Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
ok I'm back. time to reply, don't think I forgot about this ;3
now you (and Diahmat) are saying that if there isn't main gear destruction, low and mid tier crafting wont have an impact in the economy. these things arent mutually exclusive. you can have main gear destruction and make it so low and mid tier crafting arent impactful. you can also remove gear destruction and make low and mid tier crafting impactful. to make low and mid tier crafting impactful, you have to design with that in mid and build a system around it. a max level player whose gear got destroyed wont want a level 1 sword, or level 10 sword...these things arent mutually exclusive.
regarding sinks. no, a game doesn't need gear sinks. it needs sinks, period. you don't need to have main gear destruction to have sinks. in this case I'm assuming gear destruction when you mean gear sinks. if you just mean gear sinks, then you can have gear sinks without main gear destruction (new gear making old gear obsolete for example). gear destruction isn't the only possible way to have a sink.
so by claiming that the game means gear isnks (not destruction) you are agreeing that gear destruction isn't the only way to keep the economy going, since gear destruction isn't the only way to add gear sinks and contradicting yourself.
regarding risk and reward, you are also forgetting about balance.
tell me which one makes more sense to you:
spend 6 months getting all the mats to craft your gear because of the high difficulty/quantity of mats acquisition, then lose your gear in 6 mins. now you have to spend another 6 months re acquiring the same mats.
or
spend 1 hour getting more gear then lose it after a bit.
it will be hard to get gear in aoc as already stated by steven. you basically want them to make gear really easy to acquire simply because you believe there is only one solution for a particular problem.
presenting the problem is completely fine, but this better to leave the solution to the devs. they are the ones who know the game after all, we don't. tell me how many times you go to your doctor, then you tell him your symptoms and then tell him how to treat you and what medicine to give you. its the same thing.
also, just because you drop gear, doesn't mean the gear is destroyed. the gear isn't removed from the economy. another player has it, so the gear still exists in the world (its not a gear sink) and can be sold or traded without needing to be crafted. i don't see how you claim this is the same as gear destruction or that it will help crafters.
regarding wether crafting and rp is more important than combat in aoc, just because crafters and rpers have a place in the game, doesn't mean the game is focused on crafting or rping (acting). a basketball player can enjoy a baseball or soccer match every now and then.
remove crafting and roleplaying from aoc, you still have combat, mobs, PVP, bosses, dungeons, caravans, castle sieges, naval combat, archetypes, node wars, etc, etc.
remove combat and all you have is pressing e on a tree and then e again on a crafting station. no more mobs, PVP, bosses, dungeons, caravans, castle sieges, naval combat, archetypes, node wars, etc, etc. so really, Is it the same game? are crafters more important? don't think so.
Welcome back!
You are taking what I've said and are stretching it into something I don't recognize again.
I actually agree with most of what you said.
1. General sinks must exist: Yes
2. Gear sinks don't have to exist: No. Any section of the economy that doesn't have something that acts a sink will build up over time and cause issues.
3. The only way to skin the cat is through durability: No, it can be done a lot of ways. Repair costs is nice, requiring low gear to make higher gear is great. They just have to be strong enough sinks to make a difference.
4. "Best to leave this to the devs": No, I've thought about it and decided that I'm going to design it for them. Start to finish.
5. RP vs Combat or something: I'm not sure what you meant there. You asked in an earlier post if the crafter or the adventurer was more important. In this context the crafter takes priority in design choices. Crafters 3 years after launch should have all the same business options that crafters day one have. If Intrepid can manage it.
6. It being hard to aquire gear can be enough of a sink: I honestly don't think so. It just makes it take longer to flood the market.
There is not one solution, and I think you guys are right in saying it can be a combination of small solutions. We will see as things get released, but I'm definitely worried about it with the info we currently have.
