Cactus Game Design Message Boards

As some may have read, I have decided to begin work on developing a more equal scale of value among Redemption Cards for trading. I am currently in the rough stages of development. I am going to begin testing of the system on TEXP because it is one of the smaller sets. It also features less variables (closer distribution of availability) and thus it is easier to predict what should happen (i.e if Grapes and Mayhem are not the top two cards, I need a new equation). Here is the method I currently have outlined (this method is subject to change) to determine card value. As you can see, I will be assigning card ratings and then using a slightly weighted average. The most likely thing to change in the equation is the weights to each element. Please leave me comments on your opinion of possible categories of rating that I did not consider or your opinion on proper weights to use for the total average.

Availability: How difficult is this card to acquire (think of rarity)
Irreplaceability: How hard is this card to replace in your deck with other cards performing a similar function (also considering functional reprints or pre-prints [i.e. Warriors Harvest Time would score lower on this scale than it would if there was no Promo Harvest Time])
Versatility: How easily can this card fit into multiple types of decks (considering thematic cards [i.e. Asher] and card type [artifacts are inherently more versatile than single color enhancements])
Playability: How strong is this card when used properly (assuming the deck builder maximizes the use of this card)

Rating on a scale of 00.00-10.00 with 10.00 indicating the highest possible score on the scale.

Equation for determing overall card value: .5(Availability Score) + .175(Irreplaceability Score) + .15(Versatility Score) + .175(Playability Score)

Son of God
.35*0 + .25*10 + .25*10 + .15*10 = 6.5

Women's Errors
.35*10 + .25*0 + .25*0 + 15*0 =3.5


Trading SOG for 2x Women's Errors.



The best way will be to use completely subjective supply and demand.

Son of God
.35*0 + .25*10 + .25*10 + .15*10 = 6.5

Women's Errors
.35*10 + .25*5 + .25*5 + 15*0 =3.25


Trading SOG for 2x Women's Errors.



The best way will be to use completely subjective supply and demand.

You have hit the main problem with using a formula. My personal position is going to be to note statistical anomalies (i.e. Son of God's value is overstated due to it's highly unique gameplay elements).

Actually, I am going to try to avoid that. I think I am going to further weight availability at the cost of playability and versatility in order to push the equation more towards supply and demand and see how that goes.

Just a little criticism... sounds like to much work for something that is likely to be unaccepted by many.

Also, I do not think using an equation like that will work out. Way too much bias involved.

My opinion: Ask 5-10 of the most prominent traders/sellers to distinguish every 3LG price that should be changed based on relative value to the other cards. then adopt them into a trading amendment for the 3LG price list. It will save soo much time starting with the 3LG prices.

Traders and Sellers I'd recommend:
Reyzen
The Guardian
Gabe
TechnoEthicist
Crashfach2002
Cpt.Jaeger
SoulSeeker
YMT

.My thoughts.

It would save time to start with 3LG prices but it would also bias the data further. The idea is to present an alternative to that listing, so why would I start with it?

Another possible solution is to chart Women's Errors as outliers in the availability rating. Because so few of them are in print, it is feasible to grant them a ridiculous number such as 20 to intentionally bias the data in thier favor.

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on February 16, 2011, 12:21:39 AM

Another possible solution is to chart Women's Errors as outliers in the availability rating. Because so few of them are in print, it is feasible to grant them a ridiculous number such as 20 to intentionally bias the data in thier favor.

an equation like that won't work...

You haven't presented a reasonable reason why it will not work. Rawr presented the initial problems with the formula which I have suggested corrections for which in test sheets I just ran with an adjusted equation using my assigned grades scored SoG's total value at around 4 while Women's Errors (with an overage score of 20) scored around 9. It's not hard to intentionally bias certain cards which are in extremely low supply such as Women's Errors. You would really only need to bias those 4 cards (and possible a slight bias on Faithful Servant). The rest of the cards should in theory work out once the inital equation is balanced properly. Obviously there will be dissention when I release any numbers because of the view that I am presenting subjectivity upon the relative values (which I am), but there are easy ways to correct that apparent subjectivity once the project begins to take flight.

problem=it's all based on your opinion

Every cardlist is based on an opinion. You simply are choosing not to respect my opinion. Like I said before, I have ways to prevent my opinion from being the sole source of this listing, but I need to get the project running before such possibilities could be implemented.

If you'll notice, Jager, his process doesn't use supply and demand based around the present, but more of a theoretical approach.  Thus, he doesn't need the input of you or Ken.

To have an alternative to the sellers pricing lists.  That's another reason people like you wouldn't fit well, as he wants this to be an alternative, and not the same thing in a new package.

Exactly.  I don't see how it's more useful than what Ken or Bany has going.

Well, it does provide a standard of value outside of S/D.

True, this would be interesting to combine with something like what Drew is doing.  Help n00bs get an idea that the KoT they just grabbed is pretty nifty.

Wait, what is drew doing?

Trying to start a knowledge site about Redemption.

Alex, that's exactly what I said.

I spent the last 90 min thinking of possible equations and came to the decision that an equation to find trade values without at least 100 outliers would be near impossible and not worth the time.

the DI/TEXP/FOOF/ROA throw off the equation for the rest of the cards, plus there are about 30 individual cards that will almost certainly be outliers as well.

What would really be nice is a spreadsheet containing 3LG, covenant games, and 2 of the active sellers' (on here) prices, plus the average of them all

You said you wanted to practice your Excel skills, right?  I think this would be much more useful.