new repair cost system

Started 2 Oct 2019
by majky666
in Tavern
Surprised me in bad way. Repair of netherium rapier drop (14.7 DPS, 45 lvl or so?) costed me 54 gold from 96% condition, lvl 40 plate torso 10g 97s for 1%. It is too high I think and should be lowered.
Wed 2 Oct 2019 12:42 PM by Freedomcall
according to the servernews, there is no dmg reduction until 90% of condition.
I think you should just use it without repair and sell, regarding lvling gears....
Wed 2 Oct 2019 1:29 PM by ExcretusMaximus
It's a gold sink to reduce inflation, which is a good thing.

It's not like they added durability loss, just condition, which again is a good thing.

Some people are never happy.
Wed 2 Oct 2019 4:20 PM by Zouz
Another measure to make pvpers pve?
Wed 2 Oct 2019 4:25 PM by Sepplord
It all depends on how much RVR can be done with how much pve time...

Goldsinks are important but if pure pvpers suddenly have to go farming a lot it would be a turnoff for me
Wed 2 Oct 2019 5:42 PM by chryso
If I understand this correctly, this means that you no longer need to keep a PVE suit or a separate hammer for doors. Is that correct?
Wed 2 Oct 2019 8:44 PM by Forlornhope
Yeah, not happy about this either. Seems adding con loss to accessories would be enough rather than 40g per one con loss. I do not play this game to pve, and rarely have enough time to play as it is. So to be able to afford repair, pots, recharges I'll have to spend way more time pve'ing than I ever want to.
Wed 2 Oct 2019 11:31 PM by Sepplord
just finished a 5hour RvR session, my overall repair was under 100g for it...

It was on a bonedancer though, so relatively cheap items in the template (if that matters)
All Armor+accessories was 58-60g in total and the staff 36g


sadly i didn't check how much gold i made in it, but a kill in a 4man with noone else hitting the target gives around 3gold, so over 5hours we would only need to kill ~33people with a 4man to get repaircosts (not including taskgold or other rewards that can be made to gold)


So at least from a caster POV it seems reasonable
Thu 3 Oct 2019 8:56 AM by Frigzy
"Player crafter can no longer repair equipable items, a blacksmith NPC must be used"

*sigh* Really?

The only good part is no more duration loss; but now RvR has suddenly turned into a money sink instead of a slight gain.

Overall terrible change. Going the wrong direction, in the lines of "that other server" ...
Thu 3 Oct 2019 12:32 PM by Keelia
Frigzy wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 8:56 AM
"Player crafter can no longer repair equipable items, a blacksmith NPC must be used"

*sigh* Really?

The only good part is no more duration loss; but now RvR has suddenly turned into a money sink instead of a slight gain.

Overall terrible change. Going the wrong direction, in the lines of "that other server" ...

What this is a great change. Why should the PvPer only have to PvP to be successful. He needs to PvE as well. Just because he plays for 2 hours a day doesn’t mean he’s exempt for having to farm. This game needs more gold sinks, the community is clearly asking for it. Maybe you could tax people for killing people in RVR. Like 4g a kill, that should help increase the server population, people love forking over plat for no apparent reason at all.
Thu 3 Oct 2019 2:44 PM by gotwqqd
Why does the game need a gold sink?
Thu 3 Oct 2019 5:08 PM by Roto23
Does it cost the same to repair from 99 % to 100% as it costs to repair from 90% to 100%?
Thu 3 Oct 2019 7:17 PM by Forlornhope
Roto23 wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 5:08 PM
Does it cost the same to repair from 99 % to 100% as it costs to repair from 90% to 100%?

No, it will cost you about 40g per 1 con loss on a level 51 piece of gear.
Thu 3 Oct 2019 11:29 PM by gotwqqd
Forlornhope wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 7:17 PM
Roto23 wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 5:08 PM
Does it cost the same to repair from 99 % to 100% as it costs to repair from 90% to 100%?

No, it will cost you about 40g per 1 con loss on a level 51 piece of gear.

Excessive
Thu 3 Oct 2019 11:36 PM by Forlornhope
gotwqqd wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 11:29 PM
Forlornhope wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 7:17 PM
Roto23 wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 5:08 PM
Does it cost the same to repair from 99 % to 100% as it costs to repair from 90% to 100%?

No, it will cost you about 40g per 1 con loss on a level 51 piece of gear.

Excessive

Definitely, I hope they tone it down a notch.
Fri 4 Oct 2019 5:28 AM by REVOLTE
Forlornhope wrote:
Thu 3 Oct 2019 11:36 PM
Definitely, I hope they tone it down a notch.

they absolutely should.
most people have already built up huuuge wallets.
i dont consider myself being rich but i couldnt give a rats arse if it cost me 1p a day or whatever to rep my gear since theres nothing else for me to spend money on anyways. i could go on pvping until the server goes down eventually.

so whats the point of the change? it certainly wont fix the servers unfixable economy but rather create even more barriers for noobs/casuals/pvponly players.
not a fan.
Fri 4 Oct 2019 12:21 PM by chryso
I don't understand where people get all of this money. I have 3 50s on alb and about 5p and I felt like I was doing pretty well. Now I am not so sure. I have a merc who just dinged 50, got his epic gear and is using the neck quest sword. The only thing I have done at 50 after getting the epic gear is one Sidi run. At the end of the run my sword was at 99%. I went to check and see how much repair would be and it is 30g. That is not a lot but I got zero gold on the Sidi run and rolled about 100 so I also got no loot. I only checked one weapon on repair. If my other items are also degraded it could be expensive. I am not sure how long I will be able to afford to keep playing.
Fri 4 Oct 2019 2:55 PM by desp
1. Reduce repair cost for lvl 1-40 items to previous values.
2. Reduce repair cost for 41-52lvl items to values like 2-5g per con. We now have not only weapon and armor but also jewelry damaged so reapir parts raise from 1-2 (main hand and torso mostly) to 5-6 parts, if leave 20-30g per con for such amount of repaired parts then it become to 100-200g per session easily. Too much for anyone except gold farmers.
Fri 4 Oct 2019 4:43 PM by Keelia
chryso wrote:
Fri 4 Oct 2019 12:21 PM
I don't understand where people get all of this money. I have 3 50s on alb and about 5p and I felt like I was doing pretty well. Now I am not so sure. I have a merc who just dinged 50, got his epic gear and is using the neck quest sword. The only thing I have done at 50 after getting the epic gear is one Sidi run. At the end of the run my sword was at 99%. I went to check and see how much repair would be and it is 30g. That is not a lot but I got zero gold on the Sidi run and rolled about 100 so I also got no loot. I only checked one weapon on repair. If my other items are also degraded it could be expensive. I am not sure how long I will be able to afford to keep playing.

They farm, I could farm a decent amount of plat bore hour on my necro solo. Usually knock out an hour or so before/after my 8 man would run. After 2 months on alb I had about 45 plat.

Do the same thing on hib, at 15p but just made a new temp and leveled a alch so a decent chunk right there
Fri 4 Oct 2019 11:49 PM by Liah
i dont understand why they changed the dur. loss. Makes all the armor/weaponcrafters pretty much useless now since the market is swamped with stuff..
Sat 5 Oct 2019 5:51 AM by inky2019
Agreed a useless change. Bit late in game for this change.
Sun 6 Oct 2019 7:52 AM by desp
Keelia wrote:
Fri 4 Oct 2019 4:43 PM
They farm, I could farm a decent amount of plat bore hour on my necro solo. Usually knock out an hour or so before/after my 8 man would run. After 2 months on alb I had about 45 plat.

Do the same thing on hib, at 15p but just made a new temp and leveled a alch so a decent chunk right there
Sorry, dont have time for spent on gold farming, have only a few hours for RvR, sometimes raid, and all it (except feathers which im dont have enough still) is money sink like charges, buffs and now huge repairs.
Sun 6 Oct 2019 2:56 PM by Siouxsie
New repair cost system punishes casual players.
Undo this system. Instead:
1) Make durability 100% on all items and never make it decrease
2) Only allow armor and weapons to degrade condition
3) Allow players to repair it (again with no durability loss)

The last thing this game needs is yet another goldsink. With a dwindling population, you're going to scare away
and would-be new players or players wanting to come back after time away.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:03 AM by Sepplord
my biggest gripe with the system is that it unfairly applies to different playstyles/classes

When their suggestions came out, it sounded as if they wanted to do something against the caster meta....but this system benefits casters over anyone else making casters the cheapest to maintain. Casters are already BY FAR the cheapest to template. I have templated everycaster within one or two hours for a handful of plat, while i can't even get a skald-temp finished because the equipment needed isn't even available and when items pop up a single accessory costs more than a full-template of a caster.

And then this system comes around, and burdens non caster players with additional costs that are higher than their caster counterparts.

And while writing this i am afraid that caster-repaircosts will get increased instead of the other way around
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:44 AM by gruenesschaf
Sepplord wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:03 AM
my biggest gripe with the system is that it unfairly applies to different playstyles/classes

When their suggestions came out, it sounded as if they wanted to do something against the caster meta....but this system benefits casters over anyone else making casters the cheapest to maintain. Casters are already BY FAR the cheapest to template. I have templated everycaster within one or two hours for a handful of plat, while i can't even get a skald-temp finished because the equipment needed isn't even available and when items pop up a single accessory costs more than a full-template of a caster.

And then this system comes around, and burdens non caster players with additional costs that are higher than their caster counterparts.

And while writing this i am afraid that caster-repaircosts will get increased instead of the other way around

While this was in the same thread, it's unrelated to the caster meta stuff. Also, the repair cost is the same for everyone as only the item level is relevant and no longer the sell price (in which case cloth would have been cheaper).
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:57 AM by REVOLTE
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:44 AM
Allso, the repair cost is the same for everyone as only the item level is relevant and no longer the sell price (in which case cloth would have been cheaper).


dont get me wrong, im not a schafhater...but do you actually play this game?
melees just naturally have higher equipment decay by...well...getting hit often. so naturally, an overall increase in gear maintenance cost will affect melees more than casters.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 7:46 AM by Sepplord
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:44 AM
Sepplord wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:03 AM
my biggest gripe with the system is that it unfairly applies to different playstyles/classes

When their suggestions came out, it sounded as if they wanted to do something against the caster meta....but this system benefits casters over anyone else making casters the cheapest to maintain. Casters are already BY FAR the cheapest to template. I have templated everycaster within one or two hours for a handful of plat, while i can't even get a skald-temp finished because the equipment needed isn't even available and when items pop up a single accessory costs more than a full-template of a caster.

And then this system comes around, and burdens non caster players with additional costs that are higher than their caster counterparts.

And while writing this i am afraid that caster-repaircosts will get increased instead of the other way around

While this was in the same thread, it's unrelated to the caster meta stuff. Also, the repair cost is the same for everyone as only the item level is relevant and no longer the sell price (in which case cloth would have been cheaper).

I understand that the points are unrelated, but it does feel a bit wierd to be thinking about "nerfing" the castermeta and then implementing unrelated changes that favor casters. Even if it is just a slight difference.

While casters pay the same for already damaged equipment, their equipment often takes much less damage. It gets most obvious when you look at PvE, where the tank gets pummeled by mobs and has his armor damaged while a caster will most often only be using his staff.
Does a 2Hand degrade twice as fast as compared to someone dualwielding when they attack the same amount of times (or better, attack for the same amount of time)?

Don't get me wrong, to me the goldsink seems reasonable (the minstrel outlier, was unintentional and you reacted fast). When i wrote "my biggest gripe" i should have made it clear, that while it is the biggest one for me...it is still a small complaint overall.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 7:48 AM by Chaskha
I play casters mainly. I do both PvE (Darkspire, Guild PL) and PvP and take the occasional SC orders.
I'm rich. Not filthy rich but let's say I could template a dozen of the most expansive classes to template.
This repair system has minimal impact on me. It fits my playstyle.

Now with that said, most people I know doing mainly RvR, no commerce, no PvE. They rely on selling BPs for reskins.
It buy them pots and they can manage but now, especially for the melee characters, I'm afraid they may be forced to PvE. Which isn't nice.

Maybe would it be possible to implement a different decay for PvP (20%) and PvE (100%) ?

I do fear that people will feel the need for more money and it will increase prices of it all: commerce, BPs, feathers and again, people like me will thrive while it is not at all necessary.

Just my 2 cents.
The idea is good but it punishes RvRers too much (and I know, a portion of that community would need IRL slaps for their immense assholery but it's not the way).
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:41 AM by gruenesschaf
REVOLTE wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:57 AM
dont get me wrong, im not a schafhater...but do you actually play this game?
melees just naturally have higher equipment decay by...well...getting hit often. so naturally, an overall increase in gear maintenance cost will affect melees more than casters.

Sure tanks will see more decay in PvE / Keep fights vs guards but the repair cost per condition point is still the same for all as it's based on item level and the decay rate is the same per spell and melee attack / getting hit.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:46 AM by gruenesschaf
Sepplord wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 7:46 AM
While casters pay the same for already damaged equipment, their equipment often takes much less damage. It gets most obvious when you look at PvE, where the tank gets pummeled by mobs and has his armor damaged while a caster will most often only be using his staff.
Does a 2Hand degrade twice as fast as compared to someone dualwielding when they attack the same amount of times (or better, attack for the same amount of time)?

Same rate for now but I'm currently testing / was testing over the weekend a couple things locally:
Weapon decay modified by weapon speed, as almost everything like procs normalized to 3.5, additional modifier on offhand (something like 50 - 75%)
For Armor 100-item absorb chance to apply condition decay (90% for leather, 81 for studded, 73 for chain, 66 for plate), weapon speed / offhand modifier would apply here as well.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:08 AM by Topenga
Made a reaver, had the template ready in the early 30s and was already wearing the complete jewelry...what can I say...despite not being a clever move I was shocked: now I'm in the 40s and the stuff is down to like 85% and costs like 400-500g per item to repair. No! Really, no!
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:26 AM by REVOLTE
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:46 AM
Same rate for now but I'm currently testing / was testing over the weekend a couple things locally:
Weapon decay modified by weapon speed, as almost everything like procs normalized to 3.5, additional modifier on offhand (something like 50 - 75%)
For Armor 100-item absorb chance to apply condition decay (90% for leather, 81 for studded, 73 for chain, 66 for plate), weapon speed / offhand modifier would apply here as well.

...which implies that even from your point of view the implemented system is flawed. you are a smart guy. you cant tell me you havent thought about this before.
which brings up the question: why dont you guys start implementing stuff AFTER thinking things through? to me, this kind of feels like reverse uthgard (where they only implemented additions after testing them for at least 2 years and making sure they work 100% in any possible scenario). maybe, just maybe a middle ground would be a tad smarter? the server has suffered big time already by what feels like shots from the hip.

justmy2groschn.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:31 AM by gruenesschaf
REVOLTE wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:26 AM
...which implies that even from your point of view the implemented system is flawed. you are a smart guy. you cant tell me you havent thought about this before.
which brings up the question: why dont you guys start implementing stuff AFTER thinking things through? to me, this kind of feels like reverse uthgard (where they only implemented additions after testing them for at least 2 years and making sure they work 100% in any possible scenario). maybe, just maybe a middle ground would be a tad smarter? the server has suffered big time already by what feels like shots from the hip.

justmy2groschn.

When it was initially implemented spells caused twice the accessory condition decay making it about equal, that was however reversed 2 days later leaving this difference which will be changed in the next day or two.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:40 AM by REVOLTE
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:31 AM
When it was initially implemented spells caused twice the accessory condition decay making it about equal, that was however reversed 2 days later leaving this difference which will be changed in the next day or two.

ill try my best to log in more to test the new adaptations. my point still stands. to me personally, it seems like you guys need to slow down a bit. but as i said before...thats just my personal opinion and ofc ur welcome to do as you please with your server. anyways...i appreciate your guys efforts and ofc as always your quick responses, schaf.

edit:
@topenga: lul, as someone who ALWAYS has their chars temp ready @35-40ish i feel your pain.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 11:27 AM by iamsaitam
REVOLTE wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:26 AM
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:46 AM
Same rate for now but I'm currently testing / was testing over the weekend a couple things locally:
Weapon decay modified by weapon speed, as almost everything like procs normalized to 3.5, additional modifier on offhand (something like 50 - 75%)
For Armor 100-item absorb chance to apply condition decay (90% for leather, 81 for studded, 73 for chain, 66 for plate), weapon speed / offhand modifier would apply here as well.

...which implies that even from your point of view the implemented system is flawed. you are a smart guy. you cant tell me you havent thought about this before.
which brings up the question: why dont you guys start implementing stuff AFTER thinking things through? to me, this kind of feels like reverse uthgard (where they only implemented additions after testing them for at least 2 years and making sure they work 100% in any possible scenario). maybe, just maybe a middle ground would be a tad smarter? the server has suffered big time already by what feels like shots from the hip.

justmy2groschn.

Please don't start wasting 2 years to implement anything. Terrible advice. Do things incrementally and make sure to pay attention to the feedback loop.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 1:56 PM by Keelia
Ever see the movie Tommy boy? When he’s trying to make his first sale and he lights the model car on fire and starts going crazy? That’s the devs, they had this great thing going and they just smashed it and set it on fire.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 4:03 PM by REVOLTE
iamsaitam wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 11:27 AM
Please don't start wasting 2 years to implement anything. Terrible advice. Do things incrementally and make sure to pay attention to the feedback loop.

Please be so kind and actually read my posts before quoting them, thank you.

Also: fatguyinalittlecoat.gif
Mon 7 Oct 2019 4:43 PM by Keelia
iamsaitam wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 11:27 AM
REVOLTE wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 9:26 AM
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:46 AM
Same rate for now but I'm currently testing / was testing over the weekend a couple things locally:
Weapon decay modified by weapon speed, as almost everything like procs normalized to 3.5, additional modifier on offhand (something like 50 - 75%)
For Armor 100-item absorb chance to apply condition decay (90% for leather, 81 for studded, 73 for chain, 66 for plate), weapon speed / offhand modifier would apply here as well.

...which implies that even from your point of view the implemented system is flawed. you are a smart guy. you cant tell me you havent thought about this before.
which brings up the question: why dont you guys start implementing stuff AFTER thinking things through? to me, this kind of feels like reverse uthgard (where they only implemented additions after testing them for at least 2 years and making sure they work 100% in any possible scenario). maybe, just maybe a middle ground would be a tad smarter? the server has suffered big time already by what feels like shots from the hip.

justmy2groschn.

Please don't start wasting 2 years to implement anything. Terrible advice. Do things incrementally and make sure to pay attention to the feedback loop.
Because they clearly pay attention to the feed back loop. How’s that worked out so far.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:42 PM by gruenesschaf
Keelia wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 4:43 PM
Because they clearly pay attention to the feed back loop. How’s that worked out so far.

Because anything but completely removing a new gold sink is ofc not paying attention. The entire need for some new gold sink is btw because we actually listened to the feedback on the salvage loot bug fix. We should just have stuck to the change and not increased the task reward to compensate.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:45 PM by Keelia
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 6:42 PM
Keelia wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 4:43 PM
Because they clearly pay attention to the feed back loop. How’s that worked out so far.

Because anything but completely removing a new gold sink is ofc not paying attention. The entire need for some new gold sink is btw because we actually listened to the feedback on the salvage loot bug fix. We should just have stuck to the change and not increased the task reward to compensate.

Because the community asked for you to create a gold sink? I must have missed that post.
Mon 7 Oct 2019 10:20 PM by gruenesschaf
Keelia wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:45 PM
Because the community asked for you to create a gold sink? I must have missed that post.

