Forums Home Forum Rules Achaea.com Lore Wiki Vote for Achaea! IronRealms.com
Home› Everything Achaea› The Golden Dais of Creation

Gold Sinks

1…5791011

Comments

  • PenwizePenwize
    Ah right, another thing I wanted to mention:  I am not producing anywhere near the amount of gold Shecks apparently is.  Assuming he's being honest in his gold production values, UW and Annwyn must be absolutely insanely lucrative.  I can top out at maybe 60k/hour if I island hop and quest, and get lucky that nobody else has done those quests.  Meropis does not produce that kind of gold at all (I get maybe 10k in 15 minutes for certain spots like Sirocco, though I do have a chance at some talismans, which might push that to 15k if I'm really lucky), though with talismans and butchering I can push it back up to about 60k/hour there. 

    I'd be interested in hearing the kind of gold @Bouff and @Seragorn can produce hourly, since they're two other people I know that bash very steadily and should be producing a lot of gold as well.
  • CooperCooper
    @Penwize

    As a very efficient basher, a full unsidhe clear (32 unsidhe) nets around 8k in 7:00 minutes. Sidhe is about 9:00, 10k, and 44 sidhe (I skip the ones scattered around). I lost my UW numbers, but it's roughly 12k with the two ubers but skipping the north side where the scorpions are. The time on that one can vary a -lot- because it's very dependent on crits and whether the DKs choose to heal, and how lucky you get with crits on ubers. I'd guesstimate about 12 minutes on that. Also, I COULD shave off a little bit of time if I used the queue commands, but even an extra gut when someone jumps you can mean death if you're doing that, so I just spam commands a lot and have standard balance triggers.

    Going full speed with no breaks and getting the perfect loop down there without any interruptions (and ignoring sales from talismans), you can get 45k an hour from sidhe/unsidhe/dks as a dragon.

    Unless there's some major quest reward that I don't know about, Shecks's "easy" 700k a day would be 15 hours of bashing at least.

  • JovoloJovolo
    He said he typically makes 45k an hour, roughly, so 700/45 is pretty much 15 hours, yeah. Even 60k per hour is 11 hours of hunting.
  • MithridatesMithridates
    Kyrra said:

    Please no.

    I'm like the only other person on the forums that understands economics besides @Peak‌. I'd be perfect for the job!

  • AntoniusAntonius
    edited March 2014
    Annwyn is around 20k if you clear both Unsidhe and Sidhe, in my experience. The five that are "scattered around" aren't exactly out of the way, and generally add maybe a minute to a clear.

    If you have a vibrating stick there's also really no reason not to clear the northern part of the Underworld as well; scorpions are only a pain in large groups (4+) or when there's more than one or two in the room with a death knight, anything else really doesn't add much time to your run, and it's an extra 6-7k gold. Scorpions also have a slightly longer respawn timer, so every other run (if you're clearing on respawn) you don't have to worry about them, and you still get a decent chunk of that easy gold from the three vampires and five death knights. The major issue with scorpions is that you'll need to refill mending vials a lot more often.

    Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files

  • SarapisSarapis
    edited March 2014
    Penwize said:

    I really dislike the notion of scaling gold production based on level, because it's effectively punishing people for leveling up, which sounds horrible. 
    Well, more that it's a recognition of the fact that it takes less work for high level person to kill X denizen than it does for a lower level person to do it. XP already works this way, you know.
    I already have a significant issue with people non-dragon level encroaching upon dragon level bashing areas, and the idea of punishing us for going to other place and not the opposite concerns me.
    It's not punishing, it's recognizing that you have an easier time of it than they do. They're punching above their weight. Going to their areas is punching below your weight. As I said though, were we to implement this, it would come with a lower end cap so that the ultra-high level people, like yourself, have places you can earn gold in.


