Guild Wars 2

Essence Snow.3194:

Can you please elaborate on crafting trees?

Sure.

The main issue with big piles of wealth in a game like this is how it puts exclusive drops completely out of reach of ‘regular’ players; there’s basically nothing they can do to keep up with the bids for those items. They’re totally out of reach and that’s frustrating.

When you have a really, really integrated crafting system, that simply cannot happen because high value items are pegged in some way to the value of low value items; if their value starts to surge, the value of the basic materials that everyone has access to necessarily surges as well.

Precursors are an imperfect if reasonable example of how this works. The numbers are huge (creating a single precursor takes something like 70,000 common T5 materials and 30,000 T5 fine materials), but their value is in some way pegged to those. You simply cannot see precursors surge to 10k gold each without basic materials (and with it, every player’s real income) surge as well.

This is important because it doesn’t matter at all that there are people with 100,000 gold out there. If they want to buy up a ton of precursors and move prices up, they also drive up everyone’s real income (since everyone gets T5 fine and mithril). Players with 1,000,000 gold couldn’t drive everyone out of the market – as long as you’re producing mithril and elder wood and T5 fine materials, you simply cannot be pushed out of the precursor market no matter what anyone else does.

Granted, the process through which this happens is really opaque and random and a more incremental crafting system would make more sense – and the numbers are probably too high for such a system. But the point remains – the prices are constrained through crafting to everyone’s incomes.

That’s not the reality of the game though. It’s 2000 players doing fine 1 doing extremely well and 100,000 having the problem.

Essence Snow.3194:

That’s not the reality of the game though. It’s 2000 players doing fine 1 doing extremely well and 100,000 having the problem.

Your source for this reality?

Ensign.2189:

Essence Snow.3194:

Can you please elaborate on crafting trees?

Sure.

The main issue with big piles of wealth in a game like this is how it puts exclusive drops completely out of reach of ‘regular’ players; there’s basically nothing they can do to keep up with the bids for those items. They’re totally out of reach and that’s frustrating.

When you have a really, really integrated crafting system, that simply cannot happen because high value items are pegged in some way to the value of low value items; if their value starts to surge, the value of the basic materials that everyone has access to necessarily surges as well.

Precursors are an imperfect if reasonable example of how this works. The numbers are huge (creating a single precursor takes something like 70,000 common T5 materials and 30,000 T5 fine materials), but their value is in some way pegged to those. You simply cannot see precursors surge to 10k gold each without basic materials (and with it, every player’s real income) surge as well.

This is important because it doesn’t matter at all that there are people with 100,000 gold out there. If they want to buy up a ton of precursors and move prices up, they also drive up everyone’s real income (since everyone gets T5 fine and mithril). Players with 1,000,000 gold couldn’t drive everyone out of the market – as long as you’re producing mithril and elder wood and T5 fine materials, you simply cannot be pushed out of the precursor market no matter what anyone else does.

Granted, the process through which this happens is really opaque and random and a more incremental crafting system would make more sense – and the numbers are probably too high for such a system. But the point remains – the prices are constrained through crafting to everyone’s incomes.

Good post, even though i disagree with the first paragraph.
A wealthy player will obtain a precursor faster than the average player, no doubt, but after that, his demand for that item is 0 because he doesnt need it anymore, so he isnt in any competition with the average player anymore. The same goes for other rare account unlocks like dyes, skins or minis.

The crafting tree for precursors is a good and actual example since the halloween update, due to the amount of t5 fine mats dropping from the labyrinth mobs.
They lost around 1 silver in value since tuesday (bones, fangs, claws, venom sacs) and people already started forging more precursors again, which is obvious, if you consider that mithril ore gained 50% in value in the same timespan.
Elder Wood didnt move much yet but thats due to its vast supply at current value and it isnt needed as much as mithril in precursor forging.
Even if you account for mithril gaining value, this should shave off a couple of hundred gold off the prices of the most valued pres in the coming weeks.
But as you mentioned, most people dont realize that all the t5 mats they farm in the labyrinth just lost 30% value as well, so their income is diminished.

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

That’s not the reality of the game though. It’s 2000 players doing fine 1 doing extremely well and 100,000 having the problem.

Your source for this reality?

Common sense. Your source for your reality?

Wanze.8410:

But as you mentioned, most people dont realize that all the t5 mats they farm in the labyrinth just lost 30% value as well, so their income is diminished.

Most ppl farming lab arent even considering t5 mats. They are there for tots/candy corn consideration only.

Essence Snow.3194:

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

That’s not the reality of the game though. It’s 2000 players doing fine 1 doing extremely well and 100,000 having the problem.

Your source for this reality?

Common sense. Your source for your reality?

I never claimed that my example was a demographic reality in GW2, it was just an example on how 100k gold on one account has far less an impact on the economy, supply and demand than 500 gold each in 2000 accounts.
You claimed your numbers are real without backing it up.
Even if we take your numbers, wealth disparity isnt really an issue because there isnt a demand disparity between poor and rich players. Everybody just demands 1 item.

Of course, the richer players will get the item first, but once they got it, they wont demand it anymore and a formerly poor player becomes a rich one, taking its place.

I dont see you giving any substancial evidence that wealth disparity is a problem in GW2.

If there are 5 items and 10000 ppl want it 200 that are “doing fine” 2 that are loaded" and the rest are “struggling”, what will happen? Considering that there will constantly be few players “moving” up and more joining …the numbers replenish and the items are always dominated by the “top end”. It’s how the game works and it’s how society works. Only difference is that this is a GAME…..and I’m not too sure what’s so hard to understand about that.

As for evidence…just take a look around at the player base. How many are pleased with rewards? I am sorta ok with mine since I’m in the top end, but I can’t turn a blind eye to all those who those who are not. I can’t turn a deaf ear to their concerns. I can’t close myself off to what is happening just because it is not happening to me.

Essence Snow.3194:

If there are 5 items and 10000 ppl want it 200 that are “doing fine” 2 that are loaded" and the rest are “struggling”, what will happen? Considering that there will constantly be few players “moving” up and more joining …the numbers replenish and the items are always dominated by the “top end”. It’s how the game works and it’s how society works. Only difference is that this is a GAME…..and I’m not too sure what’s so hard to understand about that.

As for evidence…just take a look around at the player base. How many are pleased with rewards? I am sorta ok with mine since I’m in the top end, but I can’t turn a blind eye to all those who those who are not. I can’t turn a deaf ear to their concerns. I can’t close myself off to what is happening just because it is not happening to me.

But this isnt a problem derived from wealth disparity but from the general rarity of the item.

The superrich person might have 100 times more gold than the 10000 and qualify for wealth disparity but he wont buy all 5 items because he only needs 1. If the item costs 1000 gold and the 200 reach that threshold while the 10000 are still at 990 gold, i wouldnt call that wealth disparity.
Apart from that, the chances of someone of the 10000 selling those 5 items is 50:1. If they do so, 5 people of the 201 will not create any additional demand anymore because theirs is satisfied. The 5 that sold it, also dont create demand (because they didnt want it in the first place). Thats the demand of 10 people satisfied with the sale of 5 items, i call that a good satisfaction rate.

Anyways, i thought your goal was to add some more credibility towards your original suggestions.

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

If there are 5 items and 10000 ppl want it 200 that are “doing fine” 2 that are loaded" and the rest are “struggling”, what will happen? Considering that there will constantly be few players “moving” up and more joining …the numbers replenish and the items are always dominated by the “top end”. It’s how the game works and it’s how society works. Only difference is that this is a GAME…..and I’m not too sure what’s so hard to understand about that.

As for evidence…just take a look around at the player base. How many are pleased with rewards? I am sorta ok with mine since I’m in the top end, but I can’t turn a blind eye to all those who those who are not. I can’t turn a deaf ear to their concerns. I can’t close myself off to what is happening just because it is not happening to me.

But this isnt a problem derived from wealth disparity but from the general rarity of the item.

The superrich person might have 100 times more gold than the 10000 and qualify for wealth disparity but he wont buy all 5 items because he only needs 1. If the item costs 1000 gold and the 200 reach that threshold while the 10000 are still at 990 gold, i wouldnt call that wealth disparity.
Apart from that, the chances of someone of the 10000 selling those 5 items is 50:1. If they do so, 5 people of the 201 will not create any additional demand anymore because theirs is satisfied. The 5 that sold it, also dont create demand (because they didnt want it in the first place). Thats the demand of 10 people satisfied with the sale of 5 items, i call that a good satisfaction rate.

Anyways, i thought your goal was to add some more credibility towards your original suggestions.

So why did you bring wealth disparity up? You can’t exactly bring something up, discuss it, then tell the other person they are wrong because they are talking about what you brought up. That’s flawed logic, but ofc look who I’m talking to.

Essence Snow.3194:

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

If there are 5 items and 10000 ppl want it 200 that are “doing fine” 2 that are loaded" and the rest are “struggling”, what will happen? Considering that there will constantly be few players “moving” up and more joining …the numbers replenish and the items are always dominated by the “top end”. It’s how the game works and it’s how society works. Only difference is that this is a GAME…..and I’m not too sure what’s so hard to understand about that.

As for evidence…just take a look around at the player base. How many are pleased with rewards? I am sorta ok with mine since I’m in the top end, but I can’t turn a blind eye to all those who those who are not. I can’t turn a deaf ear to their concerns. I can’t close myself off to what is happening just because it is not happening to me.

But this isnt a problem derived from wealth disparity but from the general rarity of the item.

The superrich person might have 100 times more gold than the 10000 and qualify for wealth disparity but he wont buy all 5 items because he only needs 1. If the item costs 1000 gold and the 200 reach that threshold while the 10000 are still at 990 gold, i wouldnt call that wealth disparity.
Apart from that, the chances of someone of the 10000 selling those 5 items is 50:1. If they do so, 5 people of the 201 will not create any additional demand anymore because theirs is satisfied. The 5 that sold it, also dont create demand (because they didnt want it in the first place). Thats the demand of 10 people satisfied with the sale of 5 items, i call that a good satisfaction rate.

Anyways, i thought your goal was to add some more credibility towards your original suggestions.

So why did you bring wealth disparity up? You can’t exactly bring something up, discuss it, then tell the other person they are wrong because they are talking about what you brought up. That’s flawed logic, but ofc look who I’m talking to.

You brought it up.
I asked why people, who already sink alot of gold out of the economy (high value traders) should carry the burden of a progressive tax, even though dungeon runners are responsible for a big chunk of gold entering the economy.
By specificially targeting wealthy players, you bring wealth disparity into the discussion.
You are basically asking to take gold from rich players and allocate it into faucets for all players.
Why stop there? Why not remove 1 legendary skin from every players wardrobe, who got more than 3 unlocked and raffle it off under players that havent unlocked a single one yet? They would still have more legendary skins unlocked than the average player.
Sounds reasonable to you?

Wanze.8410:

I asked why people, who already sink alot of gold out of the economy (high value traders) should carry the burden of a progressive tax, even though dungeon runners are responsible for a big chunk of gold entering the economy.

…the tax rate is already ‘progressive’ for TP players because it taxes gross, not net.

If a player finds an item and sells it on the TP for 1g, they would net 1g before taxes, but receive 85s after the 15% tax, paying 15% overall.

If a player buys an item on the TP for 70s and sells it for 1g, they would net 30s from the transaction, but pay a 15% tax on gross, which in this case is a 50% tax on net profit.

On really low margin flipping? You might buy an item for 80s and sell it for 1g, which would net 20s, but after taxes you only get 5s, for an effective tax rate of 75%.

Essence Snow.3194:

For the scripting/coding. I really don’t think it would be too complex. After all they already have the tax code imbedded.

Have you ever programmed anything? If you have, you’ll understand why 1 simple coefficient is much, much much easier than trying to calculate a multi-level scheme based on the end result of the process you’re calculating off of.

Coding the kind of thing you’re talking about would be a nightmare (besides being utterly counterproductive). There’s a reason tax agencies are so large.

There’s no reason to change how the TP works, and this thread’s OP is badly thought out to boot.

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

If there are 5 items and 10000 ppl want it 200 that are “doing fine” 2 that are loaded" and the rest are “struggling”, what will happen? Considering that there will constantly be few players “moving” up and more joining …the numbers replenish and the items are always dominated by the “top end”. It’s how the game works and it’s how society works. Only difference is that this is a GAME…..and I’m not too sure what’s so hard to understand about that.

As for evidence…just take a look around at the player base. How many are pleased with rewards? I am sorta ok with mine since I’m in the top end, but I can’t turn a blind eye to all those who those who are not. I can’t turn a deaf ear to their concerns. I can’t close myself off to what is happening just because it is not happening to me.

But this isnt a problem derived from wealth disparity but from the general rarity of the item.

The superrich person might have 100 times more gold than the 10000 and qualify for wealth disparity but he wont buy all 5 items because he only needs 1. If the item costs 1000 gold and the 200 reach that threshold while the 10000 are still at 990 gold, i wouldnt call that wealth disparity.
Apart from that, the chances of someone of the 10000 selling those 5 items is 50:1. If they do so, 5 people of the 201 will not create any additional demand anymore because theirs is satisfied. The 5 that sold it, also dont create demand (because they didnt want it in the first place). Thats the demand of 10 people satisfied with the sale of 5 items, i call that a good satisfaction rate.

Anyways, i thought your goal was to add some more credibility towards your original suggestions.

So why did you bring wealth disparity up? You can’t exactly bring something up, discuss it, then tell the other person they are wrong because they are talking about what you brought up. That’s flawed logic, but ofc look who I’m talking to.

You brought it up.
I asked why people, who already sink alot of gold out of the economy (high value traders) should carry the burden of a progressive tax, even though dungeon runners are responsible for a big chunk of gold entering the economy.
By specificially targeting wealthy players, you bring wealth disparity into the discussion.
You are basically asking to take gold from rich players and allocate it into faucets for all players.
Why stop there? Why not remove 1 legendary skin from every players wardrobe, who got more than 3 unlocked and raffle it off under players that havent unlocked a single one yet? They would still have more legendary skins unlocked than the average player.
Sounds reasonable to you?

Opps sorry it was Ensign that brought it up, you just went with it.

I’m not sure why you always resort to extremes. Some one suggest a marginal increase and you claim the sky is falling and it couldn’t possibly be marginal b/c that doesn’t exist.

Gilosean.3805:

Essence Snow.3194:

For the scripting/coding. I really don’t think it would be too complex. After all they already have the tax code imbedded.

Have you ever programmed anything? If you have, you’ll understand why 1 simple coefficient is much, much much easier than trying to calculate a multi-level scheme based on the end result of the process you’re calculating off of.

Coding the kind of thing you’re talking about would be a nightmare (besides being utterly counterproductive). There’s a reason tax agencies are so large.

There’s no reason to change how the TP works, and this thread’s OP is badly thought out to boot.

Why would it be counter productive?

You’re stating that tax agencies are so large b/c of coding?

He is arguing tax agencies are large because of complex rules that aren’t necessary in the first place.

