Goldflation II

1568101114

Comments

  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here
    I'm all for deleting dingbat mines and refunding them, and for the record, I have a set of aethermines that I upkeep/harvest (not 125 or 300) but a decent amount. I could use the dingbats to get my aethersuit closer to finished. I have skin in the game here, so it's not like I have nothing to lose by this either.  

    As I pointed out before, I'm just trying to work within the bounds presented. So yeah, keep railing for refunds. I'm sure it's going to work eventually right? riiiight?

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • edited August 2016
    I am completely against freezing manses. I generally have 100,000 gold on me at any given time. The idea that I should have to pay for my manse, after already paying for my manse, because some people hoard over 30million gold is absurd and just punishing those who do not or cannot hoard gold.

    If we are going to start resorting to draconian measures to remove gold, then I will just retire and play elsewhere. I am here to have fun. Not be punished for being here and having fun.

    On a side note: Can we finish one project before starting another?
  • Dust (again, trying to think of a better name ... chocolate? joking!) would not be riftable but rather on your stat like dingbats. The cap would be on how much you generate through genies, traps, etc. (yes, like gold throttle).

    Again, as I've explained, manse artifacts are the only artifacts that you cannot tradein because they are transferable (and thus the policy of never refunding manse/ship upgrades/artifacts). Perhaps I'll consider a refund to the current manse owner (only) as a one-time only and never again solution but only after we've exhausted all other possibilities. I'm sure there are clever ideas out there! (And, if you're just going to post, no solution but refund-refund-refund, I'm going to ignore it.)
    image
    image
  • edited August 2016
    Nevermind, she just reiterated it. People need to read.
  • Demartel said:
    On a side note: Can we finish one project before starting another?
    This please. The combat/aff overhaul is still not even done. Monks are still not overhauled and the burns/etc update hasn't been done yet either along with whatever else remains.
  • edited August 2016
    Synkarin said:
    I'm all for deleting dingbat mines and refunding them, and for the record, I have a set of aethermines that I upkeep/harvest (not 125 or 300) but a decent amount. I could use the dingbats to get my aethersuit closer to finished. I have skin in the game here, so it's not like I have nothing to lose by this either.  

    As I pointed out before, I'm just trying to work within the bounds presented. So yeah, keep railing for refunds. I'm sure it's going to work eventually right? riiiight?
    This makes me feel like the whole thread is a bit futile. Estarra in the last thread said that she liked the dust idea. Then in this thread we get presented with the dust idea. Part way through it becomes obvious from Estarra that dust is happening. You then tell us that you were told to focus on dust and not changing mines even though you also thought it would help. Why ask players to make a group and make a thread for ideas if you are obviously ignoring half of them. At least give a reason why removing items is off the table. Is it against IRE policy? Too difficult with how code works?

    Edit: oh, just saw Estarra's post. Adding things to add things is bad game design and economies seem out of your depth. Glad to know plugging your ears is a solution.
  • ShaddusShaddus , the Leper Messiah Outside your window.
    If a retired character has a manse with dingbat mines and they're refunded, how is that going to work?
    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.
  • This may be a crazy idea but what if mines became exhausted and disappeared? Let's say you spend 10 dingbats on a mine and get 1000 comms worth and then the mine disappears. Current mines would have an equivalent of 30 uses (30,000 commodities) before disappearing.
    image
    image
  • Estarra has already explained twice now why aethermanse artifacts are untradein-able. It's because they can be transferred from person to person along with the manse.
    image
  • Othero said:
    Synkarin said:
    I'm all for deleting dingbat mines and refunding them, and for the record, I have a set of aethermines that I upkeep/harvest (not 125 or 300) but a decent amount. I could use the dingbats to get my aethersuit closer to finished. I have skin in the game here, so it's not like I have nothing to lose by this either.  

    As I pointed out before, I'm just trying to work within the bounds presented. So yeah, keep railing for refunds. I'm sure it's going to work eventually right? riiiight?
    This makes me feel like the whole thread is a bit futile. Estarra in the last thread said that she liked the dust idea. Then in this thread we get presented with the dust idea. Part way through it becomes obvious from Estarra that dust is happening. You then tell us that you were told to focus on dust and not changing mines even though you also thought it would help. Why ask players to make a group and make a thread for ideas if you are obviously ignoring half of them. At least give a reason why removing items is off the table. Is it against IRE policy? Too difficult with how code works?
    I've given reasons twice now why we don't refund manse/ship items--if no one cares to read them, that's not my fault! Correct, I like the dust idea but if an idea or ideas come up that really strike me as a much better solution, I am completely open to embracing it. However, this thread isn't a democratic vote on what to do, it's a convince Estarra on what to do thread (sorry, if that sounds harsh but that's really what it comes down to).
    image
    image
  • Shaddus said:
    If a retired character has a manse with dingbat mines and they're refunded, how is that going to work?
    Nothing would happen, the refund would be unavailable--retired characters shouldn't really benefit from manses (though I guess it's an argument against refunds because it is unfair to retired characters--there's absolutely no way that it would be rolled into the retirement system).
    image
    image
  • Demartel said:
    I am completely against freezing manses. I generally have 100,000 gold on me at any given time. The idea that I should have to pay for my manse, after already paying for my manse, because some people hoard over 30million gold is absurd and just punishing those who do not or cannot hoard gold.

    If we are going to start resorting to draconian measures to remove gold, then I will just retire and play elsewhere. I am here to have fun. Not be punished for being here and having fun.

    On a side note: Can we finish one project before starting another?
    We're not going to freeze manses.

    This project won't impact any timeline of any other project (because no one is going to be pulled to work on this) so please don't worry!
    image
    image
  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here
    They shouldn't have retired then!

    I also didn't think dingbats counted towards retirement anyway.

    As for the limited use - the main argument against any suggested solution is that it's already hard to make your investment back as it is, this would certainly seal that deal. 1k comms would never be worth 10 dingbats.

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • So...the solution to having too many commodities is to flood the market with commodities?  You want to give me 3,750,000 commodities?  You want Arimisia to have another 7,200,000 commodities?  And this is somehow going to fix the "there's too many commodities" issue?

    Makes sense.
  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here
    Ixchilgal said:
    So...the solution to having too many commodities is to flood the market with commodities?  You want to give me 3,750,000 commodities?  You want Arimisia to have another 7,200,000 commodities?  And this is somehow going to fix the "there's too many commodities" issue?

    Makes sense.

    It'd be more like a big dam breaking than an actual flood. It would surge the available commodities initially but then after those get used up (which admittedly would take a long time) things would slow down. When it comes down to it 7.2mil < infinite.

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • SylandraSylandra Join Queue for Mafia Games The Last Mafia Game
    Ixchilgal said:
    So...the solution to having too many commodities is to flood the market with commodities?  You want to give me 3,750,000 commodities?  You want Arimisia to have another 7,200,000 commodities?  And this is somehow going to fix the "there's too many commodities" issue?

    Makes sense.
    Give an alternative amount you'd be comfortable with. It stops mines from being an eternal glut of commodity-making machines. A cap limits their usefulness to a specific amount. If Estarra did this, what amount would be reasonable to you?
    Daraius said:
    "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."
  • 7.2 million is two years of nonstop harvesting for her (assuming an average of 40 per mine).  Maybe there's a better solution which is actually going to solve the problem.  Gee, I wonder what it could be.  But screw it, I'm sure it'll work out just fine in the end.  I mean, nothing bad has ever happened from telling her that something is a bad idea and it shouldn't be done....right?

  • Estarra said:
    This may be a crazy idea but what if mines became exhausted and disappeared? Let's say you spend 10 dingbats on a mine and get 1000 comms worth and then the mine disappears. Current mines would have an equivalent of 30 uses (30,000 commodities) before disappearing.
    I don't think allowing the current mines 30000 more commodities each is going to help at all, unless you plan on raising crafting costs again and implementing some of the major comm-sinks that have been bandied about. The goal is to make comms relevant again. Leaving ways to still accumulate tens of thousands won't help.

    I was kind of assuming that a full refund on the mines would involve taking the commodities stocks out as well, or at least make them decay in stock-rooms so we've got a brief 'use it or lose it' scenario before going back to relying on villages and generating excess stock through questing.

    If you really want to keep mines in some form, making them not-permanent is a good idea, and it is logical, but I think the numbers you're suggesting are high.
    #NoWireHangersEver

    Vive l'apostrophe!
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    edited August 2016
    I can say that nothing good has ever come of that line.

    I say this from experience.

    If you want to make changes to the proposal, come up with better ideas (not just retreading things that have already been turned down).  Angry retorts like yours just convince her that there is nothing better on the table and she might as well go with what she is thinking of doing.

    Edit: For clarity, this is in response to Ixchilgal, not the in between posts.
    image
  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here
    The Raffle/Lottery is a good idea as well.  


    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    Maybe add presents into one of those brackets every now and again? Once they no longer give gold, comms, or potions, making them more common might not be terribad.
  • I like the idea of lotteries for cosmetic/custom things. I think once/week is too frequent. Participation wanes over time. Maybe quarterly, or tied into special events?
    #NoWireHangersEver

    Vive l'apostrophe!
  • Talan said:

    Estarra said:
    This may be a crazy idea but what if mines became exhausted and disappeared? Let's say you spend 10 dingbats on a mine and get 1000 comms worth and then the mine disappears. Current mines would have an equivalent of 30 uses (30,000 commodities) before disappearing.
    I don't think allowing the current mines 30000 more commodities each is going to help at all, unless you plan on raising crafting costs again and implementing some of the major comm-sinks that have been bandied about. The goal is to make comms relevant again. Leaving ways to still accumulate tens of thousands won't help.

    I was kind of assuming that a full refund on the mines would involve taking the commodities stocks out as well, or at least make them decay in stock-rooms so we've got a brief 'use it or lose it' scenario before going back to relying on villages and generating excess stock through questing.

    If you really want to keep mines in some form, making them not-permanent is a good idea, and it is logical, but I think the numbers you're suggesting are high.
    It was just a random idea just to generate discussion so don't get too hung up on numbers.

    I like the idea of decaying commodities in stockroom but I think there are mechanical issues on why that's impossible (i.e., shop rifts).
    image
    image
  • So I had an, rough, idea for the gold issue:

    0) Remove the throttle and:
    1) Allow players to spend gold from a bank account (without any fees), and recreate a single bank account for the player, instead of one in each org.
    2) Remove any existing bank fees.
    3) A player may have a max amount of 10 million gold in the bank.
    4) Force players to use banks by:
    5) Any excess gold, or gold that is not in the bank, (any gold in your inv/pack) after X time (24 RL hours after the first moment of getting gold?) will take a random percent (20-100%?) of the excess gold and that percent will decay.
    5b) Release artifact (something cheap like 50-100cr?) that auto deposits gold into the player's bank account, assuming it has room.
    6) Shop gold is immune to the decay until it is picked up for the first time (so dropping/storing gold in a shop isn't a option).


    Now, step 5 might need to change to something, but to something that makes gold you are carrying disappear after some time if you don't put it in the bank. I also hate fees (and the fees are the reason people don't use the banks already along with not being able to directly use the gold), but some may say it might be needed.)

  • PortiusPortius Likes big books, cannot lie
    Weekly raffles turns them into a decent fountain for consumables. It's likely that any raffle without one of the bigger prizes would get less participation, but I think that's a good thing. It gives poorer people (probably new players, mostly) an opportunity to win something in a low stakes environment, and they're the ones who would get the most use out of tonics and such when bashing.

    I don't know how often they'd need to happen make an impact on the gold supply, of course. That's probably Estarra-only information, but it's something that the decision makers need to consider.
    Any sufficiently advanced pun is indistinguishable from comedy.
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    Could make it regular but longer, like twice an IG decade? Let tickets be bought for each given bracket, but keep most prizes hidden. Reveal one every now and then to generate hype, but only reveal the 'Win/Place/Show' prizes once they're drawn.
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    Estarra said:
    Talan said:

    Estarra said:
    This may be a crazy idea but what if mines became exhausted and disappeared? Let's say you spend 10 dingbats on a mine and get 1000 comms worth and then the mine disappears. Current mines would have an equivalent of 30 uses (30,000 commodities) before disappearing.
    I don't think allowing the current mines 30000 more commodities each is going to help at all, unless you plan on raising crafting costs again and implementing some of the major comm-sinks that have been bandied about. The goal is to make comms relevant again. Leaving ways to still accumulate tens of thousands won't help.

    I was kind of assuming that a full refund on the mines would involve taking the commodities stocks out as well, or at least make them decay in stock-rooms so we've got a brief 'use it or lose it' scenario before going back to relying on villages and generating excess stock through questing.

    If you really want to keep mines in some form, making them not-permanent is a good idea, and it is logical, but I think the numbers you're suggesting are high.
    It was just a random idea just to generate discussion so don't get too hung up on numbers.

    I like the idea of decaying commodities in stockroom but I think there are mechanical issues on why that's impossible (i.e., shop rifts).
    Actually, shop rifts have a comm cap.  Anything past that has to go on the floor (and would then be subject to decay in this scenario).  I would have to ditch a bunch of wood if you made that change though, I have been floor-saving what does not fit in the three shop rifts I have access to.

    It would be one way to get a glut of comms out of the game, leaving whatever is saved in rifts, with time to sell/use the excess comms.
    image
  • Ayisdra said:
    So I had an, rough, idea for the gold issue:

    0) Remove the throttle and:
    1) Allow players to spend gold from a bank account (without any fees), and recreate a single bank account for the player, instead of one in each org.
    2) Remove any existing bank fees.
    3) A player may have a max amount of 10 million gold in the bank.
    4) Force players to use banks by:
    5) Any excess gold, or gold that is not in the bank, (any gold in your inv/pack) after X time (24 RL hours after the first moment of getting gold?) will take a random percent (20-100%?) of the excess gold and that percent will decay.
    5b) Release artifact (something cheap like 50-100cr?) that auto deposits gold into the player's bank account, assuming it has room.
    6) Shop gold is immune to the decay until it is picked up for the first time (so dropping/storing gold in a shop isn't a option).


    Now, step 5 might need to change to something, but to something that makes gold you are carrying disappear after some time if you don't put it in the bank. I also hate fees (and the fees are the reason people don't use the banks already along with not being able to directly use the gold), but some may say it might be needed.)

    I'd rather see we had something to spend the gold on before doing this, to be honest. Somewhere further along the lines, perhaps, but I don't think it's quite there yet.
    image
  • @Estarra are there any plans for additional things to spend our gold on?

    As mentioned dust is just kinda shifting the promo item generation to a different currency, but I don't see anything right now that seems to be really talked about that's actually going to get me spending money expect donating it to Serenwilde to help pay for defences if the costs outweigh what we generate which isn't exactly filling me with enthusiasm cause... well you might as well just have the org tax my gold income.
This discussion has been closed.