PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Shleepy on October 10, 2004, 11:54:42 pm
-
OK, now, before you diss yet another thread about somehow making a nice economy, please READ the entire thing.
When the word \"economy\" is mentioned about an MMORPG, what do you think of? I dunno about you, but I think about the relation between the units of money and items in the game, specifically items that you don\'t buy from NPC\'s, but from people. Indeed, inflation and deflation certainly exist in games because of this relation, and one could argue that MMORPG economies are very realistic and complex. Yet, think about this for a moment... this economical MMORPG system is not especially complex; it\'s just hard to control. Maybe some of you have heard that the Everquest economy was in trouble from the very start of the game. GM\'s (game masters) actually had to pose as players to regulate it by selling/buying items for a certain amount of money.
WHY DOESN\'T PS HAVE THE WORLD\'S FIRST REAL COMPLEX MMORPG ECONOMY? In case you didn\'t notice that the previous sentence was completely in capitals, I\'ll explain: that is the real point of this thread.
Please note that MOST (though definitely not all) of what I\'m about to say is certainly up for argument and change, but I\'d like PS to have some sort of similar system.
I am but a n00b, but the stuff that PS will integrate into the game sounds awesome, and lots of it is pretty original. Part of this is the seeming focus on jobs and \"businesses.\" This, of course, means that the economy will be pretty hard to regulate and will require quite a bit of experimentation to make it stable and playable. Well, as long as PS\'s economy is hard to regulate, anyway, why don\'t we create a complicated system? What I mean by this is make the economy extremely realistic by MMOPRG standards. For example, the stuff that NPC\'s sell will vary in price according to the city/place that the NPC\'s are in (i.e. the scarcity of that product in that place).
What this implies: there will have to be people that work for the \"government\" of both, the entire game and specific places/cities. I guess a job would have to be \"trader,\" and they\'d have to carry stuff from one city to the other. What I mean by this is that those traders would carry goods produced by either NPC\'s or players from one place and carry them to sell to another place, producing profits for themselves and reducing/increasing the price of those goods, related goods (or as they say in Economics, \"complementary goods\" ), and items which are made using those goods. Being a trader would also be cool because they\'d have to travel long distances (using vehicles or animals, eventually?) and would thus encounter NPC mobs and player thieves. This would also create opportunities for groups/guilds of pick-pockets and just plain assassins. If that isn\'t cool, I don\'t know what is :)
Of course, this wouldn\'t be that simple. There would have to be a few economists working for the game, and this could be done in a couple ways. First of all, volunteers (such as I), could help get this system started. The programmers would need help figuring out the formulas for the price changes of NPC goods. Those same volunteers could also monitor how much trade is going on and how the value of goods needs to change, and would help the programmers AND the players stabilize the economy. Secondly, there should be a series of jobs relating to the economy in the game. I already mentioned that there would have to be traders. There\'s already plans for smiths, tailers, and stuff like that, and your average adventurers would also hunt and get goods that are 1) required for blacksmithing, tailoring, etc and 2) sold to the NPC\'s, with prices varying by WHICH NPC\'s you sell them to (for example, a librarian would not buy metal for good prices or maybe at all) and HOW MANY of those items the NPC already has. This would make the adventurers travel to other places to sell items to different NPC\'s, and/or stimulate the economy by selling it to players. Note that if the game gets big enough, not too many merchant NPC\'s will be needed (or so I judge by the current plans for the game system). Now, other economical jobs would also include things like businessmen, but those would have to be provided for select volunteer economists. Amateur businessmen would obviously pop up, too, but they would have other official jobs, especially the ones that make items.
The way the economists would regulate stuff is by buying up items (that need to have the prices stabilized or changed) from players and selling them at the prices they want to. Competition from \"amateur businessmen\" and whatever would come into play, so the volunteer economists wouldn\'t completely be in charge of the economy; they would just make sure it doesn\'t collapse, although occasional random changes in the economy would be excellent for varying game-play and make it much more exciting (kinda like a stock market, hehe).
The final thing that I want to just touch upon in this post is the supply/demand issue. The economy obviously functions upon this factor, so businesses and economists would have great impact upon early minor patches to the game. In Everquest, for example, brewing was almost completely useless; in PS, we\'d need to fix that, and programmers would have to occasionally respond to reports that volunteer economists would make, and adjust the need/want of players to buy certain items by changing the effects and the general usefulness of items.
That is all for now. What I\'d love is for developers to respond to this, or just email me at geevil@gmail.com. Fellow players/fans of PS, please post with your comments, but don\'t go too crazy with this post and complain. ;)
-
I\'ve actually given this type of thing some thought, and I think it would be much simpler and almost as effective to limit the amount of money in circulation. What this would entail is that random encounters would only drop as much as the amount exited the economy through purchases. Or, if there was too much money in the economy, shopkeepers would give store credit for the time being until there was enough to give (this would be in extreme cases, because it would be pretty annoying). The stability of the money supply should keep prices fairly stable, so that supply and demand can determine prices. Also, bank deposits would be able to recirculate, although banks (just like in our current banking system), will keep a certain percentage of their money on reserve). From my experiences it it inflation that really hurts mmorpg economies.
The consequences of this would be that it would be uncommon to receive money for easy quests.
There would be enough money in the system so that hoarding would most likely not be a factor. If a player does accumulate too much wealth so that it hurts the economy, the devs could offer them a powerful weapon at an extremely high price. This would mean there is still an incentive to get rich, but the effect on the economy could be remedied.
One thing that is probably necessary for this to work would be for players to have to buy things all the time, such as food, armor and weapon repairs, and arrows, to ensure that money circulates.
(Can\'t wait to get my economics degree)
-
Well, actually, I implied that there would be a limited amount of money in circulation, but completely forgot to write it. However, considering the fact that not many people play the game now (since you can\'t even really call it a game, yet), we\'ll need to add more money in circulation later on. Obviously, we can make money worth more/less, but you have to admit that at one point, once the game becomes big (and I hope it does so quickly), it\'s far too hard to keep the economy working by itself. Not only would the kind of system I proposed be fun, interesting, and original, but it fits the current plans for the game.
About the easy quests not making good money: If you\'re saying that\'s a good thing, I completely agree with your viewpoint. I believe what you are implying there is that you don\'t like the \"trader\" job idea, and I see where you are coming from. However, the \"quests\" that they do would really have to increase in difficulty. What I mean by this is that a starting out trader may, initially, make good money for doing a simple quest between two cities that are close by, but that\'s only for a n00b character. As he gains skill points and rises in levels (I\'m not sure if PS even uses the level system, but you know what I mean), the money he earns with the starting out quests would be extremely tiny. However, the profits made from such a quest would increase greatly if he goes between cities that are very far away.
Basically, there would be a \"global economy\" in the game. Each little place in the PS lands could produce some things cheaper and more effectively than other places. For example, not only would City A have goods used in tailoring drop very commonly in the mobs surrounding the city, but considering this, one could 1) tailer in City A because it\'s so cheap and easy and 2) traders could make money going from City A to City B, either selling the goods for tailoring or selling the trailored goods, themselves. This would create an extremely realistic model of specialization, but of course, not EVERYTHING would be completely specialized and not all tailors in City B would go completely bankrupt.
Continuing with the thought of limiting money, my system would easily implement it, and there\'s no reason not to do both with succes. Your last comment about making sure that players would have to buy things is completely on the mark. And that is why I think that both our ideas combined would work so well.
-
Wait, I just realized what you mean about doing easy quests, and I don\'t think you were trying to diss my idea :)
However, I feel that the last post is still very informative, so please read it, anyway.
-
For once, I was actually expecting the economy to work this way, but maybe I was wrong. :)
Anyway, the only unrealistic part is that the noob trader\'s return would vary depending on the level of said trader. This just doesn\'t sound right, because nobody is going to give a noob more for the same quest just because it\'s a noob.
What I\'d expect is that, as in any other game economy, the amount of money to be made is low, because the risks are low also. As noob, you don\'t have much and don\'t get much, but it\'ll still be a bit. Then you slowly accumulate money and get more experienced, so that you can buy enough to try out either bigger transfers, or take greater risks. That\'s how it is done in any SP game I\'ve playd so far, and it actually is very realistic IMO. If the risk is low, anyone can do it, so the reward or profit margin will be low, because there are so many ppl. doing it. You can either go huge, so that you transport ridiculous amounts of stuff at low margins, most likely instantly saturating the market (if there actually _are_ ways to transport these ridiculous amounts), or you can take up greater risks, which will be more lucrative, because less ppl. are able to do it. This way, noobs would have a source of revenue, simply because more experienced ppl. will not bother doing it. And if they do, it doesn\'t hurt, because they will not be better off than noobs, and will not make much more as well. No need to artificially give noobs more money or artificially reduce it for more experienced ppl. There is a basic difference between money and experience, because you\'ll get the same amount of money for selling a shirt, whether you\'ve just started or you\'ve done so for years. However, you\'ll get more experience for doing something the first time then for doing it the 100000000th time.
My 0.02 tria, now give me that shirt. ;)
-
Woah, I see the fatal flaw in my explanation.
I didn\'t mean that a lower level guy will get more money for doing the same quest/job. What I MEANT was that to the higher level guy, doing the lower level quest would be virtually worthless because the amount of money he makes will not fill his higher-level needs. Face it, the higher level person will need higher level stuff, which will obviously cost more.
Also, I don\'t think I mentioned that doing the higher level jobs will become far more dangerous, since you\'d be going on the longer and far more dangerous routes.
-
First, several mmorpg\'s already have massive, real world economies. EQ, SWG, AC (haven\'t heard much about AC 2 but would imagine that one also), FF XI, DAoC, and one other that I can\'t remember the name of all have huge economies. This includes massive amounts of people tradeskilling and others making a living by simply buying and selling. I can guaruntee that several other imminent mmorpg\'s will have massive economies, including EQ2, WOW, and quite possibly D&DO.
Second, inflation cannot be stopped. It happens to every mmorpg. Some things can be done to help control this, including gambling and a tribute system, but it will never be stopped. Too many people can figure out how to work a system. As much as you think you can stop it, I\'m sorry, you can\'t. There is no way to only allow a certain amount of money into the economy. Unless the devs decide that they will limit it by simply having all the NPC\'s server wide stop buying things. In which case, it is possible, and also really dumb and boring.
Third, in about 2 weeks after the CB release there will be 0 return for noob tradeskillers. If there were then people could make money too easily and inflation would skyrocket. The longer CB has been out, the longer it will take to become proficient enough at a tradeskill to make a profit.
Fourth, you can\'t have seperate economies in different cities. Mmorpg economies are player driven, and players don\'t typically stay in one city forever. If they did then it would get really boring really quick.
Fifth, you can\'t have any way for noob players to make decent money. Period. No quests or tradeskills can make decent money for noobs, otherwise inflation skyrockets.
And lastly:
In Everquest, for example, brewing was almost completely useless
ROFL!!! Brewing was not even close to completely useless in EQ. _EVERY_ piece of cultural smithing and tailoring _required_ a temper or dye (I think that was the tailoring counterpart) which could only be made from brewing. Every tradeskill in EQ with the exception of fishing was useful. Fishing was still useful, just to a lesser extent of all the others.
That\'s all for now.
:emerald:
-
Arcane, time to couner-argue all your points.
Brewing in EQ: It WAS almost useless. Yes, I realize that tailoring, especially, used some high-level brewing stuff. Yet, it was very easy to become a master brewer and only a few were needed on the entire server for those rare tailored items. In case you don\'t remember, in EQ, it pretty much came down to quests for good items. I remember a few of those items that needed brewery, and not only were many master tailors capable of making it, themselves, but those tailored items were nowhere near as good as some fairly easy quests that made people who took those quests a lot more money than those tailors.
About your first point: none of those MMORPG\'s had realistic economies, and I already said that EQ\'s economy was so screwed up at the beginning that they needed GM\'s to pose as players and sell stuff, and they didn\'t even tell anyone they were doing it because they realized that their system was too simple to work.
Second point: Inflation doesn\'t NEED to be stopped, it needs to be CONTROLLED to some extent. I\'d even WANT inflation and deflation to happen every once in a while, it\'s a part of a realistic economy, but we don\'t need to flood the game with money, unless it\'s necessary at the time. Of course, things out of the developers\' control will happen. I don\'t doubt this. BUT, it\'d be nice to have a way of fixing things. I also really don\'t see how your comment about NPC\'s stopping buying things is at all relevent.
Third point: Well, of course there will virtually be 0 return for complete n00b tradeskillers. I don\'t see your point there. I doubt that too many people would go crazy and become masters at their trade too quickly, since they wouldn\'t even have the financial means to do so.
Fourth point: you can, it\'s been done before, and it\'s still player driven. As long as we\'re on the EQ example, remember where trade was concentrated back in the pre-bazaar days? Well, actually, a couple places, depending on the server you played on. On most, EC was the trading point, making Freeport the center of EQ. And then, BOOM, bazaar was opened, and everybody just moved their characters there. Note that many many many people just keep idle characters there selling things. In some cases, those characters stay in the same \"city\" (well, zone in EQ) for weeks. However, did people still go from city to city? Of course! And don\'t forget that in PS, you will be able to open stores and stuff like that, so that\'s a permanent thing, which will HAVE to stay in one place. That still doesn\'t mean the owners will have to stay there all the time. You can put an NPC to work for you, or something like that. My system wouldn\'t even be fully implemented for a long, long time, so the game would hopefully be pretty well-developed.
