TOPIC: Best Possible Treasure Enhancer Configuration

Azzy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree in general with the negative light you portray people who buy tokens for resale in, but that's a matter of personal opinion.

^ this, mostly because if it those people didn't exist, neither I nor any other new players have a decent way of getting older tokens aside from yearning for an eventual reprint that may or may not happen eventually (maybe).

Well that is an interesting thing. If no one resold then likely there would be more reprints each year, but who knows hard to see a what if.

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree in general with the negative light you portray people who buy tokens for resale in, but that's a matter of personal opinion.

I was paraphrasing your exact example: people who saw it as a “risk” that they could have sold their tokens for more to some other mark before the price drop. It’s a zero-sum game, so the flipside is a neophyte trader paid top dollar for something that later fell in value. The seller’s risk of paper losses is equal to the newbies risk of actual losses.

That’s just how I see it. YMMV. Cast whatever light you wish on it

Azzy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree in general with the negative light you portray people who buy tokens for resale in, but that's a matter of personal opinion.

^ this, mostly because if it those people didn't exist, neither I nor any other new players have a decent way of getting older tokens aside from yearning for an eventual reprint that may or may not happen eventually (maybe).

I don't accept Mike's premise that Brad is portraying token resellers in a negative light.
It is worth noting that Brad too is a token reseller.

I think trying to maximize profit is natural, and the game definitely needs token resellers.

There should not be decisions made on the health of the game solely because of the interests of the secondary market is I think Brad's point.

I too picked up a lot of tokens on the secondary market. I had every opportunity to get them the first time around and I did not.

Since there are always reprints, token values definitely fluctuate. Saying a given token is immune to reprint will affect this.

Hinting a token might be reprinted will also affect its value.

It's a very delicate system.

If I were in charge I would keep the nuggets separate and stackable but no transmute for them.

I would make the future legendary treasure enhancer a fixed number of draws (no Synergy effect). I would make it slightly worse perhaps just make it a fixed +12 draws. I would not allow the two legendaries to stack.

This protects the people who have invested for years now but gives future players an opportunity for near parity.

Allowing them to stack would be harmful to the token economy imo. And it will cause more concerns with ghosting, etc.

But I'm not in charge

Kirk Bauer wrote: If I were in charge I would keep the nuggets separate and stackable but no transmute for them.

I would make the future legendary treasure enhancer a fixed number of draws (no Synergy effect). I would make it slightly worse perhaps just make it a fixed +12 draws. I would not allow the two legendaries to stack.

This protects the people who have invested for years now but gives future players an opportunity for near parity.

Allowing them to stack would be harmful to the token economy imo. And it will cause more concerns with ghosting, etc.

But I'm not in charge

This definitely seems like a reasonable option.

Then the question of how to handle the transmute recipe

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote: If I were in charge I would keep the nuggets separate and stackable but no transmute for them.

I would make the future legendary treasure enhancer a fixed number of draws (no Synergy effect). I would make it slightly worse perhaps just make it a fixed +12 draws. I would not allow the two legendaries to stack.

This protects the people who have invested for years now but gives future players an opportunity for near parity.

Allowing them to stack would be harmful to the token economy imo. And it will cause more concerns with ghosting, etc.

But I'm not in charge

This definitely seems like a reasonable option.

Then the question of how to handle the transmute recipe

Just like the coa recipes? One with aotf and the two new ones, and minimal additional ingredients. One with a points system and more additional ingredients.

Endgame wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote: If I were in charge I would keep the nuggets separate and stackable but no transmute for them.

I would make the future legendary treasure enhancer a fixed number of draws (no Synergy effect). I would make it slightly worse perhaps just make it a fixed +12 draws. I would not allow the two legendaries to stack.

This protects the people who have invested for years now but gives future players an opportunity for near parity.

Allowing them to stack would be harmful to the token economy imo. And it will cause more concerns with ghosting, etc.

But I'm not in charge

This definitely seems like a reasonable option.

Then the question of how to handle the transmute recipe

Just like the coa recipes? One with aotf and the two new ones, and minimal additional ingredients. One with a points system and more additional ingredients.

I would love to see things end up working out this way. XD

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree in general with the negative light you portray people who buy tokens for resale in, but that's a matter of personal opinion.

I was paraphrasing your exact example: people who saw it as a “risk” that they could have sold their tokens for more to some other mark before the price drop. It’s a zero-sum game, so the flipside is a neophyte trader paid top dollar for something that later fell in value. The seller’s risk of paper losses is equal to the newbies risk of actual losses.

