Economy Poll

[Kaityra]

Sorry, but I think the possible answers are way too limited, especially when it comes to economy, so it is "Other" for me.
Since this game is still in "Alpha" and since so many "professions" are missing the balancing of the economy is almost an impossible task, at least in my eyes, as every profession you will add will threaten the balance again.
At the moment the ways to earn your living are very limited and this is reflected in economy. You either follow the way of the miners and smiths and you will have plenty of money or you don't and have some problems to earn enough money to afford the equipment you need for fighting. At the moment the prices that (player)smiths charge are absurdly high, at least if you can believe the "Auction"-channel.
When the time comes that "enough" jobs are available the adjustment of the economy will happen in iterations rather than a single step. So reducing the problem with economy to Platinum only is too limited.

[Draklar]

Since this game is still in "Alpha" and since so many "professions" are missing the balancing of the economy is almost an impossible task, at least in my eyes, as every profession you will add will threaten the balance again.

I doubt they'll be adding new professions in a "short term", so that's rather beside the point.
And besides, it's fairly easy to create economy code that won't be threatened by new additions.

[Nikodemus]

Training cost is now bigger than say 3 months ago? ;P

If comes about this aspect, there is nothing what can be done without changing the code.
the more we pay for training, the longer it takes to max and the more people may be interested in maxing, though from other side less people around will be allowed to rp maxed characters. There is no golden center. You need to develop a code.
I'm only laughing at people who say "it is too easy" or "it is too hard" as you just don't have a clue. (that would be xillix lol ;P. Ok, xillix was quoting, not saying ) - maybe i shouldn't add this paragraph, afterall the more friendly we are the more people play this game. Lets all try to be smart.

All you can do about mining all types of resources right now is play with their sell price vs distance from selling point. For all the minerals the ratio should be close to the same.
This will make people to mine all kinds or resources, not only a single one.
But it won't cause any breakthough. Code has to be developed.

So I'm not voting, because closest answer is decrease platinum price, but then someone think it is all i wish, thile it is more.

[ThomPhoenix]

Just vote for either the closest thing or the item that partially fulfils your wishes. Else we could just have another 10+ page discussion thread instead of a poll and have it locked by neko once people inherently start to flame each other

[Durwyn]

Question: What should be done for the economy in the short term? 

i voted "its good as it is"
my opinions on the different choices available 
- reducing platinum: hydlaa isnt enough deserted? ojaveda maybe? think a bit, before choosing this option, if you reduce more then people will dig more because the demand of trias will be the same (i.e: the cost of trainers for example will be the same.) i think you just love digging ores and its too easy for you  

- Increase Platinum: well, then why had reduced gold? if you begin to increase platinum, people who craft with gold would only wait one thing: Crafting with Platinum!
                            for the economy, in short term, prices will rise up because: people have more cash => offer is '=' => demand rises => if demands rises, prices rises too.
                            (economics 6th year of college theory)
- Remove Platinum.: people are used to have it now, they awaited its return till (uh...well i would say summer 2006, the time i began playing =) ) summer 2006. try to take back  the food from a dog while he is eating and you will get hurt. (just an example to get my idea, it wont happen like that ) 

- Reduce the cost of training. : well at a short term that might not affect a lot, but well indeed this would be benefits in long term. if you reduce the cost of training then all is possible. even casual-players can really play! hunting, baking, cooking, selling weapons would be (uh again xD making profit?..) profit-able. (long term problems isnt asked here so wont developp them. )         

the rest of ideas are personals or jokes, i will read them now. =)
(dont quote me if you have objections, just answer the main question, thanks. )

                     

[Arerano]

Reducing training costs? So that those who already have several milions can be happy in the long term..?

Well, honestly I don't believe that any those options would "fix" economy in the short term. And it's indeed hard to fix it at all, and even harder to fix/improve it without changing code.
Economy means "dependence".

