Guild Wars 2

It is generally a bad idea to increase system complexity and/or add in restrictive mechanics when there is little to no need for them.

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Look at your response. Rather than prove the existence of a problem, you chose to play devil’s advocate. If you had a card, you could have played it.

This is a pretty weak and low blow. The existence of a problem is largely opinion and would thus be impossible to prove sufficiently. (If it is objective, please list the conditions for which you might deem something to be sufficient proof)

The rest of your post is quite honestly an appeal to authority, using the quotes and opinions of John Smith and others to make conclusive remarks about said subjectivity.

Personally I believe there is a real problem (lack of real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink). Making statements from the standpoint of devil’s advocacy rather than stating personal opinion tend to be more effective in a thread replying to a person trying to appeal to authority.

John Smith has data, being as he can access ANet data-mining. Those complaining about flipping do not have access to that data. In addition, they do not present data, they present opinions. Why would I not base my perceptions on the statements of someone who is a professional and who has access to facts when the alternative is to base my perceptions on the opinions of non-professionals who don’t provide facts?

I disagree that the problem the OP’s suggestion is designed to address is a matter of opinion. Either there is a real problem that one can identify by pointing at observable criteria, or there is not. Saying, “Flipping is bad for the game” is an opinion. There is the perception of a problem, but that does not mean the problem is real.

What data would I accept? How rich are the richest flippers? How many of them are there? How many flippers in total? What affect do they have on the game’s economy? Since we’re talking about a virtual economy, numbers that aren’t pulled out of posters’ kittens would suffice.

Finally, the “lack of a real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink” is a different problem than that the OP’s suggestion is designed to address. Can you explain how adding a karma sink to buy orders would solve the problem of a lack of a fixed non-percentage gold sink?

UPDATED PROPOSAL AND FEEDBACK SUMMARY

First of all, thanks again for all the constructive positive and negative feedback.
As my idea has changed quite a bit from my OP throughout the discussion and i wrote alot of TL/DR walls of text in response to other posts, i will summarize my updated proposal in this post and try to summarize feedback. To give a clearer overview, i will use the CDI format:

Proposal Overview
Introduce a new account bound currency (White Karma) that is rewarded for completing any game content (except trading). This currency will be used to pay taxes retroactively on filled buy orders.

Goal of the Proposal
Right now its possible to pick up huge profits while trading on the tp. While those profits are available to everyone, some people earn exponentially more than the mayority of players earns gold rewards from playing other content. This leads to wealth disparity inside the game. While it has still to be proven that a few very rich players in game cant really negatively impact the game experience of other players directly, if the wealth disparity gets too big, chances are higher that those rich players start to become Real Money Traders, which is not good for the game at all.
A fundamental aspect of taking profits off the tp is acquiring items on buy orders. So in order to limit profits each individual can pick up, we need to limit the value (note: not quantity) of items that can be purchased through buy orders.
Introducing a new currency (White Karma) that is used to pay taxes for items bought on buy order and generated by completing game content apart from the Trading Post, will do just that and therefore help to redistribute the profits obtained on the TP by a few individuals more evenly across all game content. A positive side effect of this will be that it gives Anet a tool to steer people towards certain game content they want to promote by shortly increasing its white karma rewards.

Functionality of the Proposal

The karma tax will introduce a new market force that will help to spread the profits obtained from trading (no matter from who) more evenly over the whole player base, no matter which content they enjoy most.
Ideally the amount of white karma being generated on average by the whole player base will be enough to cover all taxes raised by the value of total buy orders filled each day. This would make sure that the volume of trading that is going on right now will not be diminished by this change because the economy as it is right now is very efficient, partly because of its high velocity.

How will it change the economy?
The most obvious change will be that the spread between buy orders and sell listings for most items will most definately get bigger because you not only have to account for the 15% fees and taxes but also the value of white karma.
In the current economy that is undesireable because a higher spread would mean its easier to “exploit” by flippers to pick up even more profits. But with the added white karma tax, the flipper would need to accumulate white karma through regular content first, in order to make more flips or purchase a consumable on the tp, that is crafted with and awards white karma.
So even if a flipper picks up even more profits due to higher pricespreads and he flips more items than before the change by buying consumables of white karma from other players, a part of his profits go towards the person that sold him the white karma.
The more white karma he buys, the higher its price will rise and the more people will earn through playing their favourite game content.

Associated Risks

Under associated Risks i will list all concerns and problems that have been raised until now and try to adress them. I will do that at a later time in a seperate post.

Essence Snow.3194:

Nuance.4872:

It seems like a pursuit to fix something thats not broken.

The current wealth disparity is large but no one I know would dare break the ToS or use profits to break the ToS

What about the gem exchange? Does large wealth disparity contribute to pushing gold to gems out of reach of those on the lower end, effectively removing the option?

One thing i didnt talk about yet is how this change would affect the gold/gem ratio and gem sales in general.
I didnt think too much about it yet, though. One thing i anticipate my suggestion to do is give more gold rewards to casual players (in a way that is not guaranteed but self balancing itself). This would of course also mean that casual players with disposable income would spend less money on gems to convert to gold, which is not good for Anet. But as you already mentioned, a closer wealth disparity would mean that more people are able to exchange gold for gems to buy the stuff they want from the gem store.

IndigoSundown.5419:

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Look at your response. Rather than prove the existence of a problem, you chose to play devil’s advocate. If you had a card, you could have played it.

This is a pretty weak and low blow. The existence of a problem is largely opinion and would thus be impossible to prove sufficiently. (If it is objective, please list the conditions for which you might deem something to be sufficient proof)

The rest of your post is quite honestly an appeal to authority, using the quotes and opinions of John Smith and others to make conclusive remarks about said subjectivity.

Personally I believe there is a real problem (lack of real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink). Making statements from the standpoint of devil’s advocacy rather than stating personal opinion tend to be more effective in a thread replying to a person trying to appeal to authority.

John Smith has data, being as he can access ANet data-mining. Those complaining about flipping do not have access to that data. In addition, they do not present data, they present opinions. Why would I not base my perceptions on the statements of someone who is a professional and who has access to facts when the alternative is to base my perceptions on the opinions of non-professionals who don’t provide facts?

I disagree that the problem the OP’s suggestion is designed to address is a matter of opinion. Either there is a real problem that one can identify by pointing at observable criteria, or there is not. Saying, “Flipping is bad for the game” is an opinion. There is the perception of a problem, but that does not mean the problem is real.

What data would I accept? How rich are the richest flippers? How many of them are there? How many flippers in total? What affect do they have on the game’s economy? Since we’re talking about a virtual economy, numbers that aren’t pulled out of posters’ kittens would suffice.

Finally, the “lack of a real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink” is a different problem than that the OP’s suggestion is designed to address. Can you explain how adding a karma sink to buy orders would solve the problem of a lack of a fixed non-percentage gold sink?

Until yesterday, i was the same opinion, based on Johns statements and my own experience as a hardcore trader, that wealth disparity really isnt a problem because i saw no way, how my behaviour as a trader and consumer can hurt anyone.
But is that a reason to disregard any risks that might be entailed, if the wealth gap becomes bigger and bigger?
I think the risk of rich traders turning into RMT´s at some point is a good argument against the wealth gap becoming bigger.
Also, you want to have a balanced game, economy and reward structures.
I am pretty active in this forum and until now i have not seen a single suggestion here that would in some way regulate profits on the tp without being a mayor inconvenience or bring reward structures of regular content to the same level of trading.

If you think a little more about my suggestion, you might realize that it will basically put the task of balancing the economy into the hands of those that do it best, the traders, while regular players get a piece of the cake enjoying their favourite content.
If there is one trader who enters a market with huge profit margins, he will naturally stay in this market and invest more, while buying more white karma from other players. That will raise the price of white karma, which, you guessed it, will make EVERYBODY profit.

interesting proposition, what do you think will be bigger, the reduction in tp only players/their time spent on the tp or an increase in “buy now” orders because players don’t do the same amount of math when it comes to smaller purchases. As in where players might consider placing a buy order for luxury goods, they are more tempted to use the buy now option when they have no karma left.

