Rep System Gear Costs
View Single Post
Join Date: Jun 2012
10-28-2012, 11:20 PM
Originally Posted by
I see this coming up a lot on the forums recently, and it's not really an accurate measurement of the value of the item.
The ability to trade in a tech drop for Dilithium is a way of giving players who get a drop they don't want or need something for the time they've spent, due to the randomness of the current system. If we had allowed people to simply purchase Omega gear with Dilithium, the cost associated with them would have been higher than Diltihium store items, since the Omega/MACO/Honor Guard gear is superior to Dilithium store gear.
Now that we're moving to a system with fewer random elements, we can price Omega items, Romulan reputation items, etc. proportionately to one another based on the relative power of the items. There are several factors to take into account in pricing these items, and we're doing our best to make the costs reasonable.
As Borticus already mentioned, we're in the process of evaluating Dilithium costs in general.
Okay, let me say -- and I'm totally chill on this point, which I find requires explaining on these forums -- that I disagree with you and the other guy.
Because Cryptic designers seem to want to bend the basic laws of economics in order to support internally constructed "fair" design principles all the time anymore (and, really, players aren't mind readers so they don't know what the paradigm for fairness is supposed to be)...
And players keep constructed value equivalencies that try to treat any two things of equal work as having the same value, usually in a way that seems concerned with making everything cheap and easy (which is bad because it cheapens any need to play) or make things they already own valuable and expensive (which is also bad because it decreases the need to play).
Okay. Here's my perspective. I'm sure almost everyone reading this post studied this somewhere but here's a refresher:
Note that opportunity cost is not the sum of the available alternatives when those alternatives are, in turn, mutually exclusive to each other ? it is the value of the next best use. The opportunity cost of a city's decision to build the hospital on its vacant land is the loss of the land for a sporting center, or the inability to use the land for a parking lot, or the money which could have been made from selling the land. Use for any one of those purposes would preclude the possibility to implement any of the other.
Next best. As in, for these purposes, most expensive other option. Not "not meant to be equivalent and it was a consolation prize that we determined would..." Not "cheapest other option" or "any other option that costs that amount" as so many posters here want to argue.
Next best. Singular.
So the value of any prototype tech deflector, assuming you have one, is a deflector that the player doesn't own. Until the player doesn't need deflectors. Then the value of the prototype drop is 2034 dilithium.
EXCEPT. EXCEPT that's the value if you already have one, not the value of getting one.
Because it's a drop, it can vary, yes. Half of people get it by 75 runs at 1%. So let's say 75. That's about 18 hours, 45 minutes. or a 94k-ish dilithium value. Except the person who did 75 STF runs before got 94k dilithium and the deflector. The whole thing becomes a mess when trying to value the time any way that involves dilithium because the player also received dilithium. But 20 hours of focused activity.
*sigh* My issue is that devs don't seem interested in economic equitability of different transactions (every trade in of any kind is a trade down, often massive -- including for dilithium) and players seem to want things cheap.
Everybody is distorting this economy to push their goals, both developer and player alike, and nobody is trying to simulate a fair economic system where things are reasonably costly but where the market is healthy. Because this should be a fair, balanced, simulated economic system.
Players shouldn't get ripped off on the dilithium hand-in (which they have been) nor should players be trying to game this to make everything easy. Everybody else having this discussion is acting as a participant in the economy rather than as an observer trying to construct an illustration of a fair economy. And I at least think that last role should be one that developers and a few players who can look beyond self-interest should be discussing.
This goes back to my Lobi thing. Lobi items' value should be equal to the opportunity cost of acquiring the Lobi used to purchase the item or roughly equivalent to items with a market value of 250,000 EC per Lobi spent. Because that's roughly the stable market rate for acquiring one Lobi.
There should be a power balance/cost/trade in chart somewhere that is consistent as well as an overall policy on how much, maximum, Cryptic will undervalue something on trade in for currency.