If the miners don't pay the warriors well enough, the warriors will not protect them. No protection = the "thieves" will come and kill + loot the miners income, thus they'll have less left as if they'd pay the warriors. (needless to say that a miner can't simply switch from "I'm a great miner" to "I'm a super warrior")
The more miners actually do mine, the lower will the price per ore be.
Miners also depend on people bringing food to them, otherwise they'll be too weak to be able to mine. So, paying some merchants. Merchants buy the food from cooks, cooks buy ingredients from "hunters". Hunters and "protectors" again need weapons which are made by smiths who buy the raw materials from miners.

If there are "too many warriors/protectors", they will of course get a low income. Too many miners lowers the income for them also.. and the same for "too many cooks" and "too many merchants" and "too many hunters" etc, etc, etc.

And NO, there ought not be any "Warrior hunter mining smithy mage cook". Currently it seems like 95% of the guilds ought to change their name.. to something including "Mining" or "Miners". It's easy, "of"-guilds simply change it to "X of Mining", those who have a "X Y"-naming sheme, may try "X Miners".. etc... uhmm.. well, back to topic.

People need to get weak without food. People need to depend on each another (at least they can't do _everything_). People should be "more efficient" if they depend on each another. (More efficient = miner buys food = miner gets refreshed and can mine better again. Miner pays his warriors = warriors will protect them = less loss to the thieves.) Add some "boredom"-factor.

Lowering the "training cost" is a bad idea imho. It should rather be raised and Tria should rather be made worth less. (and easier to be obtained by not-mining. Maybe even be wiped to get at least back to some quasi-stable economy.) Some kind of "fix income / base income" might be interesting .. but that must be thought out very well.

Ileresa and Yadili earn, I think about 10 Tria a day.. selling apples and food. Why so few do actually buy, I don't understand.. if they're too tight-fisted to pay one Tria for an apple.. well.. they could even sell it again for 1 Tria - having no loss at all. Well unless you don't like to RP, because otherwise you'll lose your precious mining-time.  


Edit:

For those who voted: Reduce Platinum. It will not really change much, since the mining guilds (~95% of the guilds) already have their millions

[Tuxide]

After reading Arerano's comment about getting weak, another thing that comes to mind is that with low level players, using the /dig command is very taxing on stamina--you need 10% mental stamina to use /dig or else it will tell you that you are too tired.  A new player can probably fire the /dig command 3 or 4 times before having to take a rest.  On the other hand, high level players have an unfair advantage right now in that there is absolutely no stamina loss when using /dig, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense because you have to tire out sometime.  Thus, high level players can continuously fire the /dig command all day and all night without ever tiring.  I know this isn't specific to platinum but I am just throwing this in here as a possible annoyance to look into.  I don't know off the top of my head if this is in the progression event table or in the code itself.

[Donari Tyndale]

In my eyes, two things are vital for a working economy. First of all, get the NPCs out of it, or reduce their buying prices drastically. NPCs are the source of the sheer endless amount of money in the economy, and that makes most trading senseless. I'd prefer a viable player economy in the long term run, without any NPCs. For now, reduced buying prices would work as well, because then players would think twice before selling all their platinum to Harnquist. That way, resources are kept in the economy, and offer and demand, not fixed NPC prices would determine the price. Secondly, the cost of training needs to be reduced to fit the lowered income.

[neko kyouran]

I voted for one of the joke options as I'm not in game enough to be able t formulate a good suggestion on how to fix the economy, less be able to tell that it needs fixing. 

[Joombiel]

I voted to reduce the cost of training, and I'll tell ya why.  It is too expensive. But...seriously.  I love to quest in this game. It is challenging and I feel, one of the most interesting facets.  I also want to be a 'well rounded' player and am pursuing crafting, magic, and building a legitimate charactor.  If training costs were lowered, I think that a more robust and larger player base would be the result.  Playing Planeshift, as I feel it is meant to be played, encourages me and my charactor to become multi-faceted.  By doing this, my success, both 'personal' and from a RP standpoint, is greatly enhanced.  By reducing training cost, each charactor IG and the game as a whole will be more well-rounded.  As an aside, I couldn't help but notice that 'reduce platinum' was outstripping all other categories.  I found this interesting, since every time I go to Gugrontid to mine it, the hill is packed with players.  It seems we are compelled to mine this ore.  It is the quickest way to turn tria, which enables me to pay for overpriced training....and everbody loves to mine, right?

