farmerisme November 8, 2006 Share farmerisme Member November 8, 2006 Current thoughts... "This only gets worse when your team is losing since the "good" weapons are so expensive only the winners can reasonably afford them on a consistent enough basis to make a difference in gameplay." ---A VERY SMART PERSON It is just silly that a Deagle should cost almost 4000. This seems to me is clear evidence that this thing is out of control... I do not like being forced to use guns that I would not normally use. I really do not like being forced to use guns that are far less effective than the ones I would normally buy. I will not play on a server that has this activated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it3llig3nc3 November 8, 2006 Share it3llig3nc3 Member November 8, 2006 Finally the "penny dropped" for me and realized another thing which might reveal VALVE's original intention. Earlier a lot of people were hoping that the "free ammo" functions (so every weapon gets loaded with full ammo and magazines at the beginning of the round) is a "bug". It does not seem to be. What occured me today that it is not only that you get the free ammo but also the menu system got redesigned: 1. Keyboard shortcut for equipment has been moved to key "6" instead of key "8". Key "6" were the primary weapon bullet purchase, key "7" was the pistol one. So VALVE intentionally REMOVED them. 2. On screen buy menu got redesigned. The ammo buy boxes got removed. All of these makes me to think that the "bug" is not a bug - it's VALVE's decision to get rid of the ammo buying. Why? God knows. They don't even mention it in the release notes.... But after all this I don't expect that a patch is going to fix it in the near future... too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mk5 November 8, 2006 Share Mk5 Member November 8, 2006 Is this poll going to be addressed or not? Personally, the new pricing system is detracting from the amount of fun I'm having ingame by forcing me to use weapons I dislike. Its all well and good to mess around with a mac-10 or p90 once in awhile; however, not being able to buy my favorite guns due to costs makes me do one of two things: 1) Find a server with the DWP feature disabled. 2) Stack on the winning team so I can buy the guns I want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laz.e.rus November 8, 2006 Share Laz.e.rus Member November 8, 2006 today I used a lot of: Ump dualies 5-7 bullpup autosniper autoshotty mp5 Those were for my primary weapons Of those, I like the mp5...when Im broke. Not as a major weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie November 8, 2006 Share mookie GC Alumni November 8, 2006 The aug is as good as the m4 if not better. I recommend anyone and everyone to try it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alvin November 8, 2006 Share alvin Member November 8, 2006 Poke hates the weapon pricing. I'll just play on DM where my guns are free! At first i thought this was a good idea but i was wrong. I hate the new buy menu too. I need my 6 for primary and 7 for secondary! Steam was better off making a new, fixed, and updated dust2... -_- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vovik November 8, 2006 Share Vovik Member November 8, 2006 The aug is as good as the m4 if not better. I recommend anyone and everyone to try it out. lol mooks that sounded desperate.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie November 8, 2006 Share mookie GC Alumni November 8, 2006 The aug is as good as the m4 if not better. I recommend anyone and everyone to try it out. lol mooks that sounded desperate.... I got a 5-kill ace with the aug the other day. Too bad it was a pub and not a match. The only thing the m4 has on the aug is the flash suppressor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meherdmann November 8, 2006 Share meherdmann Member November 8, 2006 Yeah the aug is good. In addition to the silencer, the m4 is a little easier to spray (at least for me). The zoom function definitely makes it easier to get head shots, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vovik November 8, 2006 Share Vovik Member November 8, 2006 (edited) I got a 5-kill ace with the aug the other day. Too bad it was a pub and not a match.The only thing the m4 has on the aug is the flash suppressor. Yeah the aug is good. In addition to the silencer, the m4 is a little easier to spray (at least for me). The zoom function definitely makes it easier to get head shots, though. bogus, aug is horrible. it has nothing on m4. the rate of fire is slower, the recoil is much higher, and the zoom function is totally worthless - wastes time and slows rate of fire even further. 1on1. you won't even get a shot off against an m4, and if you do it will be off. Edited November 8, 2006 by Vovik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it3llig3nc3 November 8, 2006 Share it3llig3nc3 Member November 8, 2006 May I suggest to return to the original subject of this topic? It appears to me that now it becomes more a "weapon performance analysis" topic. The major questions is still: Would GC management agree to switch the DWP function OFF on the GC servers? At least until VALVE fixes the pricing algorithm. As the voting stands now 69% voted for DWP to be OFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discom November 8, 2006 Share discom Member November 8, 2006 May I suggest to return to the original subject of this topic? It appears to me that now it becomes more a "weapon performance analysis" topic. The major questions is still: Would GC management agree to switch the DWP function OFF on the GC servers? At least until VALVE fixes the