Should money have weight?

ArchivedUser

Now before you get in a twist over this topic. I have seen this work in a different game. UO, In that game, your could only carry so much, and yes gold did have weight value too.

In AoC you could have that play a role too, it would change how your planning to play the game, and make for an interesting game play.

How they got around it as players began to ask for an easier way to move funds, you could get a check from the bank, up to 1 million gold, and cash it out at the bank.

Something like this can work in AoC, also, if you need to move billions of gold between places, can you say Caravan anyone?

Is this something you would like to see?

ArchivedUser

It sounds good in theory but in practice it'll start to become a hassle. When the game first starts there will be no major buildings (such as churches, banks, coliseums, etc). At best the level 1 node will have tents and a fireplace. If gold had weight then every player starting out will have to end up micro-managing since supposedly the inventory weight limit on your character is not that high. If they do decide to make gold have weight it would have to be 0.01 and even then it might just end up causing frustration in the early stages of the game.

ArchivedUser

Lysander said:

It sounds good in theory but in practice it'll start to become a hassle. When the game first starts there will be no major buildings (such as churches, banks, coliseums, etc). At best the level 1 node will have tents and a fireplace. If gold had weight then every player starting out will have to end up micro-managing since supposedly the inventory weight limit on your character is not that high. If they do decide to make gold have weight it would have to be 0.01 and even then it might just end up causing frustration in the early stages of the game.

This could all easily be balanced. The first camp will appear in a few hours, I'm sure a storage chest will pop up with it.

ArchivedUser

My vote is no specifically because from what I've seen, trade caravans and such will only be for items, not gold. If there isn't going to be a magic transaction invisible personal vault thing that most MMOs have, like you just keep the money on you all the time, then I'd be down for it!

ArchivedUser

Isabelle said:

My vote is no specifically because from what I've seen, trade caravans and such will only be for items, not gold. If there isn't going to be a magic transaction invisible personal vault thing that most MMOs have, like you just keep the money on you all the time, then I'd be down for it!

I remember Steven stating caravans could be used for transporting currency also. Or at least heard him talking about it. I assume currency will have a weight otherwise the caravan system will become nearly pointless.

Why should it be safer to transport gold coins than gold bars?

Maybe they'll limit how much currency you can carry rather than link it to the weight system.

ArchivedUser

Lysander said:

It sounds good in theory but in practice it'll start to become a hassle. When the game first starts there will be no major buildings (such as churches, banks, coliseums, etc). At best the level 1 node will have tents and a fireplace. If gold had weight then every player starting out will have to end up micro-managing since supposedly the inventory weight limit on your character is not that high. If they do decide to make gold have weight it would have to be 0.01 and even then it might just end up causing frustration in the early stages of the game.

and no money at the start too, soooooo I wouldn't worry over having a lot in the beginning.

ArchivedUser

No was my first thought, but heck yea tranfer your gold bars with the caravan system. Hack yea.

ArchivedUser

I would absolutely love the RP aspect of this, and it makes open world PVP that much more awesome. 

ArchivedUser

IMO this system could work, if your break it down a little.

Maybe have copper and silver added, then you can get gold coins. Coppers would be the lighter of the 3.

Then when dealing with money transactions between towns, you can have gold sacks of money, alone with a few gold bars. This would be in the millions to billions. Just depends what the two towns are doing with the money.

The caravans would go out, many a few dummy ones sent out on different routes, and the main money caravan wouldn't be an easy target.

If you find it, this wouldn't be an easy pickings, but if you beat the guards, you get a large payday. Only what you can carry of course, meaning a % of what is there to take.

A money caravan would be a top prize to be had, vs the regular items to be trade ones.  

ArchivedUser

It is unrealistic to think a rudimentary banking and wealth transfer system would not be invented by a society. We've had it since the latter part of the 4th millennia B.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking

ArchivedUser

danjohnson3141 said:

It is unrealistic to think a rudimentary banking and wealth transfer system would not be invented by a society. We've had it since the latter part of the 4th millennia B.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking

There will be banks and we were just talking about transferring wealth so I don't know what your point is.

ArchivedUser

They have already stated that currency will not have weight and will not be lootable.

ArchivedUser

Elder said:

Isabelle said:

My vote is no specifically because from what I've seen, trade caravans and such will only be for items, not gold. If there isn't going to be a magic transaction invisible personal vault thing that most MMOs have, like you just keep the money on you all the time, then I'd be down for it!

