I’ll take things that are not relevant for $200 Alex.
RE: The bitter truth about Drug Wars
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The bitter truth about Drug Wars
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
I wouldn't expect someone who's developed a rent-seeking bid-bot to get it.
That zero-sum game theory is straight up hardwired.
I win. You lose.
I'll be back in a few months to illustrate my points.
AKA twice as much time as this game has even been in development.
This thread will make a nice prerequisite.
Ah you know what, I just thought of another way to fix the payouts.
Time to go write this down.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Any token they create to add value would need to either make the player more money or make them grow faster (thus making them more money) but no more money is going into the system to fund it. The more people put in, the more they want out. They even said it themselves. It’s a game about getting paid.
nice strawman argument.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It might be a strawman attack, but I think the perspective of zero-sum vs synergy is a pretty relevant reoccurring theme in the cryptosphere. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and all that.
The definition of value implies it can be transferred from one person to another. $100 goes in, $80 comes out. Even with a zero percent rake only 50% of players would make money on average. Once again, this game will be a huge win if even 10% can squeeze out net gains on average.
That same Greater Fool Theory is used by lesser men to make the argument that crypto is worthless.
That is wild speculation, and you could make the same argument directed at poker players. Did they change the rules of poker to accommodate all the losers? No, because gambling sells itself. Everyone wants to win, most will lose.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Poker is gambling. You can win big and lose big and that’s the game. There is no way to win any more than what you buy in the game and the income is set and completely determined by how much new money comes in.
Once people stop spending (which they mostly have daily spend dropped from 12k/day to around 1k) people won’t break-even.
Using poker as a comparison is again completely irrelevant. You know going into the game you can win or lose and the odds to do so are clearly established.
Apples and chop liver argument.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Alright I wrote my thoughts about what needs to happen with this game:
drugwars-fixing-the-payout-structure
I think you'd agree these would be good changes:
Conclusion (TLDR)
Can changes like this stop the game from death-spiraling?
Maybe.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You still do one of two things, increase players returns or give them an advantage that indirectly increases their return. Both are still pulling from a pool that is smaller than the demand pulling from it.
Even if they removed the development rake completely they still would be at a loss. How are they going to pay people like you who already hit break-even and are pulling from the pool still? There are 7,800 accounts all trying to do the same thing.
Now with the new changes announced it's going to end up being turtle town.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit