|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rynx Sinfar
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1211
   |
Posted - 2014.04.03 12:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Asked earlier, is there a script in place to limit the number ticket purchases a player can make? Someone can flood a ticket box last minute.
I too am curious about this since the payouts have to be manually done
Text Hydra of Subdreddit
"Remove one word and two shall rise"
|
Rynx Sinfar
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1214
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 14:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Rynx Sinfar wrote:I too am curious about this since the payouts have to be manually done I wondered if there was a way to stipulate that if player X payed over a certain threshold to gain Y number of tickets, any additional ticket purchases would be refunded back to player X. Right now, it's ease to use this system as a scam by flooding the pot with a lot of ticket purchases. I'm not exactly sure how submissions are 'queried' to random.org.
Its kind of a weird setup though for "scamming". There are 18 tickets sold for that faction warfare alliance trial lottery one.
Each sold at 500k. 90% goes into pot. It is currently at 18.1 million. So 8.1 Million was from ticket sales and it started at 10 million.
Let's say I decide to buy enough tickets to get a 50% chance of winning. So I need to buy 18 tickets for a total of 9 million isk. The total is 26.2 Million Isk. My profit if I win would be 17.2 Million Isk. So my money would be 291% greater than it was originally. Not bad for 50/50 odds. If I wanted to have a 75% chance of winning I'd buy 54 tickets. This would cost me 27 Million isk and the pot would be 42.4 Million isk. My profit if I win would be 15.4 Million Isk, and my money would be 157% of what it was originally, still not terribly for 75% odds. If I wanted 90% odds I'd buy 162 tickets at a price of 81 million. Pot would be 91 Million, profit would be 10 million, and my money would be 112% of what it originally was. Which is not terrible for a near guarantee.
However it is important to note that the last profit number was 10 million, which is where the lottery started at. Additionally these tickets are paying out at maximum percentages. If the ticket was adding 75% instead of 90% to the pot then the risk/reward would worsen (50% odds for 276% original investment, 75% odds for 142% original investment, 90% odds for 97% original investment). The risk/reward is also highly dependent on participation and initial pot. If the pot were 91 Million and tickets were 500k you might see more people giving it "a go".
However what instead would occur is people would be checking the lotteries right before "finish" at which point they'd run the above numbers and determine what was statistically in their best interests and pay accordingly.
BUT they wouldn't be the only one most likely. They'd be running the secondary game of "will anyone else game this lottery?" in which the system doesn't update for 30 minutes. Indeed if you are playing for 95% odds, and someone decides to pop in and "game" for 75% odds, you would have (in the above example) bought 162 tickets and they 54 tickets. The total tickets would be 234 and your 90% would drop to 70%, and their 75% would drop to 23%.
So perhaps you do so with 1.5 hours left to "establish dominance", You buy 162 tickets and the pot is now 91 million and 180 tickets are circulating. Someone else takes the risk and says I'll take 50/50 odds. They pay 90 mill for 180 tickets and the pot is now 172 mil, and this person has a chance 50% now to make 191% his initial investment in addition to any latecomers who want to buy individual tickets with this giant pot on the line. And this is all under fairly ideal circumstances as well.
You can also fairly guarantee people will always buy more tickets which makes it harder to buy into good expected profits, and you can also know that such an easy profit opportunity with minimal necessary savvy will draw in even more. Gambling theory is... well researched and I'm guessing well funded though in this case the creators of the lotto are the most responsible for results, but the more popular the site was the more difficult it would be as well.
THAT said, the main reason to limit it would be because people mass-buying tickets last minute is not terribly fun for everyone else.
Semi relevant / humerous
Text Hydra of Subdreddit
"Remove one word and two shall rise"
|
Rynx Sinfar
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1217
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 17:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Hey Brush I may have gotten a little emotionally invested in the math.
IR = Investment Return - Total you will have if lottery won compared to what you invested (if you put in 100m and win 200m this would be 200%)
iP = Initial Pot Size
OW = Odds of winning (for person contemplating purchase)
T = Ticket Price
sT = Sold Tickets - Tickets already bought
TPP = Ticket Price Percent that is placed in the pot
If you look at a lotto you can know the initial pot size, sold tickets, ticket price, and ticket price percent for pot.
If you then say "I want a 95% chance of winning" you have the "odds of winning".
With those numbers you can determine the possible "investment return" with the formula:
iP * ( 1 - OW ) TPP
----------------- + ------
sT * OW * T OW
Which isn't very helpful because I didn't include how much you wanted to invest and etc. But that isn't important in this case.
What DOES matter is we can convert that to find sold tickets which results in:
iP * ( 1 - OW )
--------------------------
T * ( IR * OW - TPP )
For the sake of argument let's call "Odds of winning" 50%, and investment return of 200%.
What the above formula says is "With your starting pot size, tickets at that price, and a ticket percent to pot of that number someone could purchase enough tickets for a 50% chance of winning with an investment return of 200% until X number of tickets have otherwise been sold". Which is not too big of a deal.
But if I use it on the faction warfare lotto example and I want a 90% chance of winning and a an investment return of 150% I could find that with a 10 million starting cost, 500k ticket cost, and 90% ticket to pool return, then when 5 tickets are purchased I can no longer achieve that investment return and keep a 90% chance of winning. The lower the number the better, and the farther they expect the actual number to get away from that number the better.
As a more realistic example of "utility" I input for the same lotto a 75% chance of winning and a 150% investment return. The result was that if 22 tickets were purchased before me (and I could guarantee no others would be bought) then I could still achieve those numbers. The importance there is that statistically speaking if I kept investing in 75% odds that would give me a 150% investment result, then my money would grow at a rate of 12.5% depending on how quickly I could invest.
As I mentioned in the previous post the odds of someone managing this is minimal (though timezones and etc), but you could likely whip up a "minimal" circumstance where if someone is being a bit too generous then they can be warned that while it's great that they are doing it, they might have some unintended consequences. That part can be tricky but as you do lotteries you can use historical data. If you keep track of the ticket price v current cost on average of purchasers you might manage this.
Anyway my suggestion would be take the investment return formula, decide on a baseline odds of winning which would be "bad", a reasonable number of ticket purchases to be expected, and then a "warning" level for investment return. Where you can say that at the current numbers it may end up worthwhile for someone to "buy out" the lotto.
Oh wait, screw those above ideas. Use the formula to recommend a number. So they list a ticket price, an initial pot, and you recommend a ticket return percent, or they list an initial pot, a ticket return percent and you recommend a ticket price.
idk, have fun, do what you like, if you have any questions on the math above just ping me on IRC
Text Hydra of Subdreddit
"Remove one word and two shall rise"
|
Rynx Sinfar
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1217
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 19:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Viktor Hadah Jr wrote:
Found a little problem with your math...
You are saying you need to buy 18 more tickets for 9mil that is what you are using as an expense that is your ISK so you can no count it towards your profit your profit will be only that of ISK others spent so 8.1Mil while you invested 18.1Mil yourself.
So you still have the 50/50 chance of winning but you are risking more than twice the reward.
Ah took me a second, think I see the issue you are referring to.
Quote:So my money would be 291% greater than it was originally.
Is incorrectly worded, should be
Quote:So my money would be 291% of its original total.
As in 9 mil ISK being spent, for a total of 26.2 mil ISK post, which if won would be 291% of the original amount or an increase of 191%. Generally when I am showing percent increases at 100% above I prefer to use the total change rather than net change.
Text Hydra of Subdreddit
"Remove one word and two shall rise"
|
|
|
| |
|