens. Like whenever we do a reprint, someone already have the token may not buy that one but may purchase a different token.

I don't agree that 100% of the time people would just buy something else instead. I think some percentage of the sales that would have been for the TE UR just won't happen. I know my PYP purchases (which translate to token sales) would have been significantly lower.

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree that 100% of the time people would just buy something else instead. I think some percentage of the sales that would have been for the TE UR just won't happen. I know my PYP purchases (which translate to token sales) would have been significantly lower.

I will agree it might slow an individual token buyer, same as a reprint might. But whether it affects overall sales neither of us can say. As far as you personally buying less, can you say that without even knowing what the other tokens are?
I hope you would agree that if it was determined for the good of TD that there should be a cap by Jeff (not saying he will or won't) that you would support said cap. I did say support, not necessarily agree with.

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree that 100% of the time people would just buy something else instead. I think some percentage of the sales that would have been for the TE UR just won't happen. I know my PYP purchases (which translate to token sales) would have been significantly lower.

I will agree it might slow an individual token buyer, same as a reprint might. But whether it affects overall sales neither of us can say. As far as you personally buying less, can you say that without even knowing what the other tokens are?
I hope you would agree that if it was determined for the good of TD that there should be a cap by Jeff (not saying he will or won't) that you would support said cap.

I'm surprised you think it might have no effect on overall sales. The amount of effect is debatable, but it seems reasonable that it's more than zero.

I've said in the past, and I'll say again, that I'll support Jeff's decision no matter what it is. I'm fine if he thinks he needs to keep making new TE URs with no cap, I'm fine if he wants to make new ones but have a cap, and I'm fine if he wants to go 100% reprints after the Platinum Nugget. I'm fine if he stops making UR TEs entirely after the 2025 TE UR.

Whichever decision Jeff thinks is in the best interest of TD, I'll support.

Would you support additional TE URs with no cap if Jeff thinks that's the best approach for TD?

Brad Mortensen wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: People purchasing TE URs that won't purchase them if they are already at the cap. Not people cancelling their entire token orders.

That is not what you said, but I will accept it might have been what you meant. So then you agree they may buy other tokens. Like whenever we do a reprint, someone already have the token may not buy that one but may purchase a different token.

Plus we’re operating in at least three more conversations, and a (conservatively) doubling of the player base. And people who used to play at GC are shifting some of their demand to other cons, freeing up tickets at GC (which continue to sell out.)

The game isn’t static. I would wager that token sales will continue to sell briskly, with it without stackable TEs, because the base is growing.

It’s why I hate when anyone tries to use token sales as a justification for “moar greed!” What was true three years ago is no longer reality. We just don’t know. Jeff does. Unless sales-related points come from Jeff, I ignore them completely.

You realize you just made sales related points in the same post where you said you will ignore them completely.