Goblin Squad Member
|
I guess I really never truly understood the magic coin part of the money blog.. and have a concern that perhaps a dev can address..
If coins are truly going to have no weight, cant be looted upon death, and do not need to be carried … What will stop the below scenario when settlement x needs to buy a bunch or armor / swords from settlement y?
Why use the caravan system at all? Why not just send a group of naked folks over to the site you mean to buy stuff from … have them purchase what they are suppose to, thread those items and run back home. Its cheaper than a SAD would be, has little to no risk(except for a decay point if they are mugged..), and just needs a small army of naked people with magic coins to run back and forth to buy your equipment..
What makes this a bad tactic?(this cant be what you have in mind for meaningful interaction..)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
This does not seem to be a problem with coins(*).
Your concern is really "why will anyone ever make a caravan when they could transport goods without risk if they thread the goods".
The answer is that the number of items the economy will need to consume should be so high that it will be prohibitive to try and transport all the inventory threaded.
I've said before that I suspect one consequence of the threading system is that there will be two economies in the game - the threaded and unthreaded economies. Ironically, weapons and armor, the two things that most people think will be cool to craft will also be the two things for which the least amount of crafting must be done, because they'll be lost at a much lower rate. Trust me when I say that concerns me greatly, but it is what it is.
You can't thread everything. You can't thread consumables and the combat system assumes that you're using consumables all the time to get maximum advantage. That's a partial admission that we know that the threaded economy would otherwise make it possible to avoid the impacts of the risk of losses, and again, it is what it is.
(*) Realistically we couldn't stop this problem from occurring even if we made coins lootable and have bulk. What would happen instead is that the players would evolve a substitute. The players would find the highest-value, lowest bulk, (likely threadable) items and use them as ersatz currency. In other words, before leaving on a risky journey, they'd convert Coin to Diamond Encrusted Vorpal Ghosttouch Humanbane Daggers [or whatever], thread the daggers, and then leave town. On arrival at their destination, they'd sell the daggers (which would have a price that would rapidly converge on a fixed price throughout the whole game due to the utility of this system) and convert them back into Coin.
The net effect would be an unnecessary complication to the game that would be opaque to some number of players but wouldn't really do the thing you think it would do which is put a bunch of coin out there to be robbed on the highway.
I should note that this is how banks evolved in the real world. It's much safer to transmit a piece of paper that says 'By the authority of Simon, pay Bob 100 gold pieces on receipt of this letter", which is no good to anyone but Bob, and can be replaced by Simon if it is stolen. After a point, nobody left home with bags of specie.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I expect that this may still very well happen if the distance is pretty far. Not only threading the items but taking the Death Train (killing yourself somehow) straight back to your spawn point instead of running all the way back home.
In a game where death is a quicker way to get back to home, Death Trains will be the common tactic if it can be afforded.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
when you die you lose % of your inventory.
If it is a single specialty good, yes this will happen if people really want to be annoying little pieces *ahem* mm yes.
This does not affect/work for transportation of bulk goods.
I realise that. It will be something they will need to weigh the loss of % due to death or being waylaid by bandits with additional possibility of death.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For a large company it would make sense to use the caravan system, but I most likely will be involved in a very small group of 4-5 folks and risking our haul of 5 suits of armor and 5 swords every few months to a caravan where it can be looted wont make much sense.
When I hear ..Consumables being used heavily. I take that to mean they will be available in large quantities no matter your settlement. Specialty items will be made in various locations so in order to get them from faraway places to our settlement there is no incentive to risk being hijacked on the road and loose those items.
The only time my small group would encounter caravans or SAD situations is after they finish for the day and make their way back to their home settlement. No sense in flagging a caravan down to help finish the trip and no reason to give into a SAD when the only things at risk will be whatever they found during that day.
I imagine my small group will have to make a restocking run every month or so in which we have to run back and forth buying items to be used during the next month and keeping them in our banks till they are needed..
Seems as though if they wanted to include small companies in the design including coins as inventory, would at least make us think about using the caravans to move items, because that standard threaded dagger/item used as coin in Ryan’s example would at least lose some value on that characters death due to item decay which would be a meaningful choice for a small company/ group.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This does not seem to be a problem with coins(*).
Your concern is really "why will anyone ever make a caravan when they could transport goods without risk if they thread the goods".
The answer is that the number of items the economy will need to consume should be so high that it will be prohibitive to try and transport all the inventory threaded.
I've said before that I suspect one consequence of the threading system is that there will be two economies in the game - the threaded and unthreaded economies. Ironically, weapons and armor, the two things that most people think will be cool to craft will also be the two things for which the least amount of crafting must be done, because they'll be lost at a much lower rate. Trust me when I say that concerns me greatly, but it is what it is.
You can't thread everything. You can't thread consumables and the combat system assumes that you're using consumables all the time to get maximum advantage. That's a partial admission that we know that the threaded economy would otherwise make it possible to avoid the impacts of the risk of losses, and again, it is what it is.
(*) Realistically we couldn't stop this problem from occurring even if we made coins lootable and have bulk. What would happen instead is that the players would evolve a substitute. The players would find the highest-value, lowest bulk, (likely threadable) items and use them as ersatz currency. In other words, before leaving on a risky journey, they'd convert Coin to Diamond Encrusted Vorpal Ghosttouch Humanbane Daggers [or whatever], thread the daggers, and then leave town. On arrival at their destination, they'd sell the daggers (which would have a price that would rapidly converge on a fixed price throughout the whole game due to the utility of this system) and convert them back into Coin.
The net effect would be an unnecessary complication to the game that would be opaque to some number of players but wouldn't really do the thing you think it would do which is put a bunch of...
There are so many complicated systems in Pathfinder, I'm guessing that as MMOs have evolved the developers have had to come up with come pretty intense coding to keep people from "rigging the system." It's a shame that the days of more simple, perhaps easy, gaming are over but I applaud you all for being proactive in creating a complicated, yet elegant gaming system.
With that said, what do you plan on being lootable from a player that has most of his gear/weapons threaded? There will be no "gold", and little equipment on him so I'm curious to know what you think an average player will carry? Will spells require reagents? Will archery require arrows? Will these types of things be lootable? Food? Maps? Magic items? Etc etc. What do you expect to be on the average player's corpse?
Let me also ask, have you thought about "threading" only affecting players killed unlawfully? For example, if I kill an innocent player I should only get his non-threaded items. But what if I'm an innocent player and I get attacked by a bandit and I'm victorious. Should I not get all the bandits gear? He attacked me. This could also help to make the life of a bandit more risky.
Just something for thought!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Threading has built in limitations. The higher quality/more valuable items require more threads, and characters have only so many threads to use. So if you successfully beat a high level, or someone carrying high level gear there is no chance they have threaded everything of value. Of what is not threaded some will be destroyed upon death (apparently a random selection) but the rest will be available to loot.
If a character plays multi-role they have to have more swappable items, so those will be a sought target. More good things deserving threads should be available from them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(*) Realistically we couldn't stop this problem from occurring even if we made coins lootable and have bulk. What would happen instead is that the players would evolve a substitute. The players would find the highest-value, lowest bulk, (likely threadable) items and use them as ersatz currency. In other words, before leaving on a risky journey, they'd convert Coin to Diamond Encrusted Vorpal Ghosttouch Humanbane Daggers [or whatever], thread the daggers, and then leave town. On arrival at their destination, they'd sell the daggers (which would have a price that would rapidly converge on a fixed price throughout the whole game due to the utility of this system) and convert them back into Coin.
