I personally don't mind taxing a few things.. I really have enough gold that I don't think any gold sink will fix unless it's too good to be true.
Edit: The problem certainly isn't income, it's definitely accumulation and lack of spending incentive. [Edit2: Well, outlier income is pretty bad but it doesn't matter how much income you have if you're never removing the gold]
(I'm the mom of Hallifax btw, so if you are in Hallifax please call me mom.)
== Professional Girl Gamer == Yes I play games Yes I'm a girl get over it
Design books please, could make it a gold fee to update the books for new designs.
Avurekhos says, "Dylara's a PvP menace in my eyes, totes rekting face."
The eye of Dylara materialises in your hands and flings itself around your neck, tightening incomprehensibly until it is irremovable. Perfectly clean, this eyeball has been wrenched from the socket of Dylara. It has been animated by some unusual force, constantly looking around itself as if in shock or fear. It is bathed in a light covering of white flames that roll endlessly over its surface. A single chain of empyreal metal pierces either side of the eye, allowing it to be worn around the neck.
Another design-, shopkeeping- and goldsink-related idea: Item generators (of sorts)! Essentially, you'd set it to a design, shove in enough comms to keep it going, add a gold fee for the imps working inside of it, put it in a shop and price it as you would an item, and it would then generate items as people bought them. The pros would include a wider variety of items in shops, fewer items around for the game to keep track of (as you'd only need one generator instead of ten identical pair of pants), easier for shopkeepers to keep track of their stocks, and it would drain gold out of the system (even though it'd be slow; probably between 50 gold (a pair of socks) and 500 gold (a set of robes) per sell).
That's fine for bespoke items, but enchanters might take umbrage with not being able to sell their wares.
Actually, would it be possible for Bookbinders to work with Enchanters to produce single-charge spell tags that give a single enchanting charge to whatever they're read at, like sorcelglass scrolls?
I actually really like that item generators idea. Link it to your design book, and allow you to pick which non public designs you have available to place for sale. Has the benefit of not filling the shop with lots of premade items, allows you to charge a bit more to cover the extra cost because they are unique items, and not allowing public designs means that people won't see 95% of the same thing in every shop (for common goods, pre-build or purchase directly on-demand). Please do this. Gives designers and shopkeepers incentive to make new & cool stuff, buying them actually does drain some gold from the game, and it doesn't harm anybody.
That's fine for bespoke items, but enchanters might take umbrage with not being able to sell their wares.
Actually, would it be possible for Bookbinders to work with Enchanters to produce single-charge spell tags that give a single enchanting charge to whatever they're read at, like sorcelglass scrolls?
Could "easily" make it an enchanting plinth. Holds 10-20 charges, and can be used to put a single charge of the enchantment on an item. Once it's enchanted, back to using cubes as usual. Would couple well with an item generator for rings etc.
EDIT: Also, not too fond of the idea of limiting it to non-public designs myself. Sometimes you want the ordinary designs, after all. It'll be up to the shopkeepers to decide whether or not to be unique or common. Also, there are probably enough public designs to not have shops stock all of them, so there'll definitely be variety either way.
That's fine for bespoke items, but enchanters might take umbrage with not being able to sell their wares.
Actually, would it be possible for Bookbinders to work with Enchanters to produce single-charge spell tags that give a single enchanting charge to whatever they're read at, like sorcelglass scrolls?
Could "easily" make it an enchanting plinth. Holds 10-20 charges, and can be used to put a single charge of the enchantment on an item. Once it's enchanted, back to using cubes as usual. Would couple well with an item generator for rings etc.
Not sure exactly what you mean by that, but... The main point of the plinth would be to, again, reduce the amount of items in the stockroom/items in the game. Instead of 20 tags with Beauty, you'd have a single plinth with 20 uses. Yes, you'd have to be in the shop to use it, but eh.
Unless you place a low cap on how many designs can be displayed at a time, people will generally just default to showing as much as they can. I know that if I am shopping, I would not want to wade through shop wares that look almost all exactly alike except for a few differences buried in the weeds. And, to me, putting a low cap on it kind of defeats the purpose. Making it non-public designs allows for creativity to flourish instead of a distressing amount of homogeneity and/or artificially capping at a number that stifles expansion. I suppose one option could be to add a filter that lets you ignore all public designs (because once you have seen them in one shop you have seen them in all) and could "split the difference" that way. Regardless, I do really like the idea.
I am wondering if the scope of this is just straight up, "How can we make the amount of gold that exists smaller," or if it will be an actual attempt to refresh the game economy.
To preface, I'm against the idea of the gold throttle. It carries a negative connotation of punishing individual effort, and it dissuades people from participating in bashing - a core activity.
Research:
I bashed the breeding hive and the Icewynd loop. I consider these common bashing grounds. From experience, I would estimate that either of these had not been bashed in 2-3 hours.
I hit the threshold after about 40 minutes of leisurely bashing. I am a demigoddess with a lvl 3 crit rune. I used kiwipunch, a kirigami, and a neutral damage type (no bonus, no malus).
I feel this is entirely too little bashing to reach any sort of cap. The bears and mammoths were dropping an average of 400-500 gold before I hit the threshold. Afterward, it ranged anywhere from 3-600. (It seems like the throttle is that you get 1-100% of what you would have gotten.)
I wasn't keeping track then, so I decided to head over to Feyranti and bash some jewel snakes and fanged spiders. There are 15 of each, pretty easy. People tend to forget about these guys, so they're often quite rich the first round.
I think both of these totals are skewed from what they should be.
While throttling brings a potential 25k+ haul down to 11k, that's still really high for what these are. The second round simply displays that a fraction of a pittance is a pittance - it's really low.
But realistically, the only time I'm going to kill more than one of these guys unless I'm questing. When I gold bash, I'll kill them once/rl-day and make bank, throttled or no. It is currently very_easy for experienced players to make 75k gold or more in an hour.
To me, it's very clear that the issue is the high totals that out-of-the-way mobs can accumulate, and it's only partially mitigated by this throttle. From my POV, the simple answer is to do away with this gold-accumulation-over-time system and bring back standard drops. I feel like it would be reasonable if the mobs from my example dropped 40-80 gold every time.
I realize though, that this might not be feasible. Depending on how it was implemented, this solution may involve re-assigning gold drops to every single mob/mobtype in the game. Therefore, I offer the secondary solution of bringing the accumulation time cap way, way down - as in 2 hours of accumulation max.
People will hate this, but they will also re-acclimate. Let absurd gold from mobs become a fond remembrance in Lusternia's eternal bitch about the good ol' days.
I actually have no clue where the Feyranti estate is or how to get there.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
Attached to that tower in the mountains that you have to pull a branch or some such to get to. Raezon's tower / observatory, maybe? Something like that...
I'm a bit late, don't want to read all pages. Does this mean that 5 hours of influence won't get me 70-90k anymore most of that gold goes back into paying for my potions and other supplies so I'd be left at like 40-60k after I'm buying all that plus esteem/xp boosts
though I'm mostly influencing for esteem/xp in my places
I think the general idea was for the system to loan out artifacts for gold. Otherwise it wouldn't be much of a gold sink...
I had been thinking: 1) general process gets put in place where gold is sunk (vanishes instead of transferring between players) to rent out artifacts 2) request manse dweller add-on where renter can contact denizen instead of owner, gold still vanishes instead of transferring between players (maybe player can set permissions like ally- or org-only rentals, similar to shop bin permissions)
I think the general idea was for the system to loan out artifacts for gold. Otherwise it wouldn't be much of a gold sink...
I had been thinking: 1) general process gets put in place where gold is sunk (vanishes instead of transferring between players) to rent out artifacts 2) request manse dweller add-on where renter can contact denizen instead of owner, gold still vanishes instead of transferring between players (maybe player can set permissions like ally- or org-only rentals, similar to shop bin permissions)
Does that still make a gold sink?
Well, yeah, it would. I have a hard time seeing a lot of people paying a whole bunch of credits without any kind of return at all though... Plus, how would it work exactly? Would the owner have to give the artifact to the dweller in order to lend it out (thus eliminating themselves from using it)? If not, would the dweller simply take the artifact from the owner, which would make it possible for them to lose the artifact mid-fight? If they would have to give the item to the dweller, would they be able to call it back from far away if they wanted it themselves? It seems like an overly complex solution; it'd be far easier to just let Bob or someone lend the artifacts out and eliminate all the "what ifs".
1
SylandraJoin Queue for Mafia GamesThe Last Mafia Game
Yeah just let Bob do the official lending of artifacts. If someone wants to borrow your jeweler's hammer or Gem of Cloaking or whatever, it's not as if you can't already loan it to them as is.
"Oh yeah, you're a naughty mayor, aren't you? Misfile that Form MA631-D. Comptroller Shevat's got a nice gemstone disc for you, but yer gonna have to beg for it."
I think I've said all I've got to say in this thread already... Also, I don't have a clan slot, and I'm not very active, so I wouldn't really be able to make any suggestions that aren't over the forums anyway.
Far more than in a very long time, I have been impressed with people being on-point and insightful in this thread.
I'm of the opinion that throttling new gold intake alone is insufficient, and yet one more 'solution' that while well-intentioned, is yet one more step of many that is really two steps back. It's an attempt to appease all parties, when appeasement itself limits the actual solution.
Those of us with crazy stockpiles of gold are going to have to take a hit one way or another. We have to, for the gameplay-health of those who follow. Even if it's not fair for us, it's fair (perhaps even necessary) for everybody else.
Mayor Steingrim, the Grand Schema says to you, "Well, as I recall you kinda leave a mark whereever you go."
I do not really agree with that. Taking away a good chunk of my gold is not going to do anything to help the economy-- I hoard it, so it is already outside the econony. The issue is with excessive gold that floods incessantly into the game and gets used. "Taking a hit" adds no benefit at all to anyone, simply makes more of us annoyed. If you want to get some of that gold out of the game, give us something to spend it on, don't just slam us with penalties "for the good of the game" when our holding onto gold vs. putting it back into circulation already is good for the game.
In itself, that's correct. Just taking away gold will do nothing at all. But when the counterpoint so often raised is that the playing field remains uneven anyway... maybe it's time to level it somehow? We're more than capable of dealing with it, in many cases moreso, just as any solution would ask "the newbies" to do.
When everybody agrees the system is broken, why do we need to hold on to our broken gains? We earned them, sure, but apparently we earned them brokenly.
The solution, whatever it is, is obviously far more complex than just taking a chunk of gold away.
Mayor Steingrim, the Grand Schema says to you, "Well, as I recall you kinda leave a mark whereever you go."
I also disagree that we earned it brokenly. I already stated earlier that this gold cap change would have barely affected me. I have collected my gold over the years at a slow and steady pace and it just kind of builds up. I am not generating hundreds of thousands a day. Painting everyone with the same brush here is pretty bizarre. We do not all play the game the same way.
If you want to "level the field," then give us something worth spending on. Don't tar us all with the "abusing a broken system" label.
What I'm against is the idea that to correct an issue simply must involve us maintaining the status quo; everybody maintaining our e-numbers as we always have. An actual Economy Overhaul doesn't seem out of the question, to me.
We have to be open to all options, not just the convenient ones.
Mayor Steingrim, the Grand Schema says to you, "Well, as I recall you kinda leave a mark whereever you go."
Comments
I really have enough gold that I don't think any gold sink will fix unless it's too good to be true.
Edit: The problem certainly isn't income, it's definitely accumulation and lack of spending incentive. [Edit2: Well, outlier income is pretty bad but it doesn't matter how much income you have if you're never removing the gold]
== Professional Girl Gamer ==
Yes I play games
Yes I'm a girl
get over it
The eye of Dylara materialises in your hands and flings itself around your neck, tightening incomprehensibly until it is irremovable.
Perfectly clean, this eyeball has been wrenched from the socket of Dylara. It has been animated by some unusual force, constantly looking around itself as if in shock or fear. It is bathed in a light covering of white flames that roll endlessly over its surface. A single chain of empyreal metal pierces either side of the eye, allowing it to be worn around the neck.
Actually, would it be possible for Bookbinders to work with Enchanters to produce single-charge spell tags that give a single enchanting charge to whatever they're read at, like sorcelglass scrolls?
EDIT: Also, not too fond of the idea of limiting it to non-public designs myself. Sometimes you want the ordinary designs, after all. It'll be up to the shopkeepers to decide whether or not to be unique or common. Also, there are probably enough public designs to not have shops stock all of them, so there'll definitely be variety either way.
Vive l'apostrophe!
Research:
I bashed the breeding hive and the Icewynd loop. I consider these common bashing grounds. From experience, I would estimate that either of these had not been bashed in 2-3 hours.
I hit the threshold after about 40 minutes of leisurely bashing. I am a demigoddess with a lvl 3 crit rune. I used kiwipunch, a kirigami, and a neutral damage type (no bonus, no malus).
I feel this is entirely too little bashing to reach any sort of cap. The bears and mammoths were dropping an average of 400-500 gold before I hit the threshold. Afterward, it ranged anywhere from 3-600. (It seems like the throttle is that you get 1-100% of what you would have gotten.)
I wasn't keeping track then, so I decided to head over to Feyranti and bash some jewel snakes and fanged spiders. There are 15 of each, pretty easy. People tend to forget about these guys, so they're often quite rich the first round.
First Round, with throttle:
Snakes:
426, 184, 814, 428, 86, 212, 167, 53, 289, 621, 1228, 546, 656, 179, 153.
== 6042 total, 402 average.
Spiders:
350, 531, 444, 828, 345, 500, 118, 121, 448, 141, 8, 377, 295, 131, 226.
== 4863 total, 324 average.
Second round, with throttle:
Snakes:
16, 3, 12, 23, 14, 17, 10, 9, 3, 16, 1, 14, 0, 4.
== 151 total, 10 average.
Spiders:
7, 0, 15, 5, 1, 9, 8, 9, 8, 11, 16, 2, 15, 17, 0.
== 123 total, 8 average.
I think both of these totals are skewed from what they should be.
While throttling brings a potential 25k+ haul down to 11k, that's still really high for what these are. The second round simply displays that a fraction of a pittance is a pittance - it's really low.
But realistically, the only time I'm going to kill more than one of these guys unless I'm questing. When I gold bash, I'll kill them once/rl-day and make bank, throttled or no. It is currently very_easy for experienced players to make 75k gold or more in an hour.
To me, it's very clear that the issue is the high totals that out-of-the-way mobs can accumulate, and it's only partially mitigated by this throttle. From my POV, the simple answer is to do away with this gold-accumulation-over-time system and bring back standard drops. I feel like it would be reasonable if the mobs from my example dropped 40-80 gold every time.
I realize though, that this might not be feasible. Depending on how it was implemented, this solution may involve re-assigning gold drops to every single mob/mobtype in the game. Therefore, I offer the secondary solution of bringing the accumulation time cap way, way down - as in 2 hours of accumulation max.
People will hate this, but they will also re-acclimate. Let absurd gold from mobs become a fond remembrance in Lusternia's eternal bitch about the good ol' days.
Vive l'apostrophe!
Avatar made through Picrew
though I'm mostly influencing for esteem/xp in my places
1) general process gets put in place where gold is sunk (vanishes instead of transferring between players) to rent out artifacts
2) request manse dweller add-on where renter can contact denizen instead of owner, gold still vanishes instead of transferring between players (maybe player can set permissions like ally- or org-only rentals, similar to shop bin permissions)
Does that still make a gold sink?
Avatar made through Picrew
I'm of the opinion that throttling new gold intake alone is insufficient, and yet one more 'solution' that while well-intentioned, is yet one more step of many that is really two steps back. It's an attempt to appease all parties, when appeasement itself limits the actual solution.
Those of us with crazy stockpiles of gold are going to have to take a hit one way or another. We have to, for the gameplay-health of those who follow. Even if it's not fair for us, it's fair (perhaps even necessary) for everybody else.
When everybody agrees the system is broken, why do we need to hold on to our broken gains? We earned them, sure, but apparently we earned them brokenly.
The solution, whatever it is, is obviously far more complex than just taking a chunk of gold away.
If you want to "level the field," then give us something worth spending on. Don't tar us all with the "abusing a broken system" label.
We have to be open to all options, not just the convenient ones.