    I also really dislike the idea of capping the amount of gold people can produce in a given time frame.  That's again just punishing people for wanting to bash constantly, versus any other activity. 
    No it's not. You'd be free to continue to bash for xp or rp or whatever reason you want. You'd just be getting a lot less gold once you hit your cap. I'd imagine the next 10% after the cap you might earn 90% of the gold, then 80%, 70%, etc. It'd just become continually less effective for the remainder of the 24 hours after you hit your 'full bashing effectiveness' cap.
    Are you going to cap PvP xp per day?
    PvP is not a gold faucet (nor an xp faucet). It's a net sink, unlike bashing.
      Limit the number of forges per day?  Limit inks milled, herbs gathered or minerals transmuted per day?
    Neither of those are gold faucets.
    That aside, why shouldn't someone who wants to do something for 8 hours get the full 8 hours of benefit of that activity?
    But they would. The full benefit is whatever the game defines it as being - it's no different than the fact that you don't get the same benefit in terms of % to next level that someone who is level 80 gets for killing a mob, You have to spend a -lot- more time earning X level and Y health/mana upgrades than someone who is level 100 does. This is no different, just based on a different factor.
  • XithXith
    Bashing gold is that horribly meta part of the game that makes everyone look like a mass-murderer. Yeah, I support the reduction of easy gold gains in hunting areas for obvious reasons. I get that it's still a game and you can't have your RP and eat it too. But since Achaea originally stood out from other games by focusing more on PvP and less on PvE, it's always good to tip the scales in favor of that roleplay credibility.
    That's more on the issue of an "RP sink" but modifying how gold and experience are earned is good.

    I think if a gold per day cap is put in for hunting, it would force people to be more strategic about it for the gold earnings, letting more people alternate in to hunt those areas. A lot of people don't hunt just because areas get bashed out so frequently. 

    While we're looking at hunting, and that penultimate Achaean achievement of Dragonhood, the main two ways to get experience are bashing and questing. I like neither. It would be unique to have other ways to gain experience than either killing thousands of things or doing the same mundane tasks the same way thousands of times. May warrant a new thread, but working experience into other aspects like exploration, roleplay, trade, off the top of my head... could direct focus away from the meta-killstuff experience.
    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • XithXith
    On commodity sinks, if everything cost a little more or people sold stuff for more, it would create that gold sink. I think hunting runes should fall into this category though, when you think about Jera (1 purple/250 gold), Berkana (3 yellow/240 gold), Algiz (1 green/160 gold), people are getting their basic hunting runes from buddies for 650 gold without a tip, and that's assuming Rurin prices and not milled inks that are sold for half. Inkmilling didn't so much create a gold faucet for anyone but it did remove a gold sink. I'd recommend that Jera/Berkana/Algiz have their ink costs doubled, possibly Gebu/Gebo as well.

    That 650 is probably earned back within your first 4-10 gold drops depending on where you're hunting. Another option could be to reduce body rune durations after a certain level, so that high level hunters have to get runes re-inked more often. Slows down the dragon process a tiny bit.
    Multiclass: Will self-inked runes remain when you switch over, and how often can the switch happen? I imagine plenty of people will get a rune class regardless, but with an increase in the number of runists, the ink market is going to see some action. I don't know how to address it but just mentioning.

    I'm guessing tradeskill separation and the replacement skills influence those commodity sinks a bit. The demand will go up, so the supply may not have to increase or decrease but price could go up. I'm torn on mining, because giving people the opportunity to sell more underpriced stuff always sucks for anyone who wants to be a merchant, but if it were made tedious enough that you mine a dozen ore to combine into a single piece of iron, and mining bonuses were granted only to mhun and dwarves who had not race changed in the past 30 achaean months.... but I digress...
    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • KaieKaie
    @Sarapis Sorry, Maybe I"m misunderstanding this. I don't understand how cutting into the amount of gold a person can accumulate will alleviate the problem here. The problem I took from this whole thread was that people are running out of stuff to spend gold on. Which means when this is over, people will just have to work harder to accumulate gold and in the end still face the problem of not having anything new to spend gold on.

    Maybe if you elaborated more on just how much of a cap it'll be. Like, are we talking something that will be a significant blow to bashing gold stopping people at like 40k or just capping out obnoxious rates like 500k per day?

    If it's the former then saving up for something which is already a seriously expensive and time consuming process like ships would become agonizing. How will this really be more helpful than discouraging?
  • XithXith
    edited March 2014
    Sarapis said:

    What's the thing to do when the faucet is pumping too much gold into the system? <---
    Reduce the supply of gold. <---

    The problem is that many of you have two competing desires. 
    1. Reduce the cost of credits expressed in gold. <---
    2. Maintain or increase your gold generation capacity.  <---
    Those two desires are directly at odds with each other. <---

    [...]

