Thank you for your input Carapace.
Maybe the issue is that devs haven't fully accounted for psychological and social effects that exceedingly low odds have on players collectively? If we, individually, can't be a hero, then why are we playing the game? If my individual efforts are extremely likely to yield negative results in perpetuity, then what motive do I have to attempt that feat? Players don't want an oversupply, but we also don't want to literally-impossible odds.
AL's odds model strongly affects player activity because the transaction cost (time+money) is extremely high. In Vegas, slot machines have impossible odds, but they are still attractive because the effort needed to play is minimal: place bet, pull lever, done. These days it takes less than a second per transaction.
AL's equivalent slot machine requires us to run something akin to a marathon each time we pull the lever. This is exactly what I mean about players-as-a-group thinking: if the odds don't justify individual runs, individuals won't attempt. Thoroughly considering the individual's perspective will help you make better decisions about players collectively. That group of players choosing
not to attempt to farm the Antignome set will only grow as the extremely low odds become more apparent through personal experience and social communications. Shouldn't one of the devs' top priorities be player participation?
In basic economics, undersupply and oversupply are equally serious states. What is the actual equilibrium? I don't know, but I do know disequilibrium is what we have right now.
Bookmarks