I was replying to the other dude. i mentioned you because you agreed with one of the things he said xd
edit: also, to number 6 I didn't say hard to acquire ger makes it a sink. i said if gear is hard to acquire, new gear will come out when most people finish gearing up. the new gear will make the older gear obsolete. that's the sink.
Ah, gotcha
If you look at it logically from an economic perspective, if you want the price to remain strong, (incentivising artisans to craft) you need to increase demand, or reduce the supply. This seems to be more of a demand problem.
The things you can do to increase demand:
1. Make non-consumables need repairing more, they get a significant buff when in good repair?
2. Add commissions to make items giving currency/node XP.
3. Make weapons upgradeable. You can add a +1 if you get it reforged, and pay the mats.
4. Cosmetic changes to items can be made by artisans.
5. Stat-changes and side-grades to items can be made by artisans.
The things you can do to reduce supply:
1. Make crafting items and repairs take longer.
2. Make artisans specialize into what they can do more.
3. Limit the number of artisans with a "licence" to craft in a particular node.
I don't know of any games where low level items deflated in value, but most games see items at or near the level cap deflate.
The reason for this is fairly simple. When you are a low level player, you may be earning a few silver for a quest. The price you would charge for your work (whether gathering or crafting) is based on how much you could earn doing those quest. This is how much you could expect to earn, but is also how much others at this level range are earning.
When you are at the level cap, you may earning a few gold rather than silver. This is how much you expect to get for your time.
Once a game is a few months old, most players are in a position where they are earning gold rather than silver, so if they are making lower level gear to sell, that is how much they expect to get for their time.
Since most of their market is alts, it works well enough most of the time.
If a games early level items stay at the price they were at the games release, it is a bad sign. It means players time doesn't increase in value.
This is generally the case in games where either a recipe or a component is rare (or the item itself, when crafting isnt involved), but not outright limited. It is also generally only the case when only considering items at the level cap, lower level items usually follow a different path than this - even though this is the exact path many items at the level cap follow in many games.
Eve Online. The items don't excessively inflate or deflate. They stay steady over time, the ups and downs occur with resource price changes or competing items that use the same resources becoming more or less in demand. Because items leave the economy, things don't become flooded and thus maintain a natural value.
Huge inflation tends to happen in games like WoW that only take two weeks to level and tend to give away all the gear a player needs as they level. The only people who care about lower tier gear are people who transmog, and they have cash so prices go up.
Most games don't have player driven economies so the numbers are always off anyway.
And they would be sure to include it if they don't want their game to fail.
OK.
Ashes is not made for everyone.
I'm confused because you just said this causes huge deflation. Also, it has nothing to do with transmog. Go play classic Wow or any game without transmog, the same thing happens.
----
I think you don't really understand why low-level crafting is unprofitable. It's unprofitable because players are willing to lose currency in order to gain crafting XP. It's unprofitable in Wow, it was unprofitable in probably the most player-driven economy ever in SWG. It was unprofitable the last time I played Albion Online. If the playerbase thinks XP is worth more than currency, it will be unprofitable.
I'm not sure how that breaks down in EVE, I've never played it, but have heard it described as more of a space trader simulation than RPG. Gold might be worth more than XP in that type of game.
There are also more items around, for fewer people to use, with each iteration. Unless you specifically only count the absolute top-of-the-line of low-level gear released in the most recent game update, or the abslute peak item that has ever been crafted. But no one needs those to level up.
Also, the alts you're talking about don't make the economy go around anyway, because they only trade with each other. The prices with players that aren't involved in closed cycles are the relevant parts of the global economy.
Which leaves us with max level. Where it absolutely does matter when the economy is full of existing high-tier items.
I'm not even in the "item depletion is necessary" camp, but with arguments like yours, I'm considering switching.
I never said anything about deflation in WoW.
And low level gear doesn't really exist in SWG. Gear there is about experimentation.
The top class resources and highly experimented items flooded the market. There are no levels, its just skill grind. One thing SWG and WoW had in common was max lvl in under two weeks. The gear has no value (except to other crafters).
