Having fun in GW2 = much longer time of playing to earn enough in game currency to buy those cool skins. Welcome to MMOs.
That assumes interest in “looking cool” based on others’ opinions. I’m not, most of my alts wear gear that you can buy in a week or two of casual play. However, I am aware of the psychological compulsions that drive most MMO players. And so are game designers. It just seems like the players themselves are not.
Please, stop arguing. We’re not going to get anywhere and this thread will get closed. I’d like to see some good suggestions instead of arguments as to who has the bigger… “brain”.
I think first of all you should adress how you would handle the sudden demand on gift related mats that will occur, if tens of thousands of precursors are being handed out simultaneously.
As someone who is very much interested in a career in economics, how did you get involved in MMO economies? Also, what would you consider your basic day-to-day routine?
Step 1 is definitely play MMOs. Play them a lot, play many different types, be the best at them. Learn to understand them from every perspective, not just your own.
These are all of course suggestions that come from (and essentially describe) my personal opinions on the matter. You could, arguably, get a job without accomplishing these, but you’ll be much better at that job if you do.
Does that include understanding mmo socioeconomics, reward psychology, and how the two relate?
They reintroduced Sonder the Seller that trades Zhaitaffy for consumables, which had elevated prices since the were unavailable for a time. I know a lot of supply was bought to meet the sale prices of these items.
My point is that your opinion is not the authority on whether or not something is considered grindy.
That doesn’t detract from my argument. Still, because your trolling, I will restate so I’m not going to be attacked by pedantic arguments by reference to your MMO dictionary.
You can get whatever you want simply by doing what activity you enjoy that provides rewards in this game. It’s just a matter of time. Therefore, it would be stupid for someone to complain about having to do something they don’t like, repeated, to get a thing they think they need when they don’t need it. Hence, arguments like “GW2 is grindy because I need X” are dumb.
I does precisely that. Not only does it do that, but you try to counter debate by using the same premise as that you are countering, then say it’s dumb. In other words you are saying the very same about yourself, which is rather amusing to say the least.
In layman’s you are arguing along such lines: You are wrong because blue is a horrible color. Your counter that my opinion about the color blue is not a basis of authority is invalid because it is an opinion. My opinion is correct. Opinions other than mine are dumb because blue is indeed a horrible color.
The game isn’t grindy … Grindy games MAKE me do things I don’t want to do repeatedly for gear that is necessary to complete content. GW2 doesn’t do that.
Legendaries, precursor, ascended gear is a class of gear for people that WANT that extra performance boost who are WILLING to grind to get it. In fact, Anet even gives people an out from grinding these things with options as well. Anyone claiming the game is grindy has no idea what they are talking about.
Yes, grindy games make you…you being key. Making a statement that others don’t know what they are talking about since their opinions are differing from yours, is obtuse to say the least.
I don’t get your point. GW2 isn’t grindy. It’s not even close. If people find it grindy, it’s because they CHOOSE to do content they don’t like to get loot they don’t need for content they want to do. Only the highest level fractals require you to repeat content many times but even then, it’s not a grind because if your doing lots of fractals, it’s only to get to higher level fractals because you want to, not because your chasing loot.
People that attribute being forced to grind for some bit of gear simply lack the willpower to tell themselves they don’t need it. If you don’t like grinding, once you realize you don’t need legendaries or ascended armor, you stop grinding and your game instantly becomes doing things you WANT to do, not doing things to GET things you think you need.
My point is that your opinion is not the authority on whether or not something is considered grindy. It’s very much the same as saying that a certain food tastes good for everyone because it tastes good to you….ie…..all opinion and a matter of personal preference
The game isn’t grindy … Grindy games MAKE me do things I don’t want to do repeatedly for gear that is necessary to complete content. GW2 doesn’t do that.
Legendaries, precursor, ascended gear is a class of gear for people that WANT that extra performance boost who are WILLING to grind to get it. In fact, Anet even gives people an out from grinding these things with options as well. Anyone claiming the game is grindy has no idea what they are talking about.
Yes, grindy games make you…you being key. Making a statement that others don’t know what they are talking about since their opinions are differing from yours, is obtuse to say the least.
Thing with condi is dmg over time. The shorter time something is alive the less dmg it does. Also there are condi caps. So the more condi players and the less time the less condi matters. This is where zerker shines.
Condi is great for solo or duo encounters. After that zerkers are where it’s at for dmg.
Zerker=things dying faster
Condi=more dmg over time
So the more ppl and the faster something dies the less condi is preferable.
Just curious if and how the economy dictates reward structure/ rng coding and what influences the levels to which items are determined as economically acceptable?
I can’t imagine this practice is against the rules, as long as they are placing the orders by hand.
that said, all 4 of those top-10 lists on the homepage are not useful in any way and should be changed. “most recently sold item” would be a good list, as would “most recently added item”
Those would change so fast they’d be but a flicker.
Not the OP’s point. The point of increasing the rate at which precursors are available. JS noted that the increase in supply would only have a corresponding increased in demand give a certain set of variables. He then further noted that it turns away from that phenomenon rapidly (would lower prices) once pushed past those specific variable values.
Basically it says that they know how to decrease prices via increasing supply, but they don’t want to for various reasons.
Yeah, that was still rather vague to say the least. The whole notion of a phenomenon occurring outside of what was expected and expectations shifting in accordance to said phenomenon until an observable breaking point really does not help prove the topical point.
None of this seems odd to anyone that there seems to be a pretty obvious divide?
No, because without extra data like actual hours played per day (most people say they play less than they actually do) and exactly what are they doing that time, we can’t really reach any conclusion.
For example, if someone plays 5 hours a day, but does almost exclusively high level fractals with a good group during those 5 hours, of course will get more exotics than someone that does dungeons, who in turn will get more than someone that does only dungeons, who will also get more exotics than someone killing world bosses, who will also get more than someone that just goes around the world exploring and doing events as they pop up.
Just like in WvW, someone that does roaming or that plays in massive zerg Vs. zerg battles will get less exotics that someone that’s doing a karma train capturing easy targets and avoiding combat.
Ahh but not everyone posts just a number. Many post have things like hours, type of content, and mf included.
We know accounts are not all treated the same b/c of past occurrences. What we don’t know is if that still* has any bearing on rewards (still* denotes that past account bugs did have an effect on rewards).
I’m fairly confident that players that have continuously played with the same people over the course of the game will attest to knowing others that either have what seems as continuous luck or continuous misfortune. For many it becomes an ongoing joke b/c its predictable to who will get or not get what.
I can assure you … your implication that Anet isn’t funding GW2 development with gemstore sales is obtuse to more than just myself. If you aren’t aware of all the content that has been released on a very consistent and frequent basis over the last 2 years, then I think obtuse really was the correct description. How can you even be qualified to ask such a question when the continued development of the game is actually one of it’s strong selling points? I have to ask myself if you even play this game for claiming a lack of development in it. I can imagine even the most unreasonable person would acknowledge the amount and frequency of content that’s added to this game, even if they didn’t like it.
I was under the impression that funds come from and go to NCsoft.
I can’t claim to know the exact details of whatever business arrangement NCsoft and Anet have but I doubt Anet devs work for free and I know the content in GW2 doesn’t create itself.
There’s nothing to argue about that comment. It really seems as if your are arguing for the sake of arguing. Ofc they are not working for free. No one said that, but you. Why even add it in? Have you had a nap today?
I can assure you … your implication that Anet isn’t funding GW2 development with gemstore sales is obtuse to more than just myself. If you aren’t aware of all the content that has been released on a very consistent and frequent basis over the last 2 years, then I think obtuse really was the correct description. How can you even be qualified to ask such a question when the continued development of the game is actually one of it’s strong selling points? I have to ask myself if you even play this game for claiming a lack of development in it. I can imagine even the most unreasonable person would acknowledge the amount and frequency of content that’s added to this game, even if they didn’t like it.
I was under the impression that funds come from and go to NCsoft.
It’s a small step in a better direction. I’m hoping they have reassigned whoever was in charge of rewards and have a new person that is gingerly easing into doing what this game has needed for far too long. The game in general kinda reminds me of my govt. Is it great? No, but it’s better than most other options. Fixing their rewards would be like fixing our govt. corruption and balancing our govt. budget. It would make it great!
Yet another thing you misunderstand. While I was a student, I’m going to school to learn. Because I didn’t know concepts, or reasons as to why certain judgments or settlements are made, I would question.
from the perspective of anet, yes you can.
this is about what makes anet money, anet can does in fact trade fake money for real money.
like i said this is about what anet can profit off of, and what is of monetary value to anet.
the gold players trade to them is of monetary value to anet.
notice in all my explanations i told you how much money anet makes off these things, not how much i make.
anet gets monetary value from players trading gold, and actual money from people who trade gems.
this is their business model.
Gold can only be traded for gems that have already been purchased though, which is why gold does not have a monetary value. If you could straight up buy gold from ArenaNet, then yes, gold would also have monetary value for them. It is because the only thing you can buy is gems that gems are the only thing that holds monetary value for ArenaNet. Things like gold and gem store items don’t have monetary value, but they do serve to induce more purchasing of gems, but it is still only the act of trading real money for gems that creates revenue for ArenaNet and thus only gems have an actual value to ArenaNet.
monetary value still works through transition.
if you can trade one apple for one orange, and you can sell apples for 2 dollars, oranges still have a monetary value through apples.
monetary value is the worth of the money you can obtain by trading the item. even if there is a step inbetween, it still has monetary value.
this is the premise of use of currencies between different countries.
Which is precisely the reason the definition has “if sold” in it.
Noun 1. monetary value – the property of having material worth (often indicated by the amount of money something would bring if sold)monetary value – the property of having material worth (often indicated by the amount of money something would bring if sold)
No…Just because there is no " Buy Gold" Button doesn’t mean they are not selling gold.
Yes it does because buying gold and exchanging gold for gems is NOT the same thing. That’s not just a subtle distinction either. It has RL implications for how they run their business.
You mean that letter from Anet-a-claus……….lol
Ok, If I Buy 800 gems for $10, and then use the gems to Buy In Game Gold. I Just Bought in game gold for $10.
Two things = to the same thing are = to each other. is a basic law of mathematics.
If A = B, and B= C, then A = C.
If you are having a hard time understanding that, maybe trying to explain Monetary value is a bit ambitious, even for me.
This is a fallacy. You’re trying to apply math to something that isn’t related to math. The reason why we’re having a hard time explaining things to you, is because you have the incorrect belief that you’re correct. Like when I was younger, I believed in Santa Claus, because I would get Christmas presents and a hand written letter from him. Just because I believed it doesn’t make me right.
In our case, we know we’re right, because our arguments are based on facts, with business and economic principals to boot.
You mean the letter (user agreement) from Anet-a Claus? lol
They could say they are jebus christ in the user agreement, but that wouldn’t make it so.
I cannot fathom how gullible people can be to have someone sell them something for a set price, add a disclaimer and then have those people not only believe that the sale was essentially non-existent, but have then defend it. Is it Stokholm Syndrome or something?
Before you go off and make claims, you need to be sure you fully understand what you’re talking about. Gems have no monetary value. Gold as no monetary value. We all agree on this, because you can’t dispute facts with your options.
Regarding Gems. There are two types of Gems, per se. The ones that players like me purchase, and the ones non-paying players exchange in-game Gold for. The Gems that I purchase never existed before. They’re created out of thin air, thus brand new to the economy. Gems non-paying customers exchange for already existed when Anet first opened their servers. The Gem Exchange had a finite amount of Gems already in the pot for players to exchange for. Over time, the amount in the pot goes up and down, depending on the transactions made by players (note – Gem Store purchases destroy Gems. They don’t go into the pot). If I exchange my Gems for Gold, my Gems go into the pot. So now the pot has a mix of newly created Gems, and existing Gems from the beginning of the game.
With that said, non-paying players do not generate any revenue for Anet/NCSoft. The money comes from players like me. In business, paying customers drive the economy. Sure Anet finds all the players to be important, or there wouldn’t be a game to begin with. There would be a lot less players in game if only the microtransaction players were in there. We all get to enjoy the “free” content Anet provides, and the paying players help to sustain the status quo.
In order to sustain corporate profits, you must continue to bring in new monies. That’s the purpose of a for-profit organization. My money goes to employee salaries, overhead, R&D, dividends for shareholders, etc. This is how a business works.
How can you possibly say gems have no monetary value when it’s in writing that they are sold 800 for 10 dollars? After they are purchased by the player they might not retain that original value, but that does not nullify that they had it at one point.
As per the User Agreement, Gems have no value. When you’re buying Gems, you’re not buying something physical, nor are you buying something of value. You paid Anet for the privilege of accessing exclusive content that has Entertainment Value. Once the Gems are in your account, you have no rights to them, and Anet has every right to take it away from you at their discretion.
The User Agreement means that you cannot trade gems back into cash. That does not negate the initial monetary value Anet has placed on them of 800 for $10. Just b/c the value can fluctuate doesn’t mean it never exists.
I think you are lumping all monetary value into one circumstance and ignoring the rest.
Once you purchase the Gems, they no longer hold any value. You’re paying for the rights to acquire exclusive content, and Anet gives you these virtual credits to limit you on now much you can access. I could buy 4,000 Gems right now, and Anet would have every right to take it away without giving me a refund. Not to say that they would, but rather that they can.
You said and I quote:
Gems have no monetary value. Gold as no monetary value. We all agree on this, because you can’t dispute facts with your options.
You did not say “after initial purchase or beside rl cash purchases”.
The definition:
Noun 1. monetary value – the property of having material worth (often indicated by the amount of money something would bring if sold)monetary value – the property of having material worth (often indicated by the amount of money something would bring if sold)
In this case the material worth is the 10 dollars traded for 800 gems, thus assigning a value to gems of said ratio.
Before you go off and make claims, you need to be sure you fully understand what you’re talking about. Gems have no monetary value. Gold as no monetary value. We all agree on this, because you can’t dispute facts with your options.
Regarding Gems. There are two types of Gems, per se. The ones that players like me purchase, and the ones non-paying players exchange in-game Gold for. The Gems that I purchase never existed before. They’re created out of thin air, thus brand new to the economy. Gems non-paying customers exchange for already existed when Anet first opened their servers. The Gem Exchange had a finite amount of Gems already in the pot for players to exchange for. Over time, the amount in the pot goes up and down, depending on the transactions made by players (note – Gem Store purchases destroy Gems. They don’t go into the pot). If I exchange my Gems for Gold, my Gems go into the pot. So now the pot has a mix of newly created Gems, and existing Gems from the beginning of the game.
With that said, non-paying players do not generate any revenue for Anet/NCSoft. The money comes from players like me. In business, paying customers drive the economy. Sure Anet finds all the players to be important, or there wouldn’t be a game to begin with. There would be a lot less players in game if only the microtransaction players were in there. We all get to enjoy the “free” content Anet provides, and the paying players help to sustain the status quo.
In order to sustain corporate profits, you must continue to bring in new monies. That’s the purpose of a for-profit organization. My money goes to employee salaries, overhead, R&D, dividends for shareholders, etc. This is how a business works.
How can you possibly say gems have no monetary value when it’s in writing that they are sold 800 for 10 dollars? After they are purchased by the player they might not retain that original value, but that does not nullify that they had it at one point.
As per the User Agreement, Gems have no value. When you’re buying Gems, you’re not buying something physical, nor are you buying something of value. You paid Anet for the privilege of accessing exclusive content that has Entertainment Value. Once the Gems are in your account, you have no rights to them, and Anet has every right to take it away from you at their discretion.
The User Agreement means that you cannot trade gems back into cash. That does not negate the initial monetary value Anet has placed on them of 800 for $10. Just b/c the value can fluctuate doesn’t mean it never exists.
I think you are lumping all consideration for monetary value into one circumstance and ignoring the rest.
Before you go off and make claims, you need to be sure you fully understand what you’re talking about. Gems have no monetary value. Gold as no monetary value. We all agree on this, because you can’t dispute facts with your options.
Regarding Gems. There are two types of Gems, per se. The ones that players like me purchase, and the ones non-paying players exchange in-game Gold for. The Gems that I purchase never existed before. They’re created out of thin air, thus brand new to the economy. Gems non-paying customers exchange for already existed when Anet first opened their servers. The Gem Exchange had a finite amount of Gems already in the pot for players to exchange for. Over time, the amount in the pot goes up and down, depending on the transactions made by players (note – Gem Store purchases destroy Gems. They don’t go into the pot). If I exchange my Gems for Gold, my Gems go into the pot. So now the pot has a mix of newly created Gems, and existing Gems from the beginning of the game.
With that said, non-paying players do not generate any revenue for Anet/NCSoft. The money comes from players like me. In business, paying customers drive the economy. Sure Anet finds all the players to be important, or there wouldn’t be a game to begin with. There would be a lot less players in game if only the microtransaction players were in there. We all get to enjoy the “free” content Anet provides, and the paying players help to sustain the status quo.
In order to sustain corporate profits, you must continue to bring in new monies. That’s the purpose of a for-profit organization. My money goes to employee salaries, overhead, R&D, dividends for shareholders, etc. This is how a business works.
How can you possibly say gems have no monetary value when it’s in writing that they are sold 800 for 10 dollars? After they are purchased by the player they might not retain that original value, but that does not nullify that they had it at one point.
Run with 200-300% mf and maybe get 1 a month actively playing 10+ hrs a day. I run zerk staff guard in event farming and pvt staff guard in wvw zerg v zerg ( I have 2…one for each), zerk war in dungeons, and the rest of my toons mostly stay unplayed. Most of my exos have come from tokens, forging, or map clear, which are lack luster to say the least.
I don’t have onus of proof, you do. It’s a concept used in courts where in general the person who is making the accusation/insinuation is the one who needs to provide proof. You suspect that something is out of the norm with accounts, then that’s on you to prove. You initially stated that there are accounts marked as lucky and unlucky and you have yet to provide proof that this is the case. You may have provided proof that some accounts are hit by bugs, but that’s not proof that Anet has intentionally or unintentionally affected the drop tables for players. Again, these bugs could have been caused by a myriad of combinations at the game level, not the account level.
We’ll agree to disagree about the 2nd point since that hinges so much on the first..
And yes it is allowed since it is constructed using the API and it is merely an overlay. It’s no different than the boss timer overlays or a TS3 overlay. Of course though, Anet will never give express consent that they would allow/disallow such use of programs.
Once I provided proof that not all account are treated the same the onus shifts back to you since the only proof supports accounts being treated differently.
Either way, the onus of proof is on those who suspect there is something fishy going on with accounts, not the other way around, but I don’t find the proof provided to be sufficient or relevant.
I gave proof that accounts can be treated differently. You have not given any that they are not.
Re #2…yes let’s ignore the snippet about the tracker.
Here is the website which would have more users had the April patch not happened: http://geekleet.net/gw2/
Hardly anecdotal when you have a stat tracker.
It’s anecdotal because of the very very small sample size not the accuracy of it. Btw are those allowed?
WvW rewards being rewarded to certain people and not others is not proof that the bug was caused by an account issue. It could have been caused by a myriad of other things that screwed up the code, not related to the underlying account.
2.) Shortsighted? It’s common sense and a numbers game. I farmed this way for months and I saw only 2-3 regulars across these events, not including a few guildies that I brought along. Not to mention the API program I was using had an active tracker that showed the # of downloads and active users for the multi-server API. That number never went higher than 5 until I released my guide. There’s your proof.
1)It didn’t have to be created by an account to have varying effects on accounts. Regardless of what caused it, it resulted in accounts being treated differently and that’s what matters.
You could be doing 4000 in game playing RP, WvW and sPvP
But that doesn’t give you much of a chance at a precursor.
I have about 3500 hours in game and I picked up four precursors because my kill rate per hour was pretty high (although three of them came from mobs directly)
It does to an extent. Someone who has play 10 fold hours of another most likely has killed at least as many foes as long as they are not stationed in la playing tp or spvp.
By your logic on kills even though you have played 1/2 of my hours you’ve killed at least 4 times the foes I have. I’m almost 100% sure that’s not the case.
I’d rather wager that you have a lucky (marked) account and I have an unlucky (marked) account.
Up until the April patch, I was a hardcore farmer. I guested all the time and farmed the most dense events on the most heavily populated servers. Combine that with max magic find and that gives me the most chances at rolling for rares/exotics and a miniscule increase for precursors. Over the long haul that is a significant difference.
Account luck is all hubris and no one has any proof that such a theory exists. All my luck is because I’m doing everything I can to increase my chances, such as multi server farming, mob prioritization, proper traiting, and most of all, running a staff guardian. (and let’s not forget about rolling 3 more guardians to combat DR)
You could have an exact mirror of my farming habits and tendencies, but if you roll any other class except guardian, you will not have the same chances as me, and again that makes a big difference.
A lot of people complain that they have dedicated xxxx hours in this game while their friend has played xx hours and got a precursor.
One, that’s RNG.
Two, we do not play in a vacuum. It’s unfair to assume that everyone’s habits are equal. For all we know the person who hasn’t got anything after dedicating xxxx hours in game has been farming events with a GS mesmer or a bearbow ranger..
1) The wvw bonus bug proved that not all accounts are the same. There’s 1 big red flag many ignore.
2) Your assumption that you’re the only one that farms in a comparable manner is shortsighted.
You could be doing 4000 in game playing RP, WvW and sPvP
But that doesn’t give you much of a chance at a precursor.
I have about 3500 hours in game and I picked up four precursors because my kill rate per hour was pretty high (although three of them came from mobs directly)
It does to an extent. Someone who has play 10 fold hours of another most likely has killed at least as many foes as long as they are not stationed in la playing tp or spvp.
By your logic on kills even though you have played 1/2 of my hours you’ve killed at least 4 times the foes I have. I’m almost 100% sure that’s not the case.
I’d rather wager that you have a lucky (marked) account and I have an unlucky (marked) account.
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.
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?
I’m pretty sure we all know players with both perpetual lucky and/or perpetual unlucky accounts. If one plays enough it’s very easy to spot them. If it were streaky in nature I could get behind the rng is rng sentiment, but it’s not.
Certain accounts consistently exhibit the same patterns over time. To the point of predictability.
Ok, hypothetical:
We increase rewards to dungeon running to let’s say triple what they currently are. This would make it VERY difficult for almost all players to earn better rewards anywhere but dungeon running.
Now, everyone’s earning money and items all over the place, but we haven’t changed their original preferences for trading. This means a week later, they make the same trade preferences they previous made, just with more money, the more money makes flipping equivalently more profitable and you’re back in the same place. Unless players decide that they want to play the game differently, and there’s no reason they should, or we force them to play differently, and we shouldn’t definitely not, or we fundamentally change the way the game works, then you will have a problem. The profit from “flipping” items is a natural byproduct of people’s preferences inside a game. In my many, many years studying virtual economies I’ve never read or heard of an option that solves your personal dilemma without making the economy, the game and the players much worse off. The point of this hypothetical is the explain that even if I did think this was a problem (which I don’t) fixing it is much more complex than you may realize and you should incorporate that into your suggestions.
That being said, I’m often reading and interested in hearing your suggestions and you should feel free to present them. There are a couple of popular suggestions that do not meet my requirements of not making the game a much worse experience:
1. Server specific economies. I can’t even begin to describe the myriad of problems that server specific economies have, but I will tell you, most of them are so bad, you don’t even realize that they aren’t in their natural state.
2. Binding after purchasing items – this has been thoroughly explained in many forums the several ways that this would prove disastrous.
My biggest argument I would make against myself is that the fix for this is simply education or more information (I don’t mean academia, I mean education inside the game). I would argue that people naturally want to make the most money possible and the amount of profit available is enhanced, not by laziness, but by a lack of information or education.
To which I would respond that players have many resources for information and while some portion of this may be caused by that issue, it seems clear that it’s much more a matter of preference than education.
I think both are good arguments, and the HOW of disseminating information is the interesting part.
In your hypothetical situation you lump in increasing coin, which is the Achilles’ heel of it. Take your same situation remove the increased coin and reevaluate it. Remember the increased item rewards can balanced and do not have to be increased so heavily where the supply crushes demand.
That aside, I would very much like to hear what you think about progressive taxation.
For each buying/selling option there are multiple parties. For buying with a buy order, there are traders and consumers. This is an interesting idea while focusing on the traders, but unfortunately it lumps the buy order consumers with them.
Also without a rebalancing of karma across the game as a whole, karma trains would become ever more prevalent, which have direct negative impact on other playstyles which are either currently balanced or underbalanced.
Aside from those two, I kinda like the idea as it gets more players playing, which only increases the overall health of a mmo.
TP is a core mechanic because it’s the only reliable method to get materials/gear in this game … and it’s obviously intended to be this way from conecpt to design right to it’s implementations.
.