New efforts!

[Sinistar]

I wonder would which be easier assuming a COX fan DID win the Powerball?

1. To contract Cryptic and say, "Make me a game like City of Heroes that uses the latest version of your engine (so we could have things like being able to grasp objects and fingers instead of mitten hands)".

2. Buy the rights to COX and the disk image from NcSoft and hire Cryptic and say, "Use this to reverse engineer an updatable version of COX."

If CoX fan did win powerball I don't think buying the game would be the first on their to do list..... :)

In my case I'd have to make certain life assuring arrangements and set some things up. Then after all the dust settles look into getting CoH

[brothermutant]

If CoX fan did win powerball I don't think buying the game would be the first on their to do list..... :)

In my case I'd have to make certain life assuring arrangements and set some things up. Then after all the dust settles look into getting CoH

Screw that, I would round up some top game developers, show them the old game and pay them to reproduce it as best they can, with a significant graphics engine update and a few cool power sets I and others have thought up over the years. Then, release my kickazz game to the world, NEVER making it free to play with micro-purchases, but doing my best to keep the cost of a monthly sub low. I am a firm believer that, with a good game, good advertising (something that was lacking for CoH imho), and a good gaming community, people will willing pay to play your game. Get enough subs with good dev support and you will make more than enough to pay everyone to keep the updates and bug fixes coming.

PLUS, I would have the devs make ME my own power set (unique to me only) that lets me join others and have them say "wow, how do I get that power?" Hehe ;)

[Vee]

PLUS, I would have the devs make ME my own power set (unique to me only) that lets me join others and have them say "wow, how do I get that power?" Hehe ;)

the long awaited snack cake manipulation to mimic the most powerful comic book power? or something a bit less OP?

[Ultimate15]

*siiiiiigh*

Are we there yet?  :-\  I want to be back in Paragon.

[hurple]

I am a firm believer that, with a good game, good advertising (something that was lacking for CoH imho),

It the early days, CoH had decent advertising.  I was looking through some old comics from those days and saw a number of CoH ads.  And, of course, they appeared weekly on the early Big Bang Theory, even getting a mention from the characters a time or two.  That was a good start, it was pretty nicely targeted at the absolute core audience for that type of game.

However, they never seemed to try advertising to anyone except that core audience.  There should have been ads bought and placed in theaters to accompany any and every sci-fi/superhero movie.

But, then, even those markets would dry up once Marvel and DC started building their own MMOS.  no way they would allow a competing MMO to advertise in their comics, or in front of their movies. 

But, yes... Alot more could have been done, advertising-wise for CoX through the years.

[brothermutant]

the long awaited snack cake manipulation to mimic the most powerful comic book power? or something a bit less OP?

Nah. Always wanted an Armor Power set (similar but a lot different than Iron Man's). Idea is that the suit has parts that can come off (little bots) that can attack and be controlled by suit wearer (an MM class). Difference is when they reattach they buff the suit (and hence the wearer) allowing scrapping or tanking functions (haven't decided). Would make a cool animation  if you see the "backpack" reattach to the suit imho.

[darkgob]

I wonder would which be easier assuming a COX fan DID win the Powerball?

1. To contract Cryptic and say, "Make me a game like City of Heroes that uses the latest version of your engine (so we could have things like being able to grasp objects and fingers instead of mitten hands)".

This already happened, it's called Champions Online.

[Ultimate15]

This already happened, it's called Champions Online.

Hahaha.

That was good.

[blacksly]

That means the average number combination has been bought about three to six times, and therefore the average actual jackpot per person is going to be about two to four hundred million dollars.

Perhaps overall, but since most of those tickets failed to win with the Saturday drawing, you would only have to look at new tickets purchased since then.

As far as a lottery being unable to be a better than break-even proposition, that scenario applies only to a single-drawing lottery, where the funds then disappear. In a roll-over lottery, where a pot that is not won continues to the next drawing, it's possible that a large enough roll-over amount will create a situation where you get break-even odds or even better. Just consider the case where nobody wins for a few more drawings, and the pot is $10billion. Unlikely as we are to reach that case, if we did, then it's pretty clear that it's a better than break-even investment.

[Arcana]

Psst, I think you forgot about the rollover. The jackpot was what, somewhere around 900 million(?) as of the last drawing that nobody won. So subtract that from the total and then divide by a minimum of $2.

Well, I don't play Powerball.  I forgot to account for the fact that all purchased tickets prior to the previous drawing become invalid as opposed to staying active until a winner is drawn.

This actually means that mathematically speaking, "don't play the lottery" is not absolutely good advice.  There appears to be a mathematical condition where the statistical value of a ticket would exceed $2, given that the value of a ticket rises with the value of the roll over.  The problem is that the higher the rollover, the more people buy tickets which accelerates the jackpot higher, but dilutes the value of a single ticket.  If the jackpot has grown by about $600 million, that implies 900 million more tickets being purchased (about one third of the ticket price goes to the jackpot pot).  That sounds like the statistical average would be three shared winners.

What you need is a paradoxically high roll over and low incremental jackpot increase.  Under those circumstances, it becomes mathematically recommended to buy a lottery ticket.  What the formula is for determining that is an exercise left to the reader.

[darkgob]

Hahaha.

That was good.

I wasn't joking.

[Vee]

What the formula is for determining that is an exercise left to the reader.

I for one am betting the odds of Arcana's curiosity getting the better of her and us getting a nice summary of this formula and the findings are quite a bit better than our powerball odds :D

[MM3squints]

Calling it now numbers will be 10 1 10 1 10 1 because that is how I'm feeling right now

[Arcana]

I for one am betting the odds of Arcana's curiosity getting the better of her and us getting a nice summary of this formula and the findings are quite a bit better than our powerball odds :D

That was a safe bet.