I don’t know why you guys even bother with these “discussions” in the first place. They never come to a reasonable middle ground and everyone always resorts to extremes in their examples.

@Essence Snow: It would be far more complicated to implement what you are asking than I think you are understanding it would be. I also think you dislike TP trading so much you are basically trying to come up with a way to tax those people more without using the argument that we shouldn’t have TP trading. Your argument is basically one of a Democrat. “Tax the rich, give to the poor.” That logic is, was and always will be flawed. The best way for taxation in any facet (whether it’s video games or real life) is for EVERYONE to pay one flat tax percentage. Under that rule, people who make more will be taxed more and vice versa. If anything, the trading post taxation scheme is following that “best” practice.

@Wanze: I don’t know why you bother with these threads other than your love of being a TP trader and not wanting anything to interfere with that, ever. I actually think if someone came up with a great idea to get rid of the excessive amounts of money some players make on the TP, you would still argue against it. (That’s not to say you aren’t right in this topic)

What they should have done was not have buy orders in the first place. That way no one could ever buy and flip an item to make money. Prices would stabilize based on supply, demand and rarity of items just like they do now. You still get what you want, when you want it and no one but the original seller makes any money plus the gold sink is still present.

The basis of my end is that it is the only method that is unregulated via the game. So why not have give a little more for that allowance. If it were regulated like everything else, then ofc adding something like this would be unreasonable, but it’s not. On top of that this would allow greater rewards on the low end that (guess what) trickle back to the tp. So it ends up win win for everyone. Low end gets rewarded more and the high end has more to work with/profit from. This game is renown for poor rewards. Why on earth is it a good thing to keep that status quo?

cranked.3812:

@Wanze: I don’t know why you bother with these threads other than your love of being a TP trader and not wanting anything to interfere with that, ever. I actually think if someone came up with a great idea to get rid of the excessive amounts of money some players make on the TP, you would still argue against it. (That’s not to say you aren’t right in this topic)

What they should have done was not have buy orders in the first place. That way no one could ever buy and flip an item to make money. Prices would stabilize based on supply, demand and rarity of items just like they do now. You still get what you want, when you want it and no one but the original seller makes any money plus the gold sink is still present.

I just love how the economy works as a whole and I argue against most suggestions because they usually wont do what they are intended to do, to cap profits on the tp, but would either damage the economy as a whole or also put restrictions on other players than the wealthy.
If someone now miraciously found a way to cap profits on the tp, that would be fine by me, as i already accumulated enough wealth to not be affected by it, in fact, it would eliminate my competition.
I actually made my own suggestion on how to redistribute profits generated on the tp to the general player base a couple of months back, by adding a white karma tax (white karma is being earned like regular karma and can be traded for gold) for buy orders only (because most profits earned on the tp involve putting in buy orders).
So you cant say that I am against change in general.

Essence Snow.3194:

The basis of my end is that it is the only method that is unregulated via the game. So why not have give a little more for that allowance. If it were regulated like everything else, then ofc adding something like this would be unreasonable, but it’s not. On top of that this would allow greater rewards on the low end that (guess what) trickle back to the tp. So it ends up win win for everyone. Low end gets rewarded more and the high end has more to work with/profit from. This game is renown for poor rewards. Why on earth is it a good thing to keep that status quo?

Its a player driven economy, so the profits on the TP arent awarded through the game but by other players. Everybody can choose what value they want to receive for their loot, if they sell it on the TP. If players opt out of selling directly and listing their items, their profits will rise, its very simple. You are asking that those people can still sell directly and the person who buys it, should give some of his profits back to those players.

If you argue that rewards in this game are poor, fair enough, I might even agree on that.
But then please contribute towards the discussion of how to improve rewards for those players and not on how to take away profits from rich players and give it back to players, who gave it away freely in the first place. Because that wont change anything about their original reward, they still got the same.

Wanze.8410:

I just love how the economy works as a whole and I argue against most suggestions because they usually wont do what they are intended to do, to cap profits on the tp, but would either damage the economy as a whole or also put restrictions on other players than the wealthy.
If someone now miraciously found a way to cap profits on the tp, that would be fine by me, as i already accumulated enough wealth to not be affected by it, in fact, it would eliminate my competition.
I actually made my own suggestion on how to redistribute profits generated on the tp to the general player base a couple of months back, by adding a white karma tax (white karma is being earned like regular karma and can be traded for gold) for buy orders only (because most profits earned on the tp involve putting in buy orders).
So you cant say that I am against change in general.

You argue by saying things are bad, wrong, and/or won’t work, but never explain why. It’s basically repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results.

I like that you admit here that you wouldn’t mind change now that you have made yours and it really wouldn’t effect you. Is that your issue with things? If they don’t directly benefit you, you’ll argue till blue in the face against them? I think there’s a word for that.

@Essence Snow.3194

The reason trading profits and faucets are different is that faucets create money and trading destroys money.

If you increase or introduce a faucet you don’t “improve rewards” because rewards are relative. It used to be that 2g an hour was amazing, now it’s 10g an hour- and that’s because of faucets.

