I see no reason why we have limits on the lottery. It would be cool if we could have more grass/balance circulating from the lotto giving players a chance to win much larger sums. -vv
With this new players would not be able to be lucky and win some grass. The lottery is made to be fair for everyone right now, and it works just fine.
No support. Once you remove the limit on the lottery, it turns into something that the rich can get richer from. It becomes less a case of chance and more a case of how many tickets you have. If a newer player buy 2 tickets and an og player buys 20 tickets, the og player has a 20/22 chance of winning and the newer only a 2/22 chance of winning. The lottery is nice because it's something that newer players can make some grass to help jumpstart them, I think it's fine as it is now.
This is false, the amount of money in circulation would increase, and the proportionate chance of winning per dollar still remains the same for all parties involved. The only thing this would change is allowing players to win more than a kits worth of items. The lottery would still be "fair" for everyone. You are correct that the individual chance of winning for people who cant afford more than a few tickets would decrease but the proportionate winnings/losses still remain the same. It would only provide an opportunity for more money to circulate in the server being beneficial to both newer players and the economy of the server.
A lottery works on the basis of chance and probability. Statistically if you go into a raffle with 10 tickets against someone with 1 ticket. You are 10 times more likely to have your name pulled rather than that person who only has the single ticket. The ticket limit is put at 2 so that people can have a fair and even chance of winning the lottery to players who may not be able to afford as many tickets if there was no limit. Proportionately, if the person who bought 10 tickets lost the lottery, they lose 10 more grass rather than someone who bought 1 ticket who would only lose 1, but it still makes it unfair as at that point the likelihood of a less wealthy player to be able to win sinks and the richer player can just keep buying a marginally higher amount of tickets and have a much higher chance of winning. If I were to buy numbers to represent tickets, and I bought 9 (1-9) whilst someone only bought 1 number (10), if a randomizer selected any number from 1-9 there is a chance of 9/10 that one of my numbers would be selected, I would win whilst the person who only bought 1 number, being 10, that person has that very little chance of 1/10 of their number being selected. 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |10 Orange would relate to my numbers and the red relates to the others number I understand where you are coming from in terms of the growth of grass circulation in the lottery but it does affect the chances of winning. Sure it could be coded to not increase your chances and keep them all even, but that's not realistic of a lottery and nobody would be inclined to spend anymore if this was the case. I've inserted an image below to give a visual of what the difference in tickets do in terms of cause and affect, the person with more fish (in place of tickets) has a much higher chance of catching one (winning) rather than the others with very few fish who have a much lower chance of winning: Of course this in theory because it's still possible for someone with less tickets to win but its a lot more likely that someone with more tickets would win based on probability and chance. This is just my own personal take on the suggestion, and I respect yours too. In my opinion, it just makes the lottery become unfair and another thing for the rich to get richer from
I major in both math and computer science. Your example has a major flaw lacking any indication of resources spent or proportionate returns. Statically, the loss per dollar invested remains the SAME FOR ALL PARTIES. Obviously, having more tickets increases your chances of winning, but it also proportionately increases your losses. I cant respect an opinion that is so blatantly incorrect. Be aware that it's impossible for the "rich to get richer" in the lottery system we have in place. -vv
Definitely a no support from me. If it is limitless then it will become the battle of the rich. The lottery is created to give everyone an equal chance of winning grass.
no support, there is a reason casino's have low range table to mid and high range when gambling, not everyone has the same wallet in their pocket, the way it is is fair for everyone involved without excluding anyone and would only divide and create an opportunity for people to monopolize the lotto, instead we could use something like a coinflip on the server maybe
I don't support this change, reason stated by grips. id rather see a new form of a game for gambling EXACTLY like a coinflip, or another minigame with a pay to play system rather than them changing the perfectly functional normal lotto limit of 2 grass and 500$ , I just feel like if its not broken don't fix it. *EDIT* HOWEVER, I understand the mentality of wanting to make lotto more interesting to play, with the sums of the winning numbers increasing it would indeed make lotto more exciting, I just feel like the more money people are able to toss aside to the system, the easier it will be for long term profit for people with the money to throw away.
