Ideas for gold sinks and IG credit prices

1235712

Comments

  • Amranu said:
    Outside of new mechanics which people may or may not even use there are only a few options:

    1) Increase lower level hunting gold and decrease higher level stuff to make credits easier to obtain for newbies. This probably won't change price if done properly but helps solve one of the main issues people claim to care about when talking about cheaper credits

    2) Lower gold drops across the board, this is likely to increase supply of credits but will also make your gold worth more, doesn't really accomplish that much

    3) Greatly increase current upkeep costs for ships, mines etc. This may somewhat effect credit prices but it will annoy the piss out of everyone that's now being taxed by the game.

    Otherwise, for people bitching about supply of credits not keeping up with demand, you're simply wrong. If you demand credits you will buy them at whatever price. If you choose to wait for a lower price then that's your own problem, not the market's.
    I was actually thinking about this - and if anything - my knee-jerk reaction is actually that gold drops should be adjusted up.  I say this a bit tongue-in-cheek but really think about it - I'd be impressed if anyone levels 50-80 can net 15-20k gold/per hour of bashing, or put another way an hour of bashing for a 'midbie' might grand out ~2-3 credits or about a dollar's worth of credits.  That's a rate a child labourer in a textile factory in Bangladesh would sneer at! (no offense to anybody hyperbole for effect).  Of course I understand that simply increasing gold drops wont fix that problem.  I'm just saying that as this discussion continues, it's becoming abundantly clear to me that if anything needs fixing it's the very, very high end of bashing where the interaction of stackable effects and min/max strategies can produce extreme results.  However - I wouldn't mind seeing those same benefits of min/max strategies accruing to a midbie - IE if a midbie used ahmetite and luckbinder (unlikely though it may be to hold it) to take their gold output to 30k per hour as an example - I wouldn't shed any tears.
  • Skye said:
    @Sarapis Which is the unfortunate reality of it, which I've long realised. But how do you propose to retain fresh players when the game is (supposedly) built on a 'pay for perks' model that's increasingly pushing towards 'pay to do anything'?  Unlike mobile games, your micro transactions aren't particularly micro except for the no-brainer packages, the in-game market for credits is now a 6.8k gold wall that would intimidate any new player who isn't feeling invested in the game. 

    Allegedly, we've built an immersive roleplay world to fight in as opposed to being on the ACC test server. And it's for this immersive world that non-Pkers invest their own hundreds of dollars into things. It's p disappointing to be shrugged off like 'well yah, you guys were just sort of a side income'. 

    It makes no real difference to us what the credit price is in gold. We do care about managing the sinks and faucets in the gold economy, and part of the price of credits in gold is reflective of that, but the actual exchange rate itself doesn't really matter to us. That's you guys collectively deciding what your time vs. your money is worth, denominated in gold. After all, you don't have to buy credits with gold. There's another currency you can buy credits with - US Dollars - and in that currency credits have gotten cheaper every single year since Achaea opened.
  • Aesgar said:
    Also @Hellen, price ceilings in a nutshell D:  
    This is true, but do remember that credits from the admin are, effectively, infinite. Scarcity is not a factor to consider. I had intended that the admin would force a price ceiling via releasing an infinite number of credits onto the market at whatever price they felt was fair rather than just saying "Ok, credits from here on out are to always be priced at 6k". If that were the case, we really would start seeing such issues here. It would be interesting to see for a while, but as I said I don't think it would be the best solution.

    The in-game economy would have to be well and truly screwed for that kind of intervention to occur, however. Probably one of the best ways to deal with the kind of inflation we're seeing is to make more gold sinks, as has been stated in the thread numerous times.
  • I never have any more than about 100k at any one time. It usually goes on Credits or random shit. Not sure I could cope with millions in my pack.