[MustangMR]

I voted other because I don't know enough.  If there is a feeling that platinum is destroying the economy, my question is... what else is there?  An economy needs many items to work.  I think if there is a problem here it's that there is not enough goods to sustain a healthy economy.  Expand the choices more, provide competing crafting materials, give some more things for people to spend their money on and diversify the choices.  I don't think there's enough in game right now to be concerned with the economy.  It's not going to function very well at this point in time.

[Arerano]

First of all, get the NPCs out of it, or reduce their buying prices drastically. NPCs are the source of the sheer endless amount of money in the economy, and that makes most trading senseless.

Well, but NPCs - on the other hand - are the reason that Tria are needed at all.

I voted to reduce the cost of training, and I'll tell ya why.  It is too expensive. But...seriously.

I also want to be a 'well rounded' player and am pursuing crafting, magic, and building a legitimate charactor.

*sighs* Multi-purpose-I-can-do-everything-myself characters are not really a.) realistic. b.) helping a multi-player-environment to be experienced as such.

A: "Greetings Sire, would you like to have a look at my fine collection of crafted weaponry? I am buying those from the smiths to sell them for really good prices."
B: "No thanks, I craft weapons on my own."
A: "Oh, you might be interested in some raw materials maybe? Miners deliver ores and coal and such, those I sell to the crafters. I'm a merchant, you know?"
B: "Thanks for the offer, but I'm mining my materials by myself when needed."
A: "Then you might be interested in some foods or drinks offered by the Ladies over yonder? Must be quite straining to do so many things yourself."
B shakes his head "I'm hunting my food when I'm hungry. That's what I craft the weapons for... I am also selling my weapons."
A: "Seems like you don't need anything, hmm?"
B ponders "Oh.. yes, there is something I'd like to buy. Maybe you can tell me .. who's selling some magic stuffs? I'm greatly interested in bringing my magic skills to perfection....."

[Kaityra]

In my eyes, two things are vital for a working economy. First of all, get the NPCs out of it, or reduce their buying prices drastically. NPCs are the source of the sheer endless amount of money in the economy, and that makes most trading senseless. I'd prefer a viable player economy in the long term run, without any NPCs.

This will only work in a MMO(RP)G if you can guarantee that there are enough players with the appropriate interests online 24h/day or players who play at less convenient times will have a great disadvantage.

[LigH]

IMHO:

Make other ways of crafting - and make them valuable too.

Oh, sorry -- you asked for "short term solutions"... 

[Arerano]

Ok, here comes my "short term" improvements-list which doesn't need any code changes.

Increase the loot (income for fighters) A good fighter shouldn't earn less than a bad miner. (but don't increase the "crafted"-weapon prices for selling them to NPC)
Increase weapons decay rate or, probably even better lower the 'repair to'-value[/b]. Making weapons ruined quicker.
Let food actually 'refresh' people. eg: water pouch = refreshes mental stamina. fish = refreshes physical stamina. apple = increases a bit of both.

This will lead to more people fighting which will in combination with weapon max-quality-decrease raising the need of crafted weapons.
Miners (and fighters) will buy food if it actually helps them which increases the sales for merchants.

Some change of less importance:
Since the smith of Gugrontid already bought plenty platinum, why should he need any more? Let people go to deserted Hydlaa again.. caravans could emerge and earn some little income or carrying the ores from the mines to the smiths.. or for carrying the ingots to Hydlaa.

[all those things can be implemented with progression_events (food refreshes) or by altering other things in the DB]