Open Letter to Qarl, regarding topics discussed in RMT thread

"

Qarl wrote:

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

All I know is 'increase drop rates of orbs' and 'relax the death penalty' have been suggested entirely too many times for the devs to have missed them, and yet neither has happened. Either the devs are morons for not seeing the truth of the matter or they see something we don't.

Well, I know what happens when we up the drop rate of things, people hoard their items more and use them less. I know this because we have done a lot of experimentation with drop rates in the past.

As this is the exact opposite of what people expect, when I mention this tends to people arguing with me that Economics 101 says I am wrong. Given we have the data from what actually happened, I expect I need someone who did well beyond 101 to explain why this happens.

Hello Mr. Qarl,

I read your posts but at the moment chose not to respond. In part because I was busy in private matters and reading the forums was only a diversion and because it necessitated the collection of thoughts, for which I was not ready to commit. I have since decided to respond and hope it is well received.

It appears to me at present there are (2) reasons why players do not use their currency, even when drop rates are increased. First, there is rarely an impetus, an obstruction to progress which cannot be conquered without the use of currency (or trading), even the most difficult encounters in the game can be bested by keen prowess and intuition. That however is not a bad thing, indeed it makes for a satisfying game, as our gear imperative is not strictly rigid. With improper management of time and resources, as is the prerogative of most (inexperienced) players, such encounters i.e. obstructions to progress, do however occur. They also occur in the end game mapping progression, but I digress. Those encounters have come to be known as 'one-shot difficulty' and a fun and engaging experience they do not make. If anticipated they may encourage the use of currency but even so I do not imagine they are the best possible means of creating gear imperative.

The second reason, or rather dissuasion, is that of depreciating future value. You mentioned economics 101 and I found that remarkably cheeky. This however is not a matter of economics, but finance. And finance happens to be my area of (small) expertise. Humans while not necessarily capable of distilling their motives are smart enough to found their actions on reasonable intuitions and circumstance. Indeed, that is the source of much of our historical propriety. What I am speaking of then is the present value of currency used versus currency hoarded. A currency used for the immediate progression of content as described above carries with it a depreciating value. As we gain access to superior items and content the worth of our current items diminishes. The worth of currency however remains salient. This disparity, then, is the root of our problem. The impetus described in the preceding paragraph is only a form of enticement.

There are two exceptions to this dissuasion. The first occurs when sacrifice in the present will assuredly net gains in the future (that is sacrificing wealth in order to secure superior wealth or success later in less time i.e. racing). That is also true of entrepreneurial ventures as I'm sure you experienced with the founding of GGG. Unfortunately this exception depends on urgency, especially time urgency - which is not always the driving factor or even a concern behind player actions, outside of races. Video games are after all are a diversion whose merit is the consumption of time.

The second exception is that of equivalency. This occurs when there is no longer a risk of depreciating future value. On the contrary some items can actually increase in value if they become scarcer, as legacy items do, and so they may encourage currency use. But that is not a sustainable solution as recurrent exclusivity would cause much consternation and disillusionment, except perhaps in the case of cosmetic rewards (or the McRib). Currently this exception occurs most often at the very end of progression where items have an attainable apogee, admittedly with much expense. These dissuasions therefore combine to discourage currency use throughout most of the normal game progression, which is regrettable given their engaging role in itemization. This ultimate exception is also seemingly unattainable to the average player due to barriers in time and expense and serves to alienate more than enchant.

There exists however some means of encouraging equivalency which I'm sure you have encountered on the forums and your own internal discussions. One would be bringing present sacrifice in line with future value. As described in this thread: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/540123
Of course this presents the problem of improper valuation which is subject to the trade economy and often in flux. The other concern is of design, which may not permit such an egregious change to the currency mechanics. An additional example would be expiring currency which would put a deadline on use and create urgency. Again, this too has strong objections which are not the topic at hand.

