TOPIC: Two Types of token bags in 2010?

I do actually think that this would wind up being more trouble than it's worth.<br /><br />Kim

Just think, if we all went virtual you could just send people an email with what's inside.

<br />I do actually think that this would wind up being more trouble than it's worth.<br /><br />Kim<br />

<br /><br />You know thinking about making it easier on Jeff and Co, it might be better just to make the packs into the amount of trade tokens in 100 packs, which wouldn't divide perfectly, but it would certainly make things easier.

OK, here's the math (not from NASA but from Bell Labs).  I confident enough in these numbers to publish them.<br /><br />Basically I'm breaking down the 4x series into manageable (hopefully) entities and basing the resulting quantities assuming 100 bags:<br /><br />4a) 33 50GP tokens<br />4b) 13 1/2 Dwarven Steel tokens<br />      5  1/2 Minotaur Hide tokens<br />      6  1/2 Alchemist's Parchment tokens<br />      9  1/2 Darkwood Plank tokens<br />4c) 33 1pt healing tokens<br />4d) 1 UR/GT<br /><br /><br />The 1/2 trade tokens are exactly that (2 are needed to make the appropriate trade item).  This was necessary to fit into the 33 token structure.<br /><br /><br /><br />OK, here are some of the calculations and some of the tradeoffs necessary to fit into the 4x structure being proposed:<br />

<br />
• In 100 10 packs you get 699 common tokens (1 UR/GT)
<br />
• With 40 different types of commons ==> an average of 17.475 of each token type<br />
<br />
• For gold there are 7 different tokens that add up to 95GP ==> an average of 1660.125GP worth of common tokens per 100 bags
<br />
• With the above proposal you lose an average of 10.125GP per 100 bags
<br />
• For the last 3 year's of token runs, there have been 2 pts of healing in each run, this gives 34.95 pts of healing per 100 bags; so the proposal shorts the player 1.95 pts of healing
<br />

<br /><br />The calculations for the trade items are tedious but here goes:<br />I used the last 3 year's of tokens for the calculations.  We get 28 different tokens that can be used to create Dwarven Steel(DS), 12 different tokens that can be used to create Minotaur Hide(MH), 13 different tokes that can be used to create Alchemist's Parchment(AP), and 23 different tokens that can be used to create Darkwood Plank(DP).<br /><br />Dividing each of the above numbers by 3 (three year's worth of tokens) and multiplying by 17.475 (average number of each token in 100 bags) we get:<br />

<br />
• 163.1 tokens that can create DS
<br />
• 69.9 tokens that can create MH
<br />
• 75.725 tokens that can create AP
<br />
• 133.975 tokens that can create DP
<br />

<br /><br />The next step is to divide each of the above numbers by 25 and then normalize to 33 total tokens (I'll spare you these calculations but they result in the 4x list at the beginning of the post).<br /><br />The bottom line of the normalization process is that you get almost exactly the correct number of DS and AP and are a little short on MH and DP (by 1.5 trade items).<br /><br />Enjoy!<br /><br />Jim

But here is my point...I'll take it slow for us average smarts folks.<br /><br />Numbers aint fun...Tokens are fun.<br /><br />Nuff said?<br /><br />If not...keep the 10 packs Jeff! 

I'll agree with keeping the 10 packs, but I suspect there are some people who think numbers are fun.<br /><br />Kim

It seems like, if Jeff goes with mini-bags, and lets customers pick their ratio of regular or mini-bags, everyone wins.  If people want just regular 10 packs, they can get all of those.  If customers want some or all of the mini-bags, they can get those too.  And True Dungeon might be able to save on postage and on token costs for those that do buy mini-bags.  I haven't decided how many, if any, mini-bags I'd purchase, but I don't mind having the option. 

K.I.S.S. - keep the 10 packs.<br />

It just seems like it creates more work for Jeff and Lori.<br /><br />Kim

I think the key issue is whether True Dungeon can save a significant amount of money by going to 4 token bags on some of the tokens.  If they can, and it's worth the trouble to them, I say go for it.  If it doesn't save money and just adds complexity - don't do it. 

while the idea is cool on paper, i believe it would be a money/time/logistical nightmare.<br /><br />lets stick with the regular 10-pack.

<br />4a) 33 50GP tokens<br />4b) 13 1/2 Dwarven Steel tokens<br />       5  1/2 Minotaur Hide tokens<br />       6  1/2 Alchemist's Parchment tokens<br />       9  1/2 Darkwood Plank tokens<br />4c) 33 1pt healing tokens<br />4d) 1 UR/GT<br />

<br /><br />Thank you for the calculations, they are appreciated (by me)!<br /><br />What about making a mix of Dwarven Steal, Minotaur Hide, Alchemist's Parchment, and Darkwood Plank tokens into groups of 100 for the whole percentage thing.  So 33% of the time you get a token from the trade ingredient bucket.  That way we don’t need to make any new tokens.<br /><br />4a) 33% 50GP tokens<br />4b) 33% roll on sub table below<br /><br />

---

4b sub table

---

<br />      39+1%? Dwarven Steal tokens . . . 40%?<br />      15% Minotaur Hide tokens . . . 15%?<br />      18% Alchemist's Parchment tokens . . . 20%?<br />      27% Darkwood Plank tokens . . . 25%?<br /><br />4c) 33% 1pt healing tokens<br />4d) 1% UR/GT<br /><br />In fact they will just likely be all in one part of randomizer with 33%, 33%, 33% and 1% . . . just one 33% will not be uniform (nothing new).