test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
On C-Store and promo/lockbox ships.
cbrjwrr
Member Posts: 2,782 Arc User
With the ongoing thread about wanting a C-Store Connie and D7, and Kael's reply, I started to contemplate such things.
Promo ships; R&D packs, obviously. Estimated odds of 1/100, meaning roughly 25k Zen for one ship. (well, 25k Zen for a fairly good chance of a ship; binomial probability means there is still a 33% chance of no ship) Likewise, Lockbox ships are estimated odds of 1/200 to 1/250, meaning roughly 28k Zen for one ship. 9again, result not guaranteed)
Now, there's no way Cryptic are going to make these ships cheap; the best you'll see is Mudd's market. So, hypothetical proposal - if there was a straight forward 30k Zen for an infinity promo/lockbox ship box (player chooses precise ship on box opening) would people use it?
Promo ships; R&D packs, obviously. Estimated odds of 1/100, meaning roughly 25k Zen for one ship. (well, 25k Zen for a fairly good chance of a ship; binomial probability means there is still a 33% chance of no ship) Likewise, Lockbox ships are estimated odds of 1/200 to 1/250, meaning roughly 28k Zen for one ship. 9again, result not guaranteed)
Now, there's no way Cryptic are going to make these ships cheap; the best you'll see is Mudd's market. So, hypothetical proposal - if there was a straight forward 30k Zen for an infinity promo/lockbox ship box (player chooses precise ship on box opening) would people use it?
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It would have a bit more value if it was an account unlock, but only for those with really good traits. My captains all fly different ships.
Promo pack is 1:100 and Lock box is 1:250 based on multiple tests of 10,000+ on tribble over the years. Unless you're a conspiracy nutter who thinks they bother to code in different odds there because That's Just What They Want You To Think, Man.
Sorry that I wasn't clear --I wasn't calling you a conspiracy nutter.
In many of the odds threads they just come out of the woodwork to make that claim, that tribble tests are worthless because Cryptic changes the odds there to trick us. I was griping about them, not you.
Similar to the ones who say buying from the exchange is a problem somehow because "if everyone on Earth only bought from the exchange then no one would ever open a lock box so there'd be no ships" (aside from being a silly hypothetical it ignores people who want lobi or just open some for fun).
STO is in the odd position in that people who don't want the ships set the prices.
You do realise that 1/250 is 0.4%, 1/200 is 0.5%, 1/150 is 0.66%, while 1/125 is 0.8%? All four are well within reasonably predictable outcomes if a too small sample size is used.
Cryptic won't want to lose money, that's the thing. You don't remove the biggest incentive for the consumer to gamble unless you are sure that you will make more money from the loss of gambling.
On any sample size smaller than well into the tens of thousands you cannot prove statistical significance on odds between 1/150 and 1/250, because the number of events is too low. Until you can say what "large" actually means numerically, I'm going to work off the numbers obtained from the tests where I know the sample size was 10,000+ and therefore I can confidently state the probability is between 0.4% and 0.6%, and lean towards the lower end because if anyone bothers to check the numbers they will realise even at 250 boxes opened, there's still a 36% chance of not getting the grand prize ship after spending 28k Zen.
And you really expect Cryptic to sell a 100% chance to get the ship for less than that? Frankly, the 30k Zen was going cheap; you need more than 600 boxes to be 90% confident of getting a ship. At 1000 boxes even, there is still an almost 2% chance that you get no ship. Low, sure. But this entire thing is about low chances.
That is the nature of how lockboxes work; they exploit how people don't understand mathematics. People think a few hundred boxes is a "large" sample size (granted, financially it is, but in terms of the probabilities here, it's nothing) and because they manage to get lucky, they think it i 1/125 or 1/150.
So, if you document a 10,000+ lockbox test that comes out with 1/125 or 1/150, then I'll consider revising my numbers. But, if your definition of "large" in this context is "Fred opened 300 boxes and pulled 2 ships", then your position is statistically just as invalid as saying "Bob opened 500 boxes and pulled 2 ships" or "Harry opened 10 boxes and pulled the ship".
I think you're just misremembering, or they were smaller number of boxes so the sample size gave an incorrect result. I've been reading the forums since fall 2014 and the number for large samples for lock boxes has been 1:250.
See for example ("12,000 Lockbox Sample conducted in February 2014" ): https://sto.gamepedia.com/Tholian_Lock_Box
We could do a forum search to attempt to settle this, but search here is pretty awful.
While I do favor things being available in the C-Store, I think $300 for a ship is quite excessive and no, I would not take that deal. Given that a standard C-Store ship is 3k Zen, I would price Legendary ships around 6k and then I would price Promo ships closer to 10k.
That is based on nothing but my personal arbitrary value system. I understand I am not buying 'a ship' the money is going toward the entertainment value derived from the purchase and that's about the value I would personally place on it. That's still almost the price of 2 full AAA Games, so not cheap.. but I think that $300 is excessive.
The obligation is on you to prove that your claim of 1/125 to 1/150 is true, and a "multiple thousand" is not remotely precise enough; that is a small sample size for the purposes of obtaining odds of a grand prize ship, although it would be adequate for assessing the more likely outcomes.
So, once again going through the numbers:
"multiple thousands" is a totally inadequate sample to start with, let alone the imprecision of it; at 1000 lockboxes, no ship at all is well within the set of reasonable outcomes. You need at least 3600 boxes before you can say it is a statistical outlier to not get the ship at all, while at the opposite extreme you get 21 ships.
Even a 10,000 sample size can't be used to be sure whether it is 0.4% or 0.6%; defining reasonable as being 1 standard deviation, at 0.4% we expect 40 ships but 34 to 46 are reasonable, at 0.5% we expect 50 ships, but 43 to 57 are reasonable, and 0.6% 60 is expected but 53 to 67 are reasonable - nearly all of these outcomes are within three standard deviations of each other, which gives insufficient confidence to say what the probability is because of the overlap of results.
At 1/150 we expect 66 but 58 to 74 are reasonable. 58 however, is within three standard deviations of the results for 0.4%, which means even a non-outlier 0.4% test could have a result that looks like a 1/150 test, even at a sample size of 10,000 boxes.
At 1/125, we expect 80 ships, but 71 to 89 are reasonable, and three standard deviations is 54 to 106, meaning even 0.4% could produce an event that looks like a 1/125 of an equivalent and still be within acceptable probabilities.
All this put as simply as possible, of a 10,000 lockbox sample size test, anything between 34 and 67 is one standard deviation, 28 and 82 is two standard deviations, while 3 standard deviations could be anything between 22 to 90 ships. This is why we cannot be sure whether it is 0.4% to 0.6%, only that the value is somewhere between them.
As it stands, I'm sticking with the known facts based on repeated tests of 10k+ sample sizes that were done for multiple lockboxes and have been used as the benchmark for assessing lockbox odds for years. You bring up a 10,000+ sample test saying 1/125 or 1/150, and then you can try arguing your position, but I have already demonstrated that you would be picking a sample that got lucky.
Realistically, we need a sample size of a hundred thousand, but no one is going to be that thorough for a game.
As paying punters, it is our job to assume that the odds are in the house' favour, not our favour.
You make the claim that you have seen odds that are lower, without any attempt to substantiate your claim despite being the one contradicting the established estimates, and then claim that my figures are wrong.
Someone else gets involved to tell you the same as I said in the beginning, and you backtrack by claiming you "could have sworn" you've seen lower. Other guy then replies, this time citing some actual evidence; namely a sample of boxes current back in 2014, specifically linking the reference for the Tholian lock box.
I then reply, citing actual numerical evidence.
You then decide to double-down, and claim that you believe you have seen it commonly claimed, again without evidence or without citing the size of the samples; only alleging that you've seen it claimed and it was "supposedly" large studies.
