Best Of

More on the future implementation side, I think the ic drivers for this are why I lean more towards slightly more specific/atomised currencies/materials/comms/etc.

Fairly sure I've mentioned the idea already, but it just seems simpler overall if we had "org/guild comms" which we use for all org/guild level stuff like research and constructs because then it basically becomes a currency for dealing with that stuff and the impacts of any choices that need to be made on how to spend them are limited to that scope.

You'd also be able to balance generation and the like more closely, so scacity might mean that it's trivial for each org to get around enough to maintain their projects every year but you'd need a bit more engagement for every additional construct. Maybe there's even a point where if you've held three for a while it might put a strain on that resource that makes you consider if you need to drop it for a bit, maybe there's other optional recurring costs once you're through the progression phase of research such as patron requests.

Also, as it's within a more narrowly defined scope, none of those org level things would really impact players on the individual level of "I can't get equipment", "I can't decorate my manse", etc. There would likely still be things orgs are managing that do impact players on that level as well, of course, but those could then also be managed within their own scope of that stuff.



Anomalies are an example really. It's pretty easy to manage because you know how many you need each year, how many you'd want to build up (progression phase) or store (maintenance phase / "just in case we need to rebuild it"), and how many you need/want to expend for time wind or other buffs. They provide an incentive to participate in quakes and you can work around that or acquire more with refinement. Even the active powers, mostly, seem more effective when managed on an org level rather than by individuals (who can acquire noms for individual use through trading). But the impact of not having anomalies is also limited to their specific scope.

We're wasting our breath offering solution ideas when it's now clear that was never welcome.

For all the original producer's faults, she never would have treated her players/customers this way when they tried to help solve problems they didn't even create.

Jatius said:

Orael said:

As everyone is aware - one of our upcoming goals is to focus on the economy and re-working how it functions. The first part of this is really on us, which is to dig deep and determine how the mechanics of it function. 

We're digging into the following:

- aethergoop generation and sinks

- commodities production and sinks

- gold generation and sinks


The one thing that we still need to determine is what the eventual goals of this should be. Obviously commodity production is one of the big player concerns, but we wanted to open up this thread to give you, the players, a chance to give your input,

What would you like to see when we begin to tackle the economy?

No, it wasn't. Give your input != want your solutions.

Input is a broad term realistically, if the admin wanted only the issues they could have just said that but ideas are also input. Further, the bit you didn't bold about what players would "like to see" is similarly quite open and inclusive of ideas. And to really hit it on the head, countless times across the years players have been told to offer solutions to issues rather than just raising them which is at the least a cultural thing that tells players we are actually expected to give solutions.

Sapphira said:

The sense of entitlement, yeesh. Personally, the transparency our producers have is a world away from what we used to have and it's amazing. No more 'because that's how it is', we actually get numbers, we get explanations, we get to give input, they hear us when we say 'x is a problem because y' rather than turn a deliberate deaf ear as though it were personal criticism. Who let the Karens in here?? We as players and customers don't get to dictate outcomes, despite what we may think. That we even get to have input that is heard is amazing. We can't also cry that we don't get the solutions we hoped for, when no one -has- to ask for our input. 

You have the bolded the wrong way around.

The fact that players are willing to come here and give their input about the game is a ridiculously valuable tool to the admin. Players doing so, regardless of how they phrase it, is literally guiding the admin on what's not working and ways that things could be made to work better. Without this the admin would have to guess and this is why there are companies with outreach mechanisms to try to get this information to improve their services. 

Same thing with solutions really, specific solutions to address an issue might vary but if the admin don't meaningfully address the issues players have then players eventually leave and the game needs players. Also, even the admin have previously noted that their resources are ultimately quite limited so gathering player solutions creates an efficiency because you then have many more people looking at ways to resolve issues. (edit: Also, to note, the IREs are basically the only games in the world that I can think of where the devs can't active play them, while they were players, the admin can't exactly spin up a player character and experience the game as an actual player which makes them even more reliant on player input)
The economy issues mostly exist because the admin didn't really do the things you're saying they don't have to do and by not really doing them it created a bigger mess without actually resolving the original issues.

Honestly, a growing concern reading over the posts is about how much of this rework is just going to fix the mess created vs actually hitting those long term issues.

The sense of entitlement, yeesh. Personally, the transparency our producers have is a world away from what we used to have and it's amazing. No more 'because that's how it is', we actually get numbers, we get explanations, we get to give input, they hear us when we say 'x is a problem because y' rather than turn a deliberate deaf ear as though it were personal criticism. Who let the Karens in here?? We as players and customers don't get to dictate outcomes, despite what we may think. That we even get to have input that is heard is amazing. We can't also cry that we don't get the solutions we hoped for, when no one -has- to ask for our input. 

On another note i'm really curious to see what the admin come up with. This has become a multi-faceted and far-reaching problem where not even everyone agrees on the issues, except that there is a bunch of them. Very confident in the team to do awesome things.

Noctis said:

Third, accessibility of enchants and supplies.  Finding my way to the aethershop hub, which a new player would not know exists to begin with, there was no avaricehorn on sale to Magnagorans.  I feel as if someone or something should make all basic and quality of life things consistently available for newbies.  

Rainbow Ranch does sell all those things, including avaricehorn. I restock it at least once a day, and yesterday I ran out of avaricehorn and restocked. You must have searched just in between those two moments. Of course there are things I can't make, like waterwalk, because no one can make everything and working with third party suppliers never seems to work out for me. But I've got 95% of 'all basic and quality of life things', and the only reason I run the shop is to do exactly what you say, I certainly don't need the gold.

I'd really love to see an over-the-top re-imagining of the divine histories.