Fidgeting Writer, and other grinds

Fallen London
1

The above video, for those without the time or interest to watch it, suggests, as is commonly accepted, that people have a simply terrible grasp of statistics, and prefer big payouts, even if they’re a worse investment than other, smaller payouts.

I think this certainly applies to Fallen London, and especially to the highly profitable grind known as the Fidgeting Writer (begun on the Tale of Terror item.)
Would more people play Fidgeting Writer if the reward was bigger, even if the odds were made so much worse that it’s EPA went down?
Should more content in Fallen London follow the &quotchance based&quot model with big payouts because they are more &quotfun&quot or &quotappealing&quot than a job-like grind?

Are there other examples of big chance-based grinds in Fallen London that might make good examples, like pursuit of an Impossible Theorem, or Expeditions?

2

[quote=Ian Hart]

The above video, for those without the time or interest to watch it, suggests, as is commonly accepted, that people have a simply terrible grasp of statistics, and prefer big payouts, even if they’re a worse investment than other, smaller payouts.

I think this certainly applies to Fallen London, and especially to the highly profitable grind known as the Fidgeting Writer (begun on the Tale of Terror item.)
Would more people play Fidgeting Writer if the reward was bigger, even if the odds were made so much worse that it’s EPA went down?
Should more content in Fallen London follow the &quotchance based&quot model with big payouts because they are more &quotfun&quot or &quotappealing&quot than a job-like grind?

Are there other examples of big chance-based grinds in Fallen London that might make good examples, like pursuit of an Impossible Theorem, or Expeditions?[/quote]
I doubt it. The fidgetting writer is generally feared and avoided despite its numerical superiority, because it gets really frustrating to keep losing fortunes in echoes when going double-or-nothing. Higher variance wouldn’t do the grind any favors, really.

I expect the alure of certain rewards has just as much grasp on us as the opposite, though it really depends on the individual. Some people wouldn’t buy lottery tickets even if it offered an average of a net profit, while others would… well, do… buy them even though the average person loses big time.
edited by Grenem on 3/2/2016

3

I stopped believing in lotteries after my visit to Polythreme.

4

I usually love the EC stuff, but I’m a bit dubious on the data here (or think it’s stretched a bit thin to bear weight).

The data shows that different people have different activation frictions for playing the lottery. If the change in odds along were the driver, the smaller payouts would drive more players, and that’s not data that’s presented.

I think the most discounted math in lotteries is the odds of having to split the prize, and that’s something that’s dangerous in gaming: forcing a different play experience upon a player based on the number of competing players. An example off the top of my head is the original High Warlord grind in World of Warcraft.

I don’t think there’s much that’s applicable to FL in here, even if it is interesting to think about. The closest thing I can think of is chasing the Skin of the Bazaar or a salt weasel. If those were made more rare, they’d become status pieces for crazy end game grinders (you know who) but I don’t believe more people would consciously flip cards looking for those things.

5

There are a lot of cognitive loopholes that people fall prey to beyond just over-valuing payout size relative to odds. I suspect what makes Fidgeting Writer unpopular has more to do with loss aversion, which is also a kind of “common irrationality” – on average people tend to rate the impact of a loss as being twice the impact of a gain of the exact same size, would rather avoid a $500 fine than get a $500 bonus, and so forth.

The Fidgeting Writer gives the player items which appear in your inventory – in econ/psychology terms, they become part of the player’s “status quo” that you don’t want to lose; especially because you’re told quite explicitly that you can cash them in for valuable items, they have worth. When you proceed to the next stage of Fidgeting Writer, sometimes those items disappear, and it feels much worse than if you simply “didn’t get the prize” when playing something just as random, like the Wheel of Affection, or repeatedly trying for a rare success on a particular storylet, etc.

I tend to think FL is quite interesting in that it plays around with a lot of these psychological tricks around statistics and randomness, alongside more predictable grinds that you can invest time into. The time investment is what really gives these particular gains and losses weight, after all. Other kinds of risk/reward decisions in FL deal with different loopholes – for instance, how many people build up qualities like The Hunt is On… or Running Battle… or Investigating… up until it reaches 100%, just to avoid gambling – even though it’s far more expensive in terms of lost actions than taking the gamble at around 60-70% and avoiding the grind? There’s a similar kind of risk aversion at play there. Polythreme and Heists, Zailing and Expeditions and other mini-games have their own aggravations which prey on impatience, risk-taking and mis-estimation of complex odds, and so forth.

Games have a particular charming potential: they can let you stare into the oft-flawed workings of your own mind, if you stop to take a look.

6

[quote=Theus]I usually love the EC stuff, but I’m a bit dubious on the data here (or think it’s stretched a bit thin to bear weight).

The data shows that different people have different activation frictions for playing the lottery. If the change in odds along were the driver, the smaller payouts would drive more players, and that’s not data that’s presented.

I think the most discounted math in lotteries is the odds of having to split the prize, and that’s something that’s dangerous in gaming: forcing a different play experience upon a player based on the number of competing players. An example off the top of my head is the original High Warlord grind in World of Warcraft.

