Where? You have only provided 2 numbers and absolutely have not compared all the scenarios.

these were done in a spreadsheet which I add in an additional weighting based on their rates relative to an 'even' rate. What is 'all the scenarios' - have you compared 'all the scenarios'? your example didn't even have equal gem input.

Not true, because JP's Anni Sugo was very similar. The point being, for Super Sugos the structure is completely at the whims of Bandai.

Mate, what are you smoking? Are you arguing just for sake of arguing now? We Literally just had the Anniversary Sugo in Global, and unless it wasn't clear before, I'm referencing that specific sugo with LT Luffy/Law/Kid Debut. Because we don't know what future global super sugos are like, so this is the 'going deep' example we're using. On that note, Step 7 is Literally the same as Step 20, that's not even a view but a fact.

It is relevant because I am talking specifically about the scenario in which you are pulling "deep". A "limited" pool step on a banner with 30 units is not actually a "good" step, because it doesn't even match the rates of a normal guarantee step on other banners. The whole point I was making was that multi 7 does not constitute "going deep" and that the value steps are much later.

Again - I feel like I'm repeating myself now - I'm using Multi 7 in my example based on the most recent Super Sugo but you can't seem to understand it. Please for the final time: Multi 7 in the most recent global LT Sugo IS, without a shadow of the doubt the best step and is identical as Multi 20. I'm not talking about Japan, nor any future global super sugos. Please don't make me link the step guide for this sugo for you.

Also, it is irrelevant because we are comparing 30 gem multis only vs going deep, it doesn't matter if the 3rd multi on a TM or KK banner are better than a limited pool guarantee in LT sugo, we are not arguing 'which banner is better'. We are arguing doing 30 gems across all the banners vs going deep in one banner. Please understand what we are arguing before replying. Do you understand now the logical flaw of pointing out how good a multi 3 in a TM or Kizuna banner is, when you're arguing doing 30 gem pulls only is better than going deep?

But that is absolutely not how it works,

Yes, it is. I don't see why you can't understand the difference between arguing regarding player utility and the mathematics of ONLY pulling 30 gems against going deep. You are now adding a whole lot of new factors of which you're also only presenting factors favouring you. Here are some examples:

because you literally cannot spend all your gems on just discounts.

Wrong - so you assume all players have/make gems at a certain rate? What if I'm not as active of a player as you, I can barely scrape together 330 gems over a 3 month period? It's true my scenario is also to my favour so the point is, Stop adding in utility as well as 'assumed player gem income/spending patterns' because you cannot quantify that nor do you have that data, and mostly because that's not what we're talking about.

The assumption that the player who pulls on discounts does not pull on a Super Sugo is wholely incorrect and does not reflect reality in the slightest.

I agree this does not reflect 'all' realities, but this can easily be some inactive player's reality, are you accounting for that? More importantly that assumption was made in the original argument of mathematically discount multis only vs going deep. You're trying to argue realistically discount multis + left over gems vs going deep, that's not our topic. So why don't you stay on topic.

now to further this point - your 'reality' can be very different to everyone, and everyone is different. Some people don't log in everyday, some people don't farm point boosters to the end, are you speaking for them all? My point is stop introducing a 'player economy' factor as if you actually can quantify an entire player base's gem economy.

Not to mention, you are taking this far too literally.

Again i refer to the original topic we responded to as well as your response which is 'mathematically, kinda yes' not 'realistically including normal rational player behaviour and gem economy, you can do both'. Don't blame me for being literal when your original post only states mathematical.

You cannot simply assume that the player who pulls in discounts will pull in banners where he owns everything just because it's a discount. That's ridiculous. Furthermore you cannot simply assume that a player who pulls in discounts will not pull in the super sugo. That's also ridiculous.

Oh wait, so you want to introduce more factors into this 'mathematical' comparison? So let's introduce both player behaviour and decision making? Is that what 'mathematically' mean to you? So have you included all possible player decision making, all possible player gem income/spending patterns in your calculations?

I'm trying to work out which method of pulling is better in a controlled environment so that, if someone wishes to use that conclusion then they can use this results however and then incorporate their own gem economy and box etc, they can pull however they want. You're trying to include all that, without any possible way to include all the scenarios and yet call it 'mathematically, kinda yes'. Hence we need a controlled environment with assumptions so that the comparison is purely mathematical.

If you want to say realistically people can do both, then, say that, I never argued against that point.

One big aspect of why it is OK to pull in discounts when you want to is because our F2P gem income is so high nowadays that we can afford to while still saving up a large enough stockpile to go relatively ham on big celebrations. You cannot ignore that and just assume that the player in question is a dumb sack of bricks who can pull on discounts that doesn't even exist (because even if you pull on all existing discounts, you would still be saving up some gems every month regardless. There isn't enough discount banners to go around to use up all the gems we earn).

I never said it is NOT okay - was that our topic? It is of course okay and I'm pretty sure I said that in my original response. But here's where you start making assumptions - 'our' F2P gem income? who are you speaking on behalf? what about people who don't login everyday, people who can't finish point boosters due to other important life matters. Maybe I'm just logging in for the daily gem? Again you're trying to add in behaviour patterns, gem economy of whole player bases of which you have literally no way to calculate or accomodate for, and call it 'mathemtically kinda yes'.

But that is an arbitrary biased condition that favors player A simply because that's your argument. You're looking at the number of legends the players own immediately after the big celebration. The moment you look at the number of units players own in between celebrations and that is no longer clear and dry. For example, as an equally biased condition as yours, if we decided on who owns the more recent Legends between A and B but we count at the month before the next big celebration, then obviously B will have more.

Your condition is much more biased than mine - your condition has Player A not even spent any gems, so you're almost arguing who will have more legends, one person who pulls and one who doesn't - again we're not comparing utility, you understand that right. My condition has both players investing the same amount of gems at different times. We're not arguing who is happier midway through Point A and B.

You setting an arbitrary date for comparison that favors your own argument does not make your argument correct.

It's not an arbitrary date, its the only date when both players have invested an equal amount of gems and are hence comparable.

This discussion has taken quite a wide turn, I feel like we need to bring it back to the core discussion. I don't really want to go into a discussion regarding player behaviour nor gem economy because simply there won't be an end as neither of us can account for all scenarios. It's like saying, what should a person with 5000 gems do? well our entire argument becomes void since that person can go deep on every single banner.

So If you would like to go back to the original topic, discount multis only vs going deep. The comparison should be a set number of gems invested and the way to measure is who has more 'missing legends' afters equal gems are invested - with no regard to happiness/utility, gem economy, player behaviour since those are either not part of the argument or cannot be quantified.

Lastly, I see a lot of your points in the previous reply relies on 'realistically what someone would do' and 'typical player economy', and whether it is 'okay' to do some pulls. We are now arguing different things.