As a ftp, I'd like the rate to be as low as possible, let the ptw burn their money!

Just saying, this really causes polarizing opinion between people who want the ninja versus the people who don't want to fight against the ninja

If you don't want randomness, you should wait for an event where you can get it w/ a fixed value (or roughly fixed value, as some stuff giving a somewhat random, but easily predictable number of event points per "go" with which you can exchange for the ninja you want).

Most ninjas aren't exclusively in random events, so you don't get to complaint about randomness when you decide to try to get it from such RNG events.

1. you are not paying 30k ingot to get him, so that's not the correct valuation. that's like me converting 10,000 chinese Yuan to USD and getting $1506.25 then proceed to claim that the 25 cents cost me 10,000 yuan and that the exchange rate is ridiculous.

Granted, people often value ingots less than its face value, so whatever difference will go toward the extra rewards, but that still does not mean the WHOLE thing is SPENT on the ninja (and you are ignoring other reward tiers)

2. Any sale price is fair as long as the purchase is optional. I don't think abstract art are worth the canvas they are painted on yet they are sold for hundreds, thousands or even much much more. But that's fair, I'm not to forced to buy the useless thing.

3. If they actually value something at "X" then it makes sense that on average you are expected to spend "X" before getting it out of a random event. Expecting anything less would be foolish. Noiw, the valuation is certainly not at 30k, but it could still be quite high. And when you play the lottery, you can lose. So there is really no one to blame but you for the decision you made. Did you know that the lottery is called a tax on the poor as well as a tax on the *a word for less than intelligent*?

So man up and accept your own responsibilities. There are plenty of things in the game that can be, in fact, blamed on the game. Such as arena, DB, masuri (not in the way most people think), sage (also not in the way most people think) and so on. But this is NOT one of them. This, no matter how bad the rate, is on the player.

That is, of course, assuming that the RNG is independent, that is to say they are not doing some gimmick to tie it to level, play time, spending etc (as there is rumor that newbie gets increased chances to draw them in and make them stay) That's a rather difficult thing to prove or disprove and not really the topic of discussion. But it is important to note that if that were true, then it is the game's fault, as it's shady practice.

There is no inherit difference between so called "in game pixels" and art. They are both items of no intrinsic value* and only gain value due to people's appreciation and the entertainment they bring. Any argument in the contrary, without actual logical backing, is merely bias honed by time. Art have been around a long time, so it have been accepted as valuable. Movies, as it were, were merely a demonstration of technological wonder and did not become a form of art until quite some years after its conception. Many people have been pushing for games, anime and more such modern concept as art. Granted, this game is a poor example of it, but fact remains that there is no intrinsic differences

*Art, and any other form of media, do potentially have historical value, that is to say to let the "future" people learn of the time at which the art is created. But this is only true for certain type of art and generally not true for abstract art. As it were, abstract art depends on knowing the background in which it is created in order to be understood, the complete opposite of this form of value. Digital games are, as it were, a fairly modern invention. So it is difficult to say whether they will end up having such historical value in the future. But if nothing else, it would provide some insight into our technological level for future man to figure out, should for some reason or another, no better record exist. There are also games, certainly not this one as far as I can see, that have certain cultural and political information baked into them. So there is that too. So in a way, on this front, the "good" games will be comparable with arts in general, whereas games like this is quite comparable to the modern abstract art.

And there is almost no, if any at all, "real" currency in circulation today. We have long past the point at which we use currency of actual value, such as gold and silver. Most currency today are fiat currency, that is to say something with value that is enforced by a governing entity and/or agreement between governing entities. As far as the game goes, the game IS the governing entity. So while ingot is certainly not recognized outside of its bound, it is a fiat currency within the game. It is, in fact, no different than a currency issued by some dictator that works perfectly well (risk of hyperinflation aside) within a certain country but not recognized by the international community. The game, as it were, is very much a dictatorship.

And if that does not sate you, think bitcoin vs ether instead of yuan vs USD. Neither of those are currency of intrinsic value nor even currency that is enforced by governing entities. They hold value because people accept that they hold value. If, somehow, one single person buys up ALL the bitcoin (or ether), there is every chance that everyone else will simply go "meh, it's worthless now" because there is nothing stopping that from happening. So if it makes you happy, think about buying bitcoin with ether or vise versa. The same logic would still apply, you did NOT pay the full price for a specific PART of the product you bought.

In any case, do try to come up with a logical argument instead of merely dismissing things you don't like/agree with. Things don't randomly become true because you say so, you need to back it up with reasons.

I would support revealing rates. That said, given unknown rate, I believe it is the responsibility of the player to be pessimistic. If you aren't and lose out, that's still mostly on you. I've never opposed this particular option before.

What I have a problem with is the unrealistic expectations some people have shown and then proceed to blame the game for their own fault.

You see, I am fine with a mostly objective statement of "rate is low" after some amount of observation. This can very well be an objective fact.

I am not fine with "rate is low, it made me waste money, it's game's fault, the rate is unfair". This is people unwilling to accept the blame and fault of their own actions and demonstrating entitlement.

As for option 2, there is literally nothing to be gained for the company to raise the rates. Because even if it is as high as 10%, there could be someone not getting it after 100 rolls (roughly 1 out of 40,000, a bit of a stretch to happen in a single event, but will happen eventually) and then we will see fresh complaints of "omg this game is rigged against me, caz everyone else gawt it and i didn't" because people will continue to not understand how randomness works.

And do you think people will actually notice or be able to prove a rate change from 0.5% to 0.6%? I seriously doubt it. Since all we can see is yes or no, it would literally take hundreds of thousands of pulls and thus hundreds of drops to even come up with a reasonable conclusion. This alone is not impossible, it can easily be done between all the servers. The problem would be data collection. How do you know, aside from yourself, how many pull any other player have done? From the perspective of a single player, you can't see the difference of "a little, TINY change in the rates", fact of the matter is that as a single player, you cannot draw a concrete conclusion on whether rates changed unless it change by a factor of at least 2, probably 5, especially if you stop pulling after getting the item you want. And news flash, a increase of 100% or 400% from the base rate is not "a little, TINY change in the rates".

So fact of the matter is, complaint will continue. Because most people don't care about what the reality is, they only care about what they perceive.

On second thought, revealing rate will have its own problems. Because yet again, people don't know how randomness works. If they tell you it's 2% and you don't get it after 100 rolls, you are probably going to rage. Never mind the chance of NOT getting it is 13.2%, or roughly 1 in 8, so pretty much one in every other server or so(for more active servers anyway). Nope, people aren't going to care that they are just unlucky, they are going to accuse that the rate is false regardless of whether it is (to be clear, it could be a lie, but somehow I don't see people doing a sufficiently large number study that's unbiased. That pretty much never happens, in any game, people will just rage first and refuse to think through it rationally)

I wonder if rate should be revealed after all... they really should make statistic a mandatory course in school...

So you see, it's not a matter of whether I want them to do something. It's a matter of I actually think through whether them doing it will have any positive effect for them. And the sad truth is, the answer will probably be no. So why would they? You are overestimating "people", probably because you haven't been to enough forums.