90% of jokers on gold stakes are perishble and or rentals

[Skull]

And I don't think this makes for a very fun or fair game. I feel that the spawn rate of these tags should be lowered.

What you guys think?

[srn347]

Or at least they should back off of buffoon packs and/or jokers spawned from tags. Localthunk went out of his way to incentivise skipping for joker tags and yet there's less reason to skip for them than before.

[malogoss]

I hate the current "dodge dirty jokers" game.
30% for each (perish, rent, eternal) is way too high when all 3 stack up, that simple. It leaves 1/3 of the jokers clean.

Suggestions:

Either the shop jokers or the packs jokers have to be clean. If you want to pay to risk the other option, then that's on you. I'd prefer a clean shop, to make joker tags worth something.
or
Bring the 30% down to 15%. That way 60% of jokers are clean, less are rental + eternal (aka useless), etc. It would make it manageable.

Also, so many things would be instantly fixed if the ante 1 reroll cost started at $0 and ante 2 at $2. No need to add or remove game mechanics, just do that and all games beginning would be much smoother, at any stake. It could make things a bit too easy at high stakes, then make it $1 and $3 for high stakes and voila. Two numbers changed, impact everyone's game in a positive way, making early game less RNG heavy.

[󠀡󠀡󠀡󠀡]

More rng just for more rng

[Aw3som3-117]

It's not 90%. A joker can be normal, eternal, or perishable, and then each of those has a 30% chance of being a rental. Assuming 30% for eternal and 30% for perishable, that would give a 0.4*0.7 = 28% chance of a joker being normal and not a rental. Though, I saw something suggesting that the perishable rate might be closer to 35% due to a code error, but I can't confirm that.

Overall I'm actually a big fan of the updates in the beta, personally. And for the record I find it much easier than it was previously on gold stake. The pack costs made so many strategies problematic, and the -1 hand size made almost every hand based option besides pairs and high card pretty bad, and was just generally awful for consistency, both in the early game and later on.

That being said, one thing that I feel is kinda cheap is when the updated "get a specific joker in the next shop" tags that now make said joker free hits a rental joker. If it's perishable then it can still be good temporary power that you can ditch later for its sell value, and if it's eternal it can make for an interesting choice of whether it's worth the slot (negative jokers notwithstanding), but when it's rental and would've only cost 1 anyway it just feels bad imo.

[malogoss]

Originally posted by Aw3som3-117:

It's not 90%. A joker can be normal, eternal, or perishable, and then each of those has a 30% chance of being a rental. Assuming 30% each for eternal and 30% for perishable, that would give a 0.4*0.7 = 28% chance of a joker being normal and not a rental.

Each eternal, perishable and rental have a 30% chance, from the patch details.

So a joker would have to dodge all 3 to remain clean. 0.7^3 = 0.34 of being clean. (that number probably isn't correct, keep reading)

I don't know in what order those 3 status are checked. But the same joker can't be eternal and perishable at the same time. So say the game checks for eternal first, it means that 30% of all jokers don't even have the possibility to be perishable. So 0.7*0.3 would be perishable, 21%. If the game checks in the reverse order, then it's the opposite, 21% of eternal. From my experience, the eternal rate and perishable rate are higher than 21%, but I have no real data, sorry.

Or the dev went all in. In which case he would have the game check for eternal (or perishable) first. Then if not eternal, it would check for perishable (or eternal) with a 43% chance. Since only 70% of jokers would even have a chance to be perishable, 0.7*0.43 = 0.30, which would mean that yes, 30% of the jokers you see will be perishable.
In that case 0.7*0.7*(1-0.43) = 0.28, and that's where the 28% comes from. 28% of jokers would be clean.

I can say, idk if it's 28% of clean jokers, or 0.7^3 = 34%. Judging by the crap I get when opening a 4 joker pack, it could very well be 28%, I wouldn't be surprised at all. It would also mean that the patch details are accurate. A real 30% of each status on all jokers you see.

EDIT: turns out, it's 34%, not 28%. See @Goblin post below.
EDIT 2: Or maybe not, see @Aw3som3 post below, 24%.