That’s just how I see it. YMMV. Cast whatever light you wish on it

That's not my example, it's not even close to my example. I portrayed the risk of holding onto the AoTF for 10 years as losing the opportunity cost of selling now and investing that money in some way for 10 years instead of holding onto a token for 10 years that is doing nothing for you for those 10 years (not applicable to anyone of course that is has no CoA or HoP and is getting treasure pulls from it over those years).

I in no way portrayed it as someone who "sold their tokens for more to some other mark before the price drop." I never even mentioned the possibility of a price drop for the AoTF, and I happen to think that it's far more likely that the value of the AoTF will go up than down.

Kirk Bauer wrote: If I were in charge I would keep the nuggets separate and stackable but no transmute for them.

I would make the future legendary treasure enhancer a fixed number of draws (no Synergy effect). I would make it slightly worse perhaps just make it a fixed +12 draws. I would not allow the two legendaries to stack.

This protects the people who have invested for years now but gives future players an opportunity for near parity.

Allowing them to stack would be harmful to the token economy imo. And it will cause more concerns with ghosting, etc.

But I'm not in charge

If max draws pushed into the 30s, the treasure mix would have to be devalued.

We could be pushing towards that direction anyway. With URTE tokens projected for 2023 and 2025 the max could jump to 27 if the new tokens stack with the existing TEs.

Jeff has already discussed reducing monster bit frequency after 2019. If that process goes too far, I think we will all regret it.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Azzy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree in general with the negative light you portray people who buy tokens for resale in, but that's a matter of personal opinion.

^ this, mostly because if it those people didn't exist, neither I nor any other new players have a decent way of getting older tokens aside from yearning for an eventual reprint that may or may not happen eventually (maybe).

I don't accept Mike's premise that Brad is portraying token resellers in a negative light.
It is worth noting that Brad too is a token reseller.

I think trying to maximize profit is natural, and the game definitely needs token resellers.

There should not be decisions made on the health of the game solely because of the interests of the secondary market is I think Brad's point.

I too picked up a lot of tokens on the secondary market. I had every opportunity to get them the first time around and I did not.

Since there are always reprints, token values definitely fluctuate. Saying a given token is immune to reprint will affect this.

Hinting a token might be reprinted will also affect its value.

It's a very delicate system.

I buy enough tokens to sometimes resale them at a later date for a profit, to help fund future purchases. I commend all the token resellers and places I can put my tokens on consignment to help people find older tokens. I can't tell you how rough it used to be where I would have to scour the forums in peoples wanting to trade and PM them about tokens they had for sale 6 months ago and to see if they still had them. It saves me countless hours. It is also amazing that If I pull an UR or some charms I don't want I can swap them out for something at a convention. Sure I might not be getting the best "rate" but the convenience factor so I don't have to take a ton of tokens home makes it easier on me when I already carry around several binders.

I think the only thing on the reselling market that has me confused is the 2nd teeth atm. How is that more expensive then the first did a bunch go missing? That's the only thing I feel like is price speculating atm but its a short supply and demand market.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Azzy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't agree in general with the negative light you portray people who buy tokens for resale in, but that's a matter of personal opinion.

^ this, mostly because if it those people didn't exist, neither I nor any other new players have a decent way of getting older tokens aside from yearning for an eventual reprint that may or may not happen eventually (maybe).

I don't accept Mike's premise that Brad is portraying token resellers in a negative light.
It is worth noting that Brad too is a token reseller.

I think trying to maximize profit is natural, and the game definitely needs token resellers.

There should not be decisions made on the health of the game solely because of the interests of the secondary market is I think Brad's point.

I too picked up a lot of tokens on the secondary market. I had every opportunity to get them the first time around and I did not.

Since there are always reprints, token values definitely fluctuate. Saying a given token is immune to reprint will affect this.

Hinting a token might be reprinted will also affect its value.

It's a very delicate system.

Exactly. Thanks, Wade

Speculation - noun - investment in stocks, property, or other ventures (like tokens?) in the hope of gain but with the risk of loss.

James J Krot wrote: I think the only thing on the reselling market that has me confused is the 2nd teeth atm. How is that more expensive then the first did a bunch go missing? That's the only thing I feel like is price speculating atm but its a short supply and demand market.

At least one big time buyer is on record as having bought a lot less tokens that year so there are about ~70 less 2nd teeth in circulation.