Fret not; we have another option available, the option of obviation. In this I mean orbs or vendor recipes whose sole purpose is the capacitation of items with depreciating future value. These orbs or recipes would serve exclusively to enhance otherwise obsolete and worthless items (and thusly appreciate their future value without affecting present sacrifice). This would be done specifically by rerolling property ranges (not values), base item type and potentially item level (although I understand item level is to be gated away by content progression). The best candidates for capacitation then would be items with attractive but low level property ranges, base item types and item level. Some RNG would be permissible in this regard and would, like the rest of the game, keep the mechanics from becoming stale and predictable. With regards to gated item progression, I think it necessary that the reagents for capacitation are also gated by progression. This may be accomplished through reagents which are of a certain base type and item level only accessible in later content, i.e. a white sword base type above yours with a higher ilevel. Additionally, such reagents should not serve a significant dual purpose, as to confound their utility as capacitors. Capacitated items should also take on an appropriate required level, commensurate with their enhanced property ranges and base type. There is also the matter of uniques whose properties may not be necessarily balanced with higher base types or property ranges. As with mirror'd items I would recommend their exception from any capacitating mechanics.

Under the above framework I should think it possible for a player to carry with him the same item, albeit transmuted, from normal onto merciless. In Diablo II players were granted the ability to name items after their character, this was often reserved for items with special merit gained after much endeavor. I should think capacitation and POE's other excellent itemization mechanics would allow players to do the opposite, that is endeavor their items into something special and carry them throughout the game.



Summary:
Players don’t use currency as a bulwark for progression because it is rarely necessary or lucrative. This relegates financially sound currency use to few players and only at the very end of progression, with little exception. The key to combating currency hoarding, then, lies not in abrupt increases of difficulty but mitigating the depreciating future value of items made with currency. There are different approaches that can be taken, for example variable crafting costs based on item level, which would diminish present cost and therefore any depreciation, but I am partial to another. That is creating mechanics that allow players to capacitate or enhance their obsolete items by way of exclusive vendor recipes or orbs whose reagents would be gated by progression and whose purpose would be to counteract depreciating future value. This capacitation could be achieved by rerolling or upgrading base item type; property ranges and potentially item level. There is some nuance involved here, specifically pertaining to the gating of crafting reagents and permissible RNG, but this can be found in more detail above and is rather in the demesne of a game developer than a financial analyst.

If you read all the way through I am much obliged.

"

There are two exceptions to this dissuasion. The first occurs when sacrifice in the present will assuredly net gains in the future (that is sacrificing wealth in order to secure superior wealth or success later in less time i.e. racing).

I started to use my currency items outside of Void League races once I read the statistics for HC League that they got next to no players.

Before that time I was like most players and stashed everything fuse/alch+.



From my point of view if I had more currency I would use more currency to craft.
Also a lot of the statistic "People don't use currency if they got more" comes from OB.

And the only real need for an upgrade was Vaal Merciless.
Till then I ran around with a level 38/39 armor.

But given the fact that you can barely control crafting I still don't like to use currency till a point where it becomes necessary.

Because if I got more currency it's more likely I get the results I want.

In CB you needed only a few mods on items mainly ES or Life, you could easily use alts to roll a 80-100 life belt aug it then trade a regal and regal it and you were fine.

Now you need far more mods to roll and since rolling certain mods became more unlikely you waste more currency while currency is rarer. This is a reason why I don't really like craftnig under current Drop rates.

Since drop rates are so damn low and the mean drop-time variance is so high, any increase in drop rates can be mistaken with being lucky with the RNG.

"when we up the drop rate of things" means nothing without details (which thing? how much increase? for how long?), since without that, the effect is likely indistinguishable from the RNG variance.

Twice an infinitesimal number is still almost zero (lim (2x) as x->0 is still 0)


I hoard things because "crafting" results are random and the only way to succeed is to brute force the odds using a lot of trials. When I get another method that is not "be lucky", maybe I will stop hoarding.

You use the limes in the wrong direction.

The limes should represent time used for grinding.

No time invested = no items.


Doubling the drop rates would double the average found currenty.


Also you need a function simulating how long do you have to craft till you have got satisfying results.

I said CB only needed 2-3 matching mods on items, that's play players didn't use much current.
For example I had a saintly chain with like 600 Defense 200 ES 94 life and some low resists.
If I had some currency for spare I used it to roll another one. I didn't use it because it wasn't necessary.
The Chainmail was good enough.