I remember Steven stating caravans could be used for transporting currency also. Or at least heard him talking about it. I assume currency will have a weight otherwise the caravan system will become nearly pointless.

Why should it be safer to transport gold coins than gold bars?

Maybe they'll limit how much currency you can carry rather than link it to the weight system.

Ah I had no idea! Ok, I'd change my vote to a yes if I could haha

Gold bullion would also be rad as a transport thing if they wanna do currency transport. Like bullion is equal to the amount of currency you put into each bar, then you get an equal currency out of it.

I dunno about the weight system playing into players though, I'm still on the fence about that

UnknownSystemError said:

They have already stated that currency will not have weight and will not be lootable.

Ah ok, well I guess that's settled :P

ArchivedUser

Elder said:

danjohnson3141 said:

It is unrealistic to think a rudimentary banking and wealth transfer system would not be invented by a society. We've had it since the latter part of the 4th millennia B.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking

There will be banks and we were just talking about transferring wealth so I don't know what your point is.

My point is that ways of transferring money without physically moving it have been around going back to the medieval period.

Take for example the original Silk Road in the 8th century. A system called "hawala" was used for convenience and safety. It's not hi tech or out of immersion to think people in Verra would be at least as advanced.

ArchivedUser

I'm sure @lexmax has the particular livestream on speed dial and can link it here if he notices this. It was the same livestream that talked about pygmy whales. They were discussing units of weight and how they had not decided on what they were going to call it. The question was related to whether currency would be lootable if a freehold was destroyed after a successful siege. They stated that there would never be a reason to store currency in your freehold, because it would not have weight, and it would not be lootable. Since they have a whole system of weights and measures being implemented, and we have never seen them flip-flop on an issue so far once they have come out with what they plan, theorycraft away, but don't be disappointed when you kill that guy thinking you're getting phat gold from him, and instead get 3 oak logs that cap your carry weight.

ArchivedUser

Without money weight, people could sell their more common items and rebuy them at another node without the need for any caravan mechanics.

I still voted for 'no' because as long as diffrent nodes have very dissimilar items to farm this wont be an issue but instead make economics more interesting, especialy if your unabel to see the current prices for your items in other nodes.
+ huge money weight by itself usualy is just a hassle and doesn't provide any real fun imo.

ArchivedUser

danjohnson3141 said:

Elder said:

danjohnson3141 said:

It is unrealistic to think a rudimentary banking and wealth transfer system would not be invented by a society. We've had it since the latter part of the 4th millennia B.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking

There will be banks and we were just talking about transferring wealth so I don't know what your point is.

My point is that ways of transferring money without physically moving it have been around going back to the medieval period.

Take for example the original Silk Road in the 8th century. A system called "hawala" was used for convenience and safety. It's not hi tech or out of immersion to think people in Verra would be at least as advanced.

Good point but towns and cities aren't working together, they're separate entities. You can't expect a network of bankers between cities that may very well be going to war.

Besides caravans are already a core mechanic of the game and a system that allowed instant transfer of wealth would nullify a lot of the caravan system. 

We have separate banks, separate markets, we should keep our money sperate as well. 

Edit: Thinking about it I don't doubt this might be a thing in an economic metropolis but when it comes to general towns and cities I don't see it working. 

ArchivedUser

Elder said:

danjohnson3141 said:

Elder said:

danjohnson3141 said:

It is unrealistic to think a rudimentary banking and wealth transfer system would not be invented by a society. We've had it since the latter part of the 4th millennia B.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking

There will be banks and we were just talking about transferring wealth so I don't know what your point is.

My point is that ways of transferring money without physically moving it have been around going back to the medieval period.

Take for example the original Silk Road in the 8th century. A system called "hawala" was used for convenience and safety. It's not hi tech or out of immersion to think people in Verra would be at least as advanced.

Good point but towns and cities aren't working together, they're separate entities. You can't expect a network of bankers between cities that may very well be going to war.

Besides caravans are already a core mechanic of the game and a system that allowed instant transfer of wealth would nullify a lot of the caravan system. 

We have separate banks, separate markets, we should keep our money sperate as well. 

Edit: Thinking about it I don't doubt this might be a thing in an economic metropolis but when it comes to general towns and cities I don't see it working. 

Makes sense. Kind of like how the science node is supposed to get teleportation.