    (Party): Mezghar says, "Stop."
  • Sure, more gold sinks. Any ideas? Because that requires new mechanics.
  • Matias said:
    If the issue is accessibility to newer people, so they can trans their skills in a free-to-play model, then just have 5000 lessons available to buy per player at 1000g each. That will remove a significant portion of gold, while not putting a hard price on credits because once you've bought those, you're back to buying credits. 
    if the issue is accessibility to newbies, is there a way to have a solution that will improve that area that will not incur any significant revenue loss?

    Like, if we assume that people who will pay for their tri-trans skills(assuming tri-trans being the basic thing we want to make accessible for all players), will almost always choose to acquire them with dollars as opposed to grinding hours, then it becomes possible to have a solution specifically targeted for the people who are unable to pay.

    Matias's solution above seems really good as it has a ceiling of 5000 lessons (about tri trans). The cost of the lessons are not affected by rising CFS prices. Beyond the 5000 lessons, no more price protection.

    A couple of things, instead of 1000 gold per lesson, which calculates to 8500 gold per credit including the 2.5 bonus lessons, maybe cut that to half, to 500 gold per lesson. Also, treat them as special lessons that cannot be acquired wholesale but limited to a certain amount per year(maybe 500), so those who wants to make use of those lessons have to be a little patient. Those who can't wait, can just pay with dollars or use regular CFS. Lastly these special lessons should only be good for class skills / maybe survival if they are to be catered only for initial accessibility.

    Possible consideration:

    - People who do not pay right now, may pay later in the future when their real life situation transitions. So retaining them now might pay off.

    - If the game is made more accessible, it can generate good feelings, which may in turn encourage people to support the game more.

    - Each player adds to game in all kind of ways, even those who do not pay, and this indirectly helps the company garner more revenue.

    If we consider more on indirect or future revenue as opposed to direct revenue, then maybe subsidies aren't so bad?

    -----

    Of course I am assuming alot of things. Maybe it has all been considered and found wanting. Still gonna post this though, just in case.



  • I only sell credits on CFS. Not sure if I have ever purchased credits from CFS. I ... threw away all of my money when I was younger and sunk it into Achaea. Thousands of dollars.  So now Goryllin lives on that largesse while I personally can't really afford that kind of investment any more (especially into a text based game that I Suck at).

    But I hate bashing and I hate walking around and I am pretty terrible at all aspects of the game. So I still pk, because that's the character type I play, but I have to support that by selling credits purchased off the website.

    (Also, I like saying screw you to the credit market and selling abnormally low). God, this just makes me realize how terrible I am at everything, including min/maxing or making a profit.

  • Wow I see so many posts suggesting penalizing hunting at certain levels. It's like complaining property prices skyrocketing. Gotta work for it if you want more of it. It's a free market, no one's discounting your chance to get what they can, just gotta work harder.

    New gold sink ideas are welcome, but definitely not any movement that penalizes hard work.
  • edited March 2016
    This conversation is hilarious coming out of a game.

    If only people cared this much about inequalities in real life.

    I agree with the step to lower the inequities by removing braid at the very least.
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna be
    edited March 2016
    Dochitha said:
    Wow I see so many posts suggesting penalizing hunting at certain levels. It's like complaining property prices skyrocketing. Gotta work for it if you want more of it. It's a free market, no one's discounting your chance to get what they can, just gotta work harder.

    New gold sink ideas are welcome, but definitely not any movement that penalizes hard work.
    But it's not "hard work". Bashing is rarely "hard work" for the majority of those that do so. It's pressing one or two keys and staring at the screen as the fight scrolls by. Sitting semi-afk for 2 hours while watching netflix shouldn't net you 50k, much less 200.

    Granted there are exceptions, those who hunt places they can't easily survive, or those that manually bash everything, but still. Bashing is far from "hard work". It's just time-consuming.
    Huh. Neat.
  • My bank account has about 80k in it, and my pack only around 200k.  I don't even have that many credits stored on me anymore.  Since I came back,  I've been investing in new classes and arties for them.  Hoarding gold would do nothing for me.  If I wasn't going to use the gold, why would I grind for it?  I'm not sure why anyone would,  really,  but I realize some people do.  Generally, unless I have a goal, I don't grind.

    That said, I am a little shocked at how many people think reducing high level grinding would be a good thing.  That's a little absurd, and would severely reduce the incentive to even develop higher level techniques for it.  Although perhaps with the insane numbers people are boasting here I can understand, so maybe I should clarify.  

    Outside of relics and ahmetite use, I am extremely skeptical that anyone is regularly generating more than 150k/hour with any sort of consistency. I've timed it, and from what I can tell, the highest gold yield zone I can farm, I farm marginally faster than anyone else does.  If I could somehow farm it non-stop, which I can't because it takes an hour to respawn and only 8 minutes to clear, I could make around 150k/hour.  But I can't,  because it's not available that often and it's the highest yield place I frequent.

    Now, if UW/Annwyn produce more than that, I am actually okay with that because of the high risk associated with those areas, although I am skeptical that they do.  I have not timed them since the changes though, maybe it's time I do.

    Still, 100k to 150k per hour at the highest level in the game, with a clearly sizable time investment to get to that point, is not that unreasonable is it?
  • edited March 2016
    Actually, I do think the idea has credibility.

    I've been thinking about a way to decrease gold supply on the high end, while increasing gold supply on the low end that won't drastically alter how people generate gold. Obviously, bashing is going to be the "bread winner" in terms of gold generation, but we can't unilaterally decrease or increase gold drops in areas. Increasing gold drops in Manara (typically a lower level hunting ground), will only increase the number of higher level people that hunt there, as the gold per hour is higher than another area that is harder to hunt. At the same time, if you gut the production of somewhere like Annwyn, then it makes the area much less attractive to hunters and thus you increase the crowds at other places.

    Someone mentioned a scaling based on level, and I think that actually could work.

    For instance:

    Level 1: 150% gold generation per mob (mob drops 100 gold, level 1s get 150 gold instead)
    Level 10: 145% gold generation 
    Level 20: 140% gold generation
    Level 30: 135% gold generation
    Level 40: 130% gold generation
    Level 50: 125% gold generation
    Level 60: 120% gold generation
    Level 70: 110% gold generation
    Level 80: 100% gold generation -- level 80 has always been the "baseline" for things in Achaea
    Level 90: 90% gold generation
    Level 100: 80% gold generation

    This model would accomplish several things at the same time:

    Decreased gold generation on the high end by a fairly small margin of 20%
    Increase gold generation at all points under level 80, increasing the buying power of non-dragons
    Decreases the invisible "wall" of the grind for lower people, as they can actually hunt up fairly decent gold per hour.

    This would be balanced considering anyone over level 90 can hunt for longer, and more areas, to still generate a decent amount of gold, while still being slightly less than before. 

    In regards to the high-end options re: ahmetite, golden braid -- they have their own limitations inherent to themselves. I think reducing the gold generated on the base level will bring both of them in line as well.

    This scaling effect would only affect the buying power of the high end negatively, while positively impact the buying power of all other levels, from what I can see.

    Also, another issue quite simply is the "power creep" that Achaea has currently. A lot of people have been playing for a long time, and amassed tons of credits and/or gold troves. Retirement helped alleviate this slightly, as anyone who retired (I assume) lost their gold in doing so. However, I would have to also assume that most of them gutted CFS with their gold prior to finalizing retirement to begin with.

    I would suggest a one-time per player ability to purchase bound credits directly from the game with gold. Literally a one-time thing where if you have 20,000,000 gold and nothing to do with it - you can purchase bound credits from the game at the current average credit price on the market. I think this could help alleviate the vast wealth that long-established players currently have. While many people grind specifically to purchase credits from the market, some people don't need the credits and have these amazingly high sums of gold lying around. When something shiny or nice comes out, they gut the credit market with their gold, and purchase whatever it is they are looking for. Adding a way to burn your gold, and still get the credits without burning the credit market directly, seems to be something that needs to be added.