I spend most currency on maps.

Crafting certain mods got way harder and it will consume currency now. So claiming the current system is better because players use currency is absurd. Players need better items to pass geacheck walls.
They would still have next to no currency if they had the double amount because the chances of rolling certain mods aren't equal anymore.

"

Hilbert wrote:

I said CB only needed 2-3 matching mods on items, that's play players didn't use much current.
For example I had a saintly chain with like 600 Defense 200 ES 94 life and some low resists.
If I had some currency for spare I used it to roll another one. I didn't use it because it wasn't necessary.
The Chainmail was good enough.

I spend most currency on maps.

Crafting certain mods got way harder and it will consume currency now. So claiming the current system is better because players use currency is absurd. Players need better items to pass geacheck walls.
They would still have next to no currency if they had the double amount because the chances of rolling certain mods aren't equal anymore.

Just for my information : ( I have been playing since OB's beginning ) are there other things than the content becoming more difficult and the mod pool getting larger that end up having the effect that you are talking about ?

"

Qarl wrote:

Well, I know what happens when we up the drop rate of things, people hoard their items more and use them less. I know this because we have done a lot of experimentation with drop rates in the past.

As this is the exact opposite of what people expect, when I mention this tends to people arguing with me that Economics 101 says I am wrong. Given we have the data from what actually happened, I expect I need someone who did well beyond 101 to explain why this happens.

The thing is Qarl in his great wisdom decided to increase the drop rates on currency without actually letting the community know!

Also, the game is inherently a hoarding currency game!

People are aware that the 'crafting' system is actually a gambling currency sink so they aren't inclined to blow all their orbs on that & would rather hoard until they can purchase something via trading.

Upping the rates & not telling the community makes the results not worth the paper they are written on.

"

lethal_papercut wrote:

Upping the rates & not telling the community makes the results not worth the paper they are written on.

Exactly this. Nobody knew drops were increased and proceeded to hoard as usual. Completely failed experiment & wrong results extrapolated from it.

Why is bad that people hoard anyway? Assuming GGG is aware why people hoard. (yea, it's the fault of shitty gambling, that doesn't give you any investment security)

Also, by what margin were the drop rates increased?

They are dismally low so if they were increased would people even notice?...apparently not.

There are folks that have played since CB and have only found 1 or 2 ex's...if they were to find 1 or 2 more should they have thought "oh Qarl must have upped the drop rates I might as well start burning through my currency"?

Increasing the drop rate on something that has a 0.0000000001% chance to drop to 0.0000000002% isn't going to suddenly make ppl start burning their orbs.

And once again, the game is a currency hoarder by design, using your currency is gambling & the only way to see a consistent return is to use them for trade.

Data without context is meaningless. Correlation does not mean causation. Not even wrong.

Scientific method, you know what it is Mr. Carl? Not apparently.




I have already read/heard to many times GGG staff rationalizing their own decisions, and while we are playing guess games with Carl. My guess is they do that because they base their assumptions on how successfully they are going to retain players. Not working so well so far, right?

I found Qarl's post a bit odd too. Not that I didn't believe people didn't hoard things, just that they couldn't figure out why people hoarded things.

In addition to the OP, I'd like to add that the fact orbs are used as both as crafting and currency. The need to use them for crafting stays consistent - you'll use whatever you need to in order to keep progressing. Greed on the other hand is scalar - "I'll use the bare minimum I need, and use the rest to hoard/trade/flip/profit!". Things that were mentioned in the OP accentuate this, such as the fact that crafted items (save those crafted at a very high level) often severely depreciate in value, at least when compared to the currency spent.

I'd suggest a vendor recipe that upgrades the base and ilvl of your item, in the style of the goddess bound-to-scorned recipe. Wouldn't be a flawless fix, but it could help the situation.

Honestly, I'm mainly surprised we havn't seen more action from GGG on this. A significant portion of the community has been very vocal about drop rates/legacy items/rmt for quite a while, you think they'd post more than "Please don't antagonize each other", or some posts explaining and/or rationalizing very basic concepts of the various systems.