Strict Standards: Declaration of KunenaLayoutBase::debug() should be compatible with JLayoutBase::debug($data = Array) in /home/newtd/public_html/libraries/kunena/layout/base.php on line 38
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: The fate of old UR's

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #37

  • Beertram
  • Beertram's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 257
Yeah, one of my friends bought some and talked me into buying some so he would have someone to play with. So there I was at the MtG booth at Gencon trying to find the $1 off coupon for their Dealer Hall section with people literally climbing over my back trying to buy some. That was my alpha starter and boosters.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #38

  • Raven
  • Raven's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +2
  • "Oooooh, Shiny!"
  • Posts: 5164
Toran wrote:
2. Yes, there are a lot of useless old armors. For example, I wouldn't offer more than, say, $20 for Plate Armor of Attack thanks to Powered Plate.

I would gladly offer a lot more than $20 for Plate Armor of Attack, if anyone's got one they want to sell or trade.
"THERE WILL NEVER BE A TOKEN EQUAL TO A GOOD BRAIN!"- Smakdown

Check out these awesome resources:
Cranston's Character Generator for iDevices or Android
Amorgen's Excel Character Generator
And the ever-useful Token DataBase, expertly maintained by Druegar.
Last Edit: 4 years 11 months ago by Raven.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #39

Raven wrote:
Toran wrote:
2. Yes, there are a lot of useless old armors. For example, I wouldn't offer more than, say, $20 for Plate Armor of Attack thanks to Powered Plate.

I would gladly offer a lot more than $20 for Plate Armor of Attack, if anyone's got one they want to sell or trade.

Ditto!
Pick your Purple and discounted token packs: discount-dungeon.com
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #40

  • Joshua Baessler
  • Joshua Baessler's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member
  • I wish my lawn was a MEC wizard so it'd cut itself
  • Posts: 599
Matthew Hayward wrote:
Kirk Bauer wrote:
joshua baessler wrote:
Power creep is inevitable in dungeon crawling. The whole thing is based on get better stuff to kill bigger things to get even better stuff to kill even bigger things.

I suppose I shouldn't have said power creep is the only option, but I do agree it is what should be expected. 10 years from now we should be able to play characters that are higher than Level 5, for example, so we can fight bigger and more awesome enemies...

Here you seem to be saying power creep is desirable? I can certainly get behind the idea of progression - I'm not sure printing better and better tokens is they way to achieve progression.

An illuminating quote from a Magic designer in the podcast on the economics of Magic I mentioned earlier, about the design choices Magic makes to keep their secondary economy healthy:
We can't just keep printing more and more and more and more powerful or more and more and more and more big and splashy cards.
Not only desirable, but to be expected. However, the game is not tokens alone, it can't just get easier and easier to smash Nightmare-level enemies, True Dungeon has to scale with it.

Because we are a small community, that means that old URs are going to lose their value. Jeff doesn't need to "give back" to the dedicated, long-term players with anything additional to compensate them for the declining value of their URs. The secondary market should not be a factor, ever, for token design or transmutation redemptions. These old URs had value once upon a time. Nothing stays valuable forever.

The fate of old URs should be a slow fading to worthlessness, having value only for their collectability. There is no need to assign a gold value for recipes to them. This would only devalue gold (the fact that we are a small community means our small economy is greatly affected by changes like this, not lessened or insignificant because we are small) and would also introduce an expectation that all URs have a base value of X, which would lead to the faster devaluation of current or near-current URs. Which, as I said, should happen eventually, but knowing the redemption value of a token would make it happen faster. Just like how new rare armor and weapons are almost immediately worth $2-$3 because they are 1/25 of an Aragonite valued at $50.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #41

  • Kirk Bauer
  • Kirk Bauer's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • www.tdtavern.com
  • Posts: 2640
joshua baessler wrote:
The secondary market should not be a factor, ever, for token design or transmutation redemptions. These old URs had value once upon a time. Nothing stays valuable forever.

Agreed regarding token design, however the transmutation program was specifically created to make useless tokens useful. I don't think transmutation should have anything to do with prices, but it should continue to consider adding value to useless tokens.
joshua baessler wrote:
The fate of old URs should be a slow fading to worthlessness, having value only for their collectability.

I would agree if we didn't already have a transmutation program. But we do, and it does things like guarantee that even a common has a little bit of usefulness. If nothing changes, one day there may be old URs that are less useful than a common. It isn't about market value, it is about making sure that URs (just like commons) are never completely useless.

Perhaps it is as simple as making URs worth 12 or 24 or 25 when creating trade goods.
My online token shop: www.tdtavern.com (5% discount code: TDFORUM)

My builds: Ranger and Bard
Last Edit: 4 years 11 months ago by Kirk Bauer.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #42

  • Toran
  • Toran's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 463
lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote:
Mike Steele wrote:
Toran wrote:
Some things:


2. Yes, there are a lot of useless old armors. For example, I wouldn't offer more than, say, $20 for Plate Armor of Attack thanks to Powered Plate.