Sounds to me like a meaningful decision is being made. If you are threading these daggers, then you cannot thread other equipment. I would hope the roads are not so safe, even from a PvE sense, that travelling naked would be a wise decision. If you have hired guards to protect you and your daggers, then your costs for safety have been paid. But if the guards are any good, I'd imagine they would be unable to thread ALL of their gear at once, thus meaning potential attackers would have some reason to strike.
I like the concept of having coins in inventory, and even giving them weight. Checks and contracts and substitute currencies are all valid things to see formed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Tuffon
"When I hear ..Consumables being used heavily. I take that to mean they will be available in large quantities no matter your settlement. Specialty items will be made in various locations so in order to get them from faraway places to our settlement there is no incentive to risk being hijacked on the road and loose those items."
Actually no. The whole point of the current system is set up so that every settlement is missing certain needing bulk goods/consumables (though this may be just raw materials I will admit).
"I imagine my small group will have to make a restocking run every month or so in which we have to run back and forth buying items to be used during the next month and keeping them in our banks till they are needed.."
As Being points out, this works for low-level characters who can thread all their low level gear, however high-level characters cannot thread everything. So it will be no longer viable to kill yourself to tele to your home settlement cause you will lose stuff.
In addition you still have to make the (extremely long) initial journey, even if you can tele back at the end. If you decide to "run it naked" I very much doubt that you will make it all the way alive at the higher levels, given the nature of the game and the fact that high-level settlements bring in high-level monsters, so your high-level goods will be very hard to get to. The sheer scale of the journey will cause a few people to caravan up, not to transport goods but simply to transport themselves.
Either way, I'm going to stay honest to the system and to my RP and travel in full gear whichever direction I go. It is neither correct nor fair to cheat all the bandit clans of their game time simply because I want to keep some arbitrary equipment I can just go get again. (if it is THAT valuable you don't want to lose it then thread it. If you are outa threads, tough. Seems like you have an important RP life decision to make, and you should have to make it).
I also like this and hope changing the current system is up for discussion.I like the concept of having coins in inventory, and even giving them weight. Checks and contracts and substitute currencies are all valid things to see formed.
I would be quite happy to see such a system implemented. It should however be noted that if they do put in a system whereby coin is carried from place to place that it will inevitably lead to two things entering the game. Not to say these are necessarily bad things merely that we should always be aware of all the ramifications of any suggestion before getting behind it.
So what are these things that will inevitably enter the system
It is the player run bank which allows you to deposit in town A and withdraw in town B. It will grow up for the same reason similar things came about in the middle ages.
I see this personally as a good thing it is full of player interaction. However this also comes with a downside. The player bank scam (it should be noted this is often not intended as a scam when it starts but at some point someone realises he is sitting on 10 million coins and he can syphon a lot of that off without anyone being the wiser unless everyone tries to get their money out at once).
I expect the first thing people will say is "Aha but GW can track all this through their logs and retrieve the money". Unfortunately it wont be quite that simple unless our scammer is a fool.
If he just turns around and steals the entire balance then sure they can do this. If over time however he merely routes 10% of each deposit to various alts it could be hard to track down how much money is missing and who it should be refunded to as their maybe 1000's of deposits stretching over a year or more.
In short player run banks are going to be caveat emptor and a lot depends on how much you trust the bank. Personally I would stick to short term deposit schemes only whereby I deposit here knowing I will get it back out over there in 20 minutes time
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Steelwing
Here is an answer to the player run bank (flawed though it may be)
1) money is tangible
2) money deposited in a bank is available in another
3) bank is PC owned
4) banks are regional (as each bank has a specific "typed" building they have to build e.g. wells fargo vs. U.S. Bank)
5) Banks have to have a form of "gold standard" (the owner/owners have to put up some form of collateral, this can be "nothing" or "1gp" but that is up to the banker to decide, and such collateral would be less likely to attract customers)
6) The deposited money must be "caravaned" if moved. This means if the owners want to have their money (that is the deposited money) they have to move it via caravan. This allows the money to be stolen by raiders, as well as providing a means to destroy in-game material. If this gets raided/hijacked en-route to wherever, then all the money is lost and the owners have to pay up the collateral.
Obviously this system needs flushing out, but I feel like this is the most viable method for a PC-run bank, as well as a way to fail-safe vs. a scam.
The NPC will get the standard bank, but it won't have any benefits, perks, and only middling-level collateral (or no caravaning and thus no interest)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
owners in #6 being the bank owners. The actual depositor will have access to this money until it gets stolen (the caravan acting as a moving bank vault in this regard), whether it is in transit or not. Should it get stolen, the collateral is divvied up among the depositor's accounts, whether as items of near or equal value or whether the item(s) are auto-sold and the sale is divvied out, and shows up immediately. This has a significant risk sure, but I am sure people will want to ensure their money is safe, and it really just ups the anty and the realism all around. Personally I don't mind the idea of losing my millions in-game due to bandit problems while it was in-transit. That actually seems kind of awesome to me, as much as it will be sure to piss me off/pain me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As much as I would like to change GW’s mind on coin, Ryan doesn’t seem to be the type to change his vision on things easily.
I only want to state that with the other systems that are being designed, great care is being taken to ensure it is something repeatable by many people, numerous times and has meaning. I do not get that same feeling when I look at the magic coin explanation. It seems to take those things away from other systems.
Put it this way a character running around in nothing but a shirt and pants and shoes is making his way along the road(headed to a settlement 30 min away to buy a new sword). The bandits see him coming and know he has nothing on him, as this is a common sight along this stretch of road.
They really have no interest in becoming CE for outright attacking him and gain nothing in the way of loot from him if they do kill him. They don’t want to give up their numbers and location to SAD someone that doesn’t have anything just so they can kill him. That would make any real targets aware they are there so they just let him pass by.
The CE hostile folks running around may have a go at him, but aren’t those people being hunted by everyone anyway so do they just kill him for fun of it? Taking a chance they are seen by one of 50 other players that all hunt CE folks in that hex?
Will there be PvE content in the way? Sure, but I planned ahead and my naked sprinter is actually a wizard, I just use invisibility when I see them and continue running even if they are lucky enough to spot me..
The idea that someone is going to stop me because they can may happen, but what is the benefit for that PC to actually confront me? They gain nothing that I can tell other than an easy kill without provocation and probably another bump toward CE.
I guess they can SAD for a reputation points but seems like there would be better us for SAD other than to just raise rep.
Guess I could trespass and get killed by lawful people if I ran through their settlement. Oh well I know not to go that way again and will just take another route on my next attempt to make it to where im going (because its not like I lost anything except some time..)
I agree that large scale settlements will have to use caravans and large orders will need to be done . I know settlements are GW end game content. That being said there will be quite a few small groups that will do something along the lines above just to avoid the hassle of caravans and the SAD system all together. Undermining the work that is going into the other systems seems counterproductive from my view point.
Will step off my soap box and fade back into the background now, just wanted to post what I think we will all see within the first few months of the game..
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If the currency has serious downsides and can be stolen easily, a parallel currency will evolve that trades those downsides for the downside of obfuscation. A mechanic that is almost universally implemented (by players!) that is also obscure is a Bad Thing, because it jacks up the barrier to entry for new players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That parallel will become currency and will be looked to be stolen as well.
Again the problem is the "naked runner" system, and again that is for another thread (maybe). The problem isn't inherent to the currency but rather to the people playing. Whether or not this currency vulnerability is implemented, there will be people running around "naked" to transport specialty items and stuff. I think GW can keep track of any such "proxy items" and make them "unthreadable".
In the end I guess it is all honor system, and people lack honor it seems, so I understand your point. Just wish it wont be so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the currency has serious downsides and can be stolen easily, a parallel currency will evolve that trades those downsides for the downside of obfuscation. A mechanic that is almost universally implemented (by players!) that is also obscure is a Bad Thing, because it jacks up the barrier to entry for new players.
