Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Pann

Coin of the realm - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

1 ore will equal a number of coins I assume. (Or will it be 1 ore = 1 coin)

 

It mentions the coins will be more efficient to carry, I would be curious as to the ratio.

 I think it would depend on the gold/silver content of the ore or in other words it's assay. In Crowfall it maybe Ore gathered in different world rings may assay out to be 5%, 15%, 35% and 60% /ton/ore. That would then translate to smelting and coin striking to say 10 coins, 30 coins to 120 coins per ton/ore. So say inventory space is 100 ore's per slot, you could carry 20,000 coins in the same inventory slot. Only Crowfall can answer the actual numbers, but it would need to be something along this line, ie: the 1 ore = 1 coin theory would make it where the best place to mine for ore would be the EK. For the method, as stated by Crowfall, to work, either the % or gold/silver per ore or scarcity of the ore must be such that the same sort of percentages are maintained. 


Obsidian-ForumSignature.jpg

 

@Obsidian_Guild - Covert Stealth Operation Specialists -  http://theobsidian.co

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players will designate as many currencies as they please. Those currencies will rise and fall in use organically as the market fluctuates. Awesome. Let that happen. If someone only wants to deal in 0.5oz gold nuggets, that's their choice. If someone else is open to many barter media, and multi-step trades, then it's up to them to manage the complexity, and their reward or loss is the result of their merit. That's the best system possible when humans are involved.

 

 

There's no such thing as "fair value". That's a bullcrap concept invented by collectivists to prop up their naive, utopian ideals. There are only perceived and coercive values. Perceived value is what you decide something is worth to you. Coercive value is what is imposed upon you by actors using market power not available to you, such as people threatening violence or game developers imposing fiat currencies. Economically, those two are indistinct.

But you are still free to accept whatever amount of coins you want for an item.  You are not selling to an NPC vendor with set prices.  Every thrall will be different.  And now, every player will have buying power with a standard coin type rather than having to spend an eternity swapping bartered goods until you get the right one eventually ending up with the item you actual wanted.


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you imagine travel time between instances of virtual space?

 

20 minute loading screens?

 

And seperate markets from large guilds is not a centralized market with every price on every item being ready to be pulled up.

Travel time to portals and portals not all being connected to every other realm.... just like most MMOs that do not have insta-porting (the bane of communities)


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kind of disappointed to be honest. I loved the idea of the barter system, and I've seen it work in games before. I know you say it's not fun, J Todd, but it was probably the most fun I have had trading...it made trading more interactive in and of itself. I never spent more time engage in economics or felt more rewarded than finding those perfect barter deals or interacting with a large amount of people, seeing what they had, and maybe finding something interesting yourself you hadn't seen before in the process.

 

I also feel like this takes a decent chunk away from the EK's. If the point is to have hundreds and hundreds and each have their own unique vendors and player driven economies, this basically stamps a lot of the emergent gameplay out by introducing common currency (which we have seen in basically every MMO). Feels like a cop out, and [at worse, but not suspected] hopefully not a path to leading to ACE monetizing in game currency on top of VIP tickets.

 

I'm kind of disappointed to be honest. I loved the idea of the barter system, and I've seen it work in games before. I know you say it's not fun, J Todd, but it was probably the most fun I have had trading...it made trading more interactive in and of itself. I never spent more time engage in economics or felt more rewarded than finding those perfect barter deals or interacting with a large amount of people, seeing what they had, and maybe finding something interesting yourself you hadn't seen before in the process.

 

I also feel like this takes a decent chunk away from the EK's. If the point is to have hundreds and hundreds and each have their own unique vendors and player driven economies, this basically stamps a lot of the emergent gameplay out by introducing common currency (which we have seen in basically every MMO). Feels like a cop out, and [at worse, but not suspected] hopefully not a path to leading to ACE monetizing in game currency on top of VIP tickets.