    I'm also working on designing a large addition/revision to part of the economy that will create additional ongoing gold sinks, and additional comm sinks as well, but I believe the real issue with gold inflation is the supply side more than the demand side (though the latter does need work). 

    No destruction economy, so he's saying the 'creation' has to be limited a little if we want credit prices to come down. So in actuality, people will have an easier time saving up for things that cost credits but a slightly harder time with things that cost gold.

    If supply of gold goes down, the demand of gold by the credit market also has to go down or they'll never sell their credits.
    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • KaieKaie
    Yes, the number appears to go down, but in actuality you don't have an easier time at all because it remains about the same if not harder. Reason is, that with the drop in the figure on credits, comes an increase in effort to accumulate gold. The effort acts as a counter weight to the decreased price which results in it remaining roughly about the same as people set the price on credits based on the current scale. So, naturally the price gets fixed at the equivalent of what is currently accepted. So, with that credit purchases remain equivalent, gold purchases become harder.

    I did manage to miss the addition/revision to gold sinks bit. So, that answers the part about addressing the issue the thread started with.
  • XithXith
    Assuming we expect tradeskill separation by the end of 2014, people will have access to a pool of at least 9 trade skills including crafting, gathering, and inkmilling. So if you want to maintain your gold output you might have to *gasp* offer goods and services and charge according to what you want to make. 

    The good thing about credit prices going down is that it also devalues the people who "pay to play", in other words buy heaps of ooc credits, sell them to finance their cures and commodities, instead of artefacts. To repeat, cheaper credits means selling more of your artie credits to get the same amount of gold, which people who want arties will be more hesitant to do. This increases the value of "play to pay". Meaning hopefully a decrease in the trend below:

    [1] Player who buys credits, gets a tailoring license, uses gold to pay for designs and comms and then sews clothes for free (no comms or tip). 
    Does custom designs for free, at their own cost. (giveaway player)
    [2] Player who buys credits, gets a tailoring license, uses gold to pay for designs and comms, sews clothes for just comms (no tip). 
    Does custom designs for only the gold and comm cost. (no profit player)
    [3] Player who buys credits, gets a tailoring license, charges for comms and service.
    Charges custom designs for tailoring service, design service (if tailor designs it), plus the cost of the design, and charges comms and service fees on crafting the item. (profit player)
    [4] Player who earns gold, gets a tailoring license, charges for comms and service.
    Charges custom designs for tailoring service, design service (if tailor designs it), plus the cost of the design, and charges comms and service fees on crafting the item. (true profit player)

    These are ranked in the order of the person you go to first when you need something. For example, you don't want to pay someone who charges 5000 gold for a bag of stasis (4), when you can give the comms, worth 2000, and have them do it for free (2). Personally I'm type [3]. I prefer a return on investment.

    So reducing the gold value of credits means the "payers" have to be more careful with their generosity because game gold becomes closer to the value of RL money. (i.e. save it for your artefacts)
    This lets the "players" have a chance to make up for their lack of ooc funding with their surplus of play time, while people with full-time jobs might have the opposite, more funds and less time.

    This applies to people who get their gold from hunting or trading and want to compete without spending big cash. Or even roleplay avenues like live performances or being a barber (I've done hair descriptions before, yes).
    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • BluefBluef Delos
    edited March 2014
    Xith said:
    Multiclass: Will self-inked runes remain when you switch over, and how often can the switch happen? I imagine plenty of people will get a rune class regardless, but with an increase in the number of runists, the ink market is going to see some action. I don't know how to address it but just mentioning.

    I'm guessing tradeskill separation and the replacement skills influence those commodity sinks a bit. The demand will go up, so the supply may not have to increase or decrease but price could go up. I'm torn on mining, because giving people the opportunity to sell more underpriced stuff always sucks for anyone who wants to be a merchant, but if it were made tedious enough that you mine a dozen ore to combine into a single piece of iron, and mining bonuses were granted only to mhun and dwarves who had not race changed in the past 30 achaean months.... but I digress...
    I was confused as to why you would want to intentionally make a brand new trades kill tedious or unattractive. Then I read your last sentence. No. No unless you'd like to give enchanting to the rajamala who bring a common form to all Sapience. The point is, giving specific class boons like this is lame if it's not balanced. More to the point of this thread though, you're talking about a time sink in regard to mining, not a gold sink. 

