Bahram's Lottery draw-system change plz

[ByFstugan]

Congratz o slotkit for not only winning coins two weeks in a row, but also this second week win both lottery alone. This post is not to try to make that win void, but a suggestion for future draws.

This is a suggestion to make some extra limitations to the lottery each week.

I'd like to suggest that if you win one lottery one week you are not in the draw for the other. There are few winners each week as it is. This became extra silly when he now won 3 out of 4 draws last two weeks. I don't think it should be impossible to win two weeks in a row, but perhaps to win the SAME kind of price two weeks in a row as well as winning both same week.

So - there are two suggestions here:
1) Make it not possible to win BOTH prices SAME week.
2) Make it not possible to win SAME price two weeks in a ROW.
*But everyone can win something each week then ofc

[EDIT:]
Due to good input from other players and more reflections I wanna do additional suggestions to changes to Bahram's lottery, but this ones is for other reasons than the main ones above! Reasons for them is explained in a post I copied them from on page 2 of this thread.

AND - NEW suggestions due to making the silly amount of coins switch hand faster:
3) Remove the max 1500 tokens per week and change it to 10'000 instead.
4) Add a max 1500 limit to the tickets instead.

AND - another suggestion to add to balance the gear:
5) Also boost the bow and make it have 3 bonuses, and make the 3rd also benefit TC so give it a "Train/Research-bonus".
6) Also give the "Branded Arm Guard" gauntlets a 3rd positive bonus, not sure what, maybe a small crit bonus since the damage bonus isn't that much higher than the boots.
[/EDIT]

 

[frogs.poison]

Top players are still making buckets of coins, coin is exiting the lower tier playerbase at a higher rate then the top according to the last post I could find from Andy on the topic - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/234105032381825024/861964322355150858/unknown.png

This makes sense, as the top players play more, get many more legendaries that they can't use, and then sell those legendaries to the lesser geared playerbase who absolutely CAN use those items.

Personally, I would outright remove the coin reward from being awarded to any player with more then 1.5 mil coins on their account, but bump up their chances of winning the gear. That, or bump up the number of weekly tokens you can acquire to the full 10k tokens, causing the top to completely sink their coins into the Lottery for a few weeks (If the wealth was evenly distributed along the top 10, they could actually do this a full 10 weeks in a row for 10 Bahram items total). As it stands, the top 100 players do NOT need more coins at this point of the game, they need better gear. And the bottom 10k players need prices to come down so they can actually gear up and play, which can only happen once there is no longer anywhere near as much coin in circulation.

I would also HEAVILY punish players who intentionally flip items by directly removing the coin thy would have got for the flipped priace. Buying items being sold for cheap and then selling it for higher, while a good business practice, has likely been a large contributer to the current extreme wealth inequality in the game. Items should be bought to be used, not to be resold later.

 

[Donar]

Yea thats a bitter taste. Good ideas here. My idea is: Make the chances of winning increase lower with the more tickets you get like: 100 tickets is way better then 1 but 400 tickets is not 4x the chance of 100 tickets. It will still increase by a little bit but not as much as in the lower segments of ticket amount.

Player, who can effort 1.5m into tickets win and can invest again 1.5m etc. creating a "game of numbers" like i quote from yesterday.

Tbh: I like the baharm gear but maybe it would be better to make it buyable like for 7m in a store and complete stop lottery since its a mischief maker in my eyes.

 

[ByFstugan]

I don't want this to turn to some communist-manifesto idea now, I think the lottery should stay a lottery and we should not punish rich players for being rich. I wanna be clear that I'm not and have never been rich myself, I've just once as I recall had 2M+ at same time and always have to sell of my best gear in storage to be able to get 1.5M for tickets each week (except for some weeks after I won the lottery @22M, which was a short time where I due to that had an exception from my max 2M coins, but now I'm poor again).

That said. I really like the idea about making the max tokens per week be increased to 10K instead, that would make it possible for the silly rich to spread their wealth faster. If anything should be limited it's the max amount tickets for the lottery so you shouldn't be able to buy to big advantage for the win. In this I'm prepared to compromise a bit to what I otherwise say here, but then in a way that it's volentary for them to spend more than 1.5M for tickets and buy more token without any ticket's recived. But we don't want the rich players to feel their tickets don't value as others and hence scare them away from the lottery, that's a loss for all others.

The lottery and the coin price for sure is a brilliant idea if devs see the need of a coin-sink, and to have an incitament for that to work I think coins speaks volumes for most players that the majority would concider "rich".

However, the suggestions I made is so that not to much should be able to land in same pockets/possession from week to week, hence my suggestions for not being able to win same price two weeks in a row (but you can still win each week) and not being able to win both prices same week (which I thought was impossible, but seems not). This I think is an very fair and logical suggestion, and I don't think most winners would disagree to that either.

About the "Game of numbers". If the pot is 20M and you put in 1.5M and get 1500 tickets you got about 3.75% chance to win coins (40M/1.5M=0,0375), and same amount to win the gear - so in total 7,5% chance to win anything. I have won both prices once, and when I did first time I had put in 20M in total first, which make it clear that you don't win easy just because you put in max amount. I also know another week when I talked to another winner that it was a guy who had put in just 100 tickets, so you can win even if not putting in much.