If trading velocity is slowed down that will increase the amount of money floating around and will increase inflation. Making the rewards feel even worse.

Traders provide liquidity to the market, and reduce spreads. Do you recognize this as true? Because your first post seems to suggest you misunderstand markets themselves on a fundamental level.

PS: Progressive taxation is necessary in reality because there are necessities. You cannot starve in GW2, there are no orphans who need a place to sleep, you cannot receive an education. Talking about progressive taxation in a game (we’re just playing a game right, this is what we apparently don’t understand) requires a deep incomprehension of the moral justification for taxation.

Essence Snow.3194:

Wanze.8410:

I just love how the economy works as a whole and I argue against most suggestions because they usually wont do what they are intended to do, to cap profits on the tp, but would either damage the economy as a whole or also put restrictions on other players than the wealthy.
If someone now miraciously found a way to cap profits on the tp, that would be fine by me, as i already accumulated enough wealth to not be affected by it, in fact, it would eliminate my competition.
I actually made my own suggestion on how to redistribute profits generated on the tp to the general player base a couple of months back, by adding a white karma tax (white karma is being earned like regular karma and can be traded for gold) for buy orders only (because most profits earned on the tp involve putting in buy orders).
So you cant say that I am against change in general.

You argue by saying things are bad, wrong, and/or won’t work, but never explain why. It’s basically repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results.

I like that you admit here that you wouldn’t mind change now that you have made yours and it really wouldn’t effect you. Is that your issue with things? If they don’t directly benefit you, you’ll argue till blue in the face against them? I think there’s a word for that.

What I didnt explain?

Risingashes.8694:

PS: Progressive taxation is necessary in reality…

It’s not really necessary, it’s just more efficient; if your state is providing services it needs to tax somewhere to keep inflation in check / pay for services (depending on whether or not you control the currency), and ideally you want to tax the marginal dollars with the lowest marginal utility to minimize the economic costs of that taxation – which usually means taxing those with the largest incomes.

In practice, the empirics imply that a somewhat less progressive tax is actually preferable to what a neoclassical model would indicate; I’d argue that a broader tax base enables stronger institutions than a top heavy one, but that’s getting far off topic.

Regardless, there’s no economic argument that I know of that wealth disparities cause problems for markets; the economics work just fine regardless of the distribution of wealth, and there isn’t any way to tax incomes of transactions that will somehow make the market more efficient. Big wealth disparities are a political problem; they are utterly toxic to all the pillars of democracy. This is a substantial problem in real life. Fortunately, it’s impossible for this to be a problem in game – it doesn’t matter how much gold you have, you still can’t bribe Queen Jennah, so all the concerns about wealth inequality in game have really tenuous support, at best.

Exactly. The only problem with wealth disparity in a game like GW2 is if those super wealthy players attempt to try and control the market, which as JS has explained in the past, is just about next to impossible for them to do. Supply comes in so fast that even for slow moving markets like Precursors, it’s next to impossible to keep a monopoly. There’s always going to be new sellers coming into the market who are more than happy to undercut you.

And supposing they DID succeed, I expect that ANet would simply intervene by increasing drop rates or introducing an alternative means of acquisition. It would not be in their best interests to have players lose trust in the TP, which would increase grey market trading and 3rd party sites. That would mean players stop taking part in the game’s primary gold sink, which would be disastrous for the game as a whole.

In fact, see the upcoming Halloween raffle for one way that ANet is injecting new supply of previously exclusive skins into the game.

The raffle is kinda bogus imo. Some players have put in 10s of thousands of chances alone. If we were limited to entries, then it would be more palatable.

And to be honest, I’m baffled by those players. If you were going to spend thousands of gold/hundreds of dollars entering the raffle, why wouldn’t you just convert those gems to gold and just buy the skin directly anyway?

Zaxares.5419:

And to be honest, I’m baffled by those players. If you were going to spend thousands of gold/hundreds of dollars entering the raffle, why wouldn’t you just convert those gems to gold and just buy the skin directly anyway?

Because some people seem to like RNG.

Zaxares.5419:

And to be honest, I’m baffled by those players. If you were going to spend thousands of gold/hundreds of dollars entering the raffle, why wouldn’t you just convert those gems to gold and just buy the skin directly anyway?

They are basically byproducts for those going for the mini and other super rare tot drops.

The trading post isn’t “regulated” because it isn’t creating anything.

All it is doing is allowing players to trade their unwanted items for a wanted currency.

This suggestion would only hurt the economy in general and would not achieve any of the goals of the suggestion.

Once again, progressive taxes are used in the real world to fund social assistance programs. We argue that the negative impact on the economy is worth it in exchange for preventing starvation, death by exposure, etc. amongst the poorest members of society. We have no such programs in this game, primarily because permanent death is not a factor, thus there is no need for a progressive tax.

mtpelion.4562:

The trading post isn’t “regulated” because it isn’t creating anything.

All it is doing is allowing players to trade their unwanted items for a wanted currency.

This suggestion would only hurt the economy in general and would not achieve any of the goals of the suggestion.

Once again, progressive taxes are used in the real world to fund social assistance programs. We argue that the negative impact on the economy is worth it in exchange for preventing starvation, death by exposure, etc. amongst the poorest members of society. We have no such programs in this game, primarily because permanent death is not a factor, thus there is no need for a progressive tax.

Why is “it doesn’t create anything” valid? It creates a wealth gap, artificial demand, artificial supply, and quite a bit of resentment.

How would it hurt the economy? Why wouldn’t it achieve efficiency and the ability to introduce more rewards?

Equality/fairness is a huge factor in games. I believe that alone should be basis for not having stand alone aspects. Much like profession balance. If one profession were way beyond all the rest, what would it matter? Everyone could just play that class. It doesn’t create anything. Just try to apply the same logic used with the tp to professions.

Essence Snow.3194:

mtpelion.4562:

The trading post isn’t “regulated” because it isn’t creating anything.

All it is doing is allowing players to trade their unwanted items for a wanted currency.

This suggestion would only hurt the economy in general and would not achieve any of the goals of the suggestion.

Once again, progressive taxes are used in the real world to fund social assistance programs. We argue that the negative impact on the economy is worth it in exchange for preventing starvation, death by exposure, etc. amongst the poorest members of society. We have no such programs in this game, primarily because permanent death is not a factor, thus there is no need for a progressive tax.

Why is “it doesn’t create anything” valid? It creates a wealth gap, artificial demand, artificial supply, and quite a bit of resentment.

How would it hurt the economy? Why wouldn’t it achieve efficiency and the ability to introduce more rewards?

Equality/fairness is a huge factor in games. I believe that alone should be basis for not having stand alone aspects. Much like profession balance. If one profession were way beyond all the rest, what would it matter? Everyone could just play that class. It doesn’t create anything. Just try to apply the same logic used with the tp to professions.

It doesnt create rewards out of thin air. Everything you gain from the TP was created in game as a reward, then put on the tp. Anet can only regulate what kind of rewards get created in game, they cant regulate what players do with these rewards afterwards.

Its up to the players to determine what they do with their rewards. If they opt to sell it for a cheap price to someone, they cant really complain, if that person offers it for more, when they want it again.

Essence Snow.3194:

mtpelion.4562:

The trading post isn’t “regulated” because it isn’t creating anything.

All it is doing is allowing players to trade their unwanted items for a wanted currency.

This suggestion would only hurt the economy in general and would not achieve any of the goals of the suggestion.

Once again, progressive taxes are used in the real world to fund social assistance programs. We argue that the negative impact on the economy is worth it in exchange for preventing starvation, death by exposure, etc. amongst the poorest members of society. We have no such programs in this game, primarily because permanent death is not a factor, thus there is no need for a progressive tax.

Why is “it doesn’t create anything” valid? It creates a wealth gap, artificial demand, artificial supply, and quite a bit of resentment.

How would it hurt the economy? Why wouldn’t it achieve efficiency and the ability to introduce more rewards?

Equality/fairness is a huge factor in games. I believe that alone should be basis for not having stand alone aspects. Much like profession balance. If one profession were way beyond all the rest, what would it matter? Everyone could just play that class. It doesn’t create anything. Just try to apply the same logic used with the tp to professions.

This is one of the reasons why certain players will never be happy with the Trading Post. The fundamental misunderstanding about how the economy works, esp. in relation to the difference between faucets and trade, will never be resolved.

And with speaking to equality and fairness, Entitlement is not a solution to any type of perceived imbalance. Suggesting something that would make you feel good, while being bad for the game, is still bad for the game.

I asked why was that valid..not what is it.

Didn’t read penguins post b/c I know is says entitlement b/c he feels entitled to do so.

Essence Snow.3194:

I asked why was that valid..not what is it.

Didn’t read penguins post b/c I know is says entitlement b/c he feels entitled to do so.

Its valid because it doesnt create anything, why is it so had to understand the fundamental difference of rewards that are created out of thin air through a faucet and items/gold traded through the tp between players?

Counter question:

Why do you think its not valid?

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

I asked why was that valid..not what is it.

Didn’t read penguins post b/c I know is says entitlement b/c he feels entitled to do so.

Its valid because it doesnt create anything, why is it so had to understand the fundamental difference of rewards that are created out of thin air through a faucet and items/gold traded through the tp between players?

Counter question:

Why do you think its not valid?

He knows I speak the truth, and can’t stand the fact that he’s basically asking for Easy Mode to get drops he wants.

Edit – Easy Mode is in reference to his desire to have more drops to offset faucet nerfs, which kinda don’t make any sense since drops are faucets. The tax on rich people is just another attempt to punish players due to jealousy.

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

I asked why was that valid..not what is it.

Didn’t read penguins post b/c I know is says entitlement b/c he feels entitled to do so.

Its valid because it doesnt create anything, why is it so had to understand the fundamental difference of rewards that are created out of thin air through a faucet and items/gold traded through the tp between players?

Counter question:

Why do you think its not valid?

Why is it so hard to explain why not creating anything is justification for being unregulated when everything else is, even when they don’t create anything.