    You also wrote in another post about commodity sinks, @Xith said, "...if everything cost a little more or people sold stuff for more, it would create that gold sink." Let me edit that for you: When everything costs a little more smart people will hang on to what they have until the price lowers. This is the most basic result of inflation in an economy: People buy less.

    To address your second point, "if people sold more stuff..." I somewhat agree. But rather than flooding an already hampered market with new shinies, it would benefit the Achaean economic market to provide more market freedom as a whole. 

    Right now merchants can either sell on market (limited interactions with opposing factions) or buy or rent a shop. There are very few auction houses (one in Meropis, maybe?) or alternative selling options available. Ads maybe, but again the interaction between seller and buyer is limited by geography and society. If you're a crafter, jewelery, herald, etc. you may have repeat customers who like your style, etc. but you what you don't have is the freedom to produce and sell your wares on global scale. 

    A global auction house would create a worldwide gold sink, especially if it were based in Delos, where everyone can visit. Rather than using a WARES command, this could operate more like the NDS currently does. For example, AH SEARCH DRESS may give you hundreds to choose from (with a cap on how many items each person can have for sale at any time). People could pay the price with the item# and the denizen who manages the shop will give you the goods from the stockroom. 

    I could see an auction stall for clothing, jewelery, foods, enchantments, forged items, gathering supplies, cures, and the like. One in each room of the abandoned marketplace in Delos. A self-regulating economy would emerge, at least in terms of produced goods. 

    Will this devalue currently owned shops? Slightly. But if the item cap is low enough, it will not do so drastically. Plus, the Garden could always come up with new boons for actually owning your own shop. 
  • XithXith
    Bluef said:
    Xith said:
    Multiclass: Will self-inked runes remain when you switch over, and how often can the switch happen? I imagine plenty of people will get a rune class regardless, but with an increase in the number of runists, the ink market is going to see some action. I don't know how to address it but just mentioning.

    I'm guessing tradeskill separation and the replacement skills influence those commodity sinks a bit. The demand will go up, so the supply may not have to increase or decrease but price could go up. I'm torn on mining, because giving people the opportunity to sell more underpriced stuff always sucks for anyone who wants to be a merchant, but if it were made tedious enough that you mine a dozen ore to combine into a single piece of iron, and mining bonuses were granted only to mhun and dwarves who had not race changed in the past 30 achaean months.... but I digress...
    I was confused as to why you would want to intentionally make a brand new trades kill tedious or unattractive. Then I read your last sentence. No. No unless you'd like to give enchanting to the rajamala who bring a common form to all Sapience. The point is, giving specific class boons like this is lame if it's not balanced. 

    I don't know what rajamala have to do with enchanting, but mhun and dwarves are a race. Races have defining features sometimes. Those happen to be known as miners. Give Grooks a fishing bonus for all I care, as long as it doesn't unbalance combat.

    More to the point of this thread though, you're talking about a time sink in regard to mining, not a gold sink.

    Time is money. 

    You also wrote in another post about commodity sinks, @Xith said, "...if everything cost a little more or people sold stuff for more, it would create that gold sink." Let me edit that for you: When everything costs a little more smart people will hang on to what they have until the price lowers. This is the most basic result of inflation in an economy: People buy less.

    If you're over level 80 in real life I guess you may not have to eat, but if you do, you pay up or die.

    To address your second point, "if people sold more stuff..." I somewhat agree. But rather than flooding an already hampered market with new shinies, it would benefit the Achaean economic market to provide more market freedom as a whole. 



    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • BluefBluef Delos
    edited March 2014
    Xith said:
    Assuming we expect tradeskill separation by the end of 2014, people will have access to a pool of at least 9 trade skills including crafting, gathering, and inkmilling. So if you want to maintain your gold output you might have to *gasp* offer goods and services and charge according to what you want to make. 

