|
|
|
realpohlice
|
 Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 5:06 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Aug 2010
Location: Giving a fuck when it ain't my turn to give a fuck.
|
Let's go back to the basics. Gold has value. Always will. Its value is guaranteed because the Dev & DM team accepts and recognizes it. It's never "useless." However, the rate of which gold is accumulated in the server is far below the rate of gold that is leaving it. So we have an ever increasing amount of gold in the economy. Inflation is felt everywhere. It's felt in the epic loots trade. The rate of new epic loots that gets extracted from the module is slower than the rate of gold coming in. So it takes more and more gold to exchange it for an epic loot. Price of epic loots goes up. It does, believe me - none of these epic loots are "priceless". Try offering 80 million GP to one of these "trade only" people and you'll see that they'd consider it. Thanks to the rapid inflation though, gold became an unreliable currency. I'm not arguing that epic loots should be cheap and common. Epic loots are powerful artifacts that every adventurer covets; it should always remain expensive and rare. I am arguing that the price shouldn't be rising up so much because of excess gold in the economy. If the supply of epic loots dwindles, then price of it should go up naturally. That's why we're here in this thread trying to find a way to make the Amian economy better. We all want a healthy game economy. It'll be better for everyone in the server. I'm really sorry to the 1% elite, because they will be more affected than everybody else. That's always the case with new changes in systems. The anomalies or the ones in the fringes takes more collateral. But it needs to be done for a healthier economy. The rich-poor gap will shorten and the elite 1% might need to expand its club to the elite 15%. We can take consolation on the fact that the gold we're left with is now more valuable though. Don't lose sight of the goal.TormakSaber wrote: Because as a DM, I would like to be able to affect the world with a financial standard an an economy that at least makes a tiny smidgen more sense than what it does not.
As a player, I would like an economy that works and is more player centric because to me, that is more fun, to deal with players than a soullless NPC merchant
As a world balancer and a "Game Designer" (used loosely) I would like the balance the world as best as possibly and promote player interaction in such a way so that the greatest number of people can interact as much as possible. The ball has always been on the Dev & DM's court. If they agree that the goal of a healthier economy is worth pursuing, they should pursue it. There's no need to wait for everybody's consent or blessing. Change will come from the top. Remember how Disco pressed to add Hak to the server? He thought it worthwhile and he pushed it. Bravo.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 7:54 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote: AlphaWaves wrote: When is a house rent or a musical instrument that does nothing but serve its day to day purpose more expensive than magical full plate there's something wrong and immersion breaking. Where do all the commoners live? Where do the minstrels buy their gear? How does anyone advertise?
I remember the commoners complaining that 1 platinum coin was massively over priced for membership into an antiquarian society. Yet there's no outcry when new flats are to let. Why is that? Indeed. I always found that strange too. Simple: the normal shops are based on the NWN algorithm of pricing items. This has been based on DnD, I guess. I think the musical instruments work along the same algorithm, and the price is depending on the spell and the number of uses. The prices for housing, on the other hand, are based on the houses being implemented as a gold sink for a player base that is stinking rich. The reason why you are so rich is part of this. Mind that a suit of Plate + 1 is supposed to be quite rare, and something like the higher plate suits unique. In Amia they are consumables that aren't consumed but sold. The 300000 GP you get for some higher range articles is not the real issue, it's the fact that there are more than 1 of each around. Anyway, the suggestion that you shouldn't do something because you can't explain something else is a strawman. That logic leads to the inevitable weight and item cap in your inventory, and I doubt anybody would fancy that. Anyway, I think this player economy can be rescued, but you need to do a series of brutal interventions to get there. You certainly can't get there without stripping a lot of gold at the start, you won't change it for a long time without changing both loot and shops either. Gold sinks just deal with the symptoms, and I doubt we'll ever keep up with the gold income as it is now.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
billytheid
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 9:10 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Location: Terra Australis
|
|
BRUTAL INTERVENTIONS!
BRUTAL INTERVENTIONS!
BRUTAL INTERVENTIONS!
Would be nice if merchant PCs could keep a little bank to represent their sustained RP though.
