Guild Wars 2

juno.1840:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

I don’t get it… the graph you showed has MC’s having a very stable supply and demand over a full year of time. The price has not reached equilibrium yet since people continue to hoard coins instead of sell them. This will stop when they reach correct market value and the number of people selling them equals the number of people buying them.

If the price is rising that means people have more money they wish to spend then they do coins. This seems to be functioning exactly like it is supposed to. With a nearly constant supply over a years time people clear have coins to sell so I don’t see the “problem”?

Clearly there is/was a problem, otherwise ANet wouldn’t have announced a change in behavior.

Is it a change in behavior or simply informing the player base that they aren’t going to intervene so don’t bother waiting for it?

9 times out of 10 when they do step in it’s to slash over supply on the TP. The only time I can remember them creating a substantial source of an under supply material was allowing ectos to be salvaged into T6 dust.

The problem mostly lies that the market will never have the opportunity to adjust downward.

The rate at which people can produce them is fixed and passive. You can not play the game while not producing them.

Without dev intervention the market behavior isn’t likely to change. Demand will constantly be added as they add new legendary items like weapons and armor. Driving the price up even more.

The issue is that they can not be directly produced or not produced by the player. As they add demand there is nothing the player base can do to increase the supply. Mystic coins are missing a balancing mechanism that would prompt players to produce more for their own profit to keep the price from getting ridiculous. It might not be now, but in the future Anet will have to take action if they are intent of keeping Mystic coins in line with other things required for items.

This is the only trade commodity in the game that has these properties, right now its course is set to only increase in price. Giving people every reason to horde them as there is nearly no risk doing so with Anet’s statement of inaction. That in itself is broken. As soon as supply is put in the hands of players like it is with every other trade commodity, the market will behave like it should with opportunities for downwards adjustments in price as players farm them for profit to increase the supply to offset increases of demand.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

I know some people like to trot out the argument that if everyone in the game wanted even 3 legendaries, the regenerating supply would dry up. But it’s moot, because nothing close to “everyone” wants even one legendary, at least, not at the prices and effort they currently required. If everyone in California, USA wanted a new Jaguar, there wouldn’t be enough vehicles to purchase, but … not that many people want one, so it’s moot.

I do think that the regenerating supply of MC is in trouble. We are constantly getting new sinks for them (now that Eureka was released with the new, streamlined 2.0 system we can expect the full set to eventually be released), leg armor, while a small sink since few people have the capital or skill/time to craft it, will still be a new sink. New guilds pop up all the time, and with them new GHs. Not to mention as the game gets older, more players will want to work towards at least 1 legendary. If new sinks are constantly being added and more and more players will constantly work towards a legendary then I do think that the regenerating supply will eventually dry up.

You also need to consider that not everyone logs in every day, for whatever reason. And also that there are a lot of free accounts (which don’t get daily login rewards, and thus are not contributing any MC to the game, but which can still craft legendaries if they want to AFAIK). There is nothing wrong with this of course, but it means that not every player is contributing MC to the game. Which of course means that the ratio I gave earlier (each person wanting 3 legendaries) will actually be substantially less than that before it starts to seriously threaten the regenerative supply of MC (since that analysis didn’t include MC used for GH, feasts of food recipes, or collection skins. It just included leg weapons). Of course with the extremely large surplus that we have it may be a while before that sets in, but eventually it will in my opinion.

Seera.5916:

The problem is there are a lot more being generated than are being consumed. There are players hoarding them, whether for sale when it hits a certain price or future usage is unknown.

If ANet does anything too drastic to the generation or to the demand, they risk the market dropping them to vendor value. ANet has to move slowly to reduce that hoarded supply before they can do anything noticeable to it. There was a bit of a panic sale when they added the Mystic Coin to a drop of one of the events that only calmed down once people realized it was a once per day thing.

I’m not saying that the coins are sitting at the true equilibrium price and that nothing should ever be done. But they also shouldn’t rush into things. Or we’ll end up with the reverse – Mystic Coins worth the same as it would be to be vendor them.

I agree that ANet should not rush into this, and should take their time and move slowly if they decide to address MC. But that doesn’t mean I think that their current policy of hands off is the best policy for the long term supply of MC vs the demand for them.

Cristalyan.5728:

“Anet must feel that at this point, for whatever reason, they don’t need to babysit the market anymore, so they aren’t.”

- indeed, indeed, indeed. Agree, agree, agree ! Unfortunately, ANet do not agree. And instead of letting the baby to grow, they still interfere in the educational process. Controlling the amount of MC delivered on the game – no matter if MC are enough or not / the supply is greater or lower than the demand – is a contradiction with J.S statement that ANet will not interfere anymore with the market. With other words we can have here 2 possible situations:

1. The statement of J. S was a lie, an attempt to pull the wool over the players eyes, OR
2. The statement was a sincere one but someone else in the game staff decided that this control over MC should be maintained – and this is against what J.S said (and if what he said is not a lie, is against the health of the game economy)

The reality is: existing economic conditions with regard to Mystic Coins include the current ways coins enter the game. The only way to adopt a hands-off approach is to leave those conditions as is.

OriOri.8724:

I agree that ANet should not rush into this, and should take their time and move slowly if they decide to address MC. But that doesn’t mean I think that their current policy of hands off is the best policy for the long term supply of MC vs the demand for them.

Good thing that’s not their long-term policy then. Mr Smith wrote about letting the market adjust itself in the near term. If some markets fix themselves, great — it becomes the long-term solution, too. But if the markets don’t fix themselves and, as he expects, get worse, then ANet will look at the data and act accordingly.

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

The problem is there are a lot more being generated than are being consumed. There are players hoarding them, whether for sale when it hits a certain price or future usage is unknown.

So? I have a lot of them in my bank. I still plan to use up every single one of them eventually (and i know i still do not have enough). they could be worth 100g per piece, and still i wouldn’t sell them, because i know that eventually i’d have to buy them back. Almost certainly at a huge loss.

Seera.5916:

ANet has to move slowly to reduce that hoarded supply before they can do anything noticeable to it.

They won’t reduce that hoarded supply. The only people that may have a real incentive to sell are those that aren’t invested in game enough to actually pay attention to the market.
(well, and market speculators, but they won’t start selling until the trend has already started to reverse)

Seera.5916:

I’m not saying that the coins are sitting at the true equilibrium price and that nothing should ever be done. But they also shouldn’t rush into things.

I don’t think “rushing into things” is what most of the players expect of them. Doing something however is. And yet, currently “doing nothing” seems to be their whole plan.

I’m very aware of how you get Mystic Coins. I sit at a full stack and sell the excess. Because I know I’ll never need more than a stack the instant I decide I want something that needs coins, if I don’t want to buy off of the TP. So don’t say the only ones who sell are ignorant.

And I only said reduce the amount being hoarded. I’m fully aware that they will never allow for the price per coin to reach a point that all hoarders for not near future use will dump 100% of their supply.

You guys are saved. I read this thread, went home yesterday, and sold 500 of my 1800+ MC’s. Problem solved! Not to mention, that 300+ gold helps with my current crafting endeavors.

Danikat.8537:

Seera.5916:

If the price got high enough they would be willing to sell. It might be something like 100g per coin before they would be willing to part with 50%. It could be 1000g.

Everyone has a price at which they are willing to sell anything. It may be a ridiculous amount given the context and usage, but everyone has a price they’d sell anything at.

I don’t think that’s true for everyone and all items.

For example I wouldn’t ever sell my mini karka. When I added it to my wardrobe it was already one of the most expensive items in the game but I had absolutely no hesitation about making it impossible to sell because I knew I never would.

This might be hard to understand but the problem is selling it would “only” get me gold. Yes it would be a lot of gold, but still only gold. To me obtaining gold is not a goal in it’s own right, it’s a step in a process (or rather several processes). I get gold so that I can get things I want.

Selling one of the things I want in order to get gold is going in circles – it’s eradicating one goal I’ve already achieved in order to reach another. And in this case it would have absolutely no benefit because the only way I could get my mini karka back would be to spend an almost equal (potentially greater) amount of gold, so it’d be a net loss.

On top of that there are numerous other ways I can obtain gold without selling things I want so no matter what the price is there will never be any incentive at all for me to sell. The same is true for Ubi and Mystic Coins. And other people and other items.

But there is a limit to this. I only want one mini karka, if I got a 2nd one (let’s ignore the fact that I can’t) I’d sell it without hesitation whether it was worth 3,000g or the 17g mine originally cost me, or 1g or whatever because I don’t have a use for two. And the same is true for Ubi – he already said he sells or gives away any Mystic Coins he gets beyond the 750 he’s saving. So it’s not like people like us are a constant ‘drain’ on the supply, just like there’s a limit to how many we’ll sell there’s a limit to how many we’ll keep.

More importantly the point I feel like a lot of people are missing in this discussion is that we’re all different and make decisions in different ways. The fact that you would sell off all your Mystic Coins for the right price doesn’t mean everyone else would, and the fact that one other person will never sell all of them doesn’t mean everyone else will hold onto a stockpile either.

Likewise we’re never going to be in a position where every active player is trying to make 4 legendaries in one go, or all the other skins that need Mystic Coins, but we’re also never going to be in a position where no one wants those things.

Which is why processes like this are difficult to work out and cannot deal with absolutes. There is no ‘magic price’ that will make everyone with a stockpile of Coins sell them, that price will be different for everyone – ranging from people who would give them away or sell them to vendors to people who will wait until they’re worth 1,000g each or will never sell at all.

(At the risk of giving the market speculators nightmares I can guarantee there is at least 1 player in the game who sells all their Mystic Coins to a vendor because they don’t know what they’re for and finds the TP too confusing to use.)

So all we can hope for is ensuring that the supply meets the demand over the long term. If the supply of available coins keeps dropping and will eventually run out then there’s a problem for the economy. If demand drops to the point where Coins very rarely sell then there’s a problem for the economy.

As long as they keep being bought and sold and there’s no reason to expect that will cease in the future there is not a problem for the economy, no matter what the price is.

If the item the mystic coin made was instant buy at 100g and one coin started instantly selling for 1000g and the crafted item had not caught up yet, that you wouldn’t consider even dumping the coins and just buying?

There’s a price that everyone will begin to dump anything they don’t think they’ll use in the near future. It may be a price that is not realistic for the game. Like the mini karma for you. I’d find it hard to imagine a player at least not thinking hard if there was a buy offer at 1 million gold for it. But everyone has a price that they will sell at.

DeanBB.4268:

You guys are saved. I read this thread, went home yesterday, and sold 500 of my 1800+ MC’s. Problem solved! Not to mention, that 300+ gold helps with my current crafting endeavors.

You deserve a meme for all the good you just did!

Amaimon.7823:

mauried.5608:

Theres currently 37800 MC for sale on the TP.
Doesnt sound like a shortage of coins to me.

37800/150 = 252 people can craft a legendary weapon at one time if they don’t rely on the meager personal income. I dunno, how big is the player base of GW2 at the moment? and this is just for the legendary weapons. Then there’s guild halls, recipes, mystic weapons etcetc

I don’t see a problem with that … I don’t even get your The point is .. there are MC’s on the market. If there was a shortage, there would be zero.

Price is down to 78s from yesterdays 85s , so buy up big.

Amaimon.7823:

mauried.5608:

Theres currently 37800 MC for sale on the TP.
Doesnt sound like a shortage of coins to me.

37800/150 = 252 people can craft a legendary weapon at one time if they don’t rely on the meager personal income. I dunno, how big is the player base of GW2 at the moment? and this is just for the legendary weapons. Then there’s guild halls, recipes, mystic weapons etcetc

GW2BLTC tries to estimate the number of items sold based on the getting detailed stats every 5 minutes. Now according to it, it appears that over 4500 MC were sold from the supply side and 6500 put up for sale in the last 24 hours. There are also numbers for coins sold immediately but since there isn’t a posting fee for those placing bids, I’m not as sure about this number, it lists 4700 sold immediately, than I am about the number bought immediately.

Edited to be clear.

Behellagh.1468:

Amaimon.7823:

mauried.5608:

Theres currently 37800 MC for sale on the TP.
Doesnt sound like a shortage of coins to me.

37800/150 = 252 people can craft a legendary weapon at one time if they don’t rely on the meager personal income. I dunno, how big is the player base of GW2 at the moment? and this is just for the legendary weapons. Then there’s guild halls, recipes, mystic weapons etcetc

GW2BLTC tries to estimate the number of items sold based on the getting detailed stats every 5 minutes. Now according to it, it appears that over 4500 MC were sold from the supply side and 6500 put up for sale in the last 24 hours. There are also numbers for coins sold immediately but since there isn’t a posting fee, I’m not as sure about them. It lists 4700 sold immediately.

You pay a listing fee, even if you sell directly.

Wanze.8410:

Behellagh.1468:

Amaimon.7823:

mauried.5608:

Theres currently 37800 MC for sale on the TP.
Doesnt sound like a shortage of coins to me.

37800/150 = 252 people can craft a legendary weapon at one time if they don’t rely on the meager personal income. I dunno, how big is the player base of GW2 at the moment? and this is just for the legendary weapons. Then there’s guild halls, recipes, mystic weapons etcetc

GW2BLTC tries to estimate the number of items sold based on the getting detailed stats every 5 minutes. Now according to it, it appears that over 4500 MC were sold from the supply side and 6500 put up for sale in the last 24 hours. There are also numbers for coins sold immediately but since there isn’t a posting fee, I’m not as sure about them. It lists 4700 sold immediately.

You pay a listing fee, even if you sell directly.

Badly worded on my part. I was commenting on GW2BLTC’s estimated volume of sales over the last 24 hours and my confidence on the count on items bought from the low seller Vs those sold to the high bidder.

Since sellers pay a fee to post an item for sale, when we see the low ask tick up it is much more likely that the item was sold than the seller pulling it and eating the fee.

Since bidders pay nothing to post a bid, when we see the high bid tick down, we can’t be as sure if it was due to an immediate sale or the high bidder pulling their bid.

Behellagh.1468:

The problem now is that there isn’t a “good” way to let air out of this bubble without bursting it. ANet’s solution is not to be the one with the pin but let the bubble pop on it’s own. Problem is the bubble bursting isn’t going to fix the problem but simply reset the price and the cycle will start all over again.

This is the most succinct description of the MC problem I have read. A healthy market is not one where it swings between feast and famine the whole time (regardless of how long the swing interval is), but rather one where the price is fairly stable because supply and demand has reached equilibrium. Without intervention, the MC market will always be a bubble waiting to burst.

So if the price of MCs was 5G each, but remained the same all the time you would be happy?

mauried.5608:

So if the price of MCs was 5G each, but remained the same all the time you would be happy?

5g a piece would be a terrible price for an object which is used in the hundreds per recipe.

John Smith

As the game develops, the economy must develop as well, and that’s one of the many reasons we’ve made hundreds of changes to economy balance throughout the lifetime of the game.

For the most part the continuous monitoring and balancing has led to an incredibly stable economy with sustainable growth and reasonable inflation levels. However, we’ve noticed a disturbing side-effect of that continuous balancing: For many markets we’ve accidently set the idea of a price, rather than the market setting the idea of a price. Flax is a great example of a market where the prices weren’t really reflective of input or demand, but rather the idea of a value. Eventually players recognized that there was an abundance of flax and the price began to trend in a positive direction. We’ve noticed that a large number of markets are exhibiting this behavior in both directions—resulting in their being underpriced or overpriced—and their prices no longer reflect the average wealth or income of players.

To address this, we’re taking a step back from the standard amount of economy balancing we’re doing; in fact, we’ve actually already started doing that. We hope to see many markets adjust their prices to match the current state of the economy. We do recognize that there are some markets moving to a place where we aren’t looking for them to be; once we see the economy moving we can reassess the markets and make improvements, as we have in the past.

PFFF !! I read again the statement, this time very careful, trying to understand the message.
And (unfortunately) the message is:

The economy is in a difficult moment because of our “balancing changes”. These where so subtle that ANet even fixed by this the price for almost all the products. We have no idea how to continue and we let the players to solve this.

Still, we reserve the right to claim the rewards if a miracle will happen and the economy will become healthy again – look at this: “To address this, we’re taking a step back from the standard amount of economy balancing we’re doing”. So, no chance for J.S to stop butchering the game. He will only perform less adjustments that the “standard amount”. So:
- if the things will go wrong – this is the players fault – J. S will grin and with a paternal tone will tell us: See where you are now, when WE (WE , J.S – or WE, ANet) took our protective hand over you? You proved once again you cannot live without us. Be quiet from now on and let US (US, JS or US, ANet) to do our job.
- If the things will go well – this is JS or ANet merit – because they still perform changes in economy – even if less than the standard amount, they never let the economy to go down. So, the ANet (or J S) interference in the way of the how MC enter in the game is exactly according to the statement.

So, I think this debate is useless. The market will never fix itself. Because by reading JS’s statement they don’t intend to let the economy to fix:-))

Sorry OP – you have non viable illusions (like a mesmer) regarding the self regulating economy.

Seera.5916:

If the item the mystic coin made was instant buy at 100g and one coin started instantly selling for 1000g and the crafted item had not caught up yet, that you wouldn’t consider even dumping the coins and just buying?

Sure. That is however a purely theoretical scenario that will never happen (just think about it for a second, and you will know why).

If you’ll try to use such examples as a basis for economical stability, don’t be surprised when things will not work out as predicted.

Behellagh.1468:

juno.1840:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

If the price is rising that means people have more money they wish to spend then they do coins. This seems to be functioning exactly like it is supposed to. With a nearly constant supply over a years time people clear have coins to sell so I don’t see the “problem”?

Clearly there is/was a problem, otherwise ANet wouldn’t have announced a change in behavior.

Is it a change in behavior or simply informing the player base that they aren’t going to intervene so don’t bother waiting for it?

ANet stated explicitly that they are changing their behavior, and some of those changes are already implemented.

mauried.5608:

So if the price of MCs was 5G each, but remained the same all the time you would be happy?

I think you partly missed my point, but…

Yes, because I would know I needn’t hoard any. If I sold 25 today because I needed a gemstore item, then need those 25 six months from now, it would always be ~125 gold’s worth. That is exactly contrary to the current situation with MC where I could sell today for 20 gold and either pay 40 gold or 5 gold (if the bubble bursts in between) in six months’ time. Not willing to risk the former, I’d rather hold on to them even if I could quadruple my supply if the latter happened.

DeanBB.4268:

You guys are saved. I read this thread, went home yesterday, and sold 500 of my 1800+ MC’s. Problem solved! Not to mention, that 300+ gold helps with my current crafting endeavors.

“Crafting endeavors” or “Crafting Endeavor”? I see what you did there.

Just as food for thought as this started as a general discussion and then focussed on mystic coins:
Personally I dont neccessarily think that the high price for MC is bad, as I am not in need of any but have a general and steady supply chain through login rewards. But I can understand people that think their price is getting too high. But I think the high price is working as intended.
I did some digging and research and it is clear to me that MC started gaining value with the announcement of the new daily login rewards in December 2014. Before that, Mc were worth a couple of silver.
In their blogpost they wrote:
One of the things we want to do is reward players for being fans of Guild Wars 2. So we’ve moved the original rewards from daily and monthly achievements, thrown in some new items for good measure, and combined it all into a new bonus system that rewards players just for logging in to the game.
I dont think anybody would feel much rewarded if he gets an item worth a couple of silver as login reward, so I assume the rise in price over the years was intended and welcome.
And people thinking that Anet will stop balancing the economy because of JS post should look a little closer to the changes they implement with nearly every update.
For example, with Ember Bay, 2 new converters have been introduced, Sentient Aberration and Anomaly, which let you exchange ascended crafting mats (dragonite, bloodstone, shards) for fluctuating mass six times a day. That Fluctuating Mass has Mystic Coins on its loot table (according to the wiki), so they just added another faucet for them. Due to the small amount of players using those converters to max potential ever day and the quite big loot table, the amount of additional coins being added to the market through them might be relatively low but its added supply nonetheless.

I tihnk alot of general supply of crafting ingredients in game is held in peoples material storage and there lies the problem. Plenty of average players just deposit whatever mats they earn into storage and forget about them. They cant be kittened to check values of mats on a general basis, so they just hoard them until they run out of storage space. When Anet introduced mat storage expanders, they kinda escalated the problem, as people were able to store 1000 (or is it 2000 now) of each mat before being notified that its full.

KyreneZA.8617:

mauried.5608:

So if the price of MCs was 5G each, but remained the same all the time you would be happy?

I think you partly missed my point, but…

Yes, because I would know I needn’t hoard any. If I sold 25 today because I needed a gemstore item, then need those 25 six months from now, it would always be ~125 gold’s worth. That is exactly contrary to the current situation with MC where I could sell today for 20 gold and either pay 40 gold or 5 gold (if the bubble bursts in between) in six months’ time. Not willing to risk the former, I’d rather hold on to them even if I could quadruple my supply if the latter happened.

This is definitely the reason a lot of more casual players are holding onto their MC as well. If they ever want a legendary it will be a huge expense for them, so how can they justify selling their MC now for some gold when they could very well end up paying much more money to buy them back later? Best thing for them is to get the price to stabilize long term. Whether that is 2 silver each, 2 gold each, 20 silver each, 85 silver each or even something else, steps need to be taken to stabilize the price of them longterm. Unfortunately due to the hoarded supply (due to the very nature of the item), any changes ANet make have the potential to crash the price immediately, which would be counter productive to a goal of long term price stability

OriOri.8724:

KyreneZA.8617:

mauried.5608:

So if the price of MCs was 5G each, but remained the same all the time you would be happy?

I think you partly missed my point, but…

Yes, because I would know I needn’t hoard any. If I sold 25 today because I needed a gemstore item, then need those 25 six months from now, it would always be ~125 gold’s worth. That is exactly contrary to the current situation with MC where I could sell today for 20 gold and either pay 40 gold or 5 gold (if the bubble bursts in between) in six months’ time. Not willing to risk the former, I’d rather hold on to them even if I could quadruple my supply if the latter happened.

This is definitely the reason a lot of more casual players are holding onto their MC as well. If they ever want a legendary it will be a huge expense for them, so how can they justify selling their MC now for some gold when they could very well end up paying much more money to buy them back later? Best thing for them is to get the price to stabilize long term. Whether that is 2 silver each, 2 gold each, 20 silver each, 85 silver each or even something else, steps need to be taken to stabilize the price of them longterm. Unfortunately due to the hoarded supply (due to the very nature of the item), any changes ANet make have the potential to crash the price immediately, which would be counter productive to a goal of long term price stability

Fortunately the price has already stabilized. This of course can change if they add another legendary weapon but there’s really no way to prevent supply/demand shocks from that.

Its stabilized, but only in the short term. JS basically admitted that he thinks the price on some items are in a huge bubble (he didn’t mention any items, but its pretty fair to assume he believes MC is one of them), and he is trying to burst those bubbles. Which means that this price is not a long term stable price. Long term means it should be at the same price for over a year, not just for a few months.

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

If the item the mystic coin made was instant buy at 100g and one coin started instantly selling for 1000g and the crafted item had not caught up yet, that you wouldn’t consider even dumping the coins and just buying?

Sure. That is however a purely theoretical scenario that will never happen (just think about it for a second, and you will know why).

If you’ll try to use such examples as a basis for economical stability, don’t be surprised when things will not work out as predicted.

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

OriOri.8724:

Its stabilized, but only in the short term. JS basically admitted that he thinks the price on some items are in a huge bubble (he didn’t mention any items, but its pretty fair to assume he believes MC is one of them), and he is trying to burst those bubbles. Which means that this price is not a long term stable price. Long term means it should be at the same price for over a year, not just for a few months.

Yeah. I don’t think many items can be considered stabilized for the longterm unless Anet stops adding things that use them which they won’t.

Seera.5916:

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

In this case the players would sell not because of the price, but because of the discrepancy. Of course, that would never happen, because while in such a situation players would gladly sell coins, they would not buy them (and you do need two sides to any transaction)

Amaimon.7823:

mauried.5608:

So if the price of MCs was 5G each, but remained the same all the time you would be happy?

5g a piece would be a terrible price for an object which is used in the hundreds per recipe.

Not really. There are other factors that need to be considered when assessing price, not just what YOU think is a bad price for the number needed in a recipe.

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

In this case the players would sell not because of the price, but because of the discrepancy. Of course, that would never happen, because while in such a situation players would gladly sell coins, they would not buy them (and you do need two sides to any transaction)

I did mention that the sell orders were instant sell, not listings.

And they would be selling because of the price because that is the discrepancy.

Seera.5916:

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

In this case the players would sell not because of the price, but because of the discrepancy. Of course, that would never happen, because while in such a situation players would gladly sell coins, they would not buy them (and you do need two sides to any transaction)

I did mention that the sell orders were instant sell, not listings.

Yes, and that’s one of the reasons why i said it will never happen. While most people would want to sell at that price due to the discrepancy, at the same time noone would want to buy at it.

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

In this case the players would sell not because of the price, but because of the discrepancy. Of course, that would never happen, because while in such a situation players would gladly sell coins, they would not buy them (and you do need two sides to any transaction)

I did mention that the sell orders were instant sell, not listings.

Yes, and that’s one of the reasons why i said it will never happen. While most people would want to sell at that price due to the discrepancy, at the same time noone would want to buy at it.

And again you seem to not get it that I said that the price people want to sell may be unrealistic for the game. However, I’d imagine for a majority of players who are hoarding for reasons other than possible near future usage (within 6-8 months), there is a reasonable price that they’d be willing to part with at least 50% of their stash. There’s nothing ANet can do to get those hoarding for possible near future usage to dump their stock without it getting into the realm of unrealistic. ANet’s trying to see if the price will climb to the point that it gets more of those hoarding for non-near future usage will dump at least a portion of their stock.

Theres no such thing as a reasonable price for anything.
Reasonable is a totally subjective term and is differant for every player.
The market as it stands is working exactly as it should.
The price is simply being set by supply / demand economics, and over the 3 days over 3000 Mcs have been traded.
Thats roughly 10% of the total MCs available to buy.
If the price was unreasonable or too high then no one would be buying, and the sellers would have to drop their prices.
There is nothing that needs fixing, which is exactly what Anet is saying.
All MMOs over time suffer from inflation in the price of commodities that get bought and sold, simply because of the infinite resource supply, but this game is by far one of the better ones at controlling the inflation rate.

mauried.5608:

Theres no such thing as a reasonable price for anything.
Reasonable is a totally subjective term and is differant for every player.
The market as it stands is working exactly as it should.
The price is simply being set by supply / demand economics, and over the 3 days over 3000 Mcs have been traded.
Thats roughly 10% of the total MCs available to buy.
If the price was unreasonable or too high then no one would be buying, and the sellers would have to drop their prices.
There is nothing that needs fixing, which is exactly what Anet is saying.
All MMOs over time suffer from inflation in the price of commodities that get bought and sold, simply because of the infinite resource supply, but this game is by far one of the better ones at controlling the inflation rate.

Meant to say realistic. Right now coins are going for ~75 s on the listing side. 80s to sell off 50% of one’s stack is not an unrealistic price for the game today.

And just because they are taking a hands off approach doesn’t mean they don’t think some of the markets in the game are higher/lower than what they want. Letting the economy work itself out in the long term is one way to see if that will fix out of balance markets.

Seera.5916:

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

In this case the players would sell not because of the price, but because of the discrepancy. Of course, that would never happen, because while in such a situation players would gladly sell coins, they would not buy them (and you do need two sides to any transaction)

I did mention that the sell orders were instant sell, not listings.

Yes, and that’s one of the reasons why i said it will never happen. While most people would want to sell at that price due to the discrepancy, at the same time noone would want to buy at it.

And again you seem to not get it that I said that the price people want to sell may be unrealistic for the game. However, I’d imagine for a majority of players who are hoarding for reasons other than possible near future usage (within 6-8 months), there is a reasonable price that they’d be willing to part with at least 50% of their stash. There’s nothing ANet can do to get those hoarding for possible near future usage to dump their stock without it getting into the realm of unrealistic. ANet’s trying to see if the price will climb to the point that it gets more of those hoarding for non-near future usage will dump at least a portion of their stock.

And i am telling you that in your example it wasn’t the price but the differential that would make people want to sell. And waiting for such a differential is pointless, because it will never happen. Those prices are too closely tied to each other to drift that far away.

mauried.5608:

Theres no such thing as a reasonable price for anything.
Reasonable is a totally subjective term and is differant for every player.
The market as it stands is working exactly as it should.
The price is simply being set by supply / demand economics, and over the 3 days over 3000 Mcs have been traded.
Thats roughly 10% of the total MCs available to buy.
If the price was unreasonable or too high then no one would be buying, and the sellers would have to drop their prices.
There is nothing that needs fixing, which is exactly what Anet is saying.
All MMOs over time suffer from inflation in the price of commodities that get bought and sold, simply because of the infinite resource supply, but this game is by far one of the better ones at controlling the inflation rate.

As I said earlier, GW2BLTC tries to estimate the actual amount traded in the last 24 hours by examining the changes in the bid/ask lists every 5 minutes and sum up differences. They estimate currently that in the last 24 hours that 8400 were bought immediately and 4400 were sold immediately. Also that 8500 new MC were put up for sale and 9300 new bids. Now I may not trust the sold immediate number as much, because it costs nothing to place a bid, as the bought immediate number but I will say that even the 8400 bought immediate number shows a healthy volume of trades.

Wanze.8410:

I tihnk alot of general supply of crafting ingredients in game is held in peoples material storage and there lies the problem. Plenty of average players just deposit whatever mats they earn into storage and forget about them. They cant be kittened to check values of mats on a general basis, so they just hoard them until they run out of storage space. When Anet introduced mat storage expanders, they kinda escalated the problem, as people were able to store 1000 (or is it 2000 now) of each mat before being notified that its full.

I have been paying minimum attention to GW2 for the past 10 months but have been catching up. I think the MC situation isn’t a situation either. Rather, a move to increased economic stability. Maybe.

On dark production potential:
The cost of maintaining materials is negligible if even above initial minimum investment to play. A players demand for gold can fall well below any gains from selling, especially if they predict new content. I think there is a sizeable player percentage for which hoarding is rational market behavior.

Psientist.6437:

Wanze.8410:

I tihnk alot of general supply of crafting ingredients in game is held in peoples material storage and there lies the problem. Plenty of average players just deposit whatever mats they earn into storage and forget about them. They cant be kittened to check values of mats on a general basis, so they just hoard them until they run out of storage space. When Anet introduced mat storage expanders, they kinda escalated the problem, as people were able to store 1000 (or is it 2000 now) of each mat before being notified that its full.

I have been paying minimum attention to GW2 for the past 10 months but have been catching up. I think the MC situation isn’t a situation either. Rather, a move to increased economic stability. Maybe.

On dark production potential:
The cost of maintaining materials is negligible if even above initial minimum investment to play. A players demand for gold can fall well below any gains from selling, especially if they predict new content. I think there is a sizeable player percentage for which hoarding is rational market behavior.

As a veteran player playing since launch, i stopped having demand for gold a long time ago. I have everything i need and if there is something i need, I have enough gold or items to sell to get what i need.
I have over 100k gold worth of listings on the tp that built up over time, so there is always something selling on any given day. Its been a long time that I went into my material storage in order to sell something, so i guess I am hoarding as well.

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

Astralporing.1957:

Seera.5916:

I know full well that level of discrepancy would likely never happen and you missed my statement that the price may not be realistic. It was an example that shows there’s a price for everything that players would sell at, even though the price may be unrealistic for the game.

In this case the players would sell not because of the price, but because of the discrepancy. Of course, that would never happen, because while in such a situation players would gladly sell coins, they would not buy them (and you do need two sides to any transaction)

I did mention that the sell orders were instant sell, not listings.

Yes, and that’s one of the reasons why i said it will never happen. While most people would want to sell at that price due to the discrepancy, at the same time noone would want to buy at it.

And again you seem to not get it that I said that the price people want to sell may be unrealistic for the game. However, I’d imagine for a majority of players who are hoarding for reasons other than possible near future usage (within 6-8 months), there is a reasonable price that they’d be willing to part with at least 50% of their stash. There’s nothing ANet can do to get those hoarding for possible near future usage to dump their stock without it getting into the realm of unrealistic. ANet’s trying to see if the price will climb to the point that it gets more of those hoarding for non-near future usage will dump at least a portion of their stock.

And i am telling you that in your example it wasn’t the price but the differential that would make people want to sell. And waiting for such a differential is pointless, because it will never happen. Those prices are too closely tied to each other to drift that far away.

But the differential is the price so the price is what causes it at the most basic level.

And I nevere said the example was realistic. As I know that for some players the price it would take to sell of anything they are hoarding for whatever reason is not realistic for the game. Which means examples given do not have to be realistic for the game. Just be enough to show that someone would sell all or about half of their hoarded supply.