It seems like you all have a misunderstanding about statical averages and gain. Users who can buy more tickets can't exploit or monopolize the system for gain or advantage that other users wouldn't normally have. For example, if I were to buy 99999 tickets against a user with one ticket, we would have the same average return in money. The calculation can be seen as I have a 99999/10000 chance of winning while they have a 1/10000 chance of winning. Now to find the advantage monetary gain we need to divide the chances of winning by the amount of money invested. When we do this we find both parties have an equal "advantage" proving buying more tickets is not a monopolize-able action. Another way of thinking about it is if I were to lose, I would be losing 99999 times versus my opposition only losing once. I'll reiterate, providing people the ability to buy more tickets is a positive thing. It allows large sums of money to enter the market and is beneficial to the economy of the server and all players by stimulating the market. -vv
I just think its better to keep lottery as fair as possible so there is no advantages and no major loss. We can increase the number of tickets but as for unlimited tickets im just not sure thats a good way to really distrubute currency.
I would like to just clear a few things up that some of this information may not consider all factors that go into the mathematically correct way based on statistics and may not be completely accurate. VV helped me better understand the gain per dollar which allowed me to realise that for example, if you spend 99$ on 99 tickets and someone spends 1$ on just one ticket. 99/100 = .99 (99 out of 100 times they would win) 1/100 = .01 (1 out of 100 times they would win) In theory, if the person with 99 tickets wins 99 of the 100 times, remembering this is just a mathematical scenario, they would win a total of $99 whilst if the person with 1 ticket wins 1 time, they will also win $99. This means that both parties stand to win $99 and lose $99 meaning there is no gain for either of them. Now i've cleared that up, Krissy made an excellent point, and it's honestly where I stand. Increasing the total ticket limit would be a good idea but I think making it unlimited is a fair bit excessive. Still no support but I do support the idea of increasing the limit
I just wanted to say that statistically you are very much accurate. If 1 ticket is 1 dollar and I buy 99 tickets and another player buys 1, and we do this 100 times, theoretically I’d win 99 times but only gain 99 dollars where the other player wins once but gains 99 dollars. In theory it would even out, but again it’s luck, it doesn’t always work perfectly according to statistics. Since the lottery is such a low number of eco dollars, I feel it’s aimed more towards the newer players who feel they want to risk a little bit of money and see if they can get some more. I think Krissys right in that we can increase ticket limit no problem, but a full out infinite number would be a bit much. Sure that one player could win that 100th lottery, but statistically they’d win it once and be spending money buying the tickets every time until they get that lucky win. The higher the number of tickets, the more it starts to lean towards the favour of the player who’s bought more. Statistically, they have the same chance of winning the same amount of money, but in reality the newer player isn’t going to spend that much to try and win that one lucky time. I can see how increasing ticket amounts would help the economy flow somewhat, but I would want to see an smaller increase in tickets first, like say 20 for economy and 10 for survival or something and see how it runs And as I’m writing this pancake basically said half of my points
I was going to make a long reply here but then I realised that I couldn't be bothered arguing for the next 6 hours of my life with someone who doesn't want other people to have their own opinion. The lottery is fine where it is now. There's no need to change it. This suggestion most likely won't go anywhere, as has pretty much every other suggestion with a similar ideal (and there are a lot of them). It's fair right now and thats what matters. Removing the limit altogether scraps the fair factor and makes the odds of winning so much more higher for richer players than it is for newer and less experienced players. Players will then stop using the lottery due to the fact that it just isn't worth it, as the person with the highest number of tickets is most likely to win almost every time. This is going to be my only reply to this thread.
Nah, bro. I already spend 12 grass on the lottery per day. This will tempt me to buy 64 lottery tickets each day XD.
Lol this is surfacing all the problems that happened back when 1ak0 had lottery bots. Higher risk = higher reward. Support, I can buy as many lotto tickets as I want IRL, why not here?
But then, some rich player could buy stacks of Tickets and rig the lottery to their favor. No support
Did you even read the responses to this thread? You spend more, you have a higher chance but less to win. You spend less, you have a lower chance but more to win. It is simple math. No outcomes of this could have someone "rigging" the lottery
Yeah they most likely would win, if they auto-bought an insane amount of tickets every time. It may get boring, but another player might want to challenge them and put in the same amount, or maybe someone who put in a low amount wins it all. I think it adds more fun to the lottery and would make more talking topics in chat