Depends on what you are talking about in SWG, pre NGE and post NGE are two separate conversations. Either way you don't need levels to wear the gear, just basic certification.
Either way, high level or low level we need sinks.
SWG isnt the most player-driven economy. Eve Online has that one. Its been studied and is used as an example of a real world economy.
As for Albion, It was always profitable, but you had to use the time-specalized resource. The one that you only go so much and gave you back materials.
If you want a game that is going to be around for a while, you need people. The more people that can find value in playing, the more content that exists. WoW is out there and if you dont want to lose gear play that. It isnt going anywhere. If Eve devs didnt suck the fun out of the game I would still be there. If you want a game that is fun for two years and then dies, I am all for no gear sink. I am all for lets rush max level and not worry about the economy. People will get bored as content gets stale. There are only so many expansions people can suffer where they have to get a new "Max-level" item because all of their previous gear has been invalidated.
and albion, mortal online and eve are out there. if you want to lose gear play that. they arent going anywhere.
The simple way in which you make an economy work is that you still make end game upgrades and gear include a certain proportion of earlier components.
So to make a level 1 sword you need 100 copper ore.
To make a level 2 sword you need 100 copper ore + 50 Iron ore.
To make a level 3 sword you need 100 copper ore + 50 Iron ore + 25 mithril, and so on.
Demand for the earlier material remans just as high as it was when everyone started, particularly if repairs require materials. This isn't a particularly difficult problem to solve if you understand economics.
The more important thing (and what I am more worried about) is to not make the game like work where people are gathering ore to pay their "rent", when they would rather be out playing the game. So this is where freehold mines/farms etc. will come in, passively producing ore, auto-gathering it and refining it.
If the designers are smart they will include a global "Yield" variable that allows them to arbitrarily modify production of ore from the mines to avoid a glut or a scarcity of lower level materials.
To avoid the freeholds getting too rich the tax/maintenance on the freehold essentially cancels out most of the profit. And this tax is also tied to the yield variable.
I agree with this 100 percent on the material usage part of you point. However that helps mitigate the cost and supply of materials, but it doesn't address the issue of the items themselves. It's whole point I'm trying to make. (Edit: although I wouldn't lean too much into the "auto" side of gathering/crafting. Too much auto is a great way to invalidate gatherers)
From the wiki:
"Specific and necessary crafting materials for higher tier items can only be obtained through the deconstruction of lower-tier items. This is designed to keep lower tier crafted gear relevant through progression and across expansions."
This is fantastic. If this is really leaned into, along with the enchantment mechanic, then it can create the sinks you need for a healthy economy. And it does it without people losing items except by choice.
Also from the wiki:
"Gear is acquired from a number of different sources, such as quests, drops, crafting, legendary bosses, guild-oriented tasks, favor, and unique currencies"
This could be a concern. It's great that you have a variety of ways to get gear for your characters, however if those items never leave because the game gives out more than it consumes through crafting and enchanting then you have a problem.
I think a couple things need to happen:
1) All gear, including non crafted, has to be destructible.
2) Non crafted gear needs to have unique resources that encourages people to destroy it instead of passing it down.
3) Crafted gear needs to provide resources or components not given out by non crafted, so it stays relevant. Or you could even just require the entire item as a "base".
We don't necessarily have to have gear destruction though wear and tear, but the game has to be set up to heavily incentivize getting rid of old gear in a variety of ways that are not adding it to the existing market.
If you don't do this, then pricing will be permanently distorted after a year or two, and gear/weapon crafters that start two years after launch have no incentive or ability to participate in the market until they reach max level. This devalues the leveling process for them, which goes against what Intrepid says they are trying to do with the leveling experience.
For those not following, it's essentially like making white vs purple Scout Blasters.
Yes, level didn't matter, you had to be certified to use gear based on your class. Quality of materials determined what your item was capable of. What is the point you are trying to make?