Just an example of "Beauty is in the eye of the Beholder", both of our Fighters are using Plate Armor of Attack, I think it is a fantastic token for Fighters that aren't using Shields. And I know another long-time player that just switched to the Plate Armor of Attack this year as well. Similar to the Scepter of the Dead - some people consider it the most useless UR around, but it seems great to me. It's a slotless token that gives a great situational bonus at a minimal cost. That's the great thing about True Dungeon tokens, different people place different values on them, so one person's trash is another's treasure. :)

I agree mike

I'm not disagreeing that Plate Armor of Attack is a good token - it IS a good token. I'm arguing that it's not worth $100 (or more) for two points of armor unless you have unlimited resources available or, in this particular case, the people speaking are the largest token purchasers/resellers, so likely already had the token anyway. I feel like you're coming at this from an "unlimited resources" standpoint, where you're considering maxing out all slots without regard for a cost/benefit ratio (which is why I said the Powered Plate is a good, similar option at a much lower price).

In a limited resources world, there are better ways to spend $100 on tokens.

More broadly, what I'm arguing for is recognition that it is beneficial for the overall token economy to expand it by lowering the sale cost of old URs for lower-tier purchasers/players rather than hoarding these tokens or seeking to have Jeff/TD incorporate them into new, more powerful recipes which could create power creep.
Last Edit: 4 years 11 months ago by Toran. Reason: Clarity
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #43

  • Joshua Baessler
  • Joshua Baessler's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member
  • I wish my lawn was a MEC wizard so it'd cut itself
  • Posts: 599
Kirk Bauer wrote:
joshua baessler wrote:
The secondary market should not be a factor, ever, for token design or transmutation redemptions. These old URs had value once upon a time. Nothing stays valuable forever.

Agreed regarding token design, however the transmutation program was specifically created to make useless tokens useful. I don't think transmutation should have anything to do with prices, but it should continue to consider adding value to useless tokens.
joshua baessler wrote:
The fate of old URs should be a slow fading to worthlessness, having value only for their collectability.

I would agree if we didn't already have a transmutation program. But we do, and it does things like guarantee that even a common has a little bit of usefulness. If nothing changes, one day there may be old URs that are less useful than a common. It isn't about market value, it is about making sure that URs (just like commons) are never completely useless.

Perhaps it is as simple as making URs worth 12 or 24 or 25 when creating trade goods.

There's a difference between creating an avenue for large volumes of useless tokens to be condensed into smaller volumes of useful tokens and creating new value for tokens that have lost their value.

Part of the problem is the +3 Rod of Niltongue. It has set a precedent. There is an expectation that Jeff is going to do something to make old URs useful again. The other problem is that at some point a guaranteed UR was offered as an incentive to buy $250 worth of tokens.

Why not let old URs die? Technically no UR should be considered to have a value higher than $7.99, the cost of the ten-pack a 00 would have come in. Let them have their increased value during their heyday and then let them fade away.

If you really want to make sure that URs are good for transmuting as well, then during the next token development we should lobby for all 20 URs to be useful in some type of recipe, and stick with that going forward. Retroactively assigning value to URs would cause more problems than it would solve.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #44

joshua baessler wrote:
Technically no UR should be considered to have a value higher than $7.99, the cost of the ten-pack a 00 would have come in. Let them have their increased value during their heyday and then let them fade away.

People who do merchandising in the collectible, pack based, randomly distributed game piece space conceive of the cost of a particular item is the cost to acquire it, on average.

The average cost to acquire a UR is $250 via bulk purchase, or $790.00 via random chance.
Pick your Purple and discounted token packs: discount-dungeon.com
Last Edit: 4 years 11 months ago by Matthew Hayward.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #45

Toran wrote:
I'm arguing that it's not worth $100 (or more) for two points of armor unless you have unlimited resources available

The same thing can be said for pretty much any UR. With a few exceptions, of things like Widseth's Mystical Lute, Cloak of the Mage, Libram of Looting, the Psionics Ioun Stone, most URs give you either +1 or +2 over a rare token of similar value.
Pick your Purple and discounted token packs: discount-dungeon.com
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #46

joshua baessler wrote:
The secondary market should not be a factor, ever, for token design or transmutation redemptions.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying - but this seems very wrong to me.

True Dungeon sells tokens to raise funds to operate their business.

To succeed at selling tokens the tokens must be desirable to people who purchase them.