 

I'm kind of disappointed to be honest. I loved the idea of the barter system, and I've seen it work in games before. I know you say it's not fun, J Todd, but it was probably the most fun I have had trading...it made trading more interactive in and of itself. I never spent more time engage in economics or felt more rewarded than finding those perfect barter deals or interacting with a large amount of people, seeing what they had, and maybe finding something interesting yourself you hadn't seen before in the process.

 

I also feel like this takes a decent chunk away from the EK's. If the point is to have hundreds and hundreds and each have their own unique vendors and player driven economies, this basically stamps a lot of the emergent gameplay out by introducing common currency (which we have seen in basically every MMO). Feels like a cop out, and [at worse, but not suspected] hopefully not a path to leading to ACE monetizing in game currency on top of VIP tickets.

 

You can still do it that way if you want to take the time to stand around and hawk your wares, nothing Todd said would prevent you from doing it.


Obsidian-ForumSignature.jpg

 

@Obsidian_Guild - Covert Stealth Operation Specialists -  http://theobsidian.co

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question of clarification on this part:

 

 

 

There are a number of sinks in the game that will accept coins. You can use them to purchase parcels and buildings from the shop, upgrade your strongholds, pay maintenance or you can treat the coins as a raw material for crafting more items.

 

Does this mean that coins can be used the same as an equivalent of their raw material, or does this mean that you must deconstruct them in (hopefully) a loss-less fashion in order to use them?


 

Er, what's "edging"?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got it backwards. I'm advocating for the most organic and fluid system possible. A system in which you decide what the sword you have is worth to you, and how much the cabbage I have is worth to you; a system in which I do the same; a system in which, if we both perceive a net personal gain in value, we make the trade, with neither of us giving two squirts of rat pee how the other person values each item. That's the most efficient economic system possible, and it is totally funked up when coercive economic actors introduce arbitrary market conditions, such as fiat currencies.

 

The system as described is relatively loose. Here's the only area where I'm concerned:

 

 

There are a number of sinks in the game that will accept coins. You can use them to purchase parcels and buildings from the shop, upgrade your strongholds, pay maintenance or you can treat the coins as a raw material for crafting more items.

 

If maintenance can only be paid in coin, then that creates a currency drain but doesn't anchor the currency against any commodities. However, if maintenance can be paid either in coin or in raw materials then that anchors the value of coin against the raw material market.

 

Similarly, if the parcels that you can buy with coin are categorically different in function and design from parcels that can be purchased with cash, then you're not linking those markets. But if I can buy the same parcel with USD X or with CFC Y, then that anchors the value of coin in terms of cash.

 

I'm concerned that if both anchors in place - linking raw material prices to coin prices to cash prices - the system won't have enough flexibility to allow economic changes to self-adjust. That will create a lot of work for ACE in terms of managing the economy and carefully, carefully tweaking campaign resource output to try to match supply vs demand at the same ratios that their hardwired currency linkages require.

 

If I were in charge of economy design for Crowfall, taking on that job would be the last thing I'd want to do. I'd much rather create a system where commodity and currency prices can float freely against each other so that an over or undersupply won't have any significant harmful effects, just cause a price change.

 

ACE should strongly consider removing most or all possible market equivalencies where they will accept two or more different categories of payment for the same service or shop item, in order to allow cash, coin, and commodity values to float freely against each other.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Travel time to portals and portals not all being connected to every other realm.... just like most MMOs that do not have insta-porting (the bane of communities)

I can't help but feel you are missing some information.

 

It was nice chatting with you


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you are still free to accept whatever amount of coins you want for an item.  You are not selling to an NPC vendor with set prices.  Every thrall will be different.  And now, every player will have buying power with a standard coin type rather than having to spend an eternity swapping bartered goods until you get the right one eventually ending up with the item you actual wanted.

That's a theoretical situation that simply has no basis in observable history. Scarcity drives production and price, in conflict with each other. Long before a commodity of significant aggregate value becomes particularly scarce, its production will increase and marketing of its availability will be promoted. Organic economies are self-adjusting via negative feedback loops.