[Woody]

Yes, the new joker types are not fun imo.

This is the same issue as before, too much garbage that causes bloat and leads to massive RNG - especially at high stakes. High stakes runs are obnoxious because of the low-ante game (bad joker RNG leads to run end by ante 2). This essentially just exacerbates the problem.

I am still a huge fan of going to a 3-item shop size. I like the new joker tags, but it really blows to use a skip tag and get a garbage rental-joker, etc.

[Goblin]

Originally posted by malogoss:

Originally posted by Aw3som3-117:

It's not 90%. A joker can be normal, eternal, or perishable, and then each of those has a 30% chance of being a rental. Assuming 30% each for eternal and 30% for perishable, that would give a 0.4*0.7 = 28% chance of a joker being normal and not a rental.

Each eternal, perishable and rental have a 30% chance, from the patch details.

So a joker would have to dodge all 3 to remain clean. 0.7^3 = 0.34 of being clean. (that number probably isn't correct, keep reading)

I don't know in what order those 3 status are checked. But the same joker can't be eternal and perishable at the same time. So say the game checks for eternal first, it means that 30% of all jokers don't even have the possibility to be perishable. So 0.7*0.3 would be perishable, 21%. If the game checks in the reverse order, then it's the opposite, 21% of eternal. From my experience, the eternal rate and perishable rate are higher than 21%, but I have no real data, sorry.

Or the dev went all in. In which case he would have the game check for eternal (or perishable) first. Then if not eternal, it would check for perishable (or eternal) with a 43% chance. Since only 70% of jokers would even have a chance to be perishable, 0.7*0.43 = 0.30, which would mean that yes, 30% of the jokers you see will be perishable.
In that case 0.7*0.7*(1-0.43) = 0.28, and that's where the 28% comes from.

I can say, idk if it's 28% of clean jokers, or 0.7^3 = 34%. Judging by the crap I get when opening a 4 joker pack, it could very well be 28%, I wouldn't be surprised at all. It would also mean that the patch details are accurate. A real 30% of each status on all jokers you see.

Here's the code:

if (area == G.shop_jokers) or (area == G.pack_cards) then
if G.GAME.modifiers.enable_eternals_in_shop and pseudorandom('stake_shop_joker_eternal'..G.GAME.round_resets.ante) > 0.7 then
card:set_eternal(true)
elseif G.GAME.modifiers.enable_perishables_in_shop and pseudorandom('ssjp'..G.GAME.round_resets.ante)/0.7 > 0.7 then
card:set_perishable(true)
end
if G.GAME.modifiers.enable_rentals_in_shop and pseudorandom('ssjr'..G.GAME.round_resets.ante) > 0.7 then
card:set_rental(true)
end
end

It is in fact 70% chance it's not eternal, then 70% chance it's not perishable, and finally 70% chance it's not rental for 34.3% chance of a clean joker. Exclusiveness is irrelevant for chance of clean jokers, since it doesn't matter if it doesn't roll for perishable if it's already eternal - it's already not clean at that point. It does mean perishables are more rare, because they only have a 70% chance to even get their 30% chance. AKA your 21% chance for perishable prediction is correct.

[malogoss]

Originally posted by Goblin:

It is in fact 70% chance it's not eternal, then 70% chance it's not perishable, and finally 70% chance it's not rental for 34.3% chance of a clean joker. Exclusiveness is irrelevant for chance of clean jokers, since it doesn't matter if it doesn't roll for perishable if it's already eternal - it's already not clean at that point. It does mean perishables are more rare, because they only have a 70% chance to even get their 30% chance. AKA your 21% chance for perishable prediction is correct.

Thank you.

So the patch description's wording, 30% of each status, is misleading. As some cards' text are. Why am I even surprised?