    The good thing about credit prices going down is that it also devalues the people who "pay to play", in other words buy heaps of ooc credits, sell them to finance their cures and commodities, instead of artefacts. To repeat, cheaper credits means selling more of your artie credits to get the same amount of gold, which people who want arties will be more hesitant to do. This increases the value of "play to pay". Meaning hopefully a decrease in the trend below:

    [1] Player who buys credits, gets a tailoring license, uses gold to pay for designs and comms and then sews clothes for free (no comms or tip). 
    Does custom designs for free, at their own cost. (giveaway player)
    [2] Player who buys credits, gets a tailoring license, uses gold to pay for designs and comms, sews clothes for just comms (no tip). 
    Does custom designs for only the gold and comm cost. (no profit player)
    [3] Player who buys credits, gets a tailoring license, charges for comms and service.
    Charges custom designs for tailoring service, design service (if tailor designs it), plus the cost of the design, and charges comms and service fees on crafting the item. (profit player)
    [4] Player who earns gold, gets a tailoring license, charges for comms and service.
    Charges custom designs for tailoring service, design service (if tailor designs it), plus the cost of the design, and charges comms and service fees on crafting the item. (true profit player)

    These are ranked in the order of the person you go to first when you need something. For example, you don't want to pay someone who charges 5000 gold for a bag of stasis (4), when you can give the comms, worth 2000, and have them do it for free (2). Personally I'm type [3]. I prefer a return on investment.

    So reducing the gold value of credits means the "payers" have to be more careful with their generosity because game gold becomes closer to the value of RL money. (i.e. save it for your artefacts)
    This lets the "players" have a chance to make up for their lack of ooc funding with their surplus of play time, while people with full-time jobs might have the opposite, more funds and less time.

    This applies to people who get their gold from hunting or trading and want to compete without spending big cash. Or even roleplay avenues like live performances or being a barber (I've done hair descriptions before, yes).
    I'm not sure it would exactly work out this way. I believe what you're forgetting to factor in are the "pay players" who don't need to purchase new credits to get a new or existent trade license or learn a trade skill because they have a huge bank of lessons and bound credits from their IRE membership. These players offset the market system you're describing here. It also doesn't address the need for an outlet for these service and goods beyond city shopping markets or the market channel, both of which giveway to the need to limit purchases from people outside your ideological or religious faction. 

    In your model, I would be a no profit player and from that standpoint, I see another flaw in the model you're presenting. Generosity is a quality of readiness to give more of something than necessary or expected. Most players who are generous in this fashion are not going to be "more careful" in their production of goods for less. If anything, they'll counter it and become more generous. This is because generosity focuses on altruism, not capitalism. If gold becomes closer to the value of RL money, I'd give more - not less. Because I have the wherewithal to do so from a long IC life of learning and hoarding all of @Kaie's hunting gold. 

    Overall, I don't think it is necessary or appropriate to be making distinctions between players who choose to buy credits and those who cannot afford or do not wish to do so. If we're going to do that though, I'd like to point out that the gold drops for less experienced players are atrocious right now. I started three new characters when the Trial changed and other than my serpent, who is really enjoying the economical advantages pickpocketing gives them at a lower level, the rest would be dead broke and stuck without OOC credits funding the purchases related to their House requirements. 
  • SarapisSarapis
    edited March 2014
    Cooper said:
    You're going to have a fairly significant number of players pissed off if you specifically target dragons and reduce the amount of gold they can gain.
    Well, it would be a curve that started somewhere (level 80? level 100? I don't know) and went up from there. It would target high level people in general, not Dragons specifically. 

    Now in essence you're saying 'Oh, we accidentally too many dragons' and there's too much gold coming into the game You're putting words in my mouth. I never said there were too many dragons. I said that the rate at which high level people (ie Dragons) generate gold is probably going to need to be downwardly adjusted because they are the cause of too much gold flowing in the game. That's called "balancing" and we do it all the time. See PvP combat, for instance. You are precisely as much a Dragon whether mobs drop zero gold (like they used to before we changed that in an attempt to adjust the economy such that there was a larger money supply) or a billion gold per death. It has an effect on one element of your power as a Dragon but if you believe that adjustments are never in order, well, the history of every MUD/MMO in existence pretty much stands in opposition to your assertion. Running a MUD means making changes, and I can't recall a single major change that we've ever made to the game that didn't generate complaints, up to and including giving more bound credits and lessons for leveling.
  • TreyTrey
    <blockquote class="Quote">
      <div class="QuoteAuthor"><a href="/profile/Trey">Trey</a> said:</div>
      <div class="QuoteText"><div>@Sarapis, had a thought just now. I found myself wishing that silver tokens still existed so that I could customize more things, based on the Mayan Crowns for gold idea. Why not simplify the matter, though? Allow customisations at 250k - 300k gold per 50cr cost. I can think of a ton of people who would be willing to shell the gold out knowing that it's saving some cost versus the (current) credit market prices, and since the gold is paid out to the administration, it effectively removes it from the economy.</div></div>
    </blockquote>