If tokens are designed with complete disregard for the secondary market, there is a strong potential for creating a situation where they are very undesirable to the people who purchase them, as a large part (probably the majority) of tokens sales are made by people who are taking secondary market valuations into consideration when purchasing tokens.

Every manufacturer of collectibles has very good business reason, and I would argue an ethical duty, to consider the impact of the secondary market in their design choices.
Pick your Purple and discounted token packs: discount-dungeon.com
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #47

  • Joshua Baessler
  • Joshua Baessler's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member
  • I wish my lawn was a MEC wizard so it'd cut itself
  • Posts: 599
Matthew Hayward wrote:

True Dungeon sells tokens to raise funds to operate their business.

To succeed at selling tokens the tokens must be desirable to people who purchase them.

I agree with both of these statements. However, tokens should be valuable for their game benefit and not because someone spent $100 (or $250, etc) on them.

To sell more tokens, continue making tokens that provide better or new benefits. If it were about maintaining token buyers' investments then why sell packs at all? Jeff would be better off to sell URs, trade items, gold, relics, legendaries directly. TDA gets no direct benefit from the secondary market.

Someone explain to me how this would be beneficial to anyone other than people sitting on bulk URs that they are not using in their personal or team builds? It seems like this would be a change that would only benefit large volume token resellers sitting on inventory that is declining in value.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: The fate of old UR's 4 years 11 months ago #48

  • Kirk Bauer
  • Kirk Bauer's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • www.tdtavern.com
  • Posts: 2640
joshua baessler wrote:
I agree with both of these statements. However, tokens should be valuable for their game benefit and not because someone spent $100 (or $250, etc) on them.

I'm not sure I understand what you said there. An UR token needs to have a more awesome benefit than a rare because it is a UR, that's how it works in TD. Because of the benefit people are willing to pay $100 or whatever for it. If a UR didn't have a valuable in-game benefit then people wouldn't be interested in it. Jeff sets the price of URs (you get 5.2 per $1k spent, plus the other tokens), so in order to sell them he needs to give people a reason to buy them.
joshua baessler wrote:
Jeff would be better off to sell URs, trade items, gold, relics, legendaries directly.

I believe that it would have been a huge mistake if he had gone down that route. Today Jeff's pricing structure is very straightforward. If he was in the business of both designing the tokens and setting their individual prices it would get really messy really quick. I never see people complain about Jeff's token pricing, it is what it is. But if he started selling HoPs (for example) directly then you'd better bet it would get crazy. Many would think they were being sold for too much, too little, etc. It is better for Jeff to keep his pricing simple and to let the secondary market take it from there.

Additionally, resellers on the secondary market sell thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per year in tokens. At that volume it is more practical to offer hundreds of distinct products at different prices. But Jeff moves hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in tokens. It would be a lot of work to sell them all separately.

The random pack method works well for many other games and I think the health of the TD economy proves it works well for TD as well.
joshua baessler wrote:
TDA gets no direct benefit from the secondary market.

Not sure what you mean by "direct", but I don't think it matters. There is a massive benefit to Jeff to have a healthy secondary market. For example, I spent tens of thousands of dollars on tokens this year that I will likely not sell until future years. If I couldn't resell them I would have bought much less.

Even for people who just buy tokens for personal use with no plans to ever sell any, they would still be willing to spend less if they weren't confident they could trade or sell the tokens at a future date if necessary. We have also seen plenty of fellow players hit hard times and sell tokens to get cash to help go through those. If they knew up front they could never do that then they likely would have spent less in the first place.

I like to think about the extremes when thinking about stuff like that. If Jeff made all token buyers sign an agreement that they would never sell any tokens, and then enforced that, do you really think his sales wouldn't be dramatically affected?
joshua baessler wrote:
Someone explain to me how this would be beneficial to anyone other than people sitting on bulk URs that they are not using in their personal or team builds? It seems like this would be a change that would only benefit large volume token resellers sitting on inventory that is declining in value.

For the record, I don't have very many old and worthless URs, if any. I haven't been collecting very long relative to some people around here. But ten years from now I probably will have plenty.

This matters to everybody because of the small and fragile TD economy. I'll use extremes again to illustrate my point. If you spent $8k this year on tokens, and next year every single one of them was eclipsed by better tokens, and you couldn't convert them or trade them, would you spend $8k again next year? Whenever anybody spends money on something, potential future resale value tends to cross their mind. Over time, as long-time players end up with more and more worthless tokens, it might affect their appetite for purchasing more tokens.

Remember that the tokens are collectible and for many of us collecting and trading and reselling is just as much part of the game as the actual dungeon runs. This is true for many collectible items. I think it was because of the transmute program that I was willing to jump into TD where I have always stayed away from collecting MtG.
My online token shop: www.tdtavern.com (5% discount code: TDFORUM)

My builds: Ranger and Bard
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.263 seconds