The key is to ensure that the parallel currencies always need to be backed by the prime currency.
This is done by only allowing the purchase of goods with said primary currency in the general markets. Under the assumption that 'most' purchases will be made through an abstracted market system that only accepts coins, then coins will remain relevant. So long as coins remain relevant, access to the parallel currency will be available through an exchange. If you want custom bartering, that is where you have to go talk to someone face-to-face.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That parallel will become currency and will be looked to be stolen as well.
Again the problem is the "naked runner" system, and again that is for another thread (maybe). The problem isn't inherent to the currency but rather to the people playing. Whether or not this currency vulnerability is implemented, there will be people running around "naked" to transport specialty items and stuff. I think GW can keep track of any such "proxy items" and make them "unthreadable".
In the end I guess it is all honor system, and people lack honor it seems, so I understand your point. Just wish it wont be so.
The naked runner system is broken down by Item Durability. Current understanding is that all threadable items will have a Durability score and that death reduces durability. Being naked makes you easy to kill, and there is always a chance you are carrying more than you can thread so you remain a viable target. Regardless, running naked makes you very vulnerable to NPC and PC foes alike. If you die, your threaded alternative currency all takes a durability hit. Now you need to pay to have it repaired before you can exchange it back out for true value. Death has still reduced the value of what you are transporting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Lifedragn
indeed, but as it was brought up before, nobody is going to randomly attack someone, and Bandits aren't going to go after a target they cannot get profit from, esp. if it is just going to end in a huge rep lost. And NPCs will still be a problem, but there will be plenty of people who will be happily occupying those NPCs' time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Lifedragn
indeed, but as it was brought up before, nobody is going to randomly attack someone, and Bandits aren't going to go after a target they cannot get profit from, esp. if it is just going to end in a huge rep lost. And NPCs will still be a problem, but there will be plenty of people who will be happily occupying those NPCs' time.
I think we are assuming that travel to transport wealth and only wealth will be commonplace. Do we envision the transport of currency alone to cause significant traffic?
I can imagine some pure money-movers, but not that many. If there are that many, then people will try disguising themselves as naked runners to move other goods, in which case naked players become a target again.
Additionally, how much money can actually be moved at a time given weight / thread limits? Ideally, your coin should weigh so much less than individual items that you are severely hampering your carry limit with a naked run. Either you have many lesser valued items that hit your weight limit, or one very high valued item that consumes all of your threads - because remember items may take multiple threads based on their quality level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Steelwing
Here is an answer to the player run bank (flawed though it may be)
1) money is tangible
Yes this was the whole premise in the first place not sure why you think it is a solution as if money is not tangible as currently proposed by Dancey you do not carry it
2) money deposited in a bank is available in another
This defeats the whole point of money being tangible which is that players have to carry coin from place to place
3) bank is PC owned
Yes as I said this is what will pop up if currency is tangible not sure again why you think this is a solution to the problem of player run banks
4) banks are regional (as each bank has a specific "typed" building they have to build e.g. wells fargo vs. U.S. Bank)
Settlements will be reluctant to allocate building slots for banks when other buildings are much more useful to them (remember building slots are strictly limited). This makes banks as buildings of limited value because they will not be ubiquitous whereas the player run bank which consists of a company ready to take deposits and pay out withdrawals and record it all on a shared spreadsheet can set up shop in all settlements
5) Banks have to have a form of "gold standard" (the owner/owners have to put up some form of collateral, this can be "nothing" or "1gp" but that is up to the banker to decide, and such collateral would be less likely to attract customers)
Player run banks in Eve have attracted in the past 10's of billions of Isk in deposits which is going to massively overshadow any collateral
6) The deposited money must be "caravaned" if moved. This means if the owners want to have their money (that is the deposited money) they have to move it via caravan. This allows the money to be stolen by raiders, as well as providing a means to destroy in-game material. If this gets raided/hijacked en-route to wherever, then all the money is lost and the owners have to pay up the collateral.