    <br><blockquote class="Quote">
      <div class="QuoteAuthor"><a href="/profile/Trey">Trey</a> said:</div>
      <div class="QuoteText"><blockquote class="Quote">
      <div class="QuoteAuthor"><a href="/profile/Antonius">Antonius</a> said:</div>
      <div class="QuoteText">@Trey Wrong thread? Either way, the cost of a customisation is 50 credits. If you allow people to buy them for 300k, or any amount, you've effectively said that's the gold cost for 50 credits. That's something Sarapis has said more than once they will never do.</div>
    </blockquote>

    It really isn't setting the gold cost for fifty credits if the only thing that can be done with gold instead of credits is customisation. I'm not suggesting that we be allowed to buy lessons or artefacts directly with gold, for example.</div>
    </blockquote>

    <br>

    Reposting here because I can't seem to remember which thread I'm in at any given moment.

  • ShecksShecks
    Three thoughts come to mind.

    1.   I think you're overlooking the fact that if you lower gold coming into the game, and credit prices lower with it, it is still going to require the exact same amount of time bashing, per credit, thus not actually making things any different.  For example, if credit prices drop to 3000 per credit, but I can only bash half the gold per hour that I used to, then the credit market has not changed at all.

    2.   I've already said this, and I'll mention it again sine it keeps getting mentioned.  People, stop talking about crafting, runes, etc, regarding gold sinks.  We're talking about the daily movement of millions of gold.  The amount of money spent on runes is like a grain of sand in the beach of gold/credit economy.

    3.   I paid OOC money for some of my artefacts, and the reason I did this was simple:  It was an investment to make my character able to generate they credits I paid back, via bashing.  Since gold-bashing places like UW/Annwyn has been happening since I have been playing the game, I felt it was perfectly safe to assume it wasn't going anywhere.  The following artefacts that I have purchased are either only for bashing, or have minor impacts on PVP - and thus you're essentially pulling the carpet out from under me on those purchases by taking away the purpose of me buying them: Bashing for credits in game.
    Veil/Gem 2400cr
    Girdle/bracelet (essentially only useful for bashing, thanks to %-based attacks) 1700cr
    crit pendant (level 2)  800cr
    level 3 gauntlets (for dragon gut) 2500cr
    level 3 lash (useless for pvp, only good for garroting npcs)  1400cr
    sip/regen ring (good for pvp, but primarily purchased for hunting)  2850cr

    The -only- reason I bought most of these (aside from the veil) was to bash.  For gold.  The reason I did this is because I did some figures and felt that in the long run, it was a decent investment, because I'd come out able to bash for some other things for my character down the line.

    Talismans mean nothing to me, especially since I have elder dragon already.  I'd say if anything, just stop dropping them for me, or make it an option - I'd much prefer to have gold.  Gold I assumed wasn't going anywhere.


  • ShecksShecks
    edited March 2014
    I don't think anyone actually has an issue with the "top 5" making a lot of gold, I think they're just upset that all the good bashing areas are constantly being throttled for their resources, making them places you either have to carefully time respawns, or fight over.  Most "bashers" can't PVP their way into a bashing area, and taking respawns is essentially not an option.

    Thus, I think all the people need are more middle to high level areas they can bash.  People aren't upset that I'm making super high amounts of gold, they're upset that they're not making it.  Two obvious counters to solving this, and the credit market problem:

    1.  Create more areas that have decent gold rates, but are less than UW/Annwyn.  That will give people something to hunt, and they will be happy.  (This was already done with islands/meropis, but apparently it isn't enough)

    2.  More credit promotions.  I've noted that credit prices tend to stay pretty steady or slightly decrease during promotions (for obvious reasons), while during the in-between (and crappy history promotion) periods, they sky-rocket, because nobody is buying credits.  I'm certainly not buying any credits with the current sale going on, and after @Sarapis statement regarding MC's, I probably won't buy any until I see an MC promotion.  This means my only credit income is through gold bashing, and not buying gray market credits.  This is what makes credit prices go up.
  • AccipiterAccipiter
    Actually, if implemented as described were you have X amount per day at 100% drop rate and then with diminishing returns after that, you will see a drop in relative credit prices as long as you don't hit the cap (assuming that a significant percentage of credits are bought by people who are currently going over the cap of course). Curious on how they will stop people from taking random people along to finish off the mob after they hit the diminishing returns but that is an implementation problem not a theoretical one.