    Penwize has cowardly forfeited the challenge to mortal combat issued by Atalkez.
  • TectonTecton The Garden of the Gods
    While part of the current spike is due to the current promotion (less people buying actual credits), there's a couple of steps here we're going to take to limit some of the outliers here over the coming days and weeks:
    • Golden Braid and Ahmetite bonuses are going to be scaled back.
    • Many of the old "give <x> to <y> for <z> gold" quests (especially in higher-level areas) are going to get reworked to be less loopable (stopping double-dipping of gold from drops and quest rewards).
    Naturally, we're going to continue working on new ideas for things to spend gold on as well!
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna be
    Step 1: Devalue my mineral, check.

    Step 2: Buy up all the stock.

    Step 3: Everyone forgets how broken it was and it's readjusted, making the value skyrocket and making me rich.

    Step 4: Spend all that gold on the new gold sinks and cry that I'm no better off.
    Huh. Neat.
  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    I honestly don't think much needs to change. Maybe the minerals and the relics... but cfs increasing by about 1k was to be expected with multiclass, and it's still "new" enough to have that sort of impact. Decreasing high level bashing too much (which has already been decreased in the not too distant past) will just make people care less about higher level hunting. Other IRE games have other incentives to keep on leveling beyond just obtaining dragon. The more you keep penalizing dragons, then what's the point? I think people are freaking out and jumping the gun a little too fast. Our credit economy is no where near as bad as some other IRE games.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • edited March 2016
    @Tecton, please watch making changes based on this thread. Other IREs have nerfed things based on threads like this calling for cheaper CFS prices and higher gold sinks/lowered gold rewards. They generally ended in disaster, and either lost players for it, or the players ended up so frustrated they didn't even feel motivated to play in the same way they had in the past.

    I, personally, don't feel there is a need to step in and do anything at all. Let the game evolve in this area, and players will adapt. Everyone always wants everything cheaper. It's human nature. There will be complaining, but that's better than penalizing players who advance.

    Credits can, and probably should, be bought more OOCly anyways. That helps fund the game, while keeping the price per hour for each credit at a more reasonable rate. I'd much rather give from $0.27 to $0.49 per credit anyways.
    Give us -real- shop logs! Not another misinterpretation of features we ask for, turned into something that either doesn't help at all, or doesn't remotely resemble what we wanted to begin with.

    Thanks!

    Current position of some of the playerbase, instead of expressing a desire to fix problems:

    Vhaynna: "Honest question - if you don't like Achaea or the current admin, why do you even bother playing?"


  • I mean, out of all the things that could be taken from this thread, nerfing high level bashing is probably the worst you could pick by a pretty large margin.

    Most people here are calling for additional gold sinks.  More things to spend money on, be they luxury items, interesting features of the game, or new goals to achieve.

    How can you honestly come to the conclusion that just nerfing the higher level players is a good idea?  Shouldn't you be aiming to incentivize your players instead?
  • That actually really addresses the problem, you're just being selfish about it.

    If high level stuff is scaled back and low level stuff is kept where it is, newer plays can generate a larger amount of gold relative to older  players, reducing the pretty massive divide that exists between anything pre-90 and anything post-90.
    image
    Cascades of quicksilver light streak across the firmament as the celestial voice of Ourania intones, "Oh Jarrod..."