While this is certainly true to begin with that coin will need to be transported over time the player run banks will build up reserves in all settlements capable of paying out most withdrawals
Obviously this system needs flushing out, but I feel like this is the most viable method for a PC-run bank, as well as a way to fail-safe vs. a scam.The NPC will get the standard bank, but it won't have any benefits, perks, and only middling-level collateral (or no caravaning and thus no interest)
This whole suggestion is predicated on their being a mechanic supplied. Even if such were to happen there is nothing to stop anyone setting a player run bank of the sort I describe and there are plenty of advantages to customers for using the unofficial bank not least of which is the ability to withdraw virtually anywhere rather than just where someone has allowed a bank to be built and that bank is linked into the same network.
I think tangible currency is a great idea. I also don't think player run banks even unofficial ones are a bad idea. I was merely pointing out that banks will spring up if the currency idea comes about and that care will be need to be exercised when using them
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Lifedragn
indeed, but as it was brought up before, nobody is going to randomly attack someone, and Bandits aren't going to go after a target they cannot get profit from, esp. if it is just going to end in a huge rep lost. And NPCs will still be a problem, but there will be plenty of people who will be happily occupying those NPCs' time.
If I knew my reputation wasn't going to be devastated by attacking random naked mobs, I would happily attack them. For two main reasons.
1) Naked characters running around the server would annoy me no end.2) IMHO it's an exploit I would like to encourage players that it isn't worth the trouble of doing this.
Additionally if I was a Bandit I would SAD that character. They have coin, and they won't want the inconvenience of having to start back at base. Sounds like a good reason for the naked mob to pay the toll, to me.
You might read my post and think it makes no logical sense to attack them and lose some rep. It doesn't have to make sense to you, it only has to make sense to me. I suspect others would also attack for similar reasons, or just because they thought it was funny.
So I might not do it all the time but I would do it occasionally. Just as I'd occasionally SAD them myself. It would be hilarious for my solo character to SAD a mob of naked runners.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Steelwing
I understand I restated some of the premises. I was just giving the full layout of the single solution, not listing various solutions. They are all a part of the whole. I'd like you to reread it in this light, as apposed to individual points then get back to me with the new problems that arise ^^
@Ravening
To myself it doesn't matter about the reputation either way.. I don't see what your problem with my statement is as I am agreeing with you as to what people SHOULD do.
I was just bringing up the problems inherent to the system. clearly the "nobody" is an overstatement, but that was just used for emphasis anyways. I meant that the average person is unlikely to attack a naked because they won't want the Rep loss. This isn't my thesis paper so I needn't worry about every little semantic problems.
I would again recommend rereading my post, and if it still isn't clear then I'll go edit it for clarity!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Steelwing
I understand I restated some of the premises. I was just giving the full layout of the single solution, not listing various solutions. They are all a part of the whole. I'd like you to reread it in this light, as apposed to individual points then get back to me with the new problems that arise ^^
@Ravening
To myself it doesn't matter about the reputation either way.. I don't see what your problem with my statement is as I am agreeing with you as to what people SHOULD do.
I was just bringing up the problems inherent to the system. clearly the "nobody" is an overstatement, but that was just used for emphasis anyways. I meant that the average person is unlikely to attack a naked because they won't want the Rep loss. This isn't my thesis paper so I needn't worry about every little semantic problems.
I would again recommend rereading my post, and if it still isn't clear then I'll go edit it for clarity!
Please kind sir/madam.
Do not take my words as a criticism to your most worthy observations. I merely wanted to throw my hat into the discussion to illuminate to one and all, that there will be odd-balls like myself, who will attack and/or SAD naked mobs, even it there is a rep hit.
