Snow Globe

The thing is that most people look for my posts about new badges and while you did attribute it, you've basically didn't bring anything to the list.

You should have let me post it seeing it was my work, not yours.

TPN:

• Are the objectives clear on the map? No.
• Is clear what to do in each stage? No.
• Can a PUG who never done this figure this out in a few tries? I doubt it.
• Can the civilians 1-shot an Incarnate Character? Yes.
• Can the AV 1-shot anyone on the other side of the battle? Yes.
• Can either the civilians or the AV 1-shot players exiting the hospital? Yes.
• Was there any feedback or changes to the trial after November 10, 2011? No.
• Was there any changes to the trial after October 28? No.
• Does the trial have the potential of failure due to having the "wrong" type of player characters in the "wrong" area? Yes.
• Does succeeding depend on reading out of game guides? yes.

The above are all questions answered incorrectly for the trial to be released on the live servers.

They didn't appear to change anything from the October 28, 2011 patch. So what, exactly, was changed?

On Triumph, yes, Keyes is being run almost (if not more) than BAF. Underground? No, it still isn't being run during prime time more than a couple times a week.

Well, I was going to post it here.

The last feedback they got on the TPN was Novemeber 10, 2011 (Feedback: TPN Campus Incarnate Trial)

The overwhelming feedback at the time was that the TPN was a confused mess that needed to be reworked. Does that, in any shape or form, sound remotely positive?

The auto-kill mechanics, the trial literally bypasses the 1-shot code (from civilians no less), to the numerous ways to screw up the trial means that no matter what rewards the trial gives out that it isn't worth my time to form.

Even those that like the trial say it was a confusing mess.

The general populace will do exactly what they do now with the Keyes (though this is now getting run thanks to the changes on November 10) & Underground Trials: Players will avoid the new trials because they aren't worth the hassle. Players are STILL avoiding the Underground on Triumph and I don't see that changing.

So, given all that, why the heck are they releasing these pancake-fests without changes? Are the developer's that masochistic?

I'm sad that I can't say exactly what I want to say to him. I know I would get mod-smacked until next year for doing so. At this point though, I think I'm going to just put him on ignore for a while.

Exactly.

So the TPN is going live with no changes, with all the feedback from late October ignored. Congratulations, you've managed to make an Incarnate Trial I will not run.

Yeah, I'm betting (see, I don't need to expect monetary transaction to gamble!) that we'll see complaints about how much they'll cost and that there will be adjustments made. If I feel the costs are too much I might add my voice to those complaints.

Quite frankly, no one but you cares to apply as strict standard to the definition of "Coupon Collector's Problem". At this point you are just tilting at windmills.

We don't need to be taught about this problem to understand that we don't like paying real money for random virtual items.

You're right, after this post I'll ignore what you say if you get excessively stringent on the problem.

As a long time computer programmer I can simulate, with a high degree of accuracy, the Coupon Collector Problem. No matter what method you might think the game is acting like, the code will obey Coupon Collector Problem definition before presenting the results to the player.

I did. To everyone but you that illustration fits the Super Pack situation. Outside a classroom, the Coupon Collector Problem can't exist by your standards. It is impossible to exist in the real world by your standards. Your standards are so precise that it leaves no room for practical application. As such you are not talking about what everyone else is.

Like I said, you are arguing theory without realizing it can't exist in the real world by your definition.

That is all I have to say about the Coupon Collector's Problem and your take on it.

Yes, and it tanked hard. Financially.

Yes, I have. It doesn't change my assessment of the Super Packs.

The second point isn't true. If the super pack contains a couple inspirations, a windfall, and reward merits, it would contain absolutely nothing of value to me. With a Collectible Card Game, I'd at least have a piece of cardstock with some artwork.

At that point, I'm gambling with real money hoping to get the virtual items I do want, and getting more items I don't want.

I have a close family member that is addicted to gambling. I know intimately the significance of the term. The exact same characteristics are present in people that these packs are aimed at. In other words, money doesn't have to change hands for it to be gambling.

I'm glad I quit M:TG with Ice Age.

People don't want to pay real money for a gamble on virtual items. However it goes deeper than that. The packs were made to entice more money from VIPs than their subscription. They were designed to make players buy what they weren't buying before: consumable items. Zwillinger said as much:
The problem is that the consumables aren't incentive enough for players to buy them. So they targeted VIPs with items they wanted to get (ATOs and costumes) and put them in with the consumables. Players called them out on it.