pricing algorithm. As the voting stands now 69% voted for DWP to be OFF. its only on in west right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie November 9, 2006 Share mookie GC Alumni November 9, 2006 As the voting stands now 69% voted for DWP to be OFF. It is off on 2/3 of the stock servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it3llig3nc3 November 9, 2006 Share it3llig3nc3 Member November 9, 2006 As the voting stands now 69% voted for DWP to be OFF. It is off on 2/3 of the stock servers. Awesome. Thanks for the info. I did not check yesterday evening - went to the cinema instead to handle my desperate need to play CS:S with regular pricing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it3llig3nc3 November 11, 2006 Share it3llig3nc3 Member November 11, 2006 (edited) I would like to offer some of my observations for discussion. I might have overlooked something but I went back and tried to understand the price determination calculation to really see why it's inflating severly prices. If you look into it some important things can be recongised. My points: Point #1 - the over inflating DESERT - this is an easy catch and flaw in the logic. First of all the pistols are isolated from the other items and they represent a separate "pool" for the calculation. What it means is that the DESERT's price only depends on the other pistol purchases. If we recognize the fact that majority of the pistols are NOT purchased we see why DESERT is the number one. For each player who died the system presents a "gift" at the start of the next round: a new pistol as part of the default gear. You don't pay for this, and it does not get accounted for in the weapon volume. So the point is that if you decide to buy a pistol you always "upgrade" or "exchange" a free existing one - and obviously the DESERT is the most logical upgrade. It's price is going to go up and up since NOT BUYING a DESERT does not mean that you buy something else! it can easily mean that you keep the "free" gun the system gave you! This fact totally undermines the calculation logic and puts the DESERT on an ever increasing path. If you look at the graph on VALVE's pricing page you will see that even when the purchase volume dropped the price kept going up. - however this is also contributable to the next flaw I'm going to describe. The SUGGESTION here is that it would be good for the DESERT if it had been classified as a main weapon - by reclassifying into the other pool it would get a less shocking price... Point #2 - over inflating main weapons such as AK47 - the price determination calculation VALVE uses takes a very "wild" view of the "economy". It says that the absolut value of the price increase/decrease a gun is going to suffer is it's share from the total market volume. So if AK47 represents 10% of the total weapon sales it will get either 10% increase or decrease. So the more popular a weapon are the more it's price will fluctulate (higher % rate). Also the problem is that the calculation uses the $$$ value of the market. So expensive weapons even with less units "sold" will take bigger part of the "pie" hence bigger percentage for increase/decrease. To be honest I can not recognize any reasonable logic behind this. It is mathematically sound but it does not "honour" any kind of economical rule. The decision to increase or decrease the price is a bit better. It says the items representing the TOP half of the number of units sold will get an increase the rest will go down. The funny thing here is that the item dominating in volume ==> popular is going to keep getting more expensive unless a new popular weapon emerges. This is exactly why even when the AK47 and M4 volumes started to drop the price kept increasing ===> unless another TWO! weapons emerges that sells as good as the AK47/M4 those two will keep going up until they become totally unaffordable for anybody. (e.g. more than 16K). Altough this might happen it will take time. Also I don't know how VALVE handles the market calculation. They say each CS:S server supplies with the "weapon sales data" every 24 hour. The question is if they take the data from the servers where DWP is OFF? If yes to hit the roof with AK47/M4 pricing is going to be impossible as DWP OFF servers will make good sales of those items keeping it in the TOP half of the volume sales ==> causing the price increase not decrease. The more analysis I make on this calculation logic the more I realize that it is "head strong" so it puts the popular items onto a hyperinflation path. Which would be OK if the recovery could be equally easy. and here comes my Point #3 - so what does it take to get an over-inflated item on the normalization path. One condition to be met: the number of units sold should drop below 50% of the total weapon sales units. BUT! when this happens another thing happens too: this weapons $$$ sales value is going to drop obviously. And what do we know from the rulebook? That the % decrease will be calculated based on the item's relative share of the total $$$ market value. So WHEN it starts to decrease it will start decreasing SLOWLY. Much slower than it got inflated! My conclusion is that VALVE's system not only OVER INFLATES the items but even if the player community reacts "rationally" the price drop of this item will come very slowly!!!! It's like skyrocket the price with a jet engine and let it drop with a parachute. I do not find it reasonable at all. I might be able to re-consider DWP is VALVE would be open to find a calculation that creates more reasonable results. Edited November 11, 2006 by it3llig3nc3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stutters November 