Warm Regards
Ravening ;-p
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here is an answer to the player run bank (flawed though it may be)1) money is tangible
2) money deposited in a bank is available in another
3) bank is PC owned
4) banks are regional (as each bank has a specific "typed" building they have to build e.g. wells fargo vs. U.S. Bank)
5) Banks have to have a form of "gold standard" (the owner/owners have to put up some form of collateral, this can be "nothing" or "1gp" but that is up to the banker to decide, and such collateral would be less likely to attract customers)
6) The deposited money must be "caravaned" if moved. This means if the owners want to have their money (that is the deposited money) they have to move it via caravan. This allows the money to be stolen by raiders, as well as providing a means to destroy in-game material. If this gets raided/hijacked en-route to wherever, then all the money is lost and the owners have to pay up the collateral.
Obviously this system needs flushing out, but I feel like this is the most viable method for a PC-run bank, as well as a way to fail-safe vs. a scam.
The NPC will get the standard bank, but it won't have any benefits, perks, and only middling-level collateral (or no caravaning and thus no interest)
I think the point Steelwing was making is that none of this is enforceable. If TSV decides to create a banking group...and we station a player in each town, take in deposits in any town, balance our books via a internal forum or even guild chat, and allow withdrawal...all for a nominal withdrawal fee, again from any town. How do you stop us? We would be entirely PC driven and require no access to specialized mechanics.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
That parallel will become currency and will be looked to be stolen as well.
Again the problem is the "naked runner" system, and again that is for another thread (maybe). The problem isn't inherent to the currency but rather to the people playing. Whether or not this currency vulnerability is implemented, there will be people running around "naked" to transport specialty items and stuff. I think GW can keep track of any such "proxy items" and make them "unthreadable".
In the end I guess it is all honor system, and people lack honor it seems, so I understand your point. Just wish it wont be so.
How would GW track DKP or an alternative cryptocurrency? Is the goal to make secure currency too inconvenient to use?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly I think that threading items shouldnt make them safe it should make them safer.
for example I die. I have a T3 greatsword threaded. The game destroys 25% of my gear. If my greatsword is selected for destruction there is a second roll. Since my greatsword is threaded there is only a 10% chance it gets destroyed on that second roll.
The result is that my greatsword is probably going to last much longer than any non threaded gear i have, BUT its not immune to destruction.
The same could apply to SADing equipment where threaded gear would be very difficult to get
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly I think that threading items shouldnt make them safe it should make them safer.
for example I die. I have a T3 greatsword threaded. The game destroys 25% of my gear. If my greatsword is selected for destruction there is a second roll. Since my greatsword is threaded there is only a 10% chance it gets destroyed on that second roll.
The result is that my greatsword is probably going to last much longer than any non threaded gear i have, BUT its not immune to destruction.
The same could apply to SADing equipment where threaded gear would be very difficult to get
No way. Most people are very protective about their hard earned stuff. If things are breaking that folks did everything they could to protect it will just lead to an exodus of players. As far as I know, there isn't an insurance policy in PFO like in EVE. Why insist on taking EVERYTHING from a player? How is that fun at all? If you want to play that way, don't thread anything but don't dump that overly hardcore all-or-nothing bull on the rest of us. Get your filthy hands off my shiny.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Leperkhaun
they have a durability thing so if you die a whole bunch it affects the gear
@Ravening
Oh no worries, I merely forgot to include my jolly little winky face at the end. here: ;)
@Forecinth
Probably too optimistic here, but player initiative. If you are royally screwin over some poor saps then the players should do something about it. If it becomes a problem that the players cannot deal with then they can always report it and have GW step in, that is kind of the point of EE if I remember correctly, among others.
The thing is that if you wish to mess with peoples money and do bank scams then you should be able to, we are trying to make this as realistic (well not exactly, but let me play devil's advocate here) as possible. If it gets around you aren't good for the money, then people won't join into your "bank" and you won't get nuthin. I guess I'm just too hopeful people will stick to their word is all.