I then reply in depth telling you why you are wrong.
You then further dig yourself in by deciding to definitely state - again without bothering to substantiate your claim - that you have definitely seen tests conclude at 1/150, and claim "multiple thousands".
I then go over the actual probabilities involved and why the sample size you claim - despite the fact that you aren't sure whether you did or didn't see them, as your story has changed as the thread has progressed, and you have never provided any evidence - is not enough for the kind of statistical analysis. I explicitly go over a variety of options at the "multiple thousands" area to explain why you cannot have confidence in that small a sample size.
You then repeat your claim that I'm wrong - having failed again to offer any evidence for your claim. And even better, you decide to claim I don't understand psychology, despite the fact that my basis for the pricing has nothing to do with what people may or may not be willing to pay; that after all, is the query of the thread - I began by outlining the probabilities involved so that people could understand the rationale behind my 30k Zen premise, then asking would people buy at that price point. People are then free to say that they would or would not be interested, and I made the conscious decision not to comment on people's statement's about their willingness to buy given the hypothetical premise. I was quite content to simply start the thread and stay impartial; I only started to reply because you started saying that I should change my numbers because of your baseless claim.
Now, either offer some actual evidence, or shut up telling me to change my numbers, because mine are based in numerical facts. It is ridiculous for you to claim that people aren't reading what you write and making assumptions about you, then go on to that to both me and Davefenstrator, especially when it's obvious from our replies that we have actually read what you wrote.
And I reserve the right to write as many "walls" as I like - someone can read them and learn. All I have done - despite the fact that the burden of proof rests on you to justify your claim, not me to justify mine - is be fair to you by actually answering the objections raised instead of dismissing you as ignorant like you deserve.
Part of the problem I see in this analysis is the total lack of recognition that no one is buying a 1/150 chance at a ship. They are buying a box that always has something in it, and maybe 1/150 times it has a ship. That other stuff has value, though, as we can plainly see from the price of the 2021 Legendary pack.
However you're also ignoring the fact they are already selling accountwide unlocks of box ships. Look at MUDDs market where the excellent Amarie Frigate and Temporal science ships come as a package deal with another thing for $300. That puts them down at 100 per ship before sale prices for 2 very good ships. At a 50% sale that is $50 per ship for accountwide unlocks of at least 2 excellent ships.
Also, Cryptic doesn't lose money selling these cheaply. These are digital products, infinitely reproducible and kept at an effectively high price only through artificial scarcity. They do not have to spend much more development costs on these ships than any regular Cstore ship.
This was part of my reasoning for suggesting a $100 price point as opposed to $300. Again, this is based on nothing but my personal opinion and my personal perception of value, but I feel $100 is a more realistic number. It's still over 3x the cost of the 'normal' T6 ship, the price point is high enough that the ships should (theoretically) remain 'special' and the price point is in line with currently offered items like Mudd's Market.
A couple things to cover though, in case they come up.. the first issue will be one of 'rarity.' It's been proposed in previous threads on this topic that the ships need to remain 'rare' and frankly, I don't consider that factor in my opinion because it's just not possible. Even now your extremely expensive ships still aren't 'rare,' once you put these out and make them desirable people will buy them. Rarity is not a factor for me, but I do believe that the $100 ships will ultimately be less common then the much more affordable $30 ships.
The second is the issue I touched on earlier and that's that "X Amount is too much for a ship that's not even real." Remember when making your opinion that you're not paying for "the ship." You're buying the Entertainment Value associated with that item. Will this item increase your enjoyment of the game? If so.. how much? How much time do you see yourself putting into the game if you have this cool new ship to fly? Will you enjoy your time more? I take this into account and then weigh it against what $100 normally gets me on a 'night out,' and believe me.. that's not as much as it used to be. At $100 I can look at the entertainment value I will get and say it's a fair price. $300, for me personally puts it well into the area I would consider a poor return on my investment. If I was going to spend that much in one chunk, I would be better off using it on a Legendary ship pack that would get me far more. Heck, I could buy the 10 pack for that.. so I would never do that for a single ship.