[Aw3som3-117]

Originally posted by Goblin:

Here's the code:

if (area == G.shop_jokers) or (area == G.pack_cards) then
if G.GAME.modifiers.enable_eternals_in_shop and pseudorandom('stake_shop_joker_eternal'..G.GAME.round_resets.ante) > 0.7 then
card:set_eternal(true)
elseif G.GAME.modifiers.enable_perishables_in_shop and pseudorandom('ssjp'..G.GAME.round_resets.ante)/0.7 > 0.7 then
card:set_perishable(true)
end
if G.GAME.modifiers.enable_rentals_in_shop and pseudorandom('ssjr'..G.GAME.round_resets.ante) > 0.7 then
card:set_rental(true)
end
end

It is in fact 70% chance it's not eternal, then 70% chance it's not perishable, and finally 70% chance it's not rental for 34.3% chance of a clean joker. Exclusiveness is irrelevant for chance of clean jokers, since it doesn't matter if it doesn't roll for perishable if it's already eternal - it's already not clean at that point. It does mean perishables are more rare, because they only have a 70% chance to even get their 30% chance. AKA your 21% chance for perishable prediction is correct.

Okay, so that's actually what the code is? Because that's what I was going with as well, based on a reddit post. But in that case this is what it's *actually* doing:
1. Generate a "random" number between 0 and 1. If it's greater than 0.7 (30% chance), the joker is eternal.
2. If a joker is not eternal, then generate a new random number between 0 and 1. Divide by 0.7, and check if that value is above 0.7 (51% chance), the joker is perishable. This is conditional on *not* being eternal, resulting in a 0.7*0.51 = 35.7% chance the joker is perishable, and a 34.3% chance of being neither eternal nor perishable.
3. After all that, generate a new random number between 0 and 1. If it's greater than 0.7 (30% chance), then the joker is a rental. This stacks with eternal, perishable, and normal jokers.

Final odds:
No modifiers: 0.343*0.7 = 24.01%
Only rental: 0.343*0.3 = 10.29%
Only eternal: 0.3*0.7 = 21%
Eternal and rental: 0.3*0.3 = 9%
Only perishable: 0.357*0.7 = 24.99%
Perishable and rental: 0.357*0.3 = 10.71%

[malogoss]

Originally posted by Aw3som3-117:

Final odds:
No modifiers: 0.343*0.7 = 24.01%
Only rental: 0.343*0.3 = 10.29%
Only eternal: 0.3*0.7 = 21%
Eternal and rental: 0.3*0.3 = 9%
Only perishable: 0.357*0.7 = 24.99%
Perishable and rental: 0.357*0.3 = 10.71%

Very interesting, to me at least.

[srn347]

Ah, I see where localthunk's mistake is. For 2 mutually exclusive 30% chances, if one doesn't happen then the conditional probability of the other one happening is 30%/70% or 3/7. Dividing by 0.7 makes no sense there. If he multiplied by 0.7 and checked for whether it's above 0.4, it'd result in the correct probability.

[Punchy]

I think Rental is interesting in the sense that it forces you to play under a harsher economy limit for lower upfront cost which feels like it fits the vibe of Gold Stake but I'm not tremendously sold on Perishable, personally. I get how it's a logical cousin to Eternal, but Eternal is an interesting mechanic because its not necessarily strictly bad or good due to how other Jokers can interact with it and can create interesting decisions due to how committal it is. Perishable is basically just, strictly a bad thing, at best it's pointless like when it's attached to Popcorn or something.

Perishable in theory forces you to find a pivot away from these pieces but you kind of want to be pivoting away to improvements in most contexts anyway? And at worst you end up with a Perishable scaling joker like Ride The Bus or something and you might as well not even offer the joker at that point, there's no possible way to really use that? Which doesn't feel great.

also yeah they spawn really often which kinda sucks given how Perishable is almost always just bad

[Goblin]

Originally posted by Aw3som3-117:

2. If a joker is not eternal, then generate a new random number between 0 and 1. Divide by 0.7, and check if that value is above 0.7 (51% chance), the joker is perishable.

♥♥♥♥, I hadn't even noticed that /0.7 there, yeah that's a big ♥♥♥♥♥♥ on his part. No wonder it feels so messed up to everyone.