[Monk]

I always hosp first and ask questions later to make sure to keep up my bad ass reputation.

[InPaceRequiscat]

(2010.Sep.02 09:21 AM)OnwardTowardTheGlory Wrote:  it's definitely a balance but not worth my time on a game to find the optimal curve. I use the $10 trainer. Costs me about $900,000 a month but I still keep $1.5 million in profit so i figure it is good enough of a balance

that is 3000 credits / 7500 developmet points of endurance a month, 36000c/9000dp of end in one year, with credits at $300 each.

I am fairly comfortable calling that 1.5 to 2 levels of endurance for you.

[Guest]

if $10 trainer gives about 10% extra boost, that gives me about 20,000 dev pts a month.

so how long would it take to recover 240,000 dev pts in a year with only 1.5 levels of endurance added?

[InPaceRequiscat]

(2010.Sep.15 05:37 AM)OnwardTowardTheGlory Wrote:  if $10 trainer gives about 10% extra boost, that gives me about 20,000 dev pts a month.

so how long would it take to recover 240,000 dev pts in a year with only 1.5 levels of endurance added?

$10 is an 8% boost, and it would take you 10 months of buying credits to get the same amount of dev points with the trainer. After 10 months, you would be continually re-investing credits into your endurance, and earning even more than the 10% trainer.

[zliplus]

Well, to complicate things further, you should theoretically take into consideration present/future values of stat development points as well. In terms of absolute point values, endurance is always better than trainers given sufficient time, but not if point values depreciate (enough) over time. I think most would agree that depreciation exists, but it's difficult to even begin to estimate, especially since it varies according to individual valuation.

[InPaceRequiscat]

(2010.Sep.15 01:50 PM)zliplus Wrote:  Well, to complicate things further, you should theoretically take into consideration present/future values of stat development points as well. In terms of absolute point values, endurance is always better than trainers given sufficient time, but not if point values depreciate (enough) over time. I think most would agree that depreciation exists, but it's difficult to even begin to estimate, especially since it varies according to individual valuation.

value of dev points? they depreciate? are you nuts? You won't have less dev points tomorrow than you did today.

If you mean something else, please re-word it.

---

It would actually be less than 10 months to equal it, because you don't need to increase your endurance a full level in order to improve stat trains.

[zliplus]

They depreciate the same way money does - through (competitive) inflation. Money is worth less over time because the total supply increases and your share decreases, both in real life and in-game. Stats become worth less over time as everyone else gains stats, so that relatively you become weaker. There's a big difference between the first to 100 and getting to 100 years later, and there's a difference between having stats *now* instead of in the future.

[InPaceRequiscat]

(2010.Sep.15 02:21 PM)zliplus Wrote:  They depreciate the same way money does - through (competitive) inflation. Money is worth less over time because the total supply increases and your share decreases, both in real life and in-game. Stats become worth less over time as everyone else gains stats, so that relatively you become weaker. There's a big difference between the first to 100 and getting to 100 years later, and there's a difference between having stats *now* instead of in the future.

What you are talking about is relative to much larger and complex economics than this, and the basis of value is demand. Getting better stats is always in demand, so your reasoning is bunk.

Unless dev points get switched out for something else, and endurance becomes useless, Endurance will always be the better buy.

---

(2010.Sep.15 02:25 PM)RenegadeJEDI Wrote:  Well inpace, when your top stat takes 10k to level up compared to your lowest 2k I get just as many points per train as I do with either.

I think the only problems with the trainers anybody has is the price. Sure paying for every single fn train sucks. Especially when in certain cases the cost damn near doubles for a 1-3%
increase in dev points per train. I think to access trainers we should pay a daily fee.

I understand that the price is kinda high, but we aren't talking about whether or not the price is too high or too low. We are talking about whether endurance or trainers are the better long term investment.

---

How the hell did my second post get shifted above yours????

[RenegadeJEDI]

Well inpace, when your top stat takes 10k to level up compared to your lowest 2k I get just as many points per train as I do with either.

I think the only problems with the trainers anybody has is the price. Sure paying for every single fn train sucks. Especially when in certain cases the cost damn near doubles for a 1-3%
increase in dev points per train. I think to access trainers we should pay a daily fee.

[Monk]

It just gets watered down is all. Have endurance and then use a trainer...Inpance go sit in the corner.