Basis For the Idea to Increase Bid Caps to 30/35 with Analysis of the Current State of our Einherjar Micro-economy

There has been some concern over equilibrium in our current points system and problems with the determination of what caps should be set, so I'm going to briefly go through some statistics.

It is found that on average over the 3rd Quarter, we generated 24.25 attendance points (currency) on average during each run including both increases and decreases in points. Keep in mind that some former attendees were removed because they were at 0 or fewer points. These people do not have any net effect on the overall point generation as their points totaled 0 when they were removed from the sheet. This is also not accounting for purchases made by lot winners from the first Odin. This means that in any given month, we can expect to generate a total of 196 attendance points.

Odin drops as follows. We will assume that no significant drops occur in the lower chambers, even though it is expected that such will occasionally happen:

# Kings abju (100%) Currently 15 points
# Body abju, Odin or kings (100%) 15 or 20 points (formula 15 * n1 + 20 * (1-n1) where n1 is a probability weight in favor of lesser abjurations)
# Odin abju (100%) 20 points
# Random abju (not 100%) 15 points (formula 15 * n2 where n2 is the probability of receiving this drop not accounting for high-tier items)
# Odin Item (Spear, Sword, Helm, Body) (not 100%) 20 points (formula 20 * n3 where n3 is the probability of receiving this drop)

So the total points consumed per Odin Run is:

15 + (15n1 + 20(1-n1)) + 20 + 15n2 + 20n3

For purposes of speculation, I will set all probability variables at 0.5 (50% chance of drop) even though I have no statistical basis for this assumption at present. If someone wants to do the actual numbers from the drop probability table, be my guest.

15 + (15 * 0.5 + 20 * 0.5) + 20 + 15 * 0.5 + 20 * 0.5 = 70

Each Odin run (with probabilities set globally to 50%) will consume 70 points provided maximal interest in all drops (i.e. all bids end up at cap).

The maximum number of Odin runs that can be conducted per month is 2. This requires no failures and 3 mules. Therefore it is estimable that 140 points will be consumed each month.

This leaves a projected monthly surplus of 196 - 140 = 56 attendance points per month which is a lot (28% surplus per month is bad). I believe that this will lead to a gradual filling of the point caps. This, at least to me, suggests that the system needs to be tuned up a little to reach equilibrium as it is easily estimable that:

1. Provided the probabilities n1, n2, and n3 favor the negative situation (no drop), the surplus will be larger than projected.
2. It is unlikely that we will have the undefeated record necessary to facilitate a 140 point per month outflow.

Therefore, in my logical estimation, in order to achieve equilibrium in the point system (i.e. to have a very low deflation rate, deflation being preferable in this type of currency system), we will need to raise the price caps for abjurations at some point.

I realize that a lot of people may be voting against the proposed measures simply based on immediate personal greed, and I encourage you to be more forward-looking than that. It may be you who gets the shaft in the future.

Back to our equation... If we increase point caps to 25/30 we will have the following projected outflow rate:

25 + (25 * 0.5 + 30 * 0.5) + 30 + 25 * 0.5 + 30 * 0.5 = 80 or 160 points per month outflow which is probably still too small, but now you can see the linearity in the function (provided 0.5 probability). Each 10 points added to both caps increases outflow by 10 points per Odin.

So we're shooting for a number that's just about 180 points per month and we'll assume 2 losses per month (realistic) which means that we do Odin 1/5 runs rather than 1/4.

Odin exposure: 1/5 * 8 = 1.6 runs per month.

Desired deflation rate should be less than 10% (hopefully under 5%) so we're shooting for:

206 - 216 or better currency outflow per month or about 211 points per month with 1.6 Odins or about 132 points per Odin.

So... we'll replace the cost of lower tier abjurations with the variable "l" and the value of high tier abjurations to "h".

l + l * 0.5 + h * 0.5 + h + l * 0.5 + h * 0.5 =

l + l * 0.5 + l * 0.5 + h + h * 0.5 + h * 0.5 =

2l + 2h

and set it equal to 132

2l + 2h = 132

or..

l + h = 66

and if we want a 5 point differential...

set h = l + 5

l + l + 5 = 66

2l = 66 - 5

l = 30.5 (31)
h = 36

which gives us:

l + (l * 0.5 + h * 0.5) + h + l * 0.5 + h * 0.5 =

2h + 2l =

2 (36) + 2 (31) = 134 points/odin * 1.6 odins/month = 214 points per month which is a little high...

so how about:

35/30 looks to be the right cost for the sake of equilibrium.

2 (35) + 2 (30) = 130 points/odin * 1.6 odin/month = 208 points per month

or a net deflation (which is good for this type of capped economy) of: 12 points per month or a 6% deflation rate.

This system will allow for the occasional "cheap" item whereas if we have lower bid caps, they will predominantly be bid at maximum. Setting a net deflation rate will allow for the micro-economy to expand and contract nicely based on a fixed maximum rate of deflation. Simply winning a bid at less than maximum will promote inflation and allow for equilibrium in the system.

Whether or not you raise the point cap, there will always be alot of people with enough points to bid the max. If the the point cap is raised, and they win an item, it will be 4.5 months, probably best case scenario, before they can accumulate 35 points to be able to get in to compete for bidding at the max again.

It would seem that the net effect of this would be to make people look elsewhere. People attend events because they want just the chance to compete for items, not just grind it out for months with zero "lotting" chances.

People join dynamis shells, for example, and are told, they can't lot until after the 3rd run. What this rule will do is basically say, they can't lot until after 35 runs! Wow.

If someone wins a lot and get their points reset to zero, it will be the same thing. Imagine if you are a longtime member in a dynamis shell and win an item. You then will be required to wait 35 more runs before you can lot on the next item.