_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 9:50 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
|
Block everyones accounts so nobody can PM you, buy soundproof earmuff's.
De-level to 1. Cap at 20. Drain all gold.
Complete restart.
Put on earmuff's.
Problem solved.
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 10:11 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
Server dies. The end.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 12:03 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
|
less loot.
1% loot chance for 1 party member
2% for 2 party members
3% for 3 members
5% for 4
7% for 5
10% for 6
_________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 12:28 PM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
1-6% seems more intuitive.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silvarus
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 12:29 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland, Europe
|
|
Loot scaling by party size... YES!
This and Pidgeons bag of holding money sink are already two pieces of the puzzle... Only a few more to go.
Add gold devaluation, merchant buy caps and uncapped respawn penalty and all should be fine.
_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 12:45 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
Actually, this was my original idea (from the "mo money mo problem" topic) AlphaWaves wrote: I was thinking that it'd best for the % chance of loot drop to be exponential.
1 party member having 1% chance of a drop
6 party members: 10% (as it is now)
This will definitely mean soloing is less profitable than being in a party.
My suggested progression would be 1.585 ^ (party members - 1)
So this would be the result:
soloing: 1.585 ^ 0 = 1%;
2 member party: 1.585 ^ 1 = 1.5%; (approx.)
3 member party: 1.585 ^ 2 = 2.5%;
4 member party: 1.585 ^ 3 = 4%;
5 member party: 1.585 ^ 4 = 6.3%;
6 member party: 1.585 ^ 5 = 10%.
This will also have a MASSIVE effect on the economy.
_________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 13:12 PM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
1-6% will have a bigger effect, though, and it's a lot more intuitive.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
msheeler
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 13:17 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2008
Location: eastern USA
|
|
I kept hearing that we needed an IC solution, and there was the suggestion of a wipe and the IC problem of what is happening to the NPC commoners who don't have the mega gold....
"News Flash" *deet dah deet deet deet*
*robust news anchor voice*
"Do to the unchecked rampant inflation problems on the isle of Amia the common people have taken to the streets in revolt. No longer able to afford food or housing for their young, large crowds have taken to the streets rioting and threatening to over through the government of Amia.
In a desperate attempt for gain control of the economy the leaders of the cities of Cordor and Kohligen along with representatives from the other outlying hamlets of Wharftown, Uhm and Bendir Dale have managed to agree on a drastic measure. Amia will begin stamping a new currency declaring the older gold crowns as worthless. Citizens will be offered a onetime trade of their old gold crowns for the new "Amian Ingot" at the rate of 1000:1."
This will allow for a good reduction of gold since 1,000,000 gold will now be worth 1,000 gold. You could even use this to create a new "sac of Amian Ingots" which drops a "pouch of ingots" in the player inventory with a value equal to the gold the player has and a weight of .1 lbs per 10 coins so 1,000 coins in value would equal 10 lbs.
You could then make this bag undroppable and untradable so that the player has to carry it or spend it in some way. This could even be made into an item like the portal wand where the "pouch of Amian Ingots" can be upgraded to a minor pouch of holding (reduce weight by 10%), a lesser pouch of holding (reduce weight by 20%), an intermediate pouch of holding (reduce weight by 50%) and a greater pouch of holding (reduce weight by 70%).
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 13:20 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
Dev Disco wrote: 1-6% will have a bigger effect, though, and it's a lot more intuitive. Sure is. The reason I had the exponential scaling was as an idea of encouraging parties too. Sort of a double whammy. But that's neither here nor there. 1-6% does the job for economy, I'd say. I'm definitely in favour. _________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estatica
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:08 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 25 Apr 2008
Location: Australia, GMT +8
|
|
Party loot scaling? Sounds like a great idea ... if you're an American.
Though it would definitely effect the economy, it's a pain for those of us who don't get on during the peak times. I myself face about 30 people on each server. Yes, it promotes partying instead of soloing for those epic loots, but there are some of us who find it will do more harm than good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:14 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
|
1-6% should be even for any group from 1 - 6 members.
2 players sharing the loot will be the same effect as 1 member soloing. This is probably most fair. Currently it is far more profitable to solo.
_________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silvarus
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:18 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland, Europe
|
AlphaWaves wrote: 1-6% should be even for any group from 1 - 6 members.
2 players sharing the loot will be the same effect as 1 member soloing. This is probably most fair. Currently it is far more profitable to solo. I'd prefer the exponential scaling. Then in parties the average share of the loot would be more than what you can get by soloing. Linear scaling is not bad either of course.
_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Didi
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:25 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Location: UK - GMT
|
|
If your aim is to make the amount of gold entering the system the same as the amount of gold leaving the system, surely even if you were to manage to do this perfectly it would do nothing to solve the problem of people currently having ludicrous amount of money. Would it not merely create a caste of wealthy aristocracy and place even more emphasis on the grinding of epic loot as the only way to access these upper echelons of wealth?
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:27 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
Dev Disco wrote: The 300000 GP you get for some higher range articles is not the real issue, it's the fact that there are more than 1 of each around.
[...]
You certainly can't get there without stripping a lot of gold at the start, you won't change it for a long time without changing both loot and shops either. Gold sinks just deal with the symptoms, and I doubt we'll ever keep up with the gold income as it is now. Thank you, Disco, for agreeing with me. In a PW where there the monsters never die and always have loot, there is an infinite source of coin. Without a continuous drain to match it, you will never solve the issue unless everything you do costs money (in which case you have essentially instituted a continuous drain) or gold becomes such a hassle to deal with (weight/volume) that people just throw away what they can't carry. You can't make the monsters die permanently. You could institute weight & volume but that favours certain types of characters over others. You could allow people to bank it and charge for deposits and withdrawals, but then you get the issue of people having to make repeated trips with their wheelbarrows to exchange large amounts of coin (and it would then make sense for someone to invent paper money in order to remove the weight/volume restriction  ). Or you can drain it out of their pockets by 'taxing' OOCly as a stand-in for IC expenses. As I said before, the weight/volume thing is doable if you have a banking system. You just withdraw your cash, hand it to the person who is standing next to you, who just deposits it again. And you tax both deposits and withdrawals. This is the best option I can think of that doesn't involve 'taxes' to drain existing gold out of the module. A stack of 1000 gp takes up one space in your inventory, is baggable and droppable, and weighs 1 lb. You can fill a few bags of holding or greater magic bags with it and it won't overly encumber you - it just means you have less space for items (the downside of trying to carry it all to avoid the banking fees  ). Cash in your 'regular' cash store also weighs 1 lb/1000 gp. (I can see this being a problem if you've just come back from an adventure with a lot of high-end items to sell. You may have to crawl from the merchant to the bank.  To avoid this, every merchant should be able to sell these 'stack of coins' items for 1000 gp each.)
The bank charges some percentage (10%?) every time you either withdraw or deposit cash. This way, you immediately write off 20% of its value. In fact, the amount available in the economy drops with every transaction. Think about this. If Joe and John are adventuring and Joe finds an item that John wants and is willing to sell, John must have 12.1K already in the bank in order for Joe to end up with 10K. And when Joe wants to buy something with that 10K, he'll actually only have 9K to give the next person (who will only pocket 8.1K, and so on). In other words, it's better to sell stuff to a merchant and immediately hand the gold to the person you're buying from (thus avoiding the bank) or do your trades in gems or other items.
You will need Morgan's representatives in every settlement (and perhaps certain large faction areas?), and woe betide you if you're stupid enough to get banned from every town in Amia, Khem and Ruathym!  And of course you also institute the big four: merchant buy caps (10% of toolset value)
no more gold drops
uncapped gold loss on respawn and forced respawn on login
gold devaluation [I am now thinking that GP^(2/3)*10 would be a reasonable reduction]* Dev Disco wrote: 1-6% will have a bigger effect, though, and it's a lot more intuitive. It will have a bigger effect on reducing loot influx. But it's still equally profitable on a per person basis to solo as it is to party. AlphaWaves' suggestion at least encourages partying, because the loot per person per hundred spawns goes up. The 1-10% slightly increases the influx over the 1-6% idea, but on the other hand it encourages partying. If all of the above are instituted, a drop rate that favours parties might be preferrable because the only earnings will now be from loot drops and we want to encourage partying (and thus, hopefully, RP) as well. * using GP^(2/3)*10, the percent reductions in gold holdings are as follows:
30M -> 0.96M (-97%)
10M -> 0.46M (-95%)
1M -> 100K (-90%)
100K -> 21.5K (-78%)
10K -> 4640 (-54%)
1K -> 1K (0%)
100 -> 210 (+110%)
50 -> 135 (+170%)
10 -> 46 (+360%)
1 -> 10 (+900%)
The equation above determines the value of X, the Xaviera factor, which tells you how hard you are being screwed  _________________  ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
Last edited by Xaviera on Mon, Aug 16 2010, 15:10 PM, edited 12 times in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silvarus
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:29 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland, Europe
|
Didi wrote: If your aim is to make the amount of gold entering the system the same as the amount of gold leaving the system, surely even if you were to manage to do this perfectly it would do nothing to solve the problem of people currently having ludicrous amount of money. Would it not merely create a caste of wealthy aristocracy and place even more emphasis on the grinding of epic loot as the only way to access these upper echelons of wealth? No one implied that this would be the complete solution. It obviously needs to go in along with heavy measures to take gold out of the system.
_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf
|
|
|
|
|
|
realpohlice
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:46 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Aug 2010
Location: Giving a fuck when it ain't my turn to give a fuck.
|
Didi wrote: If your aim is to make the amount of gold entering the system the same as the amount of gold leaving the system, surely even if you were to manage to do this perfectly it would do nothing to solve the problem of people currently having ludicrous amount of money. The plan is to drain the amount of gold in the economy faster than the rate of new gold coming in, at first. After it's shrank at a more manageable size, you slowly ease up the drainage while simultaneously adding changes that will slow the rate of new gold coming in and adding more money sinks in the module. Balancing - managing - the economy so that the drainage will become less and less intrusive. Xaviera wrote: Dev Disco wrote: 1-6% will have a bigger effect, though, and it's a lot more intuitive. But it's still equally profitable on a per person basis to solo as it is to party. It's not equally profitable. A party of 6 will hunt faster and more effectively than a solo hunter. It'll be more fun too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:52 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
realpohlice wrote: It's not equally profitable. It makes it much more profitable to party than to solo with the 1%-6% change. A party of 6 will hunt far more faster and effectively than a solo hunter; without penalising your chances of getting a loot. Good point. I'd forgotten that. _________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athyonn Ursidae
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 14:57 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
Location: UK
|
As sad as it makes me to say it but where you say the four top options is being selective as at the time of making this the third most popular option is to 'Leave it as it is'.  _________________ Siggy by Maryn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 15:00 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
|
It's up to the DM team to step in and make the decision to do what's best for the module, even if it pisses a few people off.
_________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ClockworkRed
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 15:37 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Location: Nice city, good beer
|
|
Repetitive upkeep costs for epic items in the inventory and casting costs for epic spells?
_________________ Playing atm Eowariel (Elven archer) / Gwendolyn (Monk)
Inactive: Hector (Triadic knight)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gunz
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 15:49 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Location: The City of Fallen Angels, Ca
|
|
I dig the less loot thing, by party members. A good idea. ::nods::
There's something wrong when I can run through Amia Forest as a whole on a patrol and can make 2500 gp, give or take.
_________________
My Characters:
Yuilith Kethil Menaiivan Garadeth
|
|
|
|
|
|
msheeler
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 16:20 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2008
Location: eastern USA
|
Xaviera wrote: The equation above determines the value of X, the Xaviera factor, which tells you how hard you are being screwed 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwagin
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 16:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
|
By changing the loot dynamic without administering existing a gold store reduction, you're making a serious giant 'Screw you' flag to any new characters/people, and even more inflating the value of the already well off's wealth, and boning new characters/players.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 16:28 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
|
How?
_________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silvarus
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 16:35 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland, Europe
|
realpohlice wrote: It's not equally profitable. A party of 6 will hunt faster and more effectively than a solo hunter. It'll be more fun too. Good point. I am hereby content.
_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 16:37 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
Now that I think on it, it isn't a bad idea to abolish the gold standard in cities.
In other words, gold can be used to buy very common stuff such as starting equipment, but anything more expensive or uncommon in cities will have to be transacted in local currency. There would be provision to change your gold for local currency, but most of your local currency would come from bartering items.
What I mean by that is, the merchant looks at your item, appraises its GP worth, and then adjusts that downward based on how likely it is that the NPC merchant will sell it on, which is based on certain item properties (for example, elemental damage and enhancement on weapons, AC and ability bonuses on armour and equipment). Some items may be considered worthless by NPC merchants, and for those you'll have to find a player to sell them to, or ditch them. The adjusted figure is then changed into local currency so the merchant can make an offer on your item. You can choose to accept that offer, or sell it to another player for local currency.
As for the NPC merchant inventories, this is the tricky part. Same shop interface, but the merchant won't buy (since there's already a provision for bartering in local currency).At any time, you can ask the NPC merchant for a price list in local currency for a particular category (armour, weapons, etc). All items in the shop are flagged with a variable so that when you acquire it from the merchant inventory, the cost in local currency is calculated and deducted. Any gold that you had to pay in order to start the transaction is refunded.
With gold becoming an obsolete standard, the other places may follow suit and develop their own form of item barter.
It's not perfect, but I thought it was an idea worth exploring further, if it can work at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 16:50 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
Dwagin wrote: By changing the loot dynamic without administering existing a gold store reduction, you're making a serious giant 'Screw you' flag to any new characters/people, and even more inflating the value of the already well off's wealth, and boning new characters/players. At this point I don't think there's any doubt that any 'economic revitalization package' will include a substantial devaluation. Whether it's a complete wipe, a linear reduction (eg. 95%) or a non-linear reduction (eg. GP^[2/3]*10) is up to the DM/Devs. _________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 17:04 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
cap at twenty O_o *leaves...not really but I would.*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 21:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
Yurell wrote: Server dies. The end. Drama Queen.
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 21:31 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
No, he's right. Complete vault wipes have ended more servers than probably any other cause of death outside owners just 'giving up'.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 21:34 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
TormakSaber wrote: No, he's right. Complete vault wipes have ended more servers than probably any other cause of death outside owners just 'giving up'. My statement still stands then as an opinion of the playerbase. Drama Queen *'s*
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
corypx
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 21:35 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
Selvec Darkon wrote: Yurell wrote: Server dies. The end. Drama Queen. no his evaluation of the idea was a fair assessment of the logical outcome on a diffrent note, I think all the glowing random named mobs that spawn with 100% loot chance should be changed to be 100% yellow loot instead, that also means animal monsters that glow called Greater ____________. yellow loot is cooler and it sells to NPC for less so it will lower incoming gold abit without being a major change to screw people over. _________________ ================-<Cory ShadowFlame>-================ Risenlord-Shifter(OMG a Non-Dragon Shifter that can hold his own in PvE) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwagin
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 21:48 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
Selvec Darkon wrote: TormakSaber wrote: No, he's right. Complete vault wipes have ended more servers than probably any other cause of death outside owners just 'giving up'. My statement still stands then as an opinion of the playerbase. Drama Queen *'s* My stories aren't over. You piss all over them then put them in the shredder? I walk away. Its not dramatic, it's simply saying: You do not value me? I do not value you anymore. Bye.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 22:01 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
Another thought about the 'stack of coins' inventory items. Merchants may have to sell these so that PCs can carry their loot to the bank in bags. If each 'stack' is valued at 1000 gp, merchants will charge more than the actual cost of the stack, in effect charging an additional fee (beyond the fact that they're only paying ~10% of 'fair' value for items) to act as money-changers. Exactly how much more would be determined by the character's appraise skill (I'm not sure exactly how appraise works, but I assume you can't pay less than the toolset cost for an item). If the character wants to avoid this, they either have to sell their loot in small lots, have lots of weight-reducing bags, or crawl to the bank. The bank would then accept their coin at par, subject to a 10% deposit fee. In other words, the bank accepts both the 'stack of coins' and cash from the usual inventory pool. Alternatively, the PC can use the 'stack' as currency with other players at par. Or, the PC can sell it back to a merchant for coin to purchase something else, but the item will then be subject to the buy cap, so a client trading his stack in to a merchant would only get ~10% of its value. Nasty... _________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gunz
|
Posted: Mon, Aug 16 2010, 22:16 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Location: The City of Fallen Angels, Ca
|
|
A total vault wipe would make me leave, tell ya that much. It's not being dramatic, it's saying: "You're going to take my PC's away? Well, I don't much feel like starting totally from scratch, so enjoy! "
_________________
My Characters:
Yuilith Kethil Menaiivan Garadeth
|
|
|
|
|
|
realpohlice
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 0:28 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Aug 2010
Location: Giving a fuck when it ain't my turn to give a fuck.
|
Suggestions of wipes should just be ignored at this point. They're either stonewalling change or plain too lazy to think their thoughts through. realpohlice wrote: It's evident to me that those who advocate for a vault wipe are the ones who doesn't really want any change to happen. What improvements will a wipe allow that can't be implemented now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 1:02 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
|
No, suggesting server wipe is my opinion. I think its the only answer to most of the issues people seem to be having. Ignore it if you will, but I'm not stonewalling anything, I am giving my opinion, and my view.
As for "I'll leave if you take away my character". The story doesn't end because your character isn't level 30 anymore, it simply changes.
Change is good. Besides, anything that had that kind of sweeping change would have huge IC explanations. Nobodies saying you can't recreate your character either.
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logicality
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 1:16 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: The Otherworld
|
|
Unfortunately, that's not how people think.
_________________
"A somebody was once a nobody who wanted to and did." - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
|
billytheid
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 1:16 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Location: Terra Australis
|
|
I like the 'peasent revolt causes creation of local currency' idea. Could make it like China; the local governments change the value of the currency depending on its rate of inflation and it's value realative to any other 'currency'(loot, gold, crafted items etc...)
The scaled loot will really bug folks who aren't in prime timezones and hence are lucky to get a two or three person party.
_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 1:22 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
billytheid wrote: The scaled loot will really bug folks who aren't in prime timezones and hence are lucky to get a two or three person party. As realpohlice pointed out, you operate more efficiently as a party, so even if it's not scaled but is a flat 1%/person you'll go through spawns faster in a group than solo. _________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
realpohlice
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 1:27 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Aug 2010
Location: Giving a fuck when it ain't my turn to give a fuck.
|
Selvec Darkon wrote: No, suggesting server wipe is my opinion. I think its the only answer to most of the issues people seem to be having. Ignore it if you will, but I'm not stonewalling anything, I am giving my opinion, and my view. You came here with an idea that got attacked and you resorted to insulting the playerbase instead of defending your idea. I thought you were a troll to be ignored; I'm sorry. Now that I see that you care and are serious, I'd have to ask once more what a wipe would bring to the table? What will justify its use? What improvements to the system will a wipe allow that a gradual gold drainage can't do? Your plan, "De-level to 1. Cap at 20. Complete restart." doesn't solve the underlying problems the Amian economy currently has. (This is my opinion and you're encouraged to challenge it) Or are you suggesting we do a wipe every so and so years as a way of controlling the economy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:14 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
realpohlice wrote: Selvec Darkon wrote: No, suggesting server wipe is my opinion. I think its the only answer to most of the issues people seem to be having. Ignore it if you will, but I'm not stonewalling anything, I am giving my opinion, and my view. You came here with an idea that got attacked and you resorted to insulting the playerbase instead of defending your idea. I thought you were a troll to be ignored; I'm sorry. Now that I see that you care and are serious, I'd have to ask once more what a wipe would bring to the table? What will justify its use? What improvements to the system will a wipe allow that a gradual gold drainage can't do? Your plan, "De-level to 1. Cap at 20. Complete restart." doesn't solve the underlying problems the Amian economy currently has. (This is my opinion and you're encouraged to challenge it) Or are you suggesting we do a wipe every so and so years as a way of controlling the economy? *deep breath* Level 30 is the cause of the majority of reasons as to why Amia has an over influx of gold. Items that can be sold for silly amounts. Monster that can be attacked and expectedly give out epic loot, silly amounts of bonus abilities. Eliminating epic levels removes the income on the major powers given to items, it lowers the gold influx. Restarting with a server wipe also removes those people who originally gained loads of money in earlier times on items that were overpowered or priced badly. It removes those who horde their stash of gold and removes epic items that could possibly break any form enforcement on the current "user market". This would allow strict rules to be put in place, caps and so forth, making