  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    Most of the people crying for higher level bashers to be nerfed are also basing it on exceptionally great hunters who maximize their full earning potential (Seragorn, Jhui, etc). A lot of us who may generate gold regularly do not generate it that fast, and not nearly as often. I feel I have a steady, reasonable income that is a lot less than what it used to be when I was closer to level 99/100 due to a bunch of nerfs that have already been put into place. I also play the comm market and run a shop, amongst a few other things just to go along with gold generation via bashing (like ink selling). High level bashing has been nerfed enough. Nerf the relics and the minerals, but leave the hunters alone, they've been penalized enough. We could just as easily say penalize the PKers by making it take longer to earn new slots for multiclass or something else because they're generally the ones buying up CFS to feed their new class skills and artefacts, but then the PKers would pop up saying HOW DARE YOU?! Dragons shouldn't get the shaft just because multiclass increased the price of cfs by 1k for a while. I honestly believe it'll stabilize in the future, between people finishing up their multiclass choices and all the new players from the relatively new option of retiring and creating new characters it just hasn't settled down yet. I think the problem was releasing too many new high credit demanding features, and it is what it is now.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • I don't think nerfing the top-end bashing by 20% is going to hurt the people that hunt there, realistically.

    If the regular high-end hunting is 120k per hour on average, dropping that to 90-100k instead isn't a drastic change.




    Penwize has cowardly forfeited the challenge to mortal combat issued by Atalkez.
  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    On average for a few people who claimed it so on forums? That doesn't even cover the true amount of dragons/hunters when only a fraction frequent forums, and many haven't spoken up or posted their per hour income. 20% is a lot when it has already been decreased a ton since I started playing. When I was a new dragon gold generation was easy peasy. Now it's not nearly as easy as it was, it takes a bit more effort, and is more competitive than ever.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • edited March 2016
    100-150k is on the high end of the high end, that's what I can produce if nobody else is taking a few key areas, nobody else cleared them just before me, and certain other places don't decide to engage deathtrap mode and let me clear them quickly.  I'll use Tenwat as an example because everyone knows about it.  I can't clear Tenwat in 8 minutes if someone else before me cleared it in 20, which happens all the time.  If there were somehow infinite Tenwats, that's a difference of 135k per hour vs 54k per hour.  Tenwat clears for 18k, it takes me 8 minutes.  It takes most other dragons 14.  It takes most non-dragons 20+.  The gold production over time is hugely different based on your bashing efficiency, and really most people who do it as a non-dragon would be better served questing somewhere, given how long it takes to get there and how long it takes them to clear it.

    If someone spends a lot of time ironing out minute inefficiencies and driving their clear times down, why shouldn't they be rewarded for that?
  • TectonTecton The Garden of the Gods
    Ismay said:
    @Tecton, please watch making changes based on this thread. Other IREs have nerfed things based on threads like this calling for cheaper CFS prices and higher gold sinks/lowered gold rewards. They generally ended in disaster, and either lost players for it, or the players ended up so frustrated they didn't even feel motivated to play in the same way they had in the past.

    I, personally, don't feel there is a need to step in and do anything at all. Let the game evolve in this area, and players will adapt. Everyone always wants everything cheaper. It's human nature. There will be complaining, but that's better than penalizing players who advance.

    Credits can, and probably should, be bought more OOCly anyways. That helps fund the game, while keeping the price per hour for each credit at a more reasonable rate. I'd much rather give from $0.27 to $0.49 per credit anyways.
    Oh definitely, it's not purely knee-jerk, but something we've been monitoring for a while now.
  • edited March 2016
    I don't disagree with rewarding people for their efforts, but the reward shouldn't be so high that it far outstrips what others are doing. We've had our conversations about battlerage efficiency, and most people don't use it well, that's certainly true.

    It's a fair critique to say that not everyone is represented here, absolutely. I personally can average 100-120k an hour pretty easily. While I'm not necessarily indicative of the norm, potentially, I'm also not in the "highest of the high" end, either. I don't think it is a stretch to assume that Dragons are averaging anywhere from 80-120k an hour. One run of Annwyn alone is ~85k if you do the quests (not saying people hunt there regularly, since they don't).

    For the most part, people are just spitballing ideas and seeing what sticks. It's totally acceptable to speak out against them and have logical discourse in regards to what should or should not be done. However, being realistic and honest is required as well.