There's a couple of ways to look at this problem.  One way is to look at the expected value of a ticket.  Basically, the expected value of a ticket is the jackpot multiplied by the odds of winning divided by the average number of other winners you have to divide the pot by.  If that number exceeds $2, then the bet is a mathematically sound one.

Because the odds of winning are about 300 million to one (I'm going to use rough numbers here because many others in the calculation will be estimates anyway), the expected value doesn't have any chance of breaking even until the Jackpot reaches 600 million dollars.  Until it does, don't play Powerball (using the current rules).**

Once it does, the question is whether it continues to be a good bet as more people buy tickets.  And the answer is no.  Suppose the jackpot reaches 600 million dollars and then no one wins.  When the next drawing starts, if you are the first *and only* ticket buyer the odds are in your favor.  Not to win, exactly, but the one ticket you buy is worth more than the $2 you spend.  The problem is that as more tickets are purchased the jackpot will only rise about thirty cents on the dollar for each ticket bought.  Obviously if you're paying two dollars more for a chance at less than two dollars more, that can't be good indefinitely.  Also, as more tickets are bought by more people, the odds of you having to split the jackpot even if you win rises.

If right at this second the Jackpot is some value, lets call the jackpot factor J the value of the jackpot divided by 300 million.  So right now with the jackpot somewhere around 1.5 billion dollars the jackpot factor is 5.  Hypothetically speaking if you were the only ticket holder, your two dollar ticket would be worth five dollars in expected value.  However, if you're not the only ticket holder then there's a certain chance you would have to share the jackpot.  Statistically speaking, the average number of winners is the number of live tickets divided by 300 million.  Lets call the participation factor P the number of live tickets divided by 300 million.  Basically, your expected value should be J / P.  If J/P is greater than two, your average return per ticket will be higher than the cost (assuming you only spend two dollars per entry)

How to guestimate the participation factor?  Calculate the jackpot increase from the last drawing, multiply by three (about one third of the purchase price of a ticket goes to the jackpot) and divide by 2 (assuming the average ticket price is $2).  That's the number of tickets purchased.  Divide by 300 million.  In this case, if the jackpot delta is 1.5 billion - 900 million = 600 million dollars, then that implies about 900 million tickets purchased.  That's a participation factor of 3.  That means right now the expected value of a ticket is about 5/3 = $1.66.  That's less than $2, so its mathematically unprofitable to buy a Powerball ticket today.

Working backward, when the pot was 900 million and there was no winner, tickets would have a net value greater than or equal to the cost as long as only a certain number of tickets were bought.  That number can be calculated: its actually when the new jackpot is 20% higher than the roll over jackpot.  So when the roll over was 900 million, every ticket bought up to when the jackpot became 1.08 billion was technically worth more than the $2 paid.  That was an increase of 180 million, implying 540 million tickets.  That's a participation rate of 1.8.  1.08 billion is a 3.6 jackpot factor, meaning the average Powerball number series makes 3.6 dollars.  The participation rate means an average of 1.8 people share that sequence, and split the winnings accordingly.

Using variables, when the jackpot is j and the jackpot factor is J, when you increase j by 20% you increase J to 1.2 * J.  Meanwhile the total number of tickets becomes 0.2 * j * 3 = 0.6 * j.  The participation rate is that number divided by 300 million, but j divided by 300 million is J, so that's 0.6 * J.  The value of the ticket becomes 1.2 * J / (0.6 * J) = 2, which is the break even point.

Incidentally, buying earlier doesn't mean your tickets are more valuable.  The value of a ticket is based on the total participation at the time of the drawing.  Each person that buys a ticket after you in effect decreases the value of your ticket.

A different way to look at the problem is to ask, if it was possible to instantly buy 292 million tickets covering every single possibility once, when is that strategy statistically profitable given that you're always going to win, but you might be forced to share that win with a number of different people. Maybe someone will work that one out before I get around to it:  I need to get back to some group policy testing.



** I'm about to show a formula at the end of the post for calculating when the bet is a good one, and that formula oddly doesn't seem to requite this limit.  That's because for jackpot numbers under $600 million it might still be profitable to play in theory, but those are degenerate cases where the odds are extremely high that there will be no winners, and in the case of no winners at all the formulas don't mimic reality correctly; in fact built into their assumptions is that there's a winner at all, and sometimes there aren't any - or there wouldn't be any roll over.  That's a material, but probably not large correction factor in the calculations.

[Vee]

Jackpot!

[pinballdave]

Calling it now numbers will be 10 1 10 1 10 1 because that is how I'm feeling right now

Sorry the first 5 numbers don't repeat.

[hurple]

Jackpot is getting big enough that you can buy a ticket for each and every possible combination of numbers and still amass a profit. 

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/powerball-ticket-all-combinations/423930/

[MM3squints]

Sorry the first 5 numbers don't repeat.

Boo~~ there goes my joke :F

[Codewalker]

Jackpot is getting big enough that you can buy a ticket for each and every possible combination of numbers and still amass a profit. 

Ignoring of course the practical considerations of bubbling the numbers on 300 million playslips and then paying for them in cash (as is required for lottery purchases in most places).  ;D

[MM3squints]

Jackpot is getting big enough that you can buy a ticket for each and every possible combination of numbers and still amass a profit. 

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/powerball-ticket-all-combinations/423930/

For some reason, I can see a billionaire doing this and winning with a split pot just for laughs.