 

[Slyrevick]

I started saving coins months ago to eventually buy a gear.

Now that I passed the 10 millions mark,
I'm not willing to buy any tickets...

By the time, i got addicted to saving coins

 

[ByFstugan]

I started saving coins months ago to eventually buy a gear.

Now that I passed the 10 millions mark,
I'm not willing to buy any tickets...

By the time, i got addicted to saving coins

I understand how it can get so, but also - if you invest all in tickets you will for sure have a Bahram in 7 weeks time, and when you got that on your first civ and play it you will think: "So worth it!". And if you're lucky you win a gear before or even more coins than you have now - but even if you don't you end up a winner each time you start a game with the Bahram geared civ ^^

 

[purpleganja]

I would suggest more smaller prizes instead of one jackpot if anything was going to change.
Gear would be the real jackpot and many other lots to spread the coins back into the economy.
And why not some prizes in tokens to help get to 10k faster.

 

[frogs.poison]

I don't want this to turn to some communist-manifesto idea now, I think the lottery should stay a lottery and we should not punish rich players for being rich. I wanna be clear that I'm not and have never been rich myself, I've just once as I recall had 2M+ at same time and always have to sell of my best gear in storage to be able to get 1.5M for tickets each week (except for some weeks after I won the lottery @22M, which was a short time where I due to that had an exception from my max 2M coins, but now I'm poor again).

That said. I really like the idea about making the max tokens per week be increased to 10K instead, that would make it possible for the silly rich to spread their wealth faster. If anything should be limited it's the max amount tickets for the lottery so you shouldn't be able to buy to big advantage for the win. In this I'm prepared to compromise a bit to what I otherwise say here, but then in a way that it's volentary for them to spend more than 1.5M for tickets and buy more token without any ticket's recived. But we don't want the rich players to feel their tickets don't value as others and hence scare them away from the lottery, that's a loss for all others.

The lottery and the coin price for sure is a brilliant idea if devs see the need of a coin-sink, and to have an incitament for that to work I think coins speaks volumes for most players that the majority would concider "rich".

However, the suggestions I made is so that not to much should be able to land in same pockets/possession from week to week, hence my suggestions for not being able to win same price two weeks in a row (but you can still win each week) and not being able to win both prices same week (which I thought was impossible, but seems not). This I think is an very fair and logical suggestion, and I don't think most winners would disagree to that either.

About the "Game of numbers". If the pot is 20M and you put in 1.5M and get 1500 tickets you got about 3.75% chance to win coins (40M/1.5M=0,0375), and same amount to win the gear - so in total 7,5% chance to win anything. I have won both prices once, and when I did first time I had put in 20M in total first, which make it clear that you don't win easy just because you put in max amount. I also know another week when I talked to another winner that it was a guy who had put in just 100 tickets, so you can win even if not putting in much.

Have you been able to put in 1.5 mil each week for the Bahrams tokens? If not, have you ever failed to put in less then 500k coins?

 

[ByFstugan]

Have you been able to put in 1.5 mil each week for the Bahrams tokens? If not, have you ever failed to put in less then 500k coins?

This really isn't a topic for the thread. But if you really wanna know I started on 500k per week and had to start sell best stuff in storage kind of things to get 1.5M per week later on, and was just barely made it (one sell a day to late would been fail). Since I have no work now I've put effort to it, and I had not been able to if working. But I never said I was very poor, just that I have no history of being rich, and with that I meant rich for real (as the guys in top in Andy's mess) - my level was specified.

 

[ByFstugan]

I would suggest more smaller prizes instead of one jackpot if anything was going to change.
Gear would be the real jackpot and many other lots to spread the coins back into the economy.
And why not some prizes in tokens to help get to 10k faster.

I asked when Bahrams was released that they spread out the winnings amoung a number of people, but that was not to "Bahram's" pleasing, so I think they want an easy layout on the thing. Hence my suggestion was very simple. Make it so once player can't win both same week or same price two weeks in a row - so that the few that wins at least alternate a tiny bit more than now, which last weeks was close to silly.

An extra price in tokens I think was a nice idea though - there is ALOT of coins going out, and not so much stuff coming in, so I doubt it would ruin anything.

 

[Donar]

Have you been able to put in 1.5 mil each week for the Bahrams tokens? If not, have you ever failed to put in less then 500k coins?

He's not rich won't you understand? jk

 

[purpleganja]

Yeah, any change can have an effect on the economy, so I understand if an easy layout is prefered. Even adding prize tokens would have an impact on gear's worth.


I was looking at the top coins stats and found it funny that every weeks i must be shifting between the lower tiers since im a "poor" high spender. I must screw the data by getting and sinking tons of coins while keeping so few.
There must be many players who do that.

 

[ByFstugan]

I was looking at the top coins stats and found it funny that every weeks i must be shifting between the lower tiers since im a "poor" high spender. I must screw the data by getting and sinking tons of coins while keeping so few.
There must be many players who do that.

