Quote:
Originally Posted by fastboy21
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Yah, I wasn't considering those situations...which are so limited that I just consider them special exceptions.
|
Totally. I just think they're worth mentioning because they contrast different systems for handling the "X people want thing that only appears every Y often (and X * Y = yikes!)" problem.
With a list there's a guarantee (assuming /list or no list mischief with players) that you will get your item in X * Y time. Put in the time, get rewarded with the item. "Too many people on the list" isn't a problem, just a market opportunity for people to sell places in line.
With a player agreement there is no such guarantee. Instead there's a guarantee that everyone has an equal random chance ... but you lose your guarantee that after X * Y you get your item. You could win the first roll you attend, or never win your 200th.
I think it'd be interesting if "listing" (preferably via automated GMing) actually looked more like player agreements, because I think that or some hybrid (eg. list has max 3 people on it, after that you random to get on) is closer to classic EQ to me.