I'll probably be so poor it won't be an issue

ArchivedUser

Ok how about this idea for the middle ground:

1. Currency for players no weight limits, but you can't do business for the mayor of any towns. ( The loophole for the 2nd part)

2. Currency between town mayors will have weight. This will be the gold bars, and the only way to transfer funds between any two places. So the Caravan system comes into play in these cases.

Is that a better plan for currency in the game?

ArchivedUser

I think that would be just a hassle.

ArchivedUser

Granthor said:

Ok how about this idea for the middle ground:

1. Currency for players no weight limits, but you can't do business for the mayor of any towns. ( The loophole for the 2nd part)

2. Currency between town mayors will have weight. This will be the gold bars, and the only way to transfer funds between any two places. So the Caravan system comes into play in these cases.

Is that a better plan for currency in the game?

In that case it would make more sense that each node has it's own different currency.
One node has gold bears, and other has gold hydras (names being just a place holder in this example).

Currency has no limit and no weight, but other nodes will not accept currency from different node, so player has to convert nodes currency in that node to gold bars, transport gold bars to another node, and then convert gold bars to other nodes currency in that other node.

Player could carry several forms of currency in his pocket to get around that, but in that case his fortune would be split and he wouldn't have access to all of his fortune in any one specific city anyway, only to a part of it, so that would still be fine.


But i still think it would just be a cause of unnecessary hassle.

ArchivedUser

In that case it would make more sense that each node has it's own different currency.
One node has gold bears, and other has gold hydras (names being just a place holder in this example).

Just like in the real world where gold is only worth something in the US, right? It wasn't used as common currency since, I dunno, antiquity?

ArchivedUser

Absolutely not!

ArchivedUser

I would definitely prefer that. 

ArchivedUser

Decision Matrix:

Is it fun?  Yes --> Add the feature>
               No --> Scrap it.

ArchivedUser

I voted yes, coins should have weight.

There should be work arounds though, where jewelers, bankers and gems come into play. 

It is a lot easier to carry and hide 10 gems worth 100 gold each, then it is to carry, much less hide, 1000 coins.

There are also concepts like high value coins, 1 Platinum coin = 100G, and 1 Mythril Coin = 10 Platinum coins... etc..

ArchivedUser

dmgavin said:

I voted yes, coins should have weight.

There should be work arounds though, where jewelers, bankers and gems come into play. 

It is a lot easier to carry and hide 10 gems worth 100 gold each, then it is to carry, much less hide, 1000 coins.

There are also concepts like high value coins, 1 Platinum coin = 100G, and 1 Mythril Coin = 10 Platinum coins... etc..

My thieving Kajit's treasury.  Over 450 gems, some with super high values.

The one ruby I have the mouse over was worth 350 coins, and it was not the best gem in the collection.  Had a few diamonds worth 750 coins.

Estimated value 110,000 coins.  Estimated coins weight, 1,100 pounds.

Actual gem weight 45 pounds.

Kajit loves shinieeeeeeessssssssssssss!

ArchivedUser

Yes. I agree with dmgavin.

ArchivedUser

A major inconvenience is the only thing this is. Once you finally get to do certain activities and have to quit 4 times in between because of silver weight.

No, thank you.

ArchivedUser

dmgavin said:

I voted yes, coins should have weight.

There should be work arounds though, where jewelers, bankers and gems come into play. 

It is a lot easier to carry and hide 10 gems worth 100 gold each, then it is to carry, much less hide, 1000 coins.

There are also concepts like high value coins, 1 Platinum coin = 100G, and 1 Mythril Coin = 10 Platinum coins... etc..

This is exactly how you do it  

ArchivedUser

Ariatras said:

dmgavin said:

I voted yes, coins should have weight.

There should be work arounds though, where jewelers, bankers and gems come into play. 

It is a lot easier to carry and hide 10 gems worth 100 gold each, then it is to carry, much less hide, 1000 coins.

There are also concepts like high value coins, 1 Platinum coin = 100G, and 1 Mythril Coin = 10 Platinum coins... etc..

This is exactly how you do it  

And do you have NPCs available to trade this with you at any given time, give you gold for your gems when you need gold? In this case weight on gold has no purpose, since you can trade gems back to gold in infinite quantity whenever you want, it's just unnecessary extra layer of annoyance.

Or, there are no vendors, and you need to trade gems -> gold with players, and are limited by availability of gold, and just get stuck with lots of gems that are useless to you, because you cant get gold back for them?

In any way, weight on gold and weight system is either annoying and limiting as hell, or completely artificial and unnecessary.