I first started computer programming in 1982. I've developed computer programs that are similar to the Super Packs. I've spent thousands of dollars on collectible card games. I don't really have to assume anything as experience has provided lessons as to what will happen. From those lessons, I know that I will avoid the packs. From those lessons, I know what will happen to others that will go after the items in the packs.

You currently have to set that yourself.

See this thread: Want to show off your VIP awesomeness on the forums?

This surprises you how?

-------------

Zwillinger, please suggest to the people in charge to enact a scorched-earth policy where the forums are separated from the game accounts (entirely) and put back up with no add-ins.

Put the character copy tool in the account management (in or out of game).

Require a separate login to the forums, not the same as the game account.

I think that is what the extra 150 points are for being a Tier 9 VIP. They are an additional discount on purchases.

Why would anyone want my head?

Oh, okay.

Yeah, I'd likely get one too.

What you are not getting is that it is close enough. It doesn't have to be exact. That the packs follow a subset of the problem, and that the packs can be accurately described by the Coupon Collector's Problem (yes, you can determine exactly how long until you get at least 1 of everything using that definition).

And that fits. There are over 200 things, and you can use that problem to determine either the full item list OR use the principle until such time you get the subset of the items you want. In this case the math is much more flexible than you are.

Well that is something we agree on. The fact that you are going on and on about it is increasingly pedantic (I'd suggest you look it up, but I think you know what it means).

You don't program much, huh? The base algorithm will be able to be accurately described with the the proof. There is a layer above/below/between the game and the user to change results though. If player's suggestion that the parts be able to be traded, that layer would have to disappear and we are back to it being a pure subset of the Coupon Collector's Problem.

I suggest you read this:

Isaac, Richard (1995), "8.4 The coupon collector's problem solved", The Pleasures of Probability, Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 80–82, ISBN 0-387-94415-X, MR1329545.

The book uses the example of trading cards (Baseball cards to be exact). The fact the items can be traded or not makes no difference to the problem.

You have a more strict definition of the problem than an undergraduate textbook, which means I can safely ignore your opinion.

Yes:

Seeing that you are coming into this late, I suggest you read all 1,200+ posts in the following thread for the background on this issue:
The UNofficial Super Pack Feedback Thread

Short form: It is gambling with real money to get the stuff a player wants with a fairly good chance to be disappointed. The packs have items that directly appeal to VIPs to convince them to buy the packs. Many of us have been through several Collectible Card Games and don't want any part of it here.

Players are, justifiably, saying that by doing so Paragon Studios is targeting VIPs in a predatory manner. I don't think anyone denied that the original idea would sell (and often). The issue was if they were going to sell in a manner that didn't feed on addiction.

And there was already a assured rare or very rare per pack.

Yes. Some sets I, personally, wouldn't want more than one set of ATOs. I have a finite amount of characters, therefore I want a finite amount of sets.

However take a premium account: 2 global slots. That means 2 character, likely 2 different ATs. That player would want a finite amount of sets.

Now you are deliberately trying to be antagonistic though. By a strict definition, the game cheats the Coupon Collector's Problem on costumes. It doesn't cheat the ATOs fitting the Coupon Collector's Problem at all. You are trying to do what you are accusing others of doing.

The Coupon Collector's Problem doesn't care if a collector wants more than one set or not. It is only about getting one complete set. A single ATO set fits that precise definition, even by your standards no matter how much you want to deny it.

Well I'm not going to accuse you of trolling, but I am going to say that you are intentionally trying to miss the point. You'd also fail miserably when trying to do the math.

Actually it fits.

Say the costumes were numbered (made up numbers for example) 1-20, the ATOs were 21-121, and boosts were 122-216.

The first pack you get 14, 75, 180, 152, 210.

We've been told that 14 (costume) will be prevented from being given to the player again.

So the next roll comes up with 14, 76, 182, 145, 204. Wait, 14 was a costume and picked before. So the computer picks a new number, thus fudging the roll to prevent the same costume from being picked again.

The packs are still following the "Coupon Collector's Problem", but intentionally fudging the rolls to prevent duplicate costumes. This is a common practice when programming with RNGs because they do tend to be not completely and truly random.

In the case of the ATOs, they exactly fit the definition above (including the ability to get multiples) even by your precise standards. Even with the announced changes, the ATOs in the Super Packs are an example of the "Coupon Collector's Problem". The costumes are still subject to the same problem, except the game is explicitly cheating in favor of the player when duplicates arise.

No, it is a semantics issue, not a math issue. It shows that you are superficially looking at the definition and not what is actually happening.