Fifth point: Simply said, I agree. The quests that the n00bs would do would not make them much money. I think I used the word \"decent\" before about the amount of money they make, but by that I mean enough to buy food and stuff like that. I don\'t mean that they\'ll be able to do the quests over and over to make enough money to buy even remotely good stuff. However, they\'ll be able to rise in level so they CAN do hard quests and jobs that WILL get them good money.
On a final note: you mentioned the word \"inflation\" a lot of times. In a controlled economy, inflation should not be a big issue. Also, like taltiren mentioned, it\'s fairly easy to keep it from happening with a limited supply of money. The developers can always add money if needed, but inflation should NOT be an issue and SHOULD be avoided. Nowadays, standards for MMORPG\'s are increasing, and considering the amount of experimentation already done, it\'s obvious that in a completely player controlled economy, inflation IS an issue. BUT, it CAN and SHOULD be controlled.
-
Shleepy all of the ideas you posted in the first post of this thread is all fundamental ideas. If you want I can explain why.
complex is like following the laws of supply and demand and following the production curves.
-
Ya, I agree; they aren\'t that complicated.
Supply/Demand would have to be followed, though, but following production curves just doesn\'t apply to MMORPG\'s, unless you\'re talking about microeconomics as it applies to individual businesses, in which case that\'s a given.
I\'m not trying to sound smart or introduce too many new adeas, quite frankly. There\'s only a few things that I want implemented which haven\'t been done in other MMORPG\'s, and the rest was basically the fundamental reasons for them.
-
Doh, and how do these few changes constitute \"a REAL economy\" versus the existing economies that are pretty much the same minus these few changes?
-
LOL, I think it\'s time for me to delete this thread and make a much less vague one :) ... but let\'s see if I can still repair this one.
Sorry guys, especially ArcaneFalcon and Kuiper7986. Only now did I realize where you guys are coming from.
I named the thread \"a REAL economy,\" and some of the stuff I mentioned in the first post really made it seem like I want a completely different system of economy from any MMORPG ever created and make it absolutely like real life. And then, when I got comments that I didn\'t expect that argue with, not my main ideas, but with back-up info and stuff like that, I was somewhat surprised. For some reason, it didn\'t really hit me that what you guys, except for taltiren, are arguing that my system will not create some sort of super realistic economy. And I see what ArcaneFalcon was saying about the major MMORPG economies. OF COURSE, they\'re complex economies that work, but in my opinion, there\'s just nothing exciting about them.
Time for an explanation. I made some mistakes in naming the thread and some of the introductory stuff in my first post. What I\'m really going for is a slight variation on the current MMORPG economy system that will not be simply like moderately advanced barter (which is what it is in virtually all current MMORPG\'s). What I basically meant by \"real economy\" is a simplified sort of modern economy. It\'s pretty hard to say what I\'m going for, but let me sum up my points.
PARTIALLY SPECIALIZED ECONOMY: I imagine we\'ll have different styles, different races, etc for cities/areas, so why not actually have them be a bit different? Mobs would drop items in some places that are different (or rarer) in other places. This would make the transportation of those items fastest to certain cities, making those cities \"centers\" for those items and goods that are made with those items. Please remember that the reason for me writing this thread is that I want this system to work well with PS, and in my opinion, it would. Since people will have specialized jobs and will be able to open stores and stuff like that, a specialized economy would work pretty well. It would also make different cities special, and they would not just be useless places where a bunch of NPC merchants sell cheap, common stuff. Some people (depending on their jobs) would actually have to commute between cities and travel within cities to find, for example, merchants that sell certain items for cheap. \"Brands\" would sort of be created, especially if guilds were to be formed based on people\'s crafts and the most efficient guilds that sell things in large quantities for cheap would get more business. Thus, competition would be encouraged. I realize that a monopoly would be a thing to watch out for (although an interesting thing), but since I want a more or less controlled economy, it wouldn\'t pose much of a threat.
A FEW DIFFERENT JOBS WOULD BE CREATED: \"Businessmen\" (I refered to them as Traders in my first post) could travel from city to city buying/selling things, from/to NPC\'s and/or players. There could be quests for them to do or just simple business interactions, but it wouldn\'t be easy for a n00b to make a lot of money. Once that n00b becomes higher level, though, he can take long, dangerous trips (because they would have to travel through dangerous places and because bands of thieves and pick-pockets would be encouraged to rob them) to other cities, which WOULD get them larger amounts of money. One thing this would depend on is that thieves/pickpockets would have the abilities to do this to a businessman \"class,\" and that\'s a pretty nifty idea, if I may say so myself ;) As of now, since you won\'t be able to just PvP anyone, this would make those thieves actually successful.
SUPPLY/DEMAND: This is not a new idea in the least. ALL economies function on this idea, but I just want to mention that \"economists\" would have to help developers take care of this early on so that items and tradeskills would be balanced within the game and would heavily depend on other items/tradeskills.
LIMITED SUPPLY OF MONEY: The developers would only release new money every once in a while, when lots of new people join the game, for example, but the supply would be very finite. I will quote taltiren because I agree that the developers should \"limit the amount of money in circulation. What this would entail is that random encounters would only drop as much as the amount exited the economy through purchases.\" This would control the purchasing power of the people, and create a \"circulation of capital\" effect.
VARIATION: A concern is what I\'ve mentioned up till now is just plain boring. I disagree. The economy WILL, just like in real life, fluctuate. Yes, in MMO\'s, the economies just tend to have inflations because there isn\'t a limited supply of money and people can just do quests over and over or kill easy mobs that drop a lot of money to make themselves rich. In a controlled economy with a limited supply of money, this can\'t be a problem. What do I mean by a \"controlled\" economy? It would be regulated by developers and (as I called them in my first post) \"volunteer economists.\" Wouldn\'t it be nice to have an economy where the value of money and items changes from time to time, and not just go down? It\'s possible, pretty easy, and would make the economy an actual part of life, not just a factor in considering the uber l00t that you want to buy. People would use banks as financial safe-havens and not necessarily just for storing items and money that\'s too heavy to lug around. There could even be interest rates in banks and stuff like that :)
I guess that last paragraph there is the most important, so please read it carefully.
Once again, very sorry to those people that I harshly argued against; I misunderstood your arguments and did not defend myself correctly, and even incorrectly explained myself, in the first place.
Feel free to criticize this, and try to base stuff on this post, and not necessarily my previous ones in this thread.
-
well the thing is that ub3r players hoard money, and that money is as good as stuck in a bank.
That thing about online games and real-life is that online we dont eat, dont need to change clothes twice a day, dont need to pay taxes, dont need to buy fuel for the car.
This small things add up to sometimes less than half or more than half of the average man\'s salary. This money goes back to a estranged goverment which uses it to buy/make weapons, hire post men, make roads, invest in hopeless causes, or just have enough to fill a swimming pool. the ammount that is paid to the people who built the pool is used to buy food and stuff like computers or golf-clubs and pay taxes. and it continues in a cycle
and with games not haveing taxes or daily expenses i infer that it is impossiable to have a proper realistic working economy in a game no matter what you do, unless you have the game simulate basic every day expenses theres no way its gonna happen.
besides this has ALL been discused before.
-
Originally posted by snow_RAveN
besides this has ALL been discused before.
I like Shleepy anyway for trying to add detail to his idea, but it gives us something to talk about nun-the-less.
:]
Actually, I think NPC\'s are the means in controlling most economies in games, unfortunately it\'s mostly noobs buying from the NPC\'s because there are players who will sell it cheaper. that is imo the main reason people say npc shops aren\'t needed, however if you make the economy fluctuate with trading of pc chars then you will not have lots of ppl setting up shops all over the place.
What I mean is every trade that deals with 1 player buying something from another player should be factored into the economy on a zone basis, so all the NPC\'s shops that sell that particular item, the prices will be effected on how many people are buying a particular item & how much they are buying it for, regardless if they are buying from an NPC or if they are buying from another player. that would definitely control inflation. because if the NPC price becomes to low, the player stores will pack up & move to were the NPC\'s sell for a higher price. Also to make sure that the prices do not plummet into the ground by people buying stuff for cheaper from players then npc\'s you would need to factor in how many people are buying an item. that way if people are buying allot of items in a certain city because it is cheep there then prices will skyrocket. however, maybe there should be a set margin for the entire server client, averaging all of the zone\'s markets & to not let prices fluctuate to rapidly.
This would make many players traveling salesmen or peddlers I think they were called. people should have the ability to purchase large wagons to hall items around in like a store. it would discourage people from creating \"mule chars\" because you will have to be moving from place to place most often...
Also, you should be able to purchase a list of \"suggested retail prices\" for that zone @ a particular time from npc\'s....
-
Zeraph hit the spot precisely :) Completely agree with ya there, bud, and I think you covered snow_RAveN\'s concerns pretty well, but I\'ll make some points, too.
This is a long thread, and I this has been mentioned before, but like snow_RAveN said, daily expenditures and stuff like that are important. In my opinion, it would NOT be that hard to create things like that. Food is in most MMO\'s, and if we make food (and other stuff that we can think of) more desirable and increase the want/need for similar stuff, that\'s \"daily\" expenses right there.
People hoarding money should not be a big issue with a controlled economy. Not only this, but the modern world economy really functions on those people that hoard money! The world market runs on those guys like Bill Gates and the other multi-billioners that keep their money in stocks and banks. Banks are pretty important, by the way. Loans and interest rates would be a VERY interesting touch to an MMORPG economy.
I realize that this kind of stuff has all been discussed, but why not make a nice, collective list of thoughts about the economy and making it really friggin cool?
One thing that snow_RAveN and a few of the other people don\'t understand about me is that I REALIZE that MMORPG\'s don\'t quite function like real life and they have economical systems of their own. As I previously mentioned, those economical systems are basically moderately-advanced forms of barter (just with currency), and there\'s MANY concepts that could be applied to make the PlaneShit economy 1) original 2) realistic/\"modern\" 3) FUN.
-
Ok. A simple economic plan. Of course all of economics is based on supply and demand. Who cares of some players hoard money. If they hoard money then they must not need a whole lot of items to live. Here\'s a good layout.
1. Have something in the game check item variables.
Example: (bread = 2 gold: supply 150% (surplus), demand 50%) In this case the bread would stay the same price because the supply and demand even out.
2. The variables would be checked once a month. This would be in case someone finds a really easy way to accumulate a lot of items and then selling them to the highest bidder. They\'d only be able to do that for a month and then the price would change.
The bad thing is how to figure up the supply percent and the demand percent. This is easy...you simply see how much bread was sold and how much bread was made.
You\'re all right...economics is not complex and I\'m an English major. Any economics majors disagree with my assessment?
-
I\'ve taken a bunch of economics classes, and I\'ve never seen supply and demand represented as percentages. I\'m really not sure what that means. Could you elaborate?
-
I think Mkt2015 is getting mixed up. Basically he is trying to say that supply and demand are equal, therefore the price stays the same. His little 50/150 thing doesn\'t really work in that demand is half of what it normally is and the supply has 50% extra. That would result in a massive price drop. To be equal they would need to be 100/100.
-
I think that before we tackle the economy model to be applied in game, we must first be more aware of the economic aspect of the setting. So far the only thing that lies in front of us is the currency. We know we have trias, hexas, octas and circles.
But we do not know if the economic model is similar to the feudalism and manorialism of the Middle Ages, or if the economy is regulated by the Yliakum government through the strict control of Guilds, or if the suggested \"post-Adam Smith\" concepts would be applicable in a medieval fantasy setting.
A lot has been discussed about \"businessmen\", but if you ask me, there would be no such thing as \"businessmen\" in Yliakum. Crafters, smiths, merchants, yes. But not businessmen. And in the days of yore (When speaking of \"free market\", \"variation according to supply and demand\", \"inflation\", and such terms were totally unknown) the prices were not so liberally established.
Simplifying the economy in excess will lead to it being dull and uninspiring. On the other hand, crafting an intricate and complex system will lead to it being exploited by a few and, let us be honest, how many of the players DO understand the complexity of world economics? This ignorance will undoubtedly end up with the system not being properly used.
So where do we draw the line? Is it truly worth it to spend hour after hour of brainstorming about Yliakum\'s economics when probability favours the chance of it not being properly accounted for by the players? Would a more automatised and less realistic system suffice for the needs of the gaming community? And the King of Questions: How much does the in-game economy contribute to the gaming experience as a whole, knowing that its hyerarchical importance is not as massively recognised?
Just some thoughts.
- Golbez
-
Mkt2015, I\'m not going to comment further because I do disagree with you on many levels and I don\'t see how your system would be useful. I don\'t mean to sound like a jerk, but what are are saying doesn\'t make any sense.
I think what we were discussing here (or at least what I tried to say) is how screwed up many other mmorpg economies get. I used to play swg, and after a six month hiatus from the game, prices for everything useful had risen significantly, whereas most items became practically worthless, since there was no demand for them. Golbez, it is not that having a good economic structure would add much to gameplay, it is that having an economy fail in a game takes a lot away from what the devs intended.
I have a feeling that no matter how the devs try to make the economy, it will certainly have aspects of modern economic policies included. To be honest I think it would be far more complicated to try to recreate a feudal economy (basically people farming and giving tribute to the lord) than to apply some modern economic norms (such as entrepreneurship among crafters and a limited money supply).
-
For starters I will say that the percentages, when looking back on them, wouldn\'t make sense. However, it is still based on a system that works, even if that system doesn\'t make sense. I\'m working with the idea that in a balanced economic model price would be 100% and demand would be 100% so if one was 150% and the other 50%, they would balance out. If there was a huge surplus of Eggs in the world (the real world), the price would drop because the demand would not be high. In time, however, the price would go back to the way it was because there would no longer be a surplus. Duh!!!
I don\'t care about all of these different economic models. A system of balance works for everything. A fighter has to balance out between offense and defense for instance.
What the system would have to have is a definitive cost for certain items at the very beginning. Depending on how many people end up playing the game and how the game is played will affect the cost. Costs never remain the same. When your grandparents went to see a movie it cost them 10 cents so how come I have to pay $7.50? Inflation. I don\'t know how inflation would work in an MMORPG because resources are unlimited, unlike oil in the real world. I\'m guessing that that would mean there would be no inflation. In that case, the cost of all items initially would remain the same. Would they go up and down based on supply and demand? Yes, but in the end, everything balances out.
Here are my comments for the other in this thread of collected thoughts:
The only way to have a realistic economy is if natural resources aren\'t unlimited. It\'s a game, so they probably will be unlimited.
I doubt anyone would want to pay money to a lord or king or whatever. If I hoard my money will I be beheaded because I don\'t pay the king every month? I truly doubt it.
I haven\'t played other MMORPGs except for Runescape which has a standard price for all items. Not bad. It\'s useful. Maybe the reason why the other MMORPGs sucked when it came to an economic formula was because they tried to make it too complex. Economics is not complex! If you can\'t hear me....ECONOMICS IS NOT COMPLEX!! Supply and demand. Period.
-
Originally posted by Mkt2015
For starters I will say that the percentages, when looking back on them, wouldn\'t make sense. However, it is still based on a system that works, even if that system doesn\'t make sense. I\'m working with the idea that in a balanced economic model price would be 100% and demand would be 100% so if one was 150% and the other 50%, they would balance out. If there was a huge surplus of Eggs in the world (the real world), the price would drop because the demand would not be high. In time, however, the price would go back to the way it was because there would no longer be a surplus. Duh!!!
So, we would be using a system even if we know it does not make any sense whatsoever? I hardly consider that a viable alternative.
Originally posted by Mkt2015
I doubt anyone would want to pay money to a lord or king or whatever. If I hoard my money will I be beheaded because I don\'t pay the king every month? I truly doubt it.
There are no lords or kings in Yliakum as of yet, so a feudal model should not be applied directly. What I suggest is doing a research on the economic system of the Middle Ages, and adapting it to the setting of PlaneShift.
Besides, taxes and tributes could turn out to be an interesting idea. And I have a few thoughts about the form of punishment for the evasion of such laws (Always trying to avoid the concept of \"Jail\", since it generally leads to the killing of the roleplaying).
Originally posted by Mkt2015
I haven\'t played other MMORPGs except for Runescape which has a standard price for all items.
That one is not an RPG.
Originally posted by Mkt2015
Maybe the reason why the other MMORPGs sucked when it came to an economic formula was because they tried to make it too complex. Economics is not complex! If you can\'t hear me....ECONOMICS IS NOT COMPLEX!! Supply and demand. Period.
I am a bit dumbfounded. If the only game you have played is Runescape, how come you are so aware of how much \"the other MMORPGs sucked\"? I am curious as to how you are so acquainted with those economic systems if you never played the games in question.
And the \"Economics is not complex\"? Tell that to the poor fellows that study economy for five years at university. Supply and demand is just a fraction of what economy entails. There is also Micro and Macroeconomy, depending on the guvernamental regulations, logistics, financial math, statistics, world and regional laws of economics, marketing, international finance, sociology, psychology, and a whole bunch of other pertinent matters without which economy collapses. And no, not all of it revolves around \"Supply and demand\".
It is akin to saying that Engineering is all about math. And trust me, it is not.
- Golbez
-
If economics is just supply and demand, then you can bet that supply and demand will be very complex :)
One of the keys to a fun game is balance (but not necessarily \"equality of all choices\") For prices to behave in a realistic manner, things need to be set up in a very careful way. If it was easy, it would be done a lot more.
-
There are many, many people that would dispute you in saying that the game-that-will-not-be-named is not an RPG. I don\'t want to get into what an RPG because that\'s not what this thread is.
I have not played any other MMORPG.
Yes there is micro and macro economics...and all of those other things you mentioned in an economy, but it still boils down to supply and demand. People look at those aspects simpy to try and understand supply and demand. Why a million people have to have a tickle-me-elmo? That is a good question that many people tried to answer. A friend of mine and I had a discussion once as to why GTA3 was still $40 even though it should\'ve been a greatest hits by now. He said that enough people are still buying it at that price. I told him that that makes sense, but if it was $20 many more people would buy it. Wow, you mean lowering the price of an item actually makes more people want to buy it? Duh!
I\'m not disputing that there isn\'t:
\"guvernamental regulations, logistics, financial math, statistics, world and regional laws of economics, marketing, international finance, sociology, psychology, and a whole bunch of other pertinent matters without which economy collapses\"
You are right that all of those things have to do with the economy, but almost all of those things are the nitty-gritty technical details. There was an episode of the apprentice where a person with a degree in business created this entire model of how to sell something. In the end she simply said that it has to do with the price of the item and how much people will want it. Duh! When it comes to the economy in real life it is good to know all about pychology and sociology and government regulations, etc., but this is a game...a game in which you don\'t have to advertise to sell something to someone, a game in which a lot of people who play the game just want to go on quests, kill things and then get better stats.
Would it be nice to have a REAL economy in a game? No. I play games to get away from real life. If you make the game too real it kills the fun aspect of it.
-
I have to agree with taltiren and some of the others (but especially him because his last post was right to the point).
Mkt2015, no matter what you say, MMORPG economies are complex. You even mentioned that inflation does not exist in them or something like that. If you have EVER played an MMORPG, you\'d know that is, by far, the biggest issue in the MMORPG economies.
Secondly, you said that you play games to get away from real life. Go right ahead. MANY players play MMORPG\'s because they like trading and stuff like that. That\'s part of the ECONOMY, but it doesn\'t mean that YOU specifically have to pay strict attention to it; just go with the flow. In case you don\'t know, a nice 99% of the public really has no idea how the economy operates; oh well, they\'re living, aren\'t they?
Oh, and one other thing. I think that a controlled and LIMITED capital economy will certainly be good. It will keep inflation down easily, and there won\'t be the issue of, as someone said, \"resources are unlimited, unlike oil in the real world.\" Not only can capital be limited and be part of a circular flow, but we could control ITEMS, as well. It\'s not that hard, people.
-
Originally posted by Golbez
Originally posted by Mkt2015
I doubt anyone would want to pay money to a lord or king or whatever. If I hoard my money will I be beheaded because I don\'t pay the king every month? I truly doubt it.
There are no lords or kings in Yliakum as of yet, so a feudal model should not be applied directly. What I suggest is doing a research on the economic system of the Middle Ages, and adapting it to the setting of PlaneShift.
Besides, taxes and tributes could turn out to be an interesting idea. And I have a few thoughts about the form of punishment for the evasion of such laws (Always trying to avoid the concept of \"Jail\", since it generally leads to the killing of the roleplaying).
I think the renaissance is a better model for PS. There where still kings and lords with liegepeople, but also the cities with their guilds and the merchants. The landfolk was mostly still under a feudal system, also the cities as such. But the citizens of the cities lifed in a more mercantile system with their guilds. Also the feudals werent anymore the only powerfull people, but merchants were too. For an example search for the Fugger.
For the punishment for evasion of tax/trubite laws the AFAIK feudals gone to war and landfolk would be killed. Property would be seized. In the cities they seized the property, too. And if that didnt pay all the debt, you went to special jail to starve till either someone paid the debt or death.
To avoid the effect of jail on RP, in PS we could put the offendee in jail for some minutes and then let them work for the city for a limited time. For example some sewer cleaning or harvesting missions. If they run, the militia always kills them when they try to enter the city.
-
I agree that economy don\'t need to be as complex as real life economy. Just watch for this:
1. Supply and demand are the base of an economical system.
2. To be effective, an economical system must be almost closed.
3. The circulation of items and money is the key to a good economy.
4. In our world, nothing is created, nothing is lost, all is transformed. It\'s not the case of MMORPGs.
5. In our world, people are tied to their country, state, city and much more. It\'s not the case of MMORPGs\' players.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
First, supply and demand. This is the real base of economy. Get rid of all the government and social stuff and think about it.
A cavern\'s man, let\'s name him Grohk, have 4 wifes and each one have a little garden and makes pots to store food. Grohk\'s neighboor, let\'s name him Bukop, don\'t have a family, but is a young and talented hunter, very good at crafting. Grohk don\'t have silex to produce fire, but he knows winter is coming. He goes to ask Bukop to trade one silex for 10 pots of food and a wife. Bukop want two wifes for it, but Grohk don\'t want to lose two wifes (maybe too much babies to take care of ;) ) He thinks he will be ok if his wifes stay close to him to warm him.
So the winter arrives, a tough one, very cold. The animals are rare and it\'s hard to hunt \'cause of the snow. Getting cold, Grohk travel to Bukop\'s territory with two of his wifes and offer them to Bukop. The neighboor refuse the women and ask for food instead. Grohk offers 10 pots of food, but no girl, and Bukop accepts...
You see, that\'s how it worked. It\'s a fairly simple exemple, but we need to focus on that. The setting of a MMORPG is different from our actual world. The only thing that we can be sure of is that the supply and demand have many chances to lead to market. If there is a King, he will demand for taxes to be paid to the resident. But this is addition to the base system. Can we create a world where supply and demand can be \"realistic\"? Yes. We need to limit supply and create demand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the effectivity of a closed circle. To avoid inflation, you need to keep your circle as closed as possible. If you don\'t you\'ll get a nice spiral that we could name continual inflation. To keep you circle closed, you need to control what goes in and what goes out the circle. The inner part of the circle is the \"game coffers\", and the outter part is the \"players coffers\". We need the players to take from \"game coffers\" about the same amount that the players will put back in the \"game coffers\". We don\'t speak of money, but value. When a player buy a sword, he puts money in \"game coffers\" and retreive a sword from them. When he will be selling it, he will add a worn sword to the \"game coffers\" and take some gold from them. It\'s really simple to do when there is no valuables coming from outside the system. These two last points are discussed later, but I think the idea of the closed circle is clear, so I will move on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As said before, the circulation of goods between player and system is very important. The majority of players will try to buy the minimum stuff to survive and keep their money to buy the best stuff available in the game. Those people don\'t really participate in the economy because they buy only what they REALLY need (armour, weapon, potions if they, or one of their friend, don\'t have equivalent spells) We need to create needs.
Food is obvious, as is the limited durability of items. Food is not a big issue, because most players, or so, learn to feed themself with what they find around. We could tweak a little to add some depht, like processed food (with \"in town\" equipment) is much more nutritive, and food don\'t keep fresh very long, unless processed. This encourage the players to buy food in town, because they don\'t want to buy the equipment to process the food and want to keep food fresh all their journey long.
The durability must encourage the player to consume products. A worn sword can be repaired for some time, but after a while it becomes cheaper to reforge the sword entirely. Your clothes are not indestructible too, they will get holes in and worn out with time. This is even more true for adventurers. If they buy a nice tricorn with a beautiful white feather on it, I doubt that the feather will survive the fireballs ;)
Services is another way to produce needs. Hiring guards, sellers, searchers, miners, farmers, etc... Transports, housing, banking.
If we can ride horses, maybe they will die in a battle or go away because you don\'t take care of it (and a horse certainly cost a lot)
All those little things can guarantee the players to look for money and exchange it for goods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The big problem with MMORPG is that there is always unlimited supplies. In fact, it\'s not true in all MMORPG. Some of them have a limited supply of iron in a region, and a forge can create only a limited number of weapons a day, if they have the right amount of ressources. A project named \"The Dawn\" had in mind to create a real world where all depend on something. The trees cut in a forest will grew back again, but not if you cut the forest itself. Same thing if you kill animals, or all males or female of a species. I think it was a pretty interesting idea, but the project has been postponed. Nevertheless, I think we can use the idea to limit the ressources, simplifying the rules.
We should also have mobs with logical drops. How a rat can drops a full plate? Even if it\'s a giant rat, sounds a little weird. This comes from the D&D system in which the monsters got treasures in their dens or, to the limit, in their stomach (a dragon can eat a lot, but have a stomach for, so it desolves what is in, but you could find magical objects). If orcs spawn in a region, dropping a sword half the time, people will not forge sword, but will kill orcs. We need to give a really special attention to the drops, as they can easily destroy the economical system we created. Keeping a low drop rate and a low drop value will certainly helps. This doesn\'t mean it must not have high value drops, only that these drops must be very rare and related to its previous owner.
Keeping an eye on ressource will permit the system to keep the circle closed. As example: A dwarf gets some iron from a mine and craft it in a sword. The sword is then sold to a human that fight with it a while, visiting the dwarf for repairing it a few times. Each time, the dwarf used a little amount of iron to repair the sword. One fine day the human decided to sell the sword back to the dwarf. The dwarf could repair the sword another time and sell it as it, but he decides to reuse the metal of the sword to make another a new one, but, to do so, he needs some more iron to get a fresh new blade.
In this example, we see the life cycle of the sword. I has been forged, then repaired, then reused. Each step took iron, but it has been spent only on one sword. Except the first amount of iron, each extra can be sent back to the \"world reserve\" of iron. I know, it\'s not realistic, but the system offer interesting possibility anyway.
When people will have forged enough weapons (or any tools) too use all the iron available, they will still need iron to repair or create new things. They will need to reuse their old swords to make new one, as those swords are the only iron left. This should not happen, but it could, if nobody sell/destroy their weapons, but I don\'t think each character needs 10 swords.
If a real and unwanted lack of iron appears (the number of players is much more that what the devs tought) they only have to add some iron to the \"world reserve\" to correct the problem. It could be part of a big event, or the discovery of some new spots rich in iron, or the discovery of a new metal, more resistant. It opens a great number a doors and brings the game to life.
I am sure a similar system can be applied to all other ressources used in PS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally (that soon?!? ;) ), we can\'t force characters to pay taxes because they are not tied to any specific place, and then have no duty to any lord, king, etc... That\'s true, but characters will want to buy a house, build a guild, open a shop or bazaar. This will tie them to a specific place and if they don\'t pay some taxes to the ruler of the city, they will be evicted. Maybe using a bridge, getting into a town or specific building in a region will cost something. There is a lot of way for a ruler to get some incomes. Paying or not can really influence NPCs reaction. If you never give a tith to the Church and ask for healing, they will charge you a lot more than someone who pay it. They can even refuse to help you. Guards of a city can keep you out. If you give a lot of cash to the ruler, he could have favors toward you and, in a bad situation like being flagged as a criminal, helps you to get out of troubles. This leads to all sort of interesting situations. Maybe you could even secretly pay guards to get into an area prohibited to you (maybe you were banned or it is an area only for nobles, etc..)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To conclude, I would say that it\'s not the economical rules that are hard to establish, but all what comes with them. Generating good algorythms for supply and demand is just complex enough, IMHO. I would have written much more (even if it\'s longer than I expected) on the subject, but it is going late, so I will let the first impressions on the subject appears before adding anything.
I hope I didn\'t waste my time writting this. Maybe you don\'t agree with me on some points, but I am sure some others are pretty good (cross fingers ;) )
-
Seems as though I have one more person on my my side. I didn\'t read all of what you wrote, but of what I did read it makes perfect sense.
Here\'s a question: If in a game world there is unlimited resources why would there be need for inflation?
Of course, if crystals pop up occassionally in different places of the world (I think they\'re Crystals), that would mean that there is inflation.
anyway...I\'m gonna go to bed.
-
Simple answer: Money is a resource too.
Not so simple answer: Limited money and unlimited materials gives a deflation. Ie you need vast amounts of products to earn little money. And the value of the money raises with more produkts produced. The effect is most people have no money and resort to an exchange trade. You normally dont want that ause the pot-with-a-hole-problem. If you make money unlimited too, everyone is mining money(harvest/produce and sell to a money source). You get more and more money in the system, but not more products. The money loses value. You need more money to buy things and you have an inflation.
You can avoid inflation in unlimited resource environments when every operation only transforms and you have a net gain of zero. IE mining costs as much as as you gain in selling the material. But thats means only shifting money around. And you have to enforce that for the looters, too. But nobody likes such a system, cause you always stay where you are moneywise.
The trick for a good economy is to balance everyhting so that there is a small netgain in the operations and some sinks which arent sources, too, but are wanted, like houses. That way you get a small inflation like in real life. And if the money value sinks below a certain threshold you can modify the balance to a small netloss. That way you can simulate a stable real economy.
Edit: That theorising is the easy part. Actually design such a system is very hard.
-
As Zinder said (and I thought it was clear), money is a ressource, then it needs to be kept in the closed circle to avoid inflation (or deflation, which I simply consider like a negative inflation...)
We need to keep in mind that, with the example of the blacksmith dwarf, you will take the iron from his reserves to transfer it to the \"world reserve\". This doesn\'t mean that the iron he took will be transfered to the mine near him, but somewhere around the world. If there is too many miners in a region, this region\'s mine will be depleted and the other mines, less used, will be richer than before. We will then see in the region an inflation for the iron, but not in the other region.
It creates simple dynamics that will permit traders to travel to bring some iron in the depleted region. As in real life, some people will prefer to close their shop and move to richer region and start over again, or some others (like NPCs hehe, stupid bots too tied to their home city ;) ) will prefer to pay their iron a little more from traders.
As the main exploiters are gone, the mine will slowly regenerate and the local shops will be able to retreive enough iron to fill their needs. This will bring the deflation of iron and traders will need to looks for another place to travel to (or find a way to destroy the mine ;) ).
Is not this beautiful? :)
I think the most difficult thing to do is to keep an eye on drops and, maybe, population. Drops are well explained in my previous post (or if it is not, just tell it, I will develop some more), but I didn\'t explain much about population increase, except at the end of the swords\' cycle of life part. Each character coming onto PS will bring with him some basic stuff, equipment and money.
I\'m not sure, but I think we don\'t really need to retreive from the \"world reserve\" this equipment and money (depending of the amount of ressources coming into play) because the new character will eventually need new equipment and more money. The character is in fact an increase of demand for various ressources, so sending some supplies can help to keep a stable economy. Of course, we need to pay particular attention of the relation between the new demand and the new supply added. I think the demand added will become superior to the supply added, so it should not become a problem, but a solution.
If we take this stuff from the \"world reserve\" we will need to monitor more closely the population changes to keep a good ratio of available ressources versus consummers. The reserves must be filled to make periods of prosperity and recession. It is very tied to the population, but I don\'t think we can establish a general rule to calculate the \"ultimate ratio\" before actually try it (like \"during a character life, it will consume an average of 2789 units of iron\"). It will be part of the alpha (or beta) to gather stats on this.
Anyhow, the \"world ressources\" will need to be alterate. If devs calculate that XXXXXXXXX units of iron are needed to a possible population of XXXXXX characters, before the population reach this number there will never have lack. And after the population reach this level, it will never have enough ressource to fill the needs of everybody. It\'s a simple, but important adjustment to do.
-
It seems that most people agree on a closed economy (and possibly other methods to facilitate the cyclic flow of money?), so does anyone know if that has been OFFICIALLY proposed on the official wish list?
-
Unless people are going to be selling items they have in the game on ebay.com, it will be a closed economy, or a closed system.
It\'s all about systems. The library in the game will be a system...a very small system with few variables, but it will be a variable of it\'s own within the whole [game] system.
A good idea would be to put this one hold until we know exactly what all in going to be in the game: food, stones, weapons, magic, etc. When we know that, then the economic system should be pretty apparent.
-
Mkt2015, I don\'t think you know what I\'m talking about...
I mean there is a LIMITED SUPPLY OF MONEY. Read taltiren\'s first post (it\'s the first reply on the first page) for a very nice explanation.
-
For starters your post on a closed economy is stating the obvious. Of course it\'s going to be a closed economy. Does a closed economy facilitate a cyclical flow of money? This almost makes no sense because if there isn\'t a flow of money then there is no economy. Again, you\'re stating something that is completely obvious.
I think the big question is on inflation and how it can be controlled. Yes, I did go back and read that post.
No inflation: There is only a certain amount of money in circulation and there would be hoarding and eventually there would be no more money to go around. Unless you could control hoarding (which I doubt you could) I don\'t see how this could be an option. Secondly I think that there could be anywhere between 100 people playing the game and a million people. If there\'s only a certain amount of money then the money is going to be stretched extremely thin. The only way that this might work is that a certain amount of money is put into the system based on how many people play the game. $500 (I know that money is the game is handled differenly, but just bare with me) for each person who joins the game. Well, what if several join and then quit a week later. What happens to their money and how would that affect prices?
Inflation: I don\'t know how it could be controlled to a certain degree such as 1% inflation or some such other percentage. I think it really depends as to what people are going to do. Hoarding could be a big problem. Of course, if someone has money they\'ll probably end up spending it unless they are working towards a house or a castle. If enough money is added to the system to accommodate the amount of people who join the game I don\'t think inflation would be a big problem. However, I think the bottomline is that inflation is going to occur no matter what because I really doubt that having a fixed amount of money in the game will work.
How can you have banks that give out loans with interest rates if you plan on having a fixed amount of money?
-
Ideas.
(1) Shopkeeper funds -
Shopkeepers can only spend money they have. Each shopkeeper has [X] money, and this number slowly increases over time (from assumed npc purchases). This means that you might have to find a rich man\'s shop to sell an expensive item or settle for a low lump of cash. Additionally... each shopkeeper can onlyhave [X] much money maximum
Option: The less money a shopkeeper has, they less they are willing to pay for different things.
Reasons-
Limiting the speed at which players can reduce drops to liquid assets will in turn help inflation.
Possible methods of implementation-
Method A) Simply add 4 to the shopkeeper\'s cash on hand every half second/second/whatnot, and cap it at a certain amount. Higher-class stores (magic stores, in particular) might have higher caps, longer cash-on-hand increase waits, and larger individual cash-on-hand increases.
(Ex: A general store owner might sell bread, wine, and general supplies cheaply; a relatively constant income of small amounts. A potion store owner might only sell only a few things each minute, but gets more cash from these sales.)
Method B) When the total value of items in a shopkeeper\'s inventory/shopbox reaches a certain value, they no longer buy items. Possible graduated scale (Ie, when value reaches 60% of cap, pay 10% less for items, 80% of cap pays 20% less, simulating how less money on hand would make the shopkeeper more reluctant to pay out money). I\'m not sure how you\'d code it, but I think this one might be easier.
(2) Total Cash Available
It\'s entirely beleivable that there might be more value of goods in an economy than there is of actual gold/silver specie (as this case may be, crystal specie). To increase the number of raw currency, you have to go mining of course. Possibly take the total amount of money available to shopkeepers worldwide, and limit it (Ie: 10 shops with caps of 10,000 currency each, but the sum of all of their currency can not exceed 50,000).
To increase the amount of money available, mine the crystal/mineral/etc and take it to a mint/gem polisher/etc and get it turned into viable currency. Every times a character does this, increase the amoung available throughout the world a bit (Ie: Joe mines 500 currency worth of raw material. The total currency available for the shops goes from 50,000 to 50,050). No idea what would be good to balance, but 5:1 or 10:1 should be a good starting guess for test purposes.
(3) Player based economies
Possibly, cut out stores entirely. Listen me out before shouting me down. Instead of stores, have \'sale houses\'. Players put an item/group of items for sale, but don\'t collect cash until another player buys the item/set. Basically like an open market, but simplified to make it easier on the players - instead of trying to buy and sell at the same time, you set what you want to sell, brows what others are selling, and then check to see if your items sold before leaving. If not, leave, quest, whatever, come back; if it\'s sold, then collect your money and move on.
This is probably the least susceptible to inflation, since the only way of actually increasing the amount of liquid currency in the economy this way is through monster drops/quests/game-based methods. Very easy to control cash flow. If there is too much cash lowing around, though, just have \'NPC sales\' - players get an item, but the money goes to an NPC (dissappears).
Also the most accurate for supply and demand. Items with high demand can fetch better prices, low demand means low prices (or, for extremely rare but also not frequently used objects, massiely high prices).
Could also lead to a complex barter system - trading items directly for items.
If I may use an example from another free MMORPG I\'ve played (Runescape), the object-barter used to be almost a rule. Coal certificates (worth 5 pieces of coal; used in smithing) were almost universally worth 1,000 gold. People would frequently use coal certificates as a means of paying for other goods (high-end equipment, large numbers of magic components/other consumable resources, other types of smithing material, etc).
The certificates themself also served a purpose - coal is the basis for all high-level smithing (steel, mithril, adamantite, runite). A \'consumable money\' like this might also help limit inflation.
-
Additionally... each shopkeeper can onlyhave [X] much money maximum
That\'s funny... I always thought running a shop was about making as much money as possible without hitting the limit. Surely NPCs think the same way.
If you want smarter shops, wish for NPCs that don\'t buy anything they don\'t need, and who don\'t overstock some items, unless they get them for free. What use is rat\'s tail to a blacksmith? (etc.) If you make NPC shops greedy and selfish like a player shop, then you\'ll have an economy where people don\'t get rich by selling junk to random NPCs, and people will have to get a useful profession rather than farming junk that they can sell.
Another way to keep money from getting useless is by making sure that it isn\'t too easy to manufacture wanted items. Take an armorsmith for example. The fact that you can create a full plate armor in a few clicks, in many other games makes it so easy to make tens and hundreds of these now worthless armors. If a plate armor instead took hours to make, as you would have to create every small bit and piece, then it would make the armor valuable, and it would ensure the market doesn\'t get flooded with useless items, only produced to raise skill %.
-
i only have 1 thing to say about the economy. Make the money worth something! Usaully money is useless and people just trade items because gold,coins,and etc..... are so easy to get make money hard to get and worth alot so that people just don\'t become rich and items are the only things worth something ;)
-
From what I see there is only one city so far, so the concept of multi-city economics and traders will have to wait.
I love the all the posts and think there is some very valuable ideas as well as good community spirit. But at the end of the day, I think there are only a couple of things that the devs can currently control:
1. The introduction of goods through quests.
2. The introduction of goods through trades.
3. The price of items bought by NPCs
4. The price of items sold by NPCs.
You need to vary quest items, so no one item becomes plentiful.
You need to make sure any item created will be somehow consumed ? i.e. items that are used frequently brake; consumable items have some sort of shelf life; anything that will keep the amount of items in proportion to the amount of players.
I?m no economists, but I think one way to get to a closed economy or to cap the amount of cash would be to limit the NPCs to only buy items with money that they got by selling other items. As well as only allow them to sell items they bought from other players. This would mean that players would be confronted with an NPC merchant that would not have endless supplies of items to sell as well as NPCs that would tell them, ?Sorry, I can not buy that item I do not have the money?.
Originally MMORPGs just let the NPCs sell or buy as much as the players needed. This was a root of all evil, more items are introduced by quests and trades and since there was an endless supply of cash from NPCs willing to buy, items became less valuable and players accumulated cash.