11, 2006 Author Share stutters GC Alumni November 11, 2006 point #1. this is after 1 week of pricechanges. point #2. you're lengthy observations might actually be considered in the right venue. in this case, that'd be the hlds mailing list (windows is more active than linux, but both are monitored by the srcds team). http://list.valvesoftware.com/ xoxo, sj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie November 11, 2006 Share mookie GC Alumni November 11, 2006 Point #3 - so what does it take to get an over-inflated item on the normalization path. One condition to be met: the number of units sold should drop below 50% of the total weapon sales units.BUT! when this happens another thing happens too: this weapons $$$ sales value is going to drop obviously. And what do we know from the rulebook? That the % decrease will be calculated based on the item's relative share of the total $$$ market value. So WHEN it starts to decrease it will start decreasing SLOWLY. Much slower than it got inflated! I'm sorry to break this to you, but it's simply incorrect. The items that are bought the least are decreasing by the most. Consider the timegoggles. Intuitively, less people buy timegoggles than anything else. Even if you don't believe this claim, looking at the purchase volume of each item confirms that VALVe does believe it. Timegoggles are dropping at a higher rate than any other item. It probably is true that there is some correlation between the size of an item's slice of the "money pie" and its change, but it obviously isn't the linear correlation suggested by VALVe's "if 10% of the money is spent on the m4, the m4's price will change by 10%" analogy. -1 for believing what VALVe claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it3llig3nc3 November 11, 2006 Share it3llig3nc3 Member November 11, 2006 Point #3 - so what does it take to get an over-inflated item on the normalization path. One condition to be met: the number of units sold should drop below 50% of the total weapon sales units. BUT! when this happens another thing happens too: this weapons $$$ sales value is going to drop obviously. And what do we know from the rulebook? That the % decrease will be calculated based on the item's relative share of the total $$$ market value. So WHEN it starts to decrease it will start decreasing SLOWLY. Much slower than it got inflated! I'm sorry to break this to you, but it's simply incorrect. The items that are bought the least are decreasing by the most. Consider the timegoggles. Intuitively, less people buy timegoggles than anything else. Even if you don't believe this claim, looking at the purchase volume of each item confirms that VALVe does believe it. Timegoggles are dropping at a higher rate than any other item. It probably is true that there is some correlation between the size of an item's slice of the "money pie" and its change, but it obviously isn't the linear correlation suggested by VALVe's "if 10% of the money is spent on the m4, the m4's price will change by 10%" analogy. -1 for believing what VALVe claims. You're perfectly right! First I just went by VALVE's description of the calculation but now I took all the actual data and tried to recalculate. The logic of which price gets increase vs. decrease is precise. I came to the same results. The amount if increase / decrease is hectic. I can recognize some correlation to the % share in the money pie but obviously there is a secret factor here. Increases are more or less OK but the decreases are in no relation at all. Even the order is different if I try to calculate which gets more and which less decrease. I suspect maybe the weapons itself might carry a "weight" for the calculation and also for calculating decreases there is a formula to increase the % rate as we are approaching the bottom of the list... Well even after this one thing is stands in my opinion - this system creates a huge penalty for popular items by quickly over-inflating them. This is what I see a great weakness. Anyways - thanks for the comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laz.e.rus November 11, 2006 Share Laz.e.rus Member November 11, 2006 eggs for breakfast are the bomb. I dont care how much they cost. Eggs rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peckles November 11, 2006 Share Peckles Member November 11, 2006 Lol, you're awesome. And totally right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it3llig3nc3 November 11, 2006 Share it3llig3nc3 Member November 11, 2006 very valuable contribution to the subject... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allanon November 13, 2006 Share Allanon Member November 13, 2006 very valuable contribution to the subject... indEEd. Now that we know how much Laz likes eggs for breakfast, we can really have some good discussions... but can you have eggs without bacon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laz.e.rus November 13, 2006 Share Laz.e.rus Member November 13, 2006 only if necesary. Would still like to get more feedback on people we havent heard from yet tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laz.e.rus November 14, 2006 Share Laz.e.rus Member November 14, 2006 todays updates m4 4912 ak 3974 Deagle 3800 (!) awp 4728 armor+helm 1790 he 342 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dj_ November 14, 2006 Share dj_ Member November 14, 2006 todays updatesm4 4912 ak 3974 Deagle 3800 (!) awp 4728 armor+helm 1790 he 342 Yeah, and projected shows the Deagle at 6975 for next week to be the most expensive weapon with the M4 coming in 3rd to the M249, but only by less than 150. Scary. -dj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts