Almost no weapons anymore at Trasoks and others: Probably the worst idea ever

[SynergfyFlo]

I've followed this thread with great interest. here some of my ramblings on the matter....forgive my ignorance of the detailed game mechanics if  any of this seems like nonsense.
I agree that there is a need for a more player-based economy.
Several comments have indicated that part of the problem lies in balance, and in integration.

It seems that the different threads of the economy, i.e. the paths of resource flow, are not well enough integrated to allow a player driven economy to regulate itself.
Self-regulation requires resource flows that are engaged in feedback loops - this is a systemic issue. right now, it seems that the game's economy is organised more in the fashion of a linear, throughput-based economy, with npcs, mobs and mines as sources on the one end, and npc's again as sinks on the other. To allow value to remain in the economy without fluctuations having too disruptive an effect on pc's, a diversification of resource and value flows would be important, as would the increased participation of players in such a diverse web of crafts and professions. pcs need to be able to play a much more diverse and fundamental role in gathering the raw materials, processing and selling them - for just about every item available in the game, starting with one-eyed rat skins for those outrageously fluffy adventurers' boots we all desire.

It would seem that another part of the solution might be to tackle this issue of systemic integration by making the amount of items available from npc's directly related to the amount of raw material stock he receives from pc's. the sourcing of raw materials can be seen as a type of newbie quest-like activity, engaged in until pc's have acquired trias and skills that allow them to render more valuable services or craft goods of their own. accordingly, the price of all goods traded should be allowed to fluctuate in relation to the availability of the supplies needed to make it, and the amount pc's are willing to pay for it. in converse, npc traders and smiths should only be allowed to purchase stock if they have enough trias to do so, or if players agree to sell to them for lower values. they should only be allowed to craft items if they have stock, and only sell items they have crafted or bought.

since pc's discover items as loot from mobs, could we not close this cycle a little more by allowing mobs to loot fallen players too, unless they have buddies or guild-fellows who salvage the body and its possessions....? in this case, items would have greater persistence and circulate more widelythroughout the game world, players would be more cautious about venturing to the death realms, and more fastidious about only entering combat with trusted companions with a variety of specialist skills to back them up. 

gold does seem to be strangely over-valued, considering it has little utilitarian value in-game. gold's value (apart from its possible role in crafting magical items and jewellery) would likely be more symbolic. this also relates to its use in the minting of currency. currency symbolises abstract value, that can be used to assign comparative value to items of different kinds. this is what allows it to be the grease that helps items to change hands and services to be rendered. iexcluding jewellers, imperial or royal mints would generally be the only entities to purchase gold in its raw form.

trias, though, seem to leak from the economy as water through a sieve - via npc traders, and through trainers. the trainer issue is one that i really feel passionate about - it needs to be adressed urgently.
why can advanced players not earn xp and pp by training those less skilled (e.g. a master swordsman can train anyone up to 5 levels beneath him, and receives rewards proportional to the level of his students)? Pc trainers can charge what they wish. NPC's should only train complete beginners, in my opinion, so that maxing skills depends on the development of the type of master-fellow-apprentice relationships that could form such a strong foundation for medieval-style guilds, which would then likely be governed by
councils of influential masters who extend patronage to their factions of supporters.

this should be tied to the circulation of of raw materials, goods, and services: to conduct their businesses and maintain their guild halls and other properties, guilds would depend on fellowship fees as well as on preferential access to the relevant resources - which could be much scarcer than they currently are. for this reason, I like the idea of limited resources that respond to over-exploitation with scarcity and disappearance. in the competition for scarce and finite resources and the ongoing enagement of players in extraction, production, trade, patronage networks lies a wellspring for truly vibrant guild intrigues and roleplaying!   



 

[Ravenguard]

A more player based economy would need there to be more consequences of using equipment.  You can repair something today and only lose 1 point of quality; why not have something break faster than that?  Perhaps a weapons or armor can only be repaired an amount equal to 2x its original quality; after that, it breaks.  That could mean more demand for weapons, which would then cause an increase in prices.  But, would people pay as much for weapons if they knew they were going to break quickly?

I don't, however, like the idea of widespread material restrictions on all ores.  On the more precious ones (sliver, gold, platinum), sure, as those don't have much of a function and in my eyes at least, are seen as the more 'elite' resources.  Guilds getting into resource fights over those are fine; they don't affect the new user that much.
But, things needed for general crafting, like iron and coal, should not be limited (or at least not nearly as much).  A new player should be able to start out on their own, and should not be forced to join a guild to get basic materials.  In addition, new players tend to get lost, and changing locations of those basic materials would frustrate people trying to give the game a shot.  Not to mention that it could lead down the path of guilds supplying themselves; why purchase from the market when you've got the mines controlled, metallurgists to work it, blacksmiths to make things, etc.?  I don't know of any miner or metallurgy based guilds, as those two professions are usually tagged for members of larger guilds to supply their blacksmiths, so why buy from the market when you can buy from your friends and make sure that the money stays within your guild?

I've always thought the high level PCs being able to train other players would be a fascinating idea.  Get old, you don't need to work, just train people!  But, having some sort of restriction on that would be needed; people could use bots to 'sell their training,' or 1 well known master could get mobbed.

[SynergfyFlo]

agreed on the need to secure stable broad-level access to bulk resources like coal and iron ore.
agreed also on luxury resources. perhaps it would also be useful to consider the economy as a system that exists on the backbone of an ecology, with a diverse base of living and non-living resources which are "mined", processed and benficiated. the type of economic activity newbies engage in could be used to define a career path: coal & iron ore -> smelting ->blacksmithing -> goldsmith/weaponsmith/armorer/locksmith; or: gathering -> lumber/hunting; lumber -> carpentry/joinery -> carver/bowyer/fletcher/toolmaker
etc.  living resources would be more fragile and respond more quickly to over-use than bulk nonliving resources. their spawning rate could depend on environmental conditions - no more deerskin cause the lumberjacks flattened the forest!

historical guilds tended to be very much a characterised by specialisation of some kind. they also often had complex internal hierarchies - including trainer hierarchies.
top-level masters would not necessarily get mobbed - most folks could not afford their services, and would be quite satisfied to learn from his senior students or at least from initiates who know the basics.
 

[Mrokii]

@SynergfyFlo:

I like the idea about more limited ressources and the availability of items depending on the raw materials" the merchants get. This would surely create a real need for supplying, finding or mining certain materials and it also might lead to more realistic prices.

But I do not like the idea, that a player would need to rely on more advanced players or even guilds to get higher training or materials (if that is what you were saying). This leads to some kind of master-apprentice relationship and while that can lead to some roleplaying, it can also lead to some kind of "slavery". That maybe a rather pessimistic thinking, but I fear, that newbies (or independent players) would need to do an awful lot of things until a master grants a share of his wisdom. And while some might like the idea of restricting materials (which is not possible at the moment anyway, as you would need restricted areas for mines that can be controlled by somebody, a guild typically) it might even lead to guildwars over some sources or to areas that are not even accessible for newbies or independent players.

And another problem arises for the independent players (like me). I simply don't want to be in a guild, but I might have no other choice if the only source for higher training or certain materials is a certain guild. Sorry, if I misunderstood something you wrote.

[SynergfyFlo]

ah, i agree completely about the difficulties this would create for independents, etc...
but that is exactly the awesome thing about it, in terms of scenario realism and role-playing. sure, resources like skills, cash, equipment could come to be increasingly monopolised by certain guilds and powerful pc's - but this would make it so much more realistic, and challenging. also, with the many different guilds already in existence, it would lead to some interesting competition and alliances, but also create an opportunity for guilds to define themselves with more than just heraldry, ideology and ethos - but in terms of "real" resources and the political intrigues associated with maintaining and expanding these.

then, in terms of roleplaying, there would most likely also be opportunities for loners to find archetypal hermit-style masters of high accomplishment who refuse to align themselves with any particular guild or organisation and prefer instead to pursue a life of solitude dedicated to the practise and refinement of their arts. there could even be loose (non-guild) alliances of independents who support each other.

partly, though, this is only an issue with the present skill system. actually, a teacher is only really necessary to introduce a character to the basics of a skill.
thereafter, if the student applies himself to the study of his art, a teacher would no longer be necessary, though certainly useful in terms of accelerating the process of learning and in terms of revealing specific techniques. often the higher levels of learning and understanding arise spontaneously from an intuitive grasp of the inner logic of a skill, after a long time of practise and inquiry. miyamoto musashi, one of the greatest historical japanese swordsmen ever, though introduced to formal swordsmanship at an early age, cast aside the conventional wisdom, refined his art during periods of ascetic retreat in the wilds, and through trial-and-error application in scores of lethal encounters. this completely revolutionised swordsmanship in his time. the game should accommodate this style of progression also.

[Jawn]

Just an idea.....

I think NPC smiths should sell common items, but with a catch.


They should start with 0 in stock.

*Huh?*

Yes. 0 stock and they can only sell what's been sold to them from players. Looted items not wanted, crafted items "too low" for the crafter's tastes.... oh , and maybe spawn a limited selection of item in the smith's inventory - in limited quantities, albeit -  available to sell, as well (ok, so not ~only~ what players sell... sue me). These things can be of varying qualities (and may even include a few really good magical thing, though that be rare). And if the run out of stock, they run out until more items spawn in their inventory, or some player sells weapons to them.

*shug*

Just an idea....

Oh, and use of other metals in crafting weapons would be welcome anytime soon, now 

.

[Ravenguard]

Eh... Jawn... I don't know about that, as far as NPCs selling unwanted items.  Limited, perhaps, but not the unwanted ones.

Simply because there's so many looted items, and not enough need.  It would put us in nearly the same situation as having infinite weapons available.  If someone goes off and farms the rogues in Oja, they'll get more weapons than they know what to do with, and with the near constant farming of those rogues, would lead to a massive glutton on the market.  Maybe if prices would vary as more stock is added, that could be interesting, but also somewhat difficult to deal with.

In addition, would the 'special' weapons (like Broadsword of Seduction, or an Icy Dagger) be available for purchase if one was sold to an NPC?  That could get complicated and hairy, if one has to scroll down several pages worth of Copper, Bronze, Stone, etc. weapons to find the one they may want (not to mention keeping tract of everything).

[lucasjung]

This thread actually hits upon a point I made in another thread in the general discussion forum.  To paraphrase a much earlier post in this thread by Xillix, a lot of different people seem upset about different aspects of the economy, often for apparently contradictory reasons.  Some might say that the when some people say "too much" and others say "not enough," then the balance is just right and the people complaining are just the extremists.  I don't think that this is the case.  I think that the economy in Yliakum is so completely out of whack that a majority of people (or at least a large minority) are upset about it.  Why is this?  It's because the economy is centrally managed.  Historically, centrally managed economies always perform poorly, even ones that have relatively good central management.  The management of this economy is at the extremely poor end of the spectrum because the people running it are apparently oblivious to the "law of unintended consequences:" economies are very complex things, so when you change one thing, other things that seem completely unrelated will change as well, often in a negative way.

If I understand correctly, the designers are trying to set up the economy with certain goals in mind: primarily, they want to encourage player-player interaction and they want player-based market prices.  They have made certain tweaks to the economy in order to achieve these goals.  Unfortunately, from the number of unhappy people out there, these tweaks are having undesireable side effects, and are possibly even havng an adverse effect on RP.  I have a proposal for a system that will fix most of these problems while still encouraging players to buy and sell from each other (instead of NPCs) and also make the market truly free and player-based:

1.)  Have the server track all player-to-player trades and store them in a matrix, which would have a size roughly equal to [number of different types of items that can be traded]x[number of transactions that take place in a given period of time].  This is actually not all that big compared to some of the other data that is running around on a server like this.  The size of the matrix can also be controlled by setting the "lookback period."

2.)  At regular intervals (say, once a day), perform a least-squares fit reduction on the matrix to find average values for all goods in terms of tria.  This will work well as long as a sufficient percentage of player-to-player transactions include at least some tria.  This is actually very straightforward math: I can do a small matrix by hand in less than a minute.  A big matrix requires computers, but this whole thing is running on computers, so no problem.

3.) Set all NPC store prices according to the average player-to-player prices from the least-squares fit reduction.  Have NPCs sell at a slightly higher price than players (say, 120% or 130%) and buy at a slightly lower price (say, 80% or 90%).  Remove the stock controls on the number of items an NPC can sell, but restrict NPCs to only selling mundane items, so that the only place to buy high-quality items is from other players.  Players seeking to buy mundane items will have a choice: if they are in a hurry but don't care about price, they can buy from NPCs.  If they are low on cash but have plenty of time to find a seller, they can buy from other players.  Players selling their goods can do the same.  This will give Yliakum a true, player-based, free-market economy.  If you still feel that too many people are doing business with NPCs, increase the price margin between NPC prices and market prices, which will provide more incentive for players to do business with each other.

4.) In the tutorial, designate a location in each city as "the market" and encourage newbs to go there to buy and sell gear.  Spread the word to existing players, as well.  The central plaza in Hydlaa would be a great place, and you could even set up sign-posts designating areas for different types of goods.

4.) In the future, use supply and demand if you want to effect prices.  Want iron to be more expensive?  Make it harder to mine, thus decreasing supply.  Or, require more iron to go into the production of popular items, thus increasing demand.  Either will make iron more expensive.  Be warned, though:  either action will also make iron-based items more expensive.  Want to make iron cheaper without changing the price of iron-based items?  Make iron easier to mine but require more to go into the production of items.

5.) As long as most prices are set by the free market, you can control the prices of certain items directly.  For example, gold and platinum don't have a whole lot of utility: they are mostly only good for selling to make money.  This makes them, in essence, a form of currency themselves.  You can control their prices through the NPC prices: want gold to be worth 250 tria per lump?  Have NPCs buy unlimited quantities at 245 tria per lump and sell unlimited quantities at 255 tria per lump.  If you do this to commodities with utility, however, your price will cascade through the rest of the economy: if you set the price of iron hard and fast in this way, items made from iron will adjust their prices accordingly.

6.) Make different methods of money-earning relatively equal in output.  Right now, even players who aren't really interested in mining do it anyway because it is by far the best way to make money.  This certainly does not encourage the "individuality" that the developoers claim to desire.  If you have taken the first five steps above, you can use fixed-price commodities to help maintain this balance.  For example, adjust the difficulty of mining gold and platinum so that mining a lump of gold or platinum should take about the same amount of time as any other activity that would produce the same profit.  In other words, if a lump of gold is worth 250 tria and the hide of a particular creature is worth 55 tria, mining one lump of gold should take about the same amount of time as killing four or five of that particular creature.  In this way, each player can choose his own method of making money without putting himself at a disadvantage because all means of making money will produce roughly equal profit for a given amount of time invested.

[Zhaxor]

Simply because there's so many looted items, and not enough need.  It would put us in nearly the same situation as having infinite weapons available.  If someone goes off and farms the rogues in Oja, they'll get more weapons than they know what to do with, and with the near constant farming of those rogues, would lead to a massive glutton on the market.

Well that's exactly how it should work. If there is a massive glut on the market the prices would drop so low as to make farming the rogues not worth it. People could then go off and hunt animals for body parts and furs.

In addition, would the 'special' weapons (like Broadsword of Seduction, or an Icy Dagger) be available for purchase if one was sold to an NPC?  That could get complicated and hairy, if one has to scroll down several pages worth of Copper, Bronze, Stone, etc. weapons to find the one they may want (not to mention keeping tract of everything).

Should special and magical weapons be in the same category as standard weapons anyway? Also wouldn't it be more likely that a blacksmith wouldn't stock these sorts of weapons, they would only be sold by a specialist arms dealer not an ordinary blacksmith.

However all arguments of balancing aside, the economy of Yliakum us simply not large and diverse enough to support most of these ideas, for an economy to naturally balance itself there has to be enough range of money earning trades and spending opportunites to provide a good feedback system, trying to create a feedback loop on a system with only one or two inputs will naturally result in wild oscillations. Again it's just another sign of a game in Beta development, give the devs a chance to implement a few more strands to the economy before worrying to much about balance

[lucasjung]

However all arguments of balancing aside, the economy of Yliakum us simply not large and diverse enough to support most of these ideas, for an economy to naturally balance itself there has to be enough range of money earning trades and spending opportunites to provide a good feedback system, trying to create a feedback loop on a system with only one or two inputs will naturally result in wild oscillations. Again it's just another sign of a game in Beta development, give the devs a chance to implement a few more strands to the economy before worrying to much about balance

I happen to be an engineer, and systems happen to be my specialty: controlling them, predicting their responses to stimuli, adjusting their responses to meet desired specifications, measuring and adjusting stability, etc.  Using a system like the one I proposed for setting NPC prices based upon player market prices would not result in "wild oscillations."  In fact, having the NPC prices bracket market prices (NPCs buy low and sell high) would have a dampening effect on changes in market prices (which could be undesirable in some situations, but would be a good thing most of the time).

Upon first implementing such a system, some interesting things would happen to the prices for some commodities.  If a particular commodity already has a pretty consistent price in player-player prices, it will stay that way.  However, imagine a commodity where one group of people are buying and selling it to each other for a relatively low price while another, separate group of people are buying and selling it to each other for a relatively high price, with the two groups being isolated for one reason or another.  Least-squares-fit will produce an average price that is in between the two old prices but nowhere close to either.  However, the fact that NPCs are buying and selling at the average price will slowly bring the two groups into line with each other.  In effect, this system bridges the gaps between small pocket economies and ties them into one big economy.

There is one place where this system will break down: if particular commodities are mostly bought from and sold to NPCs, with few changing hands between players, the commodity won't be well enough represented in the matrix for the least-squares-fit to produce a meaningful price.  An example of this would be weapons farmed from rogues: nobody wants to buy them, so farmers dump them on NPCs.  There are, however, ways to deal with this relatively minor problem, some of which would have the added benefit of removing the incentive to collect weapons from dead rogues.

[SynergfyFlo]

These suggestions sound really interesting.
perhaps a way to further stabilise the system is to allow the least-squares matrix to operate on a regional scale, i.e. Harnquist charges and sells differently based on the prevalence of certain items in Hydlaa, but npc's elsewhere (e.g. Trasok) would charge differently because some items are more common in Ojaveda (e.g. shortswords looted from rogues should be cheaper in oja than in Hydlaa).

Once again, though, I feel that part of this could be addressed by letting persistent items circulate among mobs, too - especially rogues should enjoy looting...? so perhaps spawn rogues with a standard, low-value weapon like a knife, but allow them to pick up new ones, and perhaps even to increase in power if they survive successive attacks by PC's. the way people speak of farming mobs suggests that victory is generally taken for granted - perhaps our rogues should be a little rougher around the edges, and perhaps even fight as teams?

[CrazyYlian]

Worst idea ever?   Can't say I see that...  and definitely don't see it as dicouraging RP.

I think Zwenze hits it on the head... ask around.   Nor is that a particularly new idea.   Only one of my characters ever bought his first weapon, and that turned out to be the least preferrable option.  Every other character I've created has a weapon given to them by someone who got tired of laughing as I spent 20 mins wrestling a rat into submission.  Usually it was prefixed weapon they had looted, and it had better stats than the stock weapons from the blacksmith.  And in the meantime, I met someone new, learned a few things and enjoyed a little RP.

And it also taught me to respect noobs as I progressed.  So if you run into me in-game and look a little ragged due to rat-wrestling, don't be at all surprised if I 'accidentally' drop a dagger or sword somewhere nearby...

[citizen]

Worst idea ever?   Can't say I see that...  and definitely don't see it as dicouraging RP.

I think Zwenze hits it on the head... ask around.   Nor is that a particularly new idea.   Only one of my characters ever bought his first weapon, and that turned out to be the least preferrable option.  Every other character I've created has a weapon given to them by someone who got tired of laughing as I spent 20 mins wrestling a rat into submission. ...

Yeah, i gave away my first low quality weapons crafted by me in the sewers. They worthed nothing, but the ones who received them found them quite useful.

[Lorit]

Well there will be no flaming.

Remember every player will begin with the weapon of their choice for going through the tutorial.

Crafters who are not as good will certainly be charging less over time and the economy will adjust.

Most of the arguments forwarded lack any consideration for the crafters, let's hear from them.

That is only true for the first character a player generates.  Additional characters get nothing. No tria, no weapons.  There is no tutorial for characters other than the first.... Although the prompts for the tutorial were there, the NPC's in question weren't and I was dumped right into East Hydlaa.  Maybe it was a bug?

[Rizin]

Maybe it was a bug?

Yes. Bug/glitch.