I’ll give you a hint…….it’s not b/c it doesn’t create anything….lol That’s like trying to answer why something is blue by saying b/c it’s blue…ie not a valid answer. Evidently this is a hard concept.

Essence Snow.3194:

I’ll keep it simple and suggest 2 things.

1) Progressive Taxation~ The more you make from the trading post the more you pay in taxes.
example) If a player makes 100g in a week, they pay 15% like we currently do. If they make 1k g a week, they pay 30%.

2) Listing Time Limits~ After a set amount of time your listing is returned to you.
example) After 3 months of not selling items are returned to the sender minus the listing fee, which is kept as a carrying fee.

1)I support the first one. 30% might be too much, maybe add more steps like 15-20-25-30. You could measure the income of the player based on influx= (money that he gets from tp) -(money that he spends on tp) per week.

2) I dont like time limits. At least not for cheap itens. Maybe apply this only for stuff costs more than 100g.

mtpelion.4562:

Dante.1763:

yes they should be taxed slightly more. maybe not 30% but more than the current.

Why?

We’ve got a “progressive” tax here in the US. The goal is not to “punish” the wealthy, but to generate tax revenue in order to pay for social welfare programs.

As there is no need to generate funding for such programs in Tyria, there is no reason to implement a progressive tax either, other than to “punish” players for successful trading.

The progressive tax rate in the US applies to income earned through wages which is how most of the middle class earn money.

The wealthy generally become wealthy through other mechanism which are taxed quite differently.

It is not a stretch at all to say that the progressive tax system is what keeps the middle class from becoming wealthy.

Now you can argue about whether this was the intent or just an effect but it’s been understood to be this way for most a century so we can surmise that this effect is acceptable to the people who write the tax code.

In a functioning society, there are two reasons to have a tax code – first, to fund the government and the second purpose (some will argue that I’ve got these backwards) is social engineering.

If you want less of something, tax it. If you want more of something, subsidize it.

You might be able to make an argument that “taxes” in GW2 “fund the government” (Anet) to the degree that the demand for gold triggers gem purchases but the desire for gems is more more driven by items in the gem shop than it is by gold sinks on TP transactions.

The real reason for the TP tax is to create some level of economic friction to slow down trading volumes on the TP. You can’t just flip massive volumes for a 1-2% uptick in price – you have to have enough margin to overcome the TP tax of 15% – the best way to do that is to actually acquire something through normal play (at essentially zero out of pocket cost) and then sell it.

Trading for profit requires players to anticipate market movements of over 15% which requires either excellent luck, planning and time or a good speculation insight.

Putting aside the technical problems with implementing tax brackets in GW2 (which would be trivial to circumvent and you could eventually see people banned for tax evasion and money laundering of in game currency having nothing to do with RMT – and that would be insane)

It seems to me that this idea is driven by the belief that it is somehow wrong for a player to want to become wealthy in the game through trading but not wrong to become wealthy by “playing the game”.

This is a highly ideological viewpoint and one that not everyone shares with the OP. While real life progressives can at least point to social programs supported by tax revenue as cover for the social engineering and behavioral distortions caused by the tax code, there is no such thing happening in GW2.

The OP has bypassed all pretense of social utilitarianism and gone directly to the social engineering aspect of “taxes”.

To what end?

Are lower income players contracting conditions at higher rates than high income players?

Are players who can only afford blue or green colored gear more likely to fail in a dungeon?

Are they more likely to experience a criminal assault in their home district or be searched by the Seraph patrol for hidden contraband?

It is a mistake to believe that holding one player back will help another player move ahead. We all have different gifts and talents and we should be free to exercise them for our own profit and enjoyment.

That is what freedom is – self ownership and self determination. If we can’t at least preserve that in a video game, then we are truly lost as a species.

“We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness. "

Essence Snow.3194:

Why is it so hard to explain why not creating anything is justification for being unregulated when everything else is, even when they don’t create anything.

I’ll give you a hint…….it’s not b/c it doesn’t create anything….lol That’s like trying to answer why something is blue by saying b/c it’s blue…ie not a valid answer. Evidently this is a hard concept.

I get the feeling that you do understand the difference between faucets and trade profits, but you’re just trying to grasp at straws hoping to find a justification that fits your arguments.

Just in case you really are in the dark, I’ll point out that all items on the TP are already regulated. You see, each and every item for sale on the TP came from a faucet. These items didn’t exist until the faucet created them. By putting additional regulations and/or taxes for highly active players, you’re attempting to punish them would a double hit. An item that had a 0.01% chance to drop, is now going to be hit with 15% tax + an additional 15% tax if you got your way. All in the name of fairness. It was punishing enough just to spend 200 hours to farm the item, but now you want to punish the lucky player even more.

In this case, “fairness” to you means “If I can’t get that drop, then Anet needs to curb the profits of those who do get it”.

Dreamslayer.7659:

The progressive tax rate in the US applies to income earned through wages which is how most of the middle class earn money.

The wealthy generally become wealthy through other mechanism which are taxed quite differently.

It is not a stretch at all to say that the progressive tax system is what keeps the middle class from becoming wealthy.

Now you can argue about whether this was the intent or just an effect but it’s been understood to be this way for most a century so we can surmise that this effect is acceptable to the people who write the tax code.

You noted that generally the wealthy become so via means that aren’t subject to the same regulations. That sounds a lot like the trading post. Lack of similar regulations allowing one avenue to excel while holding back others.

In rl it’s no secret that one of the biggest influences to politics is the wealthy. It’s no wonder they continue to lobby…ie because it works.

The real reason for the TP tax is to create some level of economic friction to slow down trading volumes on the TP. You can’t just flip massive volumes for a 1-2% uptick in price – you have to have enough margin to overcome the TP tax of 15% – the best way to do that is to actually acquire something through normal play (at essentially zero out of pocket cost) and then sell it.

I’ve been lead to believe that keeping the economy more liquid was a good thing and actually encouraged.

Trading for profit requires players to anticipate market movements of over 15% which requires either excellent luck, planning and time or a good speculation insight.

Putting aside the technical problems with implementing tax brackets in GW2 (which would be trivial to circumvent and you could eventually see people banned for tax evasion and money laundering of in game currency having nothing to do with RMT – and that would be insane)

Kinda sounds like banning for exploiting.

It seems to me that this idea is driven by the belief that it is somehow wrong for a player to want to become wealthy in the game through trading but not wrong to become wealthy by “playing the game”.

It’s the unbalance of all vehicles being regulated while one is not, allowing a growing distinction between it and everything else. It really doesn’t matter that it’s trading. It could be wvw. It’s the inequality of the principle, not the mechanic itself.

This is a highly ideological viewpoint and one that not everyone shares with the OP. While real life progressives can at least point to social programs supported by tax revenue as cover for the social engineering and behavioral distortions caused by the tax code, there is no such thing happening in GW2.

It happens all the time just not while considering the economy. Look at profession balance, farming balance, wvw balance…basically anywhere you see balance being a concern.

Essence Snow.3194:

Wanze.8410:

Essence Snow.3194:

I asked why was that valid..not what is it.

Didn’t read penguins post b/c I know is says entitlement b/c he feels entitled to do so.

Its valid because it doesnt create anything, why is it so had to understand the fundamental difference of rewards that are created out of thin air through a faucet and items/gold traded through the tp between players?

Counter question:

Why do you think its not valid?

Why is it so hard to explain why not creating anything is justification for being unregulated when everything else is, even when they don’t create anything.

I’ll give you a hint…….it’s not b/c it doesn’t create anything….lol That’s like trying to answer why something is blue by saying b/c it’s blue…ie not a valid answer. Evidently this is a hard concept.

But profits on the tp are regulated: By the players themselves. I cant buy an item for a specific price, if no one wants to sell at that price and I cant sell an item, if nobody wants to buy at my price.

Let players regulate themselves in other aspects of the game and we’ll be in business.

Essence Snow.3194:

Let players regulate themselves in other aspects of the game and we’ll be in business.

You want your cake and eat it too. You can’t have it both ways. If you can’t handle a dynamic, open market that’s run by players, then you should consider stepping away from this MMO and playing some single player games with cheat codes. Remember the up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A? You got unlimited lives. That, in essence, is what happens if you let players regulate all aspects of the game.

Why would you want progressive taxation? It looks like plain-faced envy to me. “This guy’s not doing as poorly as me; tax him!” Who cares if other people get what ultimately winds up being a higher video game score?

Sarrs.4831:

Why would you want progressive taxation? It looks like plain-faced envy to me. “This guy’s not doing as poorly as me; tax him!” Who cares if other people get what ultimately winds up being a higher video game score?

To some players, fairness means if Player A has good stuff, Player B through ~~~XYZ needs to have the exact same thing.

I would be taxed higher as I am in the higher end of profit/income. This is not for me particularly. This is for the masses, the ones that make mmo’s great.

Point 1 – I’m taxed higher in real life because my taxes go to social programs that help the unfortunate. There’s a reason for this. In a virtual game, there’s no reason to punish players who are smarter with their money.

Point 2 – Guild Wars 2 is already a great MMO. I suggest we all go out and buy Gems to show our love to Anet.

#TeamGnashblade

Essence Snow.3194:

I would be taxed higher as I am in the higher end of profit/income. This is not for me particularly. This is for the masses, the ones that make mmo’s great.

Do you really expect that the gold sunk from a progressive tax for a few mega rich people will have any significant impact on the general income of the masses, if it was put back into the economy through a faucet?

It would be increased for more than a few, it would encompass the top percent (what amount idk…that’s open to analysis). I think you’d be amazed at how much that would actually amount to. Somewhat like in rl where the top few percent control the vast majority. JS has those numbers and though I doubt he’d be willing to share.

Essence Snow.3194:

It would be increased for more than a few, it would encompass the top percent (what amount idk…that’s open to analysis). I think you’d be amazed at how much that would actually amount to. Somewhat like in rl where the top few percent control the vast majority. JS has those numbers and though I doubt he’d be willing to share.

Video. Game.

You know what happens if people don’t have money IRL? They die.
You know what happens if people don’t have gold ingame? Nothing.