I don’t think there’s much that’s applicable to FL in here, even if it is interesting to think about. The closest thing I can think of is chasing the Skin of the Bazaar or a salt weasel. If those were made more rare, they’d become status pieces for crazy end game grinders (you know who) but I don’t believe more people would consciously flip cards looking for those things.[/quote]
Some people do seek blemmigans, so to speak, but i’m a bit dubious on this area’s application as well. I mean, people do keep trying with tiny odds, but some of the lottery principle is they don’t feel a real penalty for failing. 1 action for a chance at interesting text and a 312.5 echo or 1562.5 item is always appealing. In short, it’s the difference between a small bet and a large one.

7

[quote=metasynthie]There are a lot of cognitive loopholes that people fall prey to beyond just over-valuing payout size relative to odds. I suspect what makes Fidgeting Writer unpopular has more to do with loss aversion, which is also a kind of &quotcommon irrationality&quot – on average people tend to rate the impact of a loss as being twice the impact of a gain of the exact same size, would rather avoid a $500 fine than get a $500 bonus, and so forth.

The Fidgeting Writer gives the player items which appear in your inventory – in econ/psychology terms, they become part of the player’s &quotstatus quo&quot that you don’t want to lose; especially because you’re told quite explicitly that you can cash them in for valuable items, they have worth. When you proceed to the next stage of Fidgeting Writer, sometimes those items disappear, and it feels much worse than if you simply &quotdidn’t get the prize&quot when playing something just as random, like the Wheel of Affection, or repeatedly trying for a rare success on a particular storylet, etc.

I tend to think FL is quite interesting in that it plays around with a lot of these psychological tricks around statistics and randomness, alongside more predictable grinds that you can invest time into. The time investment is what really gives these particular gains and losses weight, after all. Other kinds of risk/reward decisions in FL deal with different loopholes – for instance, how many people build up qualities like The Hunt is On… or Running Battle… or Investigating… up until it reaches 100%, just to avoid gambling – even though it’s far more expensive in terms of lost actions than taking the gamble at around 60-70% and avoiding the grind? There’s a similar kind of risk aversion at play there. Polythreme and Heists, Zailing and Expeditions and other mini-games have their own aggravations which prey on impatience, risk-taking and mis-estimation of complex odds, and so forth.

Games have a particular charming potential: they can let you stare into the oft-flawed workings of your own mind, if you stop to take a look.[/quote]

I agree! Those sorts of mechanics are some of my favorite parts of Fallen London.

I am very surprised by people’s aversion to the Fidgeting Writer though, it’s my go-to grind. I’ve been unusually lucky with it so far (averaging one coruscating soul every 30-40 Tales of Terror invested) but being well versed in statistics, I don’t think I’d lose hope even if I’d been doing much worse.

As an endgame player, I’m also always hungry for ways to spend my vast fortunes of items and useless actions, so I personally would love to see more big-gamble type content. It’s especially excellent when you can take expensive/challenging in-game actions to reduce your risk and improve your payout, such as by buying the Colossal Fluke-Core to boost your Cave of the Nadir draws, or thinning your deck to improve the draw of profitable cards, or story based cards like Skin of the Bazaar.

8

[quote=metasynthie]There are a lot of cognitive loopholes that people fall prey to beyond just over-valuing payout size relative to odds. I suspect what makes Fidgeting Writer unpopular has more to do with loss aversion, which is also a kind of &quotcommon irrationality&quot – on average people tend to rate the impact of a loss as being twice the impact of a gain of the exact same size, would rather avoid a $500 fine than get a $500 bonus, and so forth.[/quote]I know perfectly well that’s why I have to grit my teeth to play it. (Also it doesn’t rebuild stats after Nadir visits.)

9

And here I was thinking I was the only one here who watched extra credits…

Then again it was them who introduced me to Echo Bazaar, so I suppose it makes sense that others that use their channel would be here to.

As to the topic at hand, I would certainly like to see more rewarding gambles, but I don’t want it to come at the cost of more reliable grinds.

10

I hate to break it to you, but 30-40 actions is worse than average according to the community spreadsheet, and the percentages for each action recorded on there is not rounded to the nearest 10%, which should be the actual percentages. Although, I’m guessing you don’t keep track of these stats on you own spreadsheet, and the range you gave is just an estimate. At any rate, I don’t have to tell someone who knows stats that your net profit will even out in the (infinitely) long run, so keep at it.
edited by yang573 on 3/6/2016

11

I’m currently in the middle of my first ever Fidgeting Writer go, having started with 2000 Tales of Terror!! and having just finished converting all my Senses of Deja Vu. It’s certainly painful to see so many streaks of apparent significant loss, but the variation also is proving to hold my attention much better than the Affair of the Box.

I hate to break it to you, but 30-40 actions is worse than average according to the community spreadsheet, and the percentages for each action recorded on there is not rounded to the nearest 10%, which should be the actual percentages. Although, I’m guessing you don’t keep track of these stats on you own spreadsheet, and the range you gave is just an estimate. At any rate, I don’t have to tell someone who knows stats that your net profit will even out in the (infinitely) long run, so keep at it.
edited by yang573 on 3/6/2016[/quote]
Except while the recorded average actions-per-soul is a bit over 30, that’s different than the Tales-per-soul: which is also 30 and a bit, but is much more highly affected by variation from the low sample sizes up to, or rather down to, under 200 records of the final conversion. If the chances are even 10% increments then the average Tales needed per soul is almost 39.
edited by Optimatum on 3/6/2016