I understand that usually the collateral will never make up entirely for the money stored, but that is the risk. If you don't store it in the bank then you have to carry it all with you (tangible money, again, but with no weight).
@DeciusBrutus
Well basically you log onto your character, walk down to the market, and check prices, probably the easiest way.
The goal isn't to make money insecure per se, it is to make the non-money items equally secure/insecure. The alternate currency is an issue that you guys need to address (I actually didn't think about it til you mentioned it), and if you already have a system in place (like the one I proposed) it will be easy to transfer this "bank note" system onto whatever is being used. I know this isn't a perfect solution, but at least it is a jumping board of some sort.
Again, you'd need some way of checking, preferably automatic, but I cannot say what it is because I don't know how you will be tracking things in-game. And you can always just walk down to the market/bank and check the going rates and (hopefully) alter the currency in some godly fashion. Which if you cannot do I would suggest working on a method for, just in case the economy does get so bad we cannot fix it in-game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@BrotherZeal, I do not think the problem is scamming, the problem is the use of in-game system such as guild chat, or out of game system like a website to run a legitimate bank...even if we do it well and fairly, we are removing the need to transport coin/goods (or enabling others to do so), bypassing in-game checks and balances.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, if TSV is rich, we do an initial distribution of wealth and setup a banking alt in each town, each with 1 million gold. Then we can deposit in town x and withdraw in town y and vice versa. As long as TSV charges a tiny fee for each transaction and people need to travel (and hence hide their wealth to avoid SAD), that should be a profitable endeavor. Besides the initial movement of gold which Steelwing acknowledged, it would/could remove the necessity for anyone else to move gold.
So, just to clearly illustrate, if you were in town x and wanted to move 250000g to town y, you would deposit 250050g with our agent in town x, we would note on our website you had done so, then you could withdraw 250000g from our agent in town y. Essentially you have just moved your gold without risk of loosing it. And it sounds like we would run low, but once you repair and buy whatever, you will want to deposit your change to again avoid risk of SAD. Since each town should try to be profitable, it should actually be a net gain for us (or we could adjust our prices so we "make" 0.5% of our holdings per week...for instance).
For the record, TSV does not at this time intend to get into banking...that I am aware of.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you had a single customer or so with even money, yes. But say you have 100 people (1/3rd beginning settlement pop) using your bank in X. if each person has 1/4 million gold deposited and then goes to another settlement (Y) and withdraws there... how does that settlement maintain its vaults if they only have 75 people depositing there normally?
No for the most part you are not going to need to move money around, 100 people aren't just going to up and move to another settlement and then withdraw all their money at the same time as that settlement's residents or anything... usually. But it can happen (creating a "run-on-the-bank") which would require gold transfer somehow (or else stuff happens). In addition normal population movement/traveling will over time cause disparity between branches' vaults that you will need to fix by moving your money around (problems being if money starts piling up in one place and word gets out then bandits might raid it hard and if you start piling it up in one settlement the charge rate in the other won't be able to keep up with the wealth drain, if that makes sense, among other issues)
Don't worry Forencith, I'm not assuming T7V is or anything, this is purely hypothetical, of course. By the way does it irk you guys that I use "T7V" and not "TSV"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And yes, it could/would remove people from carrying their coin with them, other than a pittance they got from looting monsters or something the same. I thought that was the point of having this/the discussion, as well as one of the issues revolving around SADs?
I'll again remind that when moving money in these large sums it will be counted not as "coin" directly (in my system) but as a "bank note", whether that is an actual bank note or a super dagger or whatever, which requires further transactions (and also opens up a lot more complexity) while at the same time removing the problem of "just coin" loot.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ BrotherZael
I would not get too invested in this until you see a change in the "coin" mechanic. Until then it is intangible and non lootable. If people wanted to store their intangible gold in a bank with convenient branches (for some reason), the "bankers" could quite easily keep the balances stable in the branches without ever risking it.