I mean, I'm assuming "fluffer" is just another pjorative term for carebears, whales, etc. Of course, I could be incorrect, but I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help but feel you are missing some information.

 

It was nice chatting with you

Insta-travel = open interface, click destination. Port

 

Travel = move avatar. Time elapses as you traverse.  Not instant.


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insta-travel = open interface, click destination. Port

 

Travel = move avatar. Time elapses as you traverse.  Not instant.

Mmm hmm..

 

We were talking between EKs.

Move avatar between EKs, where there is no virtual world... yep.


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a theoretical situation that simply has no basis in observable history. Scarcity drives production and price, in conflict with each other. Long before a commodity of significant aggregate value becomes particularly scarce, its production will increase and marketing of its availability will be promoted. Organic economies are self-adjusting via negative feedback loops.

Yes market will manage but not dictate a set number.  The introduction on coins does not change that.  The stability of coins though is why bartering systems failed and in games without coins people establish a trade medium.  Introducing coins does not prevent the bartering of goods though.  I have a sword, you have some armor, we swap and are happy.  With coin, now if I do not have the armor you want, you can accept coin and only be one more trade away from getting your armor.  Bartering systems usually mean I have to go sword > ores > stone> to ???? > cabbages > armor.

 

Another reason coins are important is also the focus of the game is on PvP.  PvEconomics is not the main part of the game.  Some people will try to turn it into it one, but what the devs also have to keep in mind is supporting an economic system that also gives the majority of people that are interested in Crowfall what they want, time to PvP.


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm hmm..

 

We were talking between EKs.

Move avatar between EKs, where there is no virtual world... yep.

Awful big assumption based on a link you have not yet provided.  We do not know how transferring between EKs is going to take place, and odds are they had not even decided yet.  The closest thing we have seen is a drawing of an avatar next to an alter where they are picking a door to go through.


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awful big assumption based on a link you have not yet provided. We do not know how transferring between EKs is going to take place, and odds are they had not even decided yet. The closest thing we have seen is a drawing of an avatar next to an alter where they are picking a door to go through.

Lol.

So are you think that instant travel between housing instances, that have no physical representation in a virtual world, is a bigger assumption than them being laid out on some kind of map?


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The system as described is relatively loose. Here's the only area where I'm concerned:

 

 

If maintenance can only be paid in coin, then that creates a currency drain but doesn't anchor the currency against any commodities. However, if maintenance can be paid either in coin or in raw materials then that anchors the value of coin against the raw material market.

 

Similarly, if the parcels that you can buy with coin are categorically different in function and design from parcels that can be purchased with cash, then you're not linking those markets. But if I can buy the same parcel with USD X or with CFC Y, then that anchors the value of coin in terms of cash.

 

I'm concerned that if both anchors in place - linking raw material prices to coin prices to cash prices - the system won't have enough flexibility to allow economic changes to self-adjust. That will create a lot of work for ACE in terms of managing the economy and carefully, carefully tweaking campaign resource output to try to match supply vs demand at the same ratios that their hardwired currency linkages require.

 

If I were in charge of economy design for Crowfall, taking on that job would be the last thing I'd want to do. I'd much rather create a system where commodity and currency prices can float freely against each other so that an over or undersupply won't have any significant harmful effects, just cause a price change.

 

ACE should strongly consider removing most or all possible market equivalencies where they will accept two or more different categories of payment for the same service or shop item, in order to allow cash, coin, and commodity values to float freely against each other.

 

 Aye, I was on board until I saw that players can buy things in the RMT shop with coins. Having separate items for coins vs $$ would help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.

So are you think that instant travel between housing instances, that have no physical representation in a virtual world, is a bigger assumption than them being laid out on some kind of map?

Sure they could go again the whole point of giving people the ability to build vast EKs and allow every single one to become nothing more than a port-spot and thrall standing next to it.  I however am saying I do not know.  What we do know is that you do have to "travel" to our EKs to use their vendors.  The tangent you brought us down is now way off base.  My original suggestions was some sort of interface to help us find the vendors given that if only 10% of just the kick-starter backers activity sold items via thralls, that would be over 1700 vendor locations!