Compared to the 10 pack, $100 a ship is not a great deal, but in this case you would be paying for the fact that you're getting to 'cherry pick' a single individual ship. Compared to Legendary deals, $100 might even be a bit too high, but I think $300 is far too much.
But it's not $50 per ship on sale, it's $150 for a bundle. Per-ship sale price would be higher than bundle price. Also, it's specific ships, possibly ones that are under-performing in lock box / promo box sales based on which ships people pick for their tokens.
Ship sales need to fund the entire game, not just the cost of creating ships. Trek and regular voice actors, artists, level designers / writers, developers, other staff, equipment, servers, etc.
Cryptic might "make money" selling all ships for $10 each, but it has to be enough to fund everything and still make a decent profit.
Yes, you do have to get 3 things in the bundle, but what I am trying to point out is that Cryptic is willing to part with these things at a price point well below $300 per ship. They have some profit goal, but they decided that $50 per ship is entirely satisfactory for them, and yes for old, possibly poorly selling ships.
Yes, but my point was that if they develop a ship and sell it for $30, developing another ship isn't particularly different even if they want to lock it in a box and effectively make $150 per ship. There is also the principle of selling something at $300 to 10 people versus selling it at $30 to 1000 people. That's $3000 versus $30000. Somewhere there exists a price for maximum profit.
Something I have questioned over the years is the value of box ships, noting that they are too rare for me to care, AND that they are locked to one character. I know I'm not the only one who is terribly disinterested in them because of that. They are pricing me out of buying these ships while I'm someone who can and does spend $$$ on this game. The value is just not there, yet once they throw out a pack of ships I like, as the aforementioned stealing time pack or the first Legendary pack, I can jump on it.
It makes sense to me that the D7 and Connie are going to be $60-$150 and not the $30 for an Arbiter/Avenger but beyond that I have no idea what price they need to keep the lights on and make a profit.
I agree, I think they are trying new ideas and I like that. They probably thought the first Legendary bundle was too good which is why this one sucks, having grossly overcorrected. They probably were experimenting with the Mirror bundle at half the price of the others and are trying to find a good balance there. So I hope they can price things better over time, and find that balance of getting ships into peoples hands that want them while also making a decent profit from their efforts.
If they need to hit a certain price point to keep the lights on then they need to offer things that are actually WORTH that price point. Four new variants of existing C-Store ships packaged with a metric ton of unwanted junk isn't gonna get my wallet open.
I agree with both you and @foxrockssocks about this new bundle. Poor value and I hope it has poor sales to send a message that they went too far.
I was looking forward to a Legendary KDF Bundle with the D7, B'rel / Kor, other KDF ships. Not more fedships and a pile of junk to drive up the price. This bundle "should be hauled away AS garbage."
While you're not necessarily wrong, its pretty clear this bundle has made most everyone unhappy. Unhappy customers are not good for long term business.
At least personally I do actually intend to buy this bundle. 3/4 of the ships are ships I've wanted in legendary form (even though the L. B'rel is really underwhelming,) and I already have the zen sitting there so I don't need to buy any more. However, I'm keenly aware this bundle is a rip off. This means I'm not giving Cryptic any more $$ in the forseeable future which means I may well miss out on a L. D7, and L. D'Deridex. Does Cryptic have the ability to connect those dots? Probably not and that's a problem listening only to numbers.
I don't know how many are in my boat, who planned ahead and saved for this bundle, and are going to get it grudgingly. That may well send the wrong message, but that is also on Cryptic for not listening properly. Hopefully they can properly distinguish between people who had the zen already and people who bought zen and the bundle immediately after. If they can't, they will suffer long term if everyone else who didn't buy the bundle sticks to their guns and refuses to continue supporting the company for bad bundle practices.