I like that wording "a poor high spender", that's what I might be called also I think. I do however have alot of good gear not bound, so I have to sell so I could be rich, also wanna save it for later civs (and also got many places to improve my own on if I don't want to move around gear each new quest with different strats).

However, I might be not good enough in english here - can you explain more detailed what you said here, I fell I don't understand exactly what U R saying. Like this:

"shifting between the lower tiers" = ?
"I must screw the data = ?

I also feel I play mostly to get coins where half of them will be "sinked" now, so I feel we might play alot alike at the moment

 

[purpleganja]

I fell I don't understand exactly what U R saying. Like this:

"shifting between the lower tiers" = ?
"I must screw the data = ?

By that I mean that each week I sell stuff and I must get up in the 501 to 1000 rank and when I buy my 1500 tokens or other stuff, I fall down in the 1001 to 10000 rank.
That is based on my estimation of how much players have in those rank and I could be completely wrong.

This can make it look like a "poor" player is spending more than a "rich" player even tho I can't be considered poor since I have almost everything I could possibly want and the means to keep getting more.

I guess I'm saying that there are low coins players that are not poor among the lower tiers and we must be careful when analyzing it.

 

[frogs.poison]

This really isn't a topic for the thread. But if you really wanna know I started on 500k per week and had to start sell best stuff in storage kind of things to get 1.5M per week later on, and was just barely made it (one sell a day to late would been fail). Since I have no work now I've put effort to it, and I had not been able to if working. But I never said I was very poor, just that I have no history of being rich, and with that I meant rich for real (as the guys in top in Andy's mess) - my level was specified.

ByFstugan, while you do have to put in the work, that you can even afford to dump 1.5 mil puts you solidly in the top 100, if not even the top 50.

Hell, what was it, I think that only 20-something players have been putting 1.5 mil on a weekly basis, I'd have to look that up.

But even though you may not have that much coin banked up, you are still part of the top 1% of the playerbase in terms of overall wealth.

 

[Donar]

Well if someone plays a lot, means a doing a huge time investment, it is certain to have good / maxed gear or lots of coins. Just the fact saying like "I'm not rich, but putting 1.5m each week into the lottery" is bit disputed, without this the tread could be about a
draw-system change lol

 

[bbgambini]

I dont think "rich" players should get banned or forced to skip a week. If your 10 tickets did not make you a winner, dont take it out on the guy playing the max tickets.

 

[purpleganja]

We must understand that the person playing for max token who wins both draws the same day also lost 1498 time that day.

 

[ByFstugan]

ByFstugan, while you do have to put in the work, that you can even afford to dump 1.5 mil puts you solidly in the top 100, if not even the top 50.

Hell, what was it, I think that only 20-something players have been putting 1.5 mil on a weekly basis, I'd have to look that up.

But even though you may not have that much coin banked up, you are still part of the top 1% of the playerbase in terms of overall wealth.

Well - still this has nothing with the topic to do, but since you're still on it and want to portrait me as rich far beyond anything I've ever been, let's put the numbers here. As I've said it's been a rule that I haven't had 2M+ more than once (beside some weeks after I won), besides that I very rarely had 1M+ during any extent of time. The list of top wealthiest as Andy posted is like this translated to real numbers:

Top 10: Average about 99M each
Top 11-25 (15 ppl): Average about 40M each
Top 26-100 (75 ppl): Average almost 11M each
Top 101-500 (400 ppl): Average 3M each
Top 501-1000 (500ppl): Average 944k each
Top 1001-10000 (9k ppl): Average 85k each

So you claim I'm top 100 or even top 50. But according to this list I never been top 500 even and lightyears from being top 100. I might be in the top 5% at best I'd say, but I think even that is an optimistic value. As I've said - I really struggle and sell best stuff from my vault to get the 1.5M each week (wich I only made to 500k first bunch of weeks when I not sold my best stuff from vault). But I also said I wasn't poor. I've played and been active for long and I'm a bit of a hamster, so I got plenty stuff.

But if it's 20 or even less that put in 1.5 per week I'm not one of them since I didn't first 4-5 weeks or whatever it was - but besides that I later made it my top 1 priority to do it since and anyone who didn't that is far richer than me will not be in such list of people. So that number has low relevance since it with ease could be 500 or more if people made it a priority; hence it's not about that "20 people CAN" do it, but choosen to do it. If that's even a correct number, which also is irrelevant.

You also got to realize since you want to add my gear in storage to the calculation of my wealth that the guys sitting with 3M+ and 11M+ and even more in coins on their accounts for sure most of them got gear in par or better than mine. And that's the top 500 players, which is about 4-5% of the total I'd assume.

However - as said - this has nothing to do with that I think it's better if one player can't win both prices same week or should be able to win same price two weeks in a row. I think it's a fair balance to have such limitation - especially "not win both prices same week". I'm hoping some dev reads this post and take note of the suggestion. Bahram - where are you?

 

[Andy P XIII]

We fully expected rich players to have more coins than poor people, to have fewer things left to buy than poor people, to spend more coins buying lottery tickets than poor people, and thus to win the lottery more frequently than poor people. I’m not sure what we expected is any different than what we are observing.