 

Without something to connect them, players would just separate into tiny fractured communities.  Now maybe they want it that way.  Maybe they want us to use third-party sites to hock our wares.  I for one prefer in-game support to dubious outside sites.


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 EDIT:

 

The only downside that I see with coins is, coin currency tends to stabilize exponentially faster than barter systems.

 

An example would be if the community decides that a sword is worth 100 copper and as a crafter, you decide to sell your sword for 105 copper, nobody will ever buy it because it's too expensive. If everybody is selling swords for 100 chickens and you put your sword up for 105 chickens, chances are that player doesn't know the going rate for sword to chicken conversion because it's more abstract. 

This

 

If maintenance can only be paid in coin, then that creates a currency drain but doesn't anchor the currency against any commodities. However, if maintenance can be paid either in coin or in raw materials then that anchors the value of coin against the raw material market.

 

Similarly, if the parcels that you can buy with coin are categorically different in function and design from parcels that can be purchased with cash, then you're not linking those markets. But if I can buy the same parcel with USD X or with CFC Y, then that anchors the value of coin in terms of cash.

 

I'm concerned that if both anchors in place - linking raw material prices to coin prices to cash prices - the system won't have enough flexibility to allow economic changes to self-adjust. 

And this is what i wanted to say about my concerns earlier, but you both wrote it a lot more understandable. Thanks.
Now i'm interested what the devs have to say about this.

Edited by Navtyr

Welcome the hunger

Todd is Love, Todd is Life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why, but I have the feeling that I am going to be poor :lol:

Anyway go with this! We wanna try ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure they could go again the whole point of giving people the ability to build vast EKs and allow every single one to become nothing more than a port-spot and thrall standing next to it. I however am saying I do not know. What we do know is that you do have to "travel" to our EKs to use their vendors. The tangent you brought us down is now way off base. My original suggestions was some sort of interface to help us find the vendors given that if only 10% of just the kick-starter backers activity sold items via thralls, that would be over 1700 vendor locations!

 

Without something to connect them, players would just separate into tiny fractured communities. Now maybe they want it that way. Maybe they want us to use third-party sites to hock our wares. I for one prefer in-game support to dubious outside sites.

And to that, I was saying they might as well make a centralized market, like an auction house, since there will not be any kind of distance between the EKS.

 

It was really not a tangent, it is logical to assume there isn't by the information we have been given.

 

If you think otherwise, we should make another thread where I prove you wrong.


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The system as described is relatively loose. Here's the only area where I'm concerned:

 

 

If maintenance can only be paid in coin, then that creates a currency drain but doesn't anchor the currency against any commodities. However, if maintenance can be paid either in coin or in raw materials then that anchors the value of coin against the raw material market.

 

Similarly, if the parcels that you can buy with coin are categorically different in function and design from parcels that can be purchased with cash, then you're not linking those markets. But if I can buy the same parcel with USD X or with CFC Y, then that anchors the value of coin in terms of cash.

 

I'm concerned that if both anchors in place - linking raw material prices to coin prices to cash prices - the system won't have enough flexibility to allow economic changes to self-adjust. That will create a lot of work for ACE in terms of managing the economy and carefully, carefully tweaking campaign resource output to try to match supply vs demand at the same ratios that their hardwired currency linkages require.

 

If I were in charge of economy design for Crowfall, taking on that job would be the last thing I'd want to do. I'd much rather create a system where commodity and currency prices can float freely against each other so that an over or undersupply won't have any significant harmful effects, just cause a price change.

 

ACE should strongly consider removing most or all possible market equivalencies where they will accept two or more different categories of payment for the same service or shop item, in order to allow cash, coin, and commodity values to float freely against each other.

 

I agree with this and it will definitely affect a truly "player driven" economy but I am still debating whether or not this is a bad thing. Yes, the devs will have a lot of extra work monitoring a system like this, but in the end it might be for the best, since without any control at all things could get out of hand and fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...