I could see commodities being bought more via buy now and this benefits flippers especially whales.

Since this market is by far the biggest an fastest, do you see this as a potential risk?

I like the general idea though, more so if the karma tax increases with daily turn around perhaps? yes, artificially capping.

IndigoSundown.5419:

What data would I accept? How rich are the richest flippers? How many of them are there? How many flippers in total? What affect do they have on the game’s economy? Since we’re talking about a virtual economy, numbers that aren’t pulled out of posters’ kittens would suffice.

You’ve set your standard to a level that nobody outside of ANet can meet, while those at ANet offer not the raw figures but their conclusions of the figures. Of course this makes John Smith more credible than the others, but his conclusions are still more subjective than objective.

Some things few or nobody in this thread is disputing: growing wealth disparity, rising cost of many high end goods (precursors, etc).

People are not pulling numbers out of their rears and making conclusions out of them here. They are looking at known issues (“problem” may be subjective here so I am not using that word) and proposing ways to address them, offering some numbers as an example of how said issue may be addressed, and the possible side effects and ramifications.

You are the one coming in with the set-in-stone notion that there is no problem and you are the one constructing the narrative to fit whatever you have decided is reality.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Finally, the “lack of a real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink” is a different problem than that the OP’s suggestion is designed to address. Can you explain how adding a karma sink to buy orders would solve the problem of a lack of a fixed non-percentage gold sink?

I don’t think Wanze’s suggestion (to address the problem of people focusing solely in one aspect of the game) would fully and adequately address the problem of lack of non-percentage gold sink, but that is a much bigger problem to solve.

At the same time, I feel you are using my statement out of context. You are basically trying to stifle this discussion, with no attempt to improve or modify the proposal, simply saying that there isn’t an issue because ANet and John Smith has not conceded it to be an issue.

I meant to bring up the problem of gold sinks to show that not everything is “working as intended, no issues” simply because John Smith hasn’t said anything about it.

Still. This will slow not only flippers but anyone who buys in bulk which includes salvagers and forgers which consume a lot of excess item supply and crafters who consume a large quantity and range of mats. So you end up with a market flooded with items with prices plummeting toward +1c over vending because the supply flow doesn’t stop even when players are discouraged to remove the excess.

Behellagh.1468:

Still. This will slow not only flippers but anyone who buys in bulk which includes salvagers and forgers which consume a lot of excess item supply and crafters who consume a large quantity and range of mats. So you end up with a market flooded with items with prices plummeting toward +1c over vending because the supply flow doesn’t stop even when players are discouraged to remove the excess.

When prices on salvage items and bags drop low enough people will simply start salvaging and opening the bags themselves. This assumes that what is being salvaged/in the bags does not deviate (on average) from what it is now.

If the price does drop to vendor+1c the supply of the salvaged/open mats will drop, increasing relative demand and reversing the price back up. Should be no different now than it was before.

As a personal opinion, if such a system does encourage people to do their own salvaging/bag-opening, I think it is a good thing, as it means fewer middleman cycles and less gold absorbed by the system via the 15% tax.

Wanze.8410:

Until yesterday, i was the same opinion, based on Johns statements and my own experience as a hardcore trader, that wealth disparity really isnt a problem because i saw no way, how my behaviour as a trader and consumer can hurt anyone.

But is that a reason to disregard any risks that might be entailed, if the wealth gap becomes bigger and bigger? I think the risk of rich traders turning into RMT´s at some point is a good argument against the wealth gap becoming bigger.

Also, you want to have a balanced game, economy and reward structures.
I am pretty active in this forum and until now i have not seen a single suggestion here that would in some way regulate profits on the tp without being a mayor inconvenience or bring reward structures of regular content to the same level of trading.

If you think a little more about my suggestion, you might realize that it will basically put the task of balancing the economy into the hands of those that do it best, the traders, while regular players get a piece of the cake enjoying their favourite content.
If there is one trader who enters a market with huge profit margins, he will naturally stay in this market and invest more, while buying more white karma from other players. That will raise the price of white karma, which, you guessed it, will make EVERYBODY profit.

There are already systems in place to deal with RMTraders. The money has to get to the customer, which requires either mail or a bogus trade of a cheap item for a lot of gold. Both of these methods can be monitored and RMTraders banned. Would someone who started as a player risk his account? I think that risk is small.

I think one risk of the new proposal is that some players who place buy orders now will change over to filling sell orders if they don’t have enough of the new currency at the moment they want to place the order. It seems to me that the largest single factor that enables flip trading is the impatience of players. Why create a complication that could increase the number of items bought at high prices by players who aren’t flip trading?

The “white karma” idea (though I’d suggest not using the word karma to avoid confusion) eliminates the objection that karma has other uses and has been harder to come by since the jug nerf. I also recognize that balancing the acquisition method could lower the impact of this complication on non-flippers. Existing rewards are hardly close to being balanced across playing options. How much effort would be required to find the ideal balance point, and could those resources be better spent elsewhere? Since I believe the game needs a lot of changes and additions, I come back to the question of whether it’s necessary to complicate the trading process.

There are systems in place to deal with RMT.

Again, increasing the complexity of a system or adding in arbitrary restrictions when there is no evidence that they are needed, is an extremely bad idea.

Buttercup.5871:

Wanze, what about the crafters?

I’m particularly concerned about cooking, as some recipes require a large amount of expensive materials (e.g. revelry cake or all F&F recipes), and the profit margin is only to be found in 1) the difference between buy and sell order prices and 2) cooking in bulk. Without those, it’s no longer interesting to craft. So by adding your proposed tax, I think many will simply stop crafting. Which is not a good thing.

I’m not so sure about this proposal. It has many dubious knock-on effects. Another crafting example I could imagine is the many precursors crafters won’t be able to afford buying the mats, or have to buy the mats for too high a price, further increasing the precursor prices.

Edit: it also discourages new people to start crafting because they don’t have the karma.

hmm crafting being linked to karma is nothing new, it is already like that for cooking. and ascended crafts. In fact their are some designs where karma being worked into crafting could enhance it.

That said, the overall idea…
i dont hate it, but it just seems really boring. perhaps if karma somehow represented things that benefited the game in some way, it would be more entertaining, but really? people would just flip while grinding karma.

IndigoSundown.5419:

There are already systems in place to deal with RMTraders. The money has to get to the customer, which requires either mail or a bogus trade of a cheap item for a lot of gold. Both of these methods can be monitored and RMTraders banned. Would someone who started as a player risk his account? I think that risk is small.

I think one risk of the new proposal is that some players who place buy orders now will change over to filling sell orders if they don’t have enough of the new currency at the moment they want to place the order. It seems to me that the largest single factor that enables flip trading is the impatience of players. Why create a complication that could increase the number of items bought at high prices by players who aren’t flip trading?

The “white karma” idea (though I’d suggest not using the word karma to avoid confusion) eliminates the objection that karma has other uses and has been harder to come by since the jug nerf. I also recognize that balancing the acquisition method could lower the impact of this complication on non-flippers. Existing rewards are hardly close to being balanced across playing options. How much effort would be required to find the ideal balance point, and could those resources be better spent elsewhere? Since I believe the game needs a lot of changes and additions, I come back to the question of whether it’s necessary to complicate the trading process.

I think as long as the are RMT´s active, there arent enough systems yet in place to deal with them.
Someone players, who usually put in buy orders for the stuff they need, lets call them conscious consumers, will earn more than enough white karma on a daily basis to cover their daily needs, so i dont think that is a concern.
However, i concede that the argument of implementing cost is still a good point against it as we have to consider, if a more balanced gold reward output between regular gameplay and profits on the tp (which is generally desired but not ultimately neccesary atm) is worth it. That is up to debate and can only be answered by Anet.

Complicating the trading post isnt really an issue for people who dont want to interact alot with it because by selling their white karma to traders/flippers they have an easy way to opt out of it and still be part of the profit margin.
A good trader will always find the best profit margin on the tp, no matter how high the price for white karma is, so its a self regulating process.
I already said that i am fully aware that the economy and the tp are extremely efficient and balanced in their status quo which is due to flippers operating and bringing prices into equilibrium quite fast. Flipping for profit NEEDS to be done on a daily basis and in huge quantities in order for prices to be in equilibrium. The biggest factors for price disequilibrium are people who sell and buy directly. That holds true now and that still holds true, if white karma tax is implemented.
The biggest change would be that it would basically put the task of bringing prices into equilibrium into the hands of those that know how to do it best, traders and flippers, while giving regular players a piece of the cake.
As more competent people are now in charge of establishing equilibrium, i would argue that prices will be more balanced in the long term then they are now and gold rewards are spread more evenly across all players.

Will it be more challenging for a full time trader to make as much profit as before?
It certainly will. But arent hardcore players not complaining all the time that the game needs more challenging content?
For me the fun in trading is to find profitable markets and new ways to make lots of profit through different game mechanics, like predicting market shifts because i think it takes alot of knowledge of the game in general to do so. But do i really need all the gold i accumulate to satisfy my gaming needs? No.
Right now i call it a good day, if i make 50g profit on the tp, an average day, if i make 25g per day and not so good, if i make less ( i know that these figures are a bit low compared to other hardcore traders but i actually spend alot of time playing the game as well these days). If i only make an average of 15g per day after the change, i will still know that i have done good, when i make 30g on any given day.

DaveGan.8065:

- snip -

Some things few or nobody in this thread is disputing: growing wealth disparity, rising cost of many high end goods (precursors, etc).

- snip -

You are the one coming in with the set-in-stone notion that there is no problem and you are the one constructing the narrative to fit whatever you have decided is reality.

My notions are not set in stone. However, before supporting a solution that could create problems of its own, I’d like to know that the solution is addressing a problem that needs to be fixed and addressing the problem it claims to. I hope you’ll forgive me if I’m not quite so ready to jump on the bandwagon.

Wealth disparity is an issue in every online economy. Absent a trading post, the greatest virtual wealth will be enjoyed by those who both have the most time to play and who gather wealth most efficiently. This type of wealth disparity crops up in every online game I’ve ever played. It cannot be addressed, nor should it. Those who put in the time and effort get the rewards.

Even if flipping were to be eliminated, there would still be wealth disparity in GW2. Depending on a myriad of factors, the disparity may well be as bad as you perceive it to be now. Ergo, I have to believe that the real issue in relation to wealth discrepancy caused by flipping is that people believe flipping either produces too much wealth; or that it is believed to produce an acceptable level of wealth with too little effort. I’ve seen both assertions made — and I’d like to know what leads people to those conclusions.

I can see that the new currency suggestion being salable might serve to spread the wealth a bit. That might be a positive thing. As I’ve said before, however, I am concerned about how ANet would balance acquisition. People with the explorer playstyle are already behind the curve on all other rewards, and I’m reluctant to be further behind the curve by adding a new currency that could restrict my ability to get the best deal I can on the TP. Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

As to rising costs of the few high-end items GW2 offers — this can hardly be attributed solely to flipping. There is also the steady increase in the amount of gold in game and the low supply engendered by ANet’s actions to slow goal completion. Addressing either of those issues could lower precursor (etc.) prices without complicating a specific function on the TP.

DaveGan.8065:

At the same time, I feel you are using my statement out of context. You are basically trying to stifle this discussion, with no attempt to improve or modify the proposal, simply saying that there isn’t an issue because ANet and John Smith has not conceded it to be an issue.

I meant to bring up the problem of gold sinks to show that not everything is “working as intended, no issues” simply because John Smith hasn’t said anything about it.

After rereading your prior post in light of this, it is possible to interpret the “gold sink” issue as an example, though I did not initially read it that way. Apologies.

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation. Asking for greater evidence from supporters of the idea that flipping needs to be nerfed is a means of facilitating the discussion. In order to get this suggestion to fly, or any other approach to modify flipping, the idea is going to have to be persuasive to ANet. If supporters can’t convince me, how are they going to convince them? Also, I’ve let my reservations to the OP’s original idea be known. In fact, I would not be surprised if one of my concerns contributed to the formation of the OP’s new proposal.

IndigoSundown.5419:

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation. Asking for greater evidence from supporters of the idea that flipping needs to be nerfed is a means of facilitating the discussion. In order to get this suggestion to fly, or any other approach to modify flipping, the idea is going to have to be persuasive to ANet. If supporters can’t convince me, how are they going to convince them? Also, I’ve let my reservations to the OP’s original idea be known. In fact, I would not be surprised if one of my concerns contributed to the formation of the OP’s new proposal.

Alot of concerns and reservations that were made resulted in me reformatting and altering my initial proposal and i am sure you gave some as well, so thanks for that.
I went back and read my OP again and i realized that I actually did state that “Appeasing Whiners” about flipping profit was one of my goals. Over the course of the discussion i found other ways on how to improve the game experience in general with my edited proposal, mainly:

- More evenly spread gold distribution that is raised by profits from the tp (no matter by who or how much people they were raised) across the whole player base without having anybody to alternate his playstyle
- Less Wealth Disparity and a more even spread of gold rewards over all game content
- a more balanced economy in the long term as “professional” traders will be in charge of balancing it
- The ability for Anet to temporarily push players to try certain content that they would like to promote by temporarily adding a white karma gain buff on different content completion.

I dont think that i have to prove that a problem exists in order justify my proposal, as long as i can prove that the improvements towards the status quo justify implementation costs.

wealth disparity happens, The key is
What is life like without wealth?
What is the standard of living?
Can you attain your goals?
How do you attain your goals?

All online games have wealth disparities, but in the ones i played, gold was generally the secondary means of obtaining high end goals. You could get wealthy by doing something epic, or going on an adventure, Or being lucky. or being a master merchant.

Problem is, right now, most goals are based around gold as the most direct path to them. Now in other systems, since this is not the case, the wealth disparity isnt that important.
but here?
So the fact that no matter how good/hard/skilled/knowledgable you are at other facets of the game, you will never be able to compete with some one skilled at another playstyles, bothers people.

let me make some analaogies.

say a person thinks about getting legendaries, mystic forge skins, gem store unlocks, as their goal.
now compare that to a pvp player setting winning a tournament as his goal.
TP players are essentially analgous in this case to being a class, whom when mastered, can do 10 times the dps, and take 10 times less damage than other classes.

anyone who enjoys any other class, will not be able to beat that class (when mastered)

what many people here say is,
stop playing tournament pvp
or learn to play that class.

so if thats the reasoning, you have to either give up on your goals, or play something you dont like.

my answer, not really nerf the TP directly, but increase the depth/challenge and amount of goals that can be acheived through other playstyles. Then let people put a price tag on that skill/depth/challenge. This will balance out the feeling that you cannot attain wealth in other ways, at the same time it will make people feel like playing the tp isnt the only way to win (if they are skilled at it).

phys.7689:

snip

my answer, not really nerf the TP directly, but increase the depth/challenge and amount of goals that can be acheived through other playstyles. Then let people put a price tag on that skill/depth/challenge. This will balance out the feeling that you cannot attain wealth in other ways, at the same time it will make people feel like playing the tp isnt the only way to win (if they are skilled at it).

phys i am aware of your opinion that challenging content from other playstyles should reward better loot and i even share it to some degree.
Your other main objection seems to be that to much desireable items are mainly available through gold. This is inevitable in a game that lets you exchange real money for in game gold, unless you pay a subscription fee.
I told you many times that you should open your own topic about it to get a proper discussion going, not spam it off topic on the 3rd page of a thread that is about something completely different.

So if you dont have contructive feedback for my proposal, I would appreciate, if you leave your off topic opinion in a different thread.

Wanze.8410:

phys.7689:

snip

my answer, not really nerf the TP directly, but increase the depth/challenge and amount of goals that can be acheived through other playstyles. Then let people put a price tag on that skill/depth/challenge. This will balance out the feeling that you cannot attain wealth in other ways, at the same time it will make people feel like playing the tp isnt the only way to win (if they are skilled at it).

phys i am aware of your opinion that challenging content from other playstyles should reward better loot and i even share it to some degree.
Your other main objection seems to be that to much desireable items are mainly available through gold. This is inevitable in a game that lets you exchange real money for in game gold, unless you pay a subscription fee.
I told you many times that you should open your own topic about it to get a proper discussion going, not spam it off topic on the 3rd page of a thread that is about something completely different.

So if you dont have contructive feedback for my proposal, I would appreciate, if you leave your off topic opinion in a different thread.

that was a response to a post that i had to cut due to message length.
Someone asked for reasons why they should try to alleviate wealth disparity, i responded, and with my opinion on it. feel free to report me, they will probably remove it if they see fit

IndigoSundown.5419:

Even if flipping were to be eliminated, there would still be wealth disparity in GW2. Depending on a myriad of factors, the disparity may well be as bad as you perceive it to be now. Ergo, I have to believe that the real issue in relation to wealth discrepancy caused by flipping is that people believe flipping either produces too much wealth; or that it is believed to produce an acceptable level of wealth with too little effort. I’ve seen both assertions made — and I’d like to know what leads people to those conclusions.

I can see that the new currency suggestion being salable might serve to spread the wealth a bit. That might be a positive thing. As I’ve said before, however, I am concerned about how ANet would balance acquisition. People with the explorer playstyle are already behind the curve on all other rewards, and I’m reluctant to be further behind the curve by adding a new currency that could restrict my ability to get the best deal I can on the TP. Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

As to rising costs of the few high-end items GW2 offers — this can hardly be attributed solely to flipping. There is also the steady increase in the amount of gold in game and the low supply engendered by ANet’s actions to slow goal completion. Addressing either of those issues could lower precursor (etc.) prices without complicating a specific function on the TP.

As for you proposal, like i said, its numbers driven, it will also feel like penalty to most players, it wont come across as something to strive for, and karma is not really delivered in ways that promote playstyles evenly.

Main sources of karma event spam, and fractals 10 levels lower than you.

Most likely this will lead TP players to focus on event tag spamming in EOTM.

Its kind of good that it will add a layer of depth, to buy orders, and it will make people do other things, but think about what things it will make people do.

What sort of play will it incentivize?
Is that the sort of play that you want to expose people to?

Wanze.8410:

Frequently we see new topics popping up from people who complain about the tp and the profits being made by hardcore flippers/traders.

Many people think that it should be limited and be more in line with rewards from other gameplay.

Why should anyone be rewarded doing the things that everyone else wants to do?

If that is how the world works, I want a pay raise and a promotion while I am taking the rest of the year off work too.

phys.7689:

As for you proposal, like i said, its numbers driven, it will also feel like penalty to most players, it wont come across as something to strive for, and karma is not really delivered in ways that promote playstyles evenly.

Main sources of karma event spam, and fractals 10 levels lower than you.

Most likely this will lead TP players to focus on event tag spamming in EOTM.

Its kind of good that it will add a layer of depth, to buy orders, and it will make people do other things, but think about what things it will make people do.

What sort of play will it incentivize?
Is that the sort of play that you want to expose people to?

I already altered my initial proposal and dont use regular karma for the tax anymore but white karma. Even though i stated that white karma should be rewarded similar to regular karma, i already conceded that the current distribution of regular karma should be rebalanced , unrelated if my suggestion gets implemented or not. So also white karma should get a more dynamic and evenly spread across all playstyles. Karmatrains are something that i dont want to encourage. Right know they exist because karma rewards are static and fixed by the amount per content type you complete. I made 2 suggestions to counter that:
- Introduce DR to White Karma awards
- Give a white karma gain buff to different content every day

DarkSpirit.7046:

Wanze.8410:

Frequently we see new topics popping up from people who complain about the tp and the profits being made by hardcore flippers/traders.

Many people think that it should be limited and be more in line with rewards from other gameplay.

Why should anyone be rewarded doing the things that everyone else wants to do?

If that is how the world works, I want a pay raise and a promotion while I am taking the rest of the year off work too.

You don’t have complete control over the real life but ArenaNet does have complete control over GuildWars 2. So if one of the main goals of the devs is to reward the same amount of skill put into a certain aspect of a game evenly, which I hope it is, then the proposal Wanze has made does in fact compliment this goal. It is a nerf to the traiding post, because you wont be able to trade as much as you’re now. Yet again the nerf to HamBow warriors was, at last, a nerf, yet it compliments the PvP balance. A nerf to the traiding post will be a nerf, that’s for sure. But it will compliment the wealth balance.

IndigoSundown.5419:

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation.

I do take that back, after seeing your more recent posts. Initially there was quite a bit of skepticism.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

This may be the source of our disagreement. While you questioned the viability of this, I assumed it to be true for the purposes of the discussion. As a result we were arguing two different things. I think we are closer to the same page than it originally appears.

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

HHR LostProphet.4801:

DarkSpirit.7046:

Wanze.8410:

Frequently we see new topics popping up from people who complain about the tp and the profits being made by hardcore flippers/traders.

Many people think that it should be limited and be more in line with rewards from other gameplay.

Why should anyone be rewarded doing the things that everyone else wants to do?

If that is how the world works, I want a pay raise and a promotion while I am taking the rest of the year off work too.

You don’t have complete control over the real life but ArenaNet does have complete control over GuildWars 2. So if one of the main goals of the devs is to reward the same amount of skill put into a certain aspect of a game evenly, which I hope it is, then the proposal Wanze has made does in fact compliment this goal. It is a nerf to the traiding post, because you wont be able to trade as much as you’re now. Yet again the nerf to HamBow warriors was, at last, a nerf, yet it compliments the PvP balance. A nerf to the traiding post will be a nerf, that’s for sure. But it will compliment the wealth balance.

If you don’t reward work then nobody would do the work. If nobody does any work then the economy would be in trouble. Discouraging the use of the TP and trading does not necessarily lead to a better game.

DarkSpirit.7046:

HHR LostProphet.4801:

DarkSpirit.7046:

Wanze.8410:

Frequently we see new topics popping up from people who complain about the tp and the profits being made by hardcore flippers/traders.

Many people think that it should be limited and be more in line with rewards from other gameplay.

Why should anyone be rewarded doing the things that everyone else wants to do?

If that is how the world works, I want a pay raise and a promotion while I am taking the rest of the year off work too.

You don’t have complete control over the real life but ArenaNet does have complete control over GuildWars 2. So if one of the main goals of the devs is to reward the same amount of skill put into a certain aspect of a game evenly, which I hope it is, then the proposal Wanze has made does in fact compliment this goal. It is a nerf to the traiding post, because you wont be able to trade as much as you’re now. Yet again the nerf to HamBow warriors was, at last, a nerf, yet it compliments the PvP balance. A nerf to the traiding post will be a nerf, that’s for sure. But it will compliment the wealth balance.

If you don’t reward work then nobody would do the work. If nobody does any work then the economy would be in trouble. Discouraging the use of the TP and trading does not necessarily lead to a better game.

Noone proposed to completely destroy the reward you could gain.

DaveGan.8065:

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

Do you propose to hit the DR Tax on all transactions or just filled buy orders?
In any case, that kind of tax would only take gold out of the economy, not redistribute it to all players relative to the amount of profits that are made on the tp.

Wanze.8410:

DaveGan.8065:

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

Do you propose to hit the DR Tax on all transactions or just filled buy orders?
In any case, that kind of tax would only take gold out of the economy, not redistribute it to all players relative to the amount of profits that are made on the tp.

I would honestly prefer to just stick it to all sell orders, although it could feasibly be applied to buy orders as well. I think the game needs more sinks (a different motivation/end goal from yours), and this would be redistribution on a relative scale as the more casual players will not be as affected.

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation.

I do take that back, after seeing your more recent posts. Initially there was quite a bit of skepticism.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

This may be the source of our disagreement. While you questioned the viability of this, I assumed it to be true for the purposes of the discussion. As a result we were arguing two different things. I think we are closer to the same page than it originally appears.

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

It’s all good. I’m less familiar with this game’s economy than I am with real ones, and at least part of my issue with wanting to know the basis for the perceived problem is so that I can understand and make up my own mind about it. The other part is concern for players who aren’t farmers, speed runners, flippers, etc. but who just muck about exploring in random zones. I’d hope that these players, who are most likely on the lowest end of the wealth continuum, won’t be shafted by the new currency — if it’s implemented. I know Wanze’s plan includes proper balancing across game play styles, but I’ve noted ANet’s tendency to stack rewards in certain large events.

Just what this game needs – another form of currency. Sixteen types of currency isn’t enough for you folks? Pro tip – if sixteen currencies can’t fix the problem then adding another will only make things worse.

Wanze.8410:

IndigoSundown.5419:

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Look at your response. Rather than prove the existence of a problem, you chose to play devil’s advocate. If you had a card, you could have played it.

This is a pretty weak and low blow. The existence of a problem is largely opinion and would thus be impossible to prove sufficiently. (If it is objective, please list the conditions for which you might deem something to be sufficient proof)

The rest of your post is quite honestly an appeal to authority, using the quotes and opinions of John Smith and others to make conclusive remarks about said subjectivity.

Personally I believe there is a real problem (lack of real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink). Making statements from the standpoint of devil’s advocacy rather than stating personal opinion tend to be more effective in a thread replying to a person trying to appeal to authority.

John Smith has data, being as he can access ANet data-mining. Those complaining about flipping do not have access to that data. In addition, they do not present data, they present opinions. Why would I not base my perceptions on the statements of someone who is a professional and who has access to facts when the alternative is to base my perceptions on the opinions of non-professionals who don’t provide facts?

I disagree that the problem the OP’s suggestion is designed to address is a matter of opinion. Either there is a real problem that one can identify by pointing at observable criteria, or there is not. Saying, “Flipping is bad for the game” is an opinion. There is the perception of a problem, but that does not mean the problem is real.

What data would I accept? How rich are the richest flippers? How many of them are there? How many flippers in total? What affect do they have on the game’s economy? Since we’re talking about a virtual economy, numbers that aren’t pulled out of posters’ kittens would suffice.

Finally, the “lack of a real, significant, fixed non-percentage gold sink” is a different problem than that the OP’s suggestion is designed to address. Can you explain how adding a karma sink to buy orders would solve the problem of a lack of a fixed non-percentage gold sink?

Until yesterday, i was the same opinion, based on Johns statements and my own experience as a hardcore trader, that wealth disparity really isnt a problem because i saw no way, how my behaviour as a trader and consumer can hurt anyone.
But is that a reason to disregard any risks that might be entailed, if the wealth gap becomes bigger and bigger?
I think the risk of rich traders turning into RMT´s at some point is a good argument against the wealth gap becoming bigger.
Also, you want to have a balanced game, economy and reward structures.
I am pretty active in this forum and until now i have not seen a single suggestion here that would in some way regulate profits on the tp without being a mayor inconvenience or bring reward structures of regular content to the same level of trading.

If you think a little more about my suggestion, you might realize that it will basically put the task of balancing the economy into the hands of those that do it best, the traders, while regular players get a piece of the cake enjoying their favourite content.
If there is one trader who enters a market with huge profit margins, he will naturally stay in this market and invest more, while buying more white karma from other players. That will raise the price of white karma, which, you guessed it, will make EVERYBODY profit.

This isn’t going to affect rich traders though.

You already said why,
because they have more gold than they could need, so just less of them will play the tp.

While others who are trying to save a bit of money (buy orders fro crafting.) or make a little (buy orders on containers.) are negatively affected by this.

Yes, it will lessen flipping, but who does this help?

DaveGan.8065:

Wanze.8410:

DaveGan.8065:

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

Do you propose to hit the DR Tax on all transactions or just filled buy orders?
In any case, that kind of tax would only take gold out of the economy, not redistribute it to all players relative to the amount of profits that are made on the tp.

I would honestly prefer to just stick it to all sell orders, although it could feasibly be applied to buy orders as well. I think the game needs more sinks (a different motivation/end goal from yours), and this would be redistribution on a relative scale as the more casual players will not be as affected.

My problem with any suggestion that tried to do some DR on ALL trading (buy orders, sell listings, or direct buy/sell) is that it will slow down trading for everybody and the market gets less efficient.
I think the main reason why my suggestion works so well is that the tax is applied to FILLED buy orders only, so everybody can still but up as many buy orders as he has gold to spare and the 3 other ways of trading (buy directly, sell directly, list) are not affected at all, so i would think that my suggestion wouldnt slow down the volume of daily trade significantly. And if it gets slowed down, it will only affect the value of buy orders, which will decrease, giving those people that have a surplus of white karma (becasue they rather play the game than the tp) to get more value of it, either by taking over the flipping of the item from the flipper that ran out of white karma, which means he gets more profit per flip than the trader, selling his karma to the flipper, in that case the profit will be split or by taking advantage of lower buy order prices for items he wants to consume.

IndigoSundown.5419:

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation.

I do take that back, after seeing your more recent posts. Initially there was quite a bit of skepticism.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

This may be the source of our disagreement. While you questioned the viability of this, I assumed it to be true for the purposes of the discussion. As a result we were arguing two different things. I think we are closer to the same page than it originally appears.

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

It’s all good. I’m less familiar with this game’s economy than I am with real ones, and at least part of my issue with wanting to know the basis for the perceived problem is so that I can understand and make up my own mind about it. The other part is concern for players who aren’t farmers, speed runners, flippers, etc. but who just muck about exploring in random zones. I’d hope that these players, who are most likely on the lowest end of the wealth continuum, won’t be shafted by the new currency — if it’s implemented. I know Wanze’s plan includes proper balancing across game play styles, but I’ve noted ANet’s tendency to stack rewards in certain large events.

Look at you two all cuddled up now, nice to see.

I already tried to explain a bit on how i would like to distribute and balance white karma Acquisition and why i think the mayority of the playerbase will benefit from it and wouldnt really have to change their playstyle to avoid negative impact:

We need to know the daily value of all buy orders filled on average, lets assume 1 million gold. As we established the karma tax rate ourselves, we know how much white karma needs to be earned per day to cover these buy orders in the future to not slow down the volume of trading.
That was also a reason why i initially used regular karma because Anet already has the output data across all playstyles.

So lets say we need 1 billion karma to cover the tax for the buy order volume of 1 million gold per day and there are 1 million players.
Its all balanced but the amount of buy orders filled for each person and the amount of white karma earned for each person is very different.
Trader: Lots of buy orders/no karma/ lots of gold profit
Regular Player: Average buy order volume, average karma gain/average profit
Farmer, who until now, sold and bought directly: No Buy orders, Lots of karma, tiny profit

So i would argue that everybody will earn enough karma to maintain a healthy balance between obtaining rewards through gameplay and profits from the tp.
If somebody wants to pick up more profits than he earns white karma, he has buy white karma from somebody else, cutting him in on the profits.

Those casual players, who just muck about in zones and are on the low end of the wealth ladder now will most likely be on the lower end the wealth ladder after the change. They still earn karma through events on the map, map completion, dailies, whatever they do. Of course not as much as hardcore players but i never claimed that my proposal would fix the wealth disparity between hardcore players and casuals, thats what the gem exchange is for.
Its just more or less a tool to redistribute some of the profits that are made on the tp.

Taygus.4571:

This isn’t going to affect rich traders though.

You already said why,
because they have more gold than they could need, so just less of them will play the tp.

While others who are trying to save a bit of money (buy orders fro crafting.) or make a little (buy orders on containers.) are negatively affected by this.

Yes, it will lessen flipping, but who does this help?

Well, i cant do anything about people that are already rich but I can try to slow down the pace that wealth disparity is growing atm.
I already explained again in my prior post that those people that just want to save a bit of money by putting in buy orders for crafting orcontainers, will have no problem because they are usually the ones that play the game and earn the karma that is needed by the trader to place buy orders. They will always have an axcess of it that they can choose to sell to the trader (for direct profit) or use it to take advantage of lower buy order prices for the goods they want.

Also keep in mind that the tax will only be applied to FILLED buy orders. The total value of buy orders that you can place is still determined by the amount of gold you have.
If it should happen that you dont have enough white karma for your filled buy orders, they will stay in your pick up tap until you earn more.

You are suggesting an overly convoluted solution to a “problem” for which there is little to no evidence to suggest that it actually exists.

I applaud the effort you have put into the idea, but it is a bad idea all the same.

Fenrir.3609:

You are suggesting an overly convoluted solution to a “problem” for which there is little to no evidence to suggest that it actually exists.

I applaud the effort you have put into the idea, but it is a bad idea all the same.

Another user had the same concern and I answered in this post:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Add-Karma-tax-to-buy-orders/page/3#post4175952

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation.

I do take that back, after seeing your more recent posts. Initially there was quite a bit of skepticism.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

This may be the source of our disagreement. While you questioned the viability of this, I assumed it to be true for the purposes of the discussion. As a result we were arguing two different things. I think we are closer to the same page than it originally appears.

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

A tax that results in an increased cost to the very people you’re attempting to hinder only results in an increased price to the very people you’re attempting to benefit. Tax goes up to X%? Alright, I’ll just increase the price of my goods by X% across the board to make up for it.

Tying an additional cost in the form of a bound currency only obtained via participation in the greater world limits their ability to shove that cost increase down the customer chain.

Wanze.8410:

Fenrir.3609:

You are suggesting an overly convoluted solution to a “problem” for which there is little to no evidence to suggest that it actually exists.

I applaud the effort you have put into the idea, but it is a bad idea all the same.

Another user had the same concern and I answered in this post:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Add-Karma-tax-to-buy-orders/page/3#post4175952

That hasn’t address my concerns with the system, the primary one being that you haven’t yet given any evidence that such a system is actually needed in the first place. Making any additional compexity redundant at best and harmful at worst.

You seem to be under the impression that the system would improve the current set up and thus doesn’t need to be justified in terms of “identifying a potential problem”, I don’t agree with that sentiment.

That is leaving aside the fact it is an anathema to me in terms of how an open market should operate and how you try “promote” people getting involved in other content (you make the content interesting and rewarding and in and of itself, you don’t push people into it by penalizing them if they don’t do it).

Again I appreciate the fact that you have clearly invested some time towards this subject and seem to be looking to improve systems. I just don’t agree with your proposal.

Fenrir.3609:

Wanze.8410:

Fenrir.3609:

You are suggesting an overly convoluted solution to a “problem” for which there is little to no evidence to suggest that it actually exists.

I applaud the effort you have put into the idea, but it is a bad idea all the same.

Another user had the same concern and I answered in this post:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Add-Karma-tax-to-buy-orders/page/3#post4175952

That hasn’t address my concerns with the system, the primary one being that you haven’t yet given any evidence that such a system is actually needed in the first place. Making any additional compexity redundant at best and harmful at worst.

You seem to be under the impression that the system would improve the current set up and thus doesn’t need to be justified in terms of “identifying a potential problem”, I don’t agree with that sentiment.

That is leaving aside the fact it is an anathema to me in terms of how an open market should operate and how you try “promote” people getting involved in other content (you make the content interesting and rewarding and in and of itself, you don’t push people into it by penalizing them if they don’t do it).

Again I appreciate the fact that you have clearly invested some time towards this subject and seem to be looking to improve systems. I just don’t agree with your proposal.

If you dont agree, fair enough. The decision, if implementation costs will be warranted by the overall game improvement that is expected, is Anet to make anyways.
I dont expect everybody to like this change.
From a personal point of view, this wouldnt be a good change for me either because it would cut into my profits as a trader but i made the proposal anyways because i can see alot of good coming from it for the general health of the game and the economy.

Aidan Savage.2078:

DaveGan.8065:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You assert that I am trying to stifle discussion. I’ll ask you to rethink that accusation.

I do take that back, after seeing your more recent posts. Initially there was quite a bit of skepticism.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Wanze seems to think it could be balanced to not impact anyone except flippers who don’t play the rest of the game. If so, then all well and good.

This may be the source of our disagreement. While you questioned the viability of this, I assumed it to be true for the purposes of the discussion. As a result we were arguing two different things. I think we are closer to the same page than it originally appears.

As far as my own personal views on the subject, I would be more in favor of a more direct DR. Something like a 15% tax for the first 25 gold in transactions, 16% for the next 25 gold, 17% for the next 25%, up to a 20% tax cap.

Wanze mentioned he thought it was slightly off topic, but I do genuinely see his proposal as a sort of soft DR.

A tax that results in an increased cost to the very people you’re attempting to hinder only results in an increased price to the very people you’re attempting to benefit. Tax goes up to X%? Alright, I’ll just increase the price of my goods by X% across the board to make up for it.

Tying an additional cost in the form of a bound currency only obtained via participation in the greater world limits their ability to shove that cost increase down the customer chain.

Flipping itself increases costs the more it’s done, as every time a good gets flipped some gold leaves the economy. As a result higher costs are already being passed. Increasing taxes all around would increase costs by some, but it would also reduce the number of times items get flipped between initial seller and final user, which would decrease costs and inefficiencies at the same time.

-1

Thanks Wanze, way to completely kill the last remaining bit of enjoyment I get out of GW2.

I have little karma because I spent the last of it on obsidian shards. I’ve not run an event in weeks, and I haven’t done any “normal game play” for months, because, in my personal opinion, the game is anything but “fun” the way it is currently run. Dynamic events are dull and unrewarding. Dungeons have gimmicky mechanics (stacking, skipping, etc.), world bosses are limited to once a day, etc. For someone who is a loot focused player, GW2 has dried up completely, because Anet’s path to obtaining anything worth having in this game is “grind gold, buy on tp or gemstore”.
The only thing I had left was to flip and make a few gold (max) every day or two on the TP while I sit and hope for a change of direction from Anet. Now you want people like myself to go mindlessly grind dynamic events until our eyes bleed, just so we can flip on the tp?
Your idea comes across more as a PvP finisher. You’ve won the flipping game and are tired of making gold, so now you want to completely eliminate smaller opponents and solidify your position of extreme wealth.

Neural.1824:

-1

Thanks Wanze, way to completely kill the last remaining bit of enjoyment I get out of GW2.

I have little karma because I spent the last of it on obsidian shards. I’ve not run an event in weeks, and I haven’t done any “normal game play” for months, because, in my personal opinion, the game is anything but “fun” the way it is currently run. Dynamic events are dull and unrewarding. Dungeons have gimmicky mechanics (stacking, skipping, etc.), world bosses are limited to once a day, etc. For someone who is a loot focused player, GW2 has dried up completely, because Anet’s path to obtaining anything worth having in this game is “grind gold, buy on tp or gemstore”.
The only thing I had left was to flip and make a few gold (max) every day or two on the TP while I sit and hope for a change of direction from Anet. Now you want people like myself to go mindlessly grind dynamic events until our eyes bleed, just so we can flip on the tp?
Your idea comes across more as a PvP finisher. You’ve won the flipping game and are tired of making gold, so now you want to completely eliminate smaller opponents and solidify your position of extreme wealth.

so essentially what you are saying, is every facet of the game sucks aside from playing the TP, and the main purpose of the tp is give you some thrills with the hope that the rest of the game stops sucking.

hmm
lot can be said about that

Neural.1824:

-1

Thanks Wanze, way to completely kill the last remaining bit of enjoyment I get out of GW2.

I have little karma because I spent the last of it on obsidian shards. I’ve not run an event in weeks, and I haven’t done any “normal game play” for months, because, in my personal opinion, the game is anything but “fun” the way it is currently run. Dynamic events are dull and unrewarding. Dungeons have gimmicky mechanics (stacking, skipping, etc.), world bosses are limited to once a day, etc. For someone who is a loot focused player, GW2 has dried up completely, because Anet’s path to obtaining anything worth having in this game is “grind gold, buy on tp or gemstore”.
The only thing I had left was to flip and make a few gold (max) every day or two on the TP while I sit and hope for a change of direction from Anet. Now you want people like myself to go mindlessly grind dynamic events until our eyes bleed, just so we can flip on the tp?
Your idea comes across more as a PvP finisher. You’ve won the flipping game and are tired of making gold, so now you want to completely eliminate smaller opponents and solidify your position of extreme wealth.

No offense, but I don’t think ANet would miss you if you did quit, so your opinion is probably worth less than that of the others here.

Neural.1824:

-1

Thanks Wanze, way to completely kill the last remaining bit of enjoyment I get out of GW2.

I have little karma because I spent the last of it on obsidian shards. I’ve not run an event in weeks, and I haven’t done any “normal game play” for months, because, in my personal opinion, the game is anything but “fun” the way it is currently run. Dynamic events are dull and unrewarding. Dungeons have gimmicky mechanics (stacking, skipping, etc.), world bosses are limited to once a day, etc. For someone who is a loot focused player, GW2 has dried up completely, because Anet’s path to obtaining anything worth having in this game is “grind gold, buy on tp or gemstore”.
The only thing I had left was to flip and make a few gold (max) every day or two on the TP while I sit and hope for a change of direction from Anet. Now you want people like myself to go mindlessly grind dynamic events until our eyes bleed, just so we can flip on the tp?
Your idea comes across more as a PvP finisher. You’ve won the flipping game and are tired of making gold, so now you want to completely eliminate smaller opponents and solidify your position of extreme wealth.

You propably didnt read all my posts, fair enough. You could still buy white karma from other players to keep on flipping. Your overall profit would go down but you would still be able to make profit.

But I didnt really expect any sympathy from someone who only plays the tp, anyways.

In the first place, how the hell am I purchasing things with a metaphysical mechanism?
You must have tons of karma if you can just throw it on the TP along with your almost as hard earned gold, why don’t we toss in some dungeon tokens and badges of honor too. Might as well restrict the TP to commanders only while we’re at it.

You make the assumption that Karma is a currency. I’m purchasing things with my ‘goodness’, my willingness to do good.
Karma merchants (really bad way of saying that) are exchanging what little goods they have with me for the FAVOR I did them earlier. Karma isn’t a currency and should never be seen as that.

Why this game doesn’t have bad karma is pretty simple, Anet didn’t want us to be bad guys, we’re supposed to be the good guys, but maybe I’m an kitten.

Played a game that had both, don’t remember what it was but when you used or accumulated ‘bad karma’ it reduced your ‘good karma’ by the same amount and vice-versa (was probably Fable or something) so you could be the kitten that saved the ‘whatever’ or the good guy that saved the ‘whatever’.

Anyway, you get karma from hearts (those run out if you don’t have extra character slots) and dynamic events and you get that karma in really small amounts, the gold you get is from selling all the stuff you loot from monsters in much greater quantities. Taxing me a dynamic event every time I want to sell something is an kitten move, not to mention the failure of the OP to see that you’re taxing me based on favors to the people… Taxing me Experience is also stupid (literally…). How are you possibly going to tax my fighting experience? “You can buy this but we’re going to have to make you forget your last 3 fights!”

Experience, Karma, Skill – these things are NOT CURRENCIES:
Experience is a memory, Skill is a physiological memory, Karma is a metaphysical mechanism representing a FAVOR owed to you from someone else(Heart NPC) in the game.

STOP trying to eat my pretend world with all your taxes! You tax income, income is monetary in nature, coin pieces stamped with the empire logo are money, money is taxable.

You cannot tax my memories, you cannot tax my efficiency at defending the empire, you cannot tax my accumulated favors. STOP IT!

I’m sorry you feel there aren’t enough things to buy in the game from NPC’s that would take gold out of the pockets of the lower class, this is ANET’s problem. There is no content that we can purchase from VENDORS that takes away our gold in larger quantities that are ALWAYS available – not talking about any of the time limited multiple item bartering ones that require several gold pieces for a lackluster item. There are simply no permanent large scale gold sinks in the game excluding the gold→gems and TP taxes, listing fees, sales fees, and what is it that phone companies do? cramming? yeah, put unexpected charges that I didn’t opt into on the TP as well why don’t we?

Lil Puppy.5216:

In the first place, how the hell am I purchasing things with a metaphysical mechanism?
You must have tons of karma if you can just throw it on the TP along with your almost as hard earned gold, why don’t we toss in some dungeon tokens and badges of honor too. Might as well restrict the TP to commanders only while we’re at it.

You make the assumption that Karma is a currency. I’m purchasing things with my ‘goodness’, my willingness to do good.
Karma merchants (really bad way of saying that) are exchanging what little goods they have with me for the FAVOR I did them earlier. Karma isn’t a currency and should never be seen as that.

Why this game doesn’t have bad karma is pretty simple, Anet didn’t want us to be bad guys, we’re supposed to be the good guys, but maybe I’m an kitten.

Played a game that had both, don’t remember what it was but when you used or accumulated ‘bad karma’ it reduced your ‘good karma’ by the same amount and vice-versa (was probably Fable or something) so you could be the kitten that saved the ‘whatever’ or the good guy that saved the ‘whatever’.

Anyway, you get karma from hearts (those run out if you don’t have extra character slots) and dynamic events and you get that karma in really small amounts, the gold you get is from selling all the stuff you loot from monsters in much greater quantities. Taxing me a dynamic event every time I want to sell something is an kitten move, not to mention the failure of the OP to see that you’re taxing me based on favors to the people… Taxing me Experience is also stupid (literally…). How are you possibly going to tax my fighting experience? “You can buy this but we’re going to have to make you forget your last 3 fights!”

Experience, Karma, Skill – these things are NOT CURRENCIES:
Experience is a memory, Skill is a physiological memory, Karma is a metaphysical mechanism representing a FAVOR owed to you from someone else(Heart NPC) in the game.

STOP trying to eat my pretend world with all your taxes! You tax income, income is monetary in nature, coin pieces stamped with the empire logo are money, money is taxable.

You cannot tax my memories, you cannot tax my efficiency at defending the empire, you cannot tax my accumulated favors. STOP IT!

I’m sorry you feel there aren’t enough things to buy in the game from NPC’s that would take gold out of the pockets of the lower class, this is ANET’s problem. There is no content that we can purchase from VENDORS that takes away our gold in larger quantities that are ALWAYS available – not talking about any of the time limited multiple item bartering ones that require several gold pieces for a lackluster item. There are simply no permanent large scale gold sinks in the game excluding the gold->gems and TP taxes, listing fees, sales fees, and what is it that phone companies do? cramming? yeah, put unexpected charges that I didn’t opt into on the TP as well why don’t we?

Wow.

Lil Puppy.5216:

In the first place, how the hell am I purchasing things with a metaphysical mechanism?
You must have tons of karma if you can just throw it on the TP along with your almost as hard earned gold, why don’t we toss in some dungeon tokens and badges of honor too. Might as well restrict the TP to commanders only while we’re at it.

You make the assumption that Karma is a currency. I’m purchasing things with my ‘goodness’, my willingness to do good.
Karma merchants (really bad way of saying that) are exchanging what little goods they have with me for the FAVOR I did them earlier. Karma isn’t a currency and should never be seen as that.

Why this game doesn’t have bad karma is pretty simple, Anet didn’t want us to be bad guys, we’re supposed to be the good guys, but maybe I’m an kitten.

Played a game that had both, don’t remember what it was but when you used or accumulated ‘bad karma’ it reduced your ‘good karma’ by the same amount and vice-versa (was probably Fable or something) so you could be the kitten that saved the ‘whatever’ or the good guy that saved the ‘whatever’.

Anyway, you get karma from hearts (those run out if you don’t have extra character slots) and dynamic events and you get that karma in really small amounts, the gold you get is from selling all the stuff you loot from monsters in much greater quantities. Taxing me a dynamic event every time I want to sell something is an kitten move, not to mention the failure of the OP to see that you’re taxing me based on favors to the people… Taxing me Experience is also stupid (literally…). How are you possibly going to tax my fighting experience? “You can buy this but we’re going to have to make you forget your last 3 fights!”

Experience, Karma, Skill – these things are NOT CURRENCIES:
Experience is a memory, Skill is a physiological memory, Karma is a metaphysical mechanism representing a FAVOR owed to you from someone else(Heart NPC) in the game.

STOP trying to eat my pretend world with all your taxes! You tax income, income is monetary in nature, coin pieces stamped with the empire logo are money, money is taxable.

You cannot tax my memories, you cannot tax my efficiency at defending the empire, you cannot tax my accumulated favors. STOP IT!

I’m sorry you feel there aren’t enough things to buy in the game from NPC’s that would take gold out of the pockets of the lower class, this is ANET’s problem. There is no content that we can purchase from VENDORS that takes away our gold in larger quantities that are ALWAYS available – not talking about any of the time limited multiple item bartering ones that require several gold pieces for a lackluster item. There are simply no permanent large scale gold sinks in the game excluding the gold->gems and TP taxes, listing fees, sales fees, and what is it that phone companies do? cramming? yeah, put unexpected charges that I didn’t opt into on the TP as well why don’t we?

uhh karma in this game is currency

but if you want, you can think of it as the government looking the other way because hey you are a hero and did great things, this money you want to take must be useful somehow.

Lil Puppy.5216:

kitten

u wot m8?

DaveGan.8065:

Flipping itself increases costs the more it’s done, as every time a good gets flipped some gold leaves the economy. As a result higher costs are already being passed. Increasing taxes all around would increase costs by some, but it would also reduce the number of times items get flipped between initial seller and final user, which would decrease costs and inefficiencies at the same time.

Flipping doesn’t increase costs and less gold in the overall economy is deflationary.

Wanze.8410:

If you dont agree, fair enough. The decision, if implementation costs will be warranted by the overall game improvement that is expected, is Anet to make anyways.
I dont expect everybody to like this change.
From a personal point of view, this wouldnt be a good change for me either because it would cut into my profits as a trader but i made the proposal anyways because i can see alot of good coming from it for the general health of the game and the economy.

I don’t see the good coming from it outside of the scope of appeasing some of the “hurr durr flippers are out of whack” crowd if I’m being honest.

1. It is both an overly convoluted and ineffective method of trying to combat RMT.

2. The current (exceptionally basic) market is still even in it’s vanilla form, seemingly too complex for many players to understand. Layering additonal complexity on top of that doesn’t seem the best idea in the world. Nor does it look like a very good educational tool.

3. In terms of getting people to “do other stuff”, well you make said “stuff” interesting and rewarding in and of itself. If Anet wants to see more people doing dungeons, they should stop neglecting dungeons. If they want to see more people doing WvW or spvp, they should balance them more effectively and more frequently. If Anet wants to see people jumping into events left, right and centre, stop making them autoattack snore fests.

The notion that you attempt to drive people into content because they have to do it, not because they want to do it, is a bad design ethos.

4. Improving the overall health of the economy by narrowing wealth disparity. Well that notion does require you to actually demonstrate that this is an issue and that it needs addressing. Thus far, no one has demonstrated it is an issue. You mentioned 25/50G a day from the TP earlier (if I recall correctly). You realise people can and are pulling that (and more) from PVE a day right? So shall we add a another quasi currency in place to stop them earning gold as well? Perhaps “red karma” which requires hardcore dungeon runners to earn red karma in spvp, otherwise they can’t enter a dungeon.

5. There are already more than enough currencies in the game.

That is before you consider that it simply flies in the face of what a player driven open market is and also before you consider the actual negative impact the proposed system could have.

EDIT: Hmm, perhaps I am being overly critical/cautious and there seems little point in me just repeating my issues with the idea so i’ll leave it at that. Again I applaud the novel idea and the effort put into it, good luck with the thread.

Fenrir.3609:

I don’t see the good coming from it outside of the scope of appeasing some of the “hurr durr flippers are out of whack” crowd if I’m being honest.

1. It is both an overly convoluted and ineffective method of trying to combat RMT.

2. The current (exceptionally basic) market is still even in it’s vanilla form, seemingly too complex for many players to understand. Layering additonal complexity on top of that doesn’t seem the best idea in the world. Nor does it look like a very good educational tool.

3. In terms of getting people to “do other stuff”, well you make said “stuff” interesting and rewarding in and of itself. If Anet wants to see more people doing dungeons, they should stop neglecting dungeons. If they want to see more people doing WvW or spvp, they should balance them more effectively and more frequently. If Anet wants to see people jumping into events left, right and centre, stop making them autoattack snore fests.

The notion that you attempt to drive people into content because they have to do it, not because they want to do it, is a bad design ethos.

4. Improving the overall health of the economy by narrowing wealth disparity. Well that notion does require you to actually demonstrate that this is an issue and that it needs addressing. Thus far, no one has demonstrated it is an issue. You mentioned 25/50G a day from the TP earlier (if I recall correctly). You realise people can and are pulling that (and more) from PVE a day right? So shall we add a another quasi currency in place to stop them earning gold as well? Perhaps “red karma” which requires hardcore dungeon runners to earn red karma in spvp, otherwise they can’t enter a dungeon.

5. There are already more than enough currencies in the game.

That is before you consider that it simply flies in the face of what a player driven open market is and also before you consider the actual negative impact the proposed system could have.

EDIT: Hmm, perhaps I am being overly critical/cautious and there seems little point in me just repeating my issues with the idea so i’ll leave it at that. Again I applaud the novel idea and the effort put into it, good luck with the thread.

Starting off your post by insulting is not a very good way to add credibility to it.

That aside:
4) I provided logic/reasoning/citation to JS to why a necessity to prove there is an issue is an impossible condition while information is withheld. An expectation to fullfill such an impossible condition is a poor premise.

I also provided citation to Shiller (world leading economist…..ie expert to the experts) to why wealth disparity is an important issue not to be brushed aside. Eventually all the dirt swept under the rug will cease to remain unnoticed. I only hope the game’s life cycle ends b4 that happens.