At least with a 20 point cap, people can get in on the "lotting" sooner. After 20 runs, a "new" member isn't really new anymore.

My guess is that the 35 cap would suck for the new members and the old members.

Bassai wrote:...It would seem that the net effect of this would be to make people look elsewhere....

Yes, that's true, I'm sure that some people won't like it if the point caps are raised, but I also know that some people don't like it if we don't raise them. I'm putting forth my best effort to explain the situation and come to the most mutually beneficial solution possible. My concern is the health of the shell and how members feel about the situation, so that we can maintain a successful, powerful, and fun group. The idea of a poll is to determine how best to proceed--which path do people prefer. I have already made the argument for "3 months being a good basic attendance" to be able to get things. The problem is that there aren't realistically enough drops to cover that spread and it enables younger members to compete continually with others and can cause old, loyal members to become frustrated when they cannot obtain the piece they want despite having enough points for a long time.

The idea of the proposed system is to base the point costs on a more realistic metric. I consider "3 months attendance" to be a idealistic metric in that it "feels" good, but doesn't necessarily work well. It felt like a very fair way to make a foundational rule without having any foreknowledge of how the eventual point system would actually operate in practice--you always have to have somewhere to start, and I still appreciate the value of my original 3 month argument, but I don't think that we can practically maintain that position over the long term without causing an escalating amount of frustration among the members. In looking at the practical method in which our point system operates, I foresee that it will eventually cause a great deal of difficulty. Square Enix has set the drop rates in such a way that makes 30/35 the most practicable (according to my analysis) method. Now, I believe that I have still overestimated the drop rates we are looking at (note that we have lost 3 T3s which is more than projected) and that even with 30/35 we will still have an inflationary system over the near term.

However, I look at our group as growing and becoming more adept at this over time. Thus my estimated drop rate is a good projection for the future state of our shell and that when we achieve the goal of 1/5 Odins, that this system will provide for a fair auctioning system that will allow people to obtain less popular items cheaply and highly sought after items will be obtained by those who work the hardest to get them within reasonable limits based on the natural ebb and flow of the micro-economy that we have created.

I understand your position, and I appreciate your participation. ^_^ Remember that you may need to find additional support within the shell (possibly directly) to achieve change. If you notice, only 14 of our members have voted. This means that you have at least 20 other people to "hit on" in order to achieve your goal. I would love to see 30 votes. Also remember that other members may be lobbying against you, and that I project another Odin attempt before the end of October, so get on it if you really want to stop it.

Here's another way of looking at the situation:

Look at other events and drops of similar value:

Take a look at our Nyzul Isle static group: We did ascents for 6 months to get to floor 100, and the whole time we did that, we got no drops at all. When we did finally get to 100 and started farming, we found that (with a T3 THF) the drop rates on the pieces were frustratingly low anyway, and that Nyzul Isle in general has been designed in such a way as to make it impossible to quickly acquire ANYTHING.... We worked that bitch for 10 months straight... 10 FUCKING MONTHS... You know how many pieces we got? 6...... and one person from the static STILL doesn't have any items from it. I don't create the drop rates, Square Enix does.

Also, look at my limbus group. I have two pieces of Nashira gear. It took me about 8 months of work to get them. The Nashira hat I acquired cheaply because no one else wanted it (I think I got it for like 10 attendance points), but I had to be top dog on a waiting list to get the pants. The ultimate "Virtue Based" system is called a waiting list. You put your name down for a piece or two and whoever is on top of the list gets it when it drops. I don't want to go to a waiting list. It makes people very frustrated looking at how long it might take to get something.

On the other end of the spectrum, look at the nature of our Dynamis shell. We do cities runs with open commenting which means that someone who enters the shell green has just as much chance to get Duelist's Gloves as a guy that's been running with us for months. Look at the Xarcabard lotting criteria of 3/5... Some guy that's been with us for just 3 runs (1.5 weeks) can outlot a veteran player for Duelist's Chapeau...

I'm trying to find the center. I'm trying to find the equilibrium point between virtue and randomness for Einherjar. It's impossible, but we can try to find a good estimate. I'm saying that my initial estimate (which has no statistical basis by the way) was a bit short.

Look at some HNMLS. Some of them have 6 months no points rules or other insane things like that. Not only do you not have the ability to lot anything... You also don't even get to accumulate points for some ungodly hideous amount of time. Their drop rates are based on claims on mobs with heavy competition. Einherjar has no competition, so we can calculate (roughly) how many runs we will be doing per point.

Unfortunately, at this time, due to the fact that we have just finished "priming" the mules, I cannot calculate accurately our runs per Odin with any certainty. Once I have enough data to statistically show the number of runs per Odin, I can tell you about how many "drops per run" you'll get and that will show you how much stuff needs to cost in order to be in line with the drop rates based on our actual performance. The metric 1/5 Odins is still an idealistic metric. That gives us a buffer of 1 loss each time we do a triad of feathers and we've just used 3 losses on our second feather triad. Once I have more data (which will probably take through the 4th quarter, so projecting December), I'll be able to tell you how well we are doing and give you an update on what the economic outlook looks like going forward.

We may be looking at a system wherein items should be priced 50/55 in order to maintain equilibrium. I hope that that is not the case, but again everything depends on the shell's performance. Either way you'll still be acquiring pieces at the same rate, you're just allowing larger amounts of randomness to enter into the lotting system. The point at which the bid caps are set is essentially stating that we want a mixture of "x" amount of randomness with "y" amount of virtue where randomness indicates that someone acquires a piece over someone who has better or longer attendance and virtue indicating the value of hard work. Increasing the bid caps also has the effect of making people more selective and frugal with their points because they know that it might be 4.5 months before they can get another piece.