    In regards to competitiveness, that's actually not true. Battlerage changes have reduced competition for areas, as areas take longer to clear. It's also not harder to hunt that it used to be, it takes more than just typing gut 20,000 times though.




    Penwize has cowardly forfeited the challenge to mortal combat issued by Atalkez.
  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    Have we even figured out the earning potential of all these new super noobs?  Just walked by an 18 year old wielding SoA and soulpiercer, and wearing some other nice artefacts.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    Many Annwyn hunters do Sidhe, maybe Unsidhe, and leave the rest alone. I see a lot just do Sidhe because they don't like the afflictions on the Unsidhe part. Also, a lot of dragons don't just hunt for hours on end. One that is purely a hunter isn't going to benefit from buying a bunch of classes, nor are they going to benefit from as many artefacts that are available as PKers will. If you're going to penalize dragons, then you need to penalize PKers, because they're the ones eating up CFS more than anybody. Also, if dragons are going to get penalized every single time cfs spikes a little, then there needs to be some new incentive that isn't just another talisman set... something more substantial that makes one want to keep playing and hunting. Nerf after nerf on one group of individuals isn't good for player retention in that group, and doesn't make obtaining that goal all that desirable to begin with.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • People keep referencing Penwize on the magic scale of Midas, but he has put in the time to really be efficient and deserve his rewards in my opinion.    I'm sure he has taken the time to explore, figure out the optimal routes, and how to use his battlerage efficiently, and how to squeeze out seconds which over a long term turn into great value.  And I'm sure the list of optimizations is longer than what I have listed - those seemingly small details really add up over a ton of play time and continued effort.

    As someone who had over a million gold in his bank account from questing by level 70 it wasn't too hard to make gold as a new person.  If you take the time to explore, find the quests, and plan things out you can be immensely profitable.    If you want to put in the base level of effort and grind Manara or your org hunting lists and wonder why you cannot get exceptional returns then that's probably why. 

    If you want to make 20K gold a hour as a newer player it is entirely possible, and a great introductory sum of gold, but you need to do a little bit of legwork.    The admin have built a huge expansive world with a ton of hidden nooks and crannies, but a lot of people in my experience have no idea about it because they have never explored outside a small set list of areas that others have provided for them.

  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    To add more to my thoughts on this, people keep bringing up the same old bashing areas. Tenwat Annwyn Tenwat Annwyn. Tir was already nerfed a bit (but still viable for people who need dragon talismans). Pretty sure Sirocco must have been, because it's no where near worth the time and effort it takes like it used to be. But what about UW? Way more gold per denizen than Annwyn. Better XP and experience, too. The Fissure is also great gold, though I really won't argue that it shouldn't because it's pretty risky there. If you know what you're doing in Ageiro, the gold is great. Places like Hriddan/Isaia can EASILY be farmed for gold before dragon. I can think of a LOT of areas and quests (and my quest knowledge is pretty limited compared to some other hunters I know) where you can farm gold all day long if you wanted to. Still, having all of this information in mind, I really don't take advantage of all of it, and I'd think it's safe to say most dragons won't. I know Seragorn has a vast knowledge of hunting grounds and gold he could be making, but his list of places he's actually hunting is pretty limited to certain areas. He could greatly expand that if he wanted to. Any one of us can, but most of us don't. To be honest, I don't touch most of the areas I'm aware of unless it's a hunting competition and I want to take part. I still say dragons aren't necessarily the problem. Too many credit cost heavy features were released too close to each other. There's plenty of earning potential for lower level hunters, especially since their hunting hasn't been nerfed quite as much as dragon hunting has already been. I've said this time and time again and will continue doing so... EXPLORING IS IMPORTANT. The more places you know, the better your potential. The majority of Achaeans limit themselves too much, and instead of partaking in this very obvious answer to their problems, they just complain and blame dragons instead and say it's not fair.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

Sign In or Register to comment.