    And I don't think people are upset about you making the gold and I don't think they are upset that they aren't making the gold. They are upset about the huge gap between things that cost 10-20k and things that cost 2-5million. If you can't consistently make enough money to put a dent in that, there is very little incentive to work towards it. The price gap between denizen produced things, cures, clothes ect. and anything else is so big that it doesn't encourage the small, achievable goals that make people enjoy their time because they feel like they are making progress.

    Think of a newbie, they make 20k fairly easily, buy armour, some cures and weapons and think right, what is my next non-RP goal. There is a huge mountain for them to climb before they can attempt to buy the next tier of items. Armour/weapons are they only thing they can really upgrade with gold and 5 points on a stat doesn't seem like a reason to spend all your money if you don't know a lot about the combat system. Transing skills is really the only thing you can do with gold and with the leveling credits all poured into one skill you only need like 150 credits to trans it but even that is a million nowdays, though as you can spend them in part it isn't as big a psychological hurdle. After that the next level is housing at 50cr a room which isn't bad but then anything else is saving for millions of gold at a time/having credits sitting there that are taunting you until you hit the magic number.


  • ShecksShecks
    edited March 2014
    I hope it's clear that the reason I bash for so much gold is because I spend a massive amount of money and time on bashing.

    It's not fair for people who bash 3-5 hours a week to complain that they're not making as much gold as someone who spends 50 hours a week bashing.  Anyone can make gold, they just have to go do it (instead of sitting AFK at Centre Crossing doing nothing for 8 hours).  The only problem with this is bashing area availability, which is something I discussed in my previous post.
  • CynlaelCynlael
    edited March 2014
    Make housing purchasable with gold like other IRE games. Keep the credit prices for stuff like willpower regen room etc.

  • BluefBluef Delos
    edited March 2014
    Xith said:

    I don't know what rajamala have to do with enchanting, but mhun and dwarves are a race. 

    If you're over level 80 in real life I guess you may not have to eat, but if you do, you pay up or die.



    @Xith these comments in no way address the two main points I was making. 
    1. The fact that what you said would lead to economic inflation.
    2. The fact that you're unnecessarily categorizing Achaeans into two categories (with some obvious bias):
      • Those who buy credits
      • Those who don't

  • PeakPeak
    @Sarapis @Tecton

    5 item gold auction every quarter.
  • XithXith
    Only if it were the same 5 items. I'd rather their limited coding time go into other quarterly things like classleads, as well as more events and other improvements.
    If every quarter they auctioned a Sceptre, Chenubian wings, etc, etc, etc.  Although really those things should maybe be limited to once per year anyway.
    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • AccipiterAccipiter
    I think a pretty good rule of thumb would be anything that currently costs credits isn't up for negotiation as far as getting them to cost gold is concerned.
  • ShecksShecks
    edited March 2014
    So far, a good rule of thumb is that any idea is not up for negotiation.

    IRE's stance is pretty solid: Let the gold market is rise, it makes people buy more credits. (which makes the gold market rise)
  • AccipiterAccipiter
    edited March 2014
    That isn't close to fair. Our position as players is different that their position as a business, but the health of the game is still important to keep their business running. 

    If their only option to keep the game running is to heavily cut into their revenue, I am sure they would do it if it was still profitable to run the game, but that isn't the case. You can do everything in the game without paying for it currently, it is just getting harder over time for the new players to do so, and it is set up in a way that IRE gets the money for every credit spent no matter how you get it. They have made significant changes in the period I was dormant that have devalued gold in order to make the game more accessible. When I left, broot was selling for 250g a pop, now you can get it for 5g. The cheapest herbs sold for 4 times the amount you can get anything at now. 

    There is a surplus of gold, that can't be denied, but saying that IRE will allow rampant inflation because it will sell more credits isn't borne out either by historical evidence or current design implementation. Gold sinks that aren't simply copies of what you can get with credits will result in more credits being sold because people will buy the credits to sell. Currently if you have a ship already, there is no point in having a large amount of gold because there is little to spend it on besides credits, which means why bother selling them? 

    TLDR: IRE is a greedy business just like any other, but their revenue rests largely on the health of their games.
Sign In or Register to comment.