enforcement of a level market possible, and stopping rediculous inflation. Level 20 cap also removes issues of overpowered classes and feats. Wizards at level 20 have a nice assortment of spells that are not pushed to the max. It also balances out the spells better. This prevents soloing, and issues with monster balances, fixing issues with boss hunting, which eventually causes problems with the marketplace. It places a need to team, and a need to work with each other, less focus on the hording of gold and the xp also. A full restart is the only decent answer to this issue because any other fix can be broken via some other way. A clean slate is needed to implement the rules and standards needed to keep the marketplace level and fair. These same ideas mentioned in this current thread to be put in as a "fix" won't fix anything. It'll be a temporary stopper. It won't fix the issue, and will only slow the problem for a moment till the inflation continues. A completely new start is one of the extreme measures I think are needed. I believe other people have mentioned extreme measures are needed. Also, this is not the first thread of this type. At least 20 of these pop up every 5 months, and basically I've come to the conclusion that the only fix that would work is a vault wipe and a level cap of 20. Now saying that, I made the suggestion as it was an old joke, one akin to asking for haste potions, or dev crit be fixed for only WM's. A joke. One that people took seriously and went stupid with. I still stand by my statement that people drama queen over the idea of server wipes, or other drastic measures. This servers players do get a little attached to their ideals and beliefs on the server, and thus do create a bit more drama then is needed when dramatic suggestions are made. I myself am a culprit of this, though I now seek to have a more open mind on such suggestions. So finally with this large block of text I was hoping to avoid, and apperently failed, I say blah. Blah to you, Blah to me, and Blah to this problem. Blah.
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:31 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
A vault wipe is overkill. Nobody can be accused of being a drama queen for objecting to a vault wipe.
I don't mind so much starting what is essentially a new character. I've found that being a fresh level 3 is the bestest and most challenging time for a character. What I object to in a server wipe is the need to go through the whole character creation wizard, however many times is needed to re-create my line-up of characters. And then there's the outfits.
Would it kill you to actually think about players as people instead of roleplaying machines with nothing better to do than sit in the character creator and customiser all day long?
Last edited by Selmak on Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:33 AM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GreatPigeon
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:32 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 May 2009
Location: London, UK
|
|
charge people to post on forums!
_________________ The Peacock wrote: [GreatPigeon] is better than me. Uncle-Opustus wrote: Just before I fall asleep, I like to pretend it's just a public feat so Pigeon can succeed in politics and save the world from poverty... with his unicorn and shining armour and Excalibur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colapops
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:33 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Location: Keep your distance.
|
GreatPigeon wrote: charge people to post on forums! _________________ The origin of storms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:38 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
GreatPigeon wrote: charge people to post on forums! It's a million-dollar idea!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Tue, Aug 17 2010, 3:41 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
Selmak wrote: A vault wipe is overkill. Nobody can be accused of being a drama queen for objecting to a vault wipe.
I don't mind so much starting what is essentially a new character. I've found that being a fresh level 3 is the bestest and most challenging time for a character. What I object to in a server wipe is the need to go through the whole character creation wizard, however many times is needed to re-create my line-up of characters. And then there's the outfits.
Would it kill you to actually think about players as people instead of roleplaying machines with nothing better to do than sit in the character creator and customiser all day long? Actually none of what you typed is roleplay. I don't think of people as roleplay machines. Seriously now, what is up peoples ass about this? I made a suggestion based on personal opinion. A suggestion already shot down before many many times. Exactly why is it everyone feels the need to jump on me about it? Its not the end of the world when I make a suggestion, espically one thats likely to be ignored and as been said about 100x it's not going to happen. Bloody hell. Lighten up people.
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 101 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Login