I don't think the player base would ever ask for a gold sink in any game and yet every game has them, almost as if it were a good thing that the ingame currency has some value.
Tue 8 Oct 2019 1:49 AM by Jafeeio
I'd love some back-end data on this because it's very hard to discuss without having some insight into how things changed since you increased the task rewards (which I was a strong proponent for since it seemed like the best idea to help out new players going through the leveling process and not severely impacting endgame goldmaking).

I think in general it just feels bad to spend a lot of gold for just playing the game and having to worry about upkeep even if it would be the same net result gaining less gold and having to repair for less. WoW used to have an exp penalty for playing a long time each day and then switched it around to having rested exp and "normal" exp later and everybody was happy with that.

Personally I'm not seeing any reasonable inflation in the market that can't be attributed to missing competition or missing supply. I did not see a single person trying to sell feathers while I was ingame and there are very few feather items on the market. This is obviously not ideal for anyone. Platin does not have any value if there is nothing to buy.

I might have written this somewhere before but DAoC just isn't as influenced by "the general population accumulating more gold" than other MMOs. Markets cannot be cornered and resources are infinite. Arcanium costs the same as it did 10 months ago at the vendor, spellcraft gems cost the same, alchemy ingredients cost the same and nobody can change that except the developers, so there will always be an anchor if things get out of hand. It is also not as feasible to go around the housing zone, buy up all the items and relist them as it is in other MMOs with margin trading like EVE or WoW. So what bad thing would happen if everybody suddenly got a free 20p in their pocket today? Maybe people would finally buy some epic procs
Tue 8 Oct 2019 9:36 AM by gruenesschaf
Jafeeio wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 1:49 AM
I might have written this somewhere before but DAoC just isn't as influenced by "the general population accumulating more gold" than other MMOs. Markets cannot be cornered and resources are infinite. Arcanium costs the same as it did 10 months ago at the vendor, spellcraft gems cost the same, alchemy ingredients cost the same and nobody can change that except the developers, so there will always be an anchor if things get out of hand. It is also not as feasible to go around the housing zone, buy up all the items and relist them as it is in other MMOs with margin trading like EVE or WoW. So what bad thing would happen if everybody suddenly got a free 20p in their pocket today? Maybe people would finally buy some epic procs

While that is largely true, as soon as something exists that players need and hence want to trade for (feathers, rogs, bps here or the actual drop items / alchemy drop ingredients without a feather / token system) something has to be used to trade with and the ingame currency should be the logical choice. If no sink exists at all, you will end up with gold having no value as nobody needs it and hence prices ever increasing or some alternative currency being used as it happened in lots of games.

Given that you will make a somewhat static amount of gold if you level from 1 - 50 on your first char that's not really being influenced by any of the current gold sinks or the inflation, the spending power of new people is heavily affected the actual gold value / inflation, for that reason alone it's worth it to fight inflation, even before it reaches stupid heights where the limits of the used number system are reached (e. g. 2147483647 aka the reason for the 200p cap per char on live)
Tue 8 Oct 2019 10:50 AM by gotwqqd
gruenesschaf wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 9:36 AM
Jafeeio wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 1:49 AM
I might have written this somewhere before but DAoC just isn't as influenced by "the general population accumulating more gold" than other MMOs. Markets cannot be cornered and resources are infinite. Arcanium costs the same as it did 10 months ago at the vendor, spellcraft gems cost the same, alchemy ingredients cost the same and nobody can change that except the developers, so there will always be an anchor if things get out of hand. It is also not as feasible to go around the housing zone, buy up all the items and relist them as it is in other MMOs with margin trading like EVE or WoW. So what bad thing would happen if everybody suddenly got a free 20p in their pocket today? Maybe people would finally buy some epic procs

While that is largely true, as soon as something exists that players need and hence want to trade for (feathers, rogs, bps here or the actual drop items / alchemy drop ingredients without a feather / token system) something has to be used to trade with and the ingame currency should be the logical choice. If no sink exists at all, you will end up with gold having no value as nobody needs it and hence prices ever increasing or some alternative currency being used as it happened in lots of games.

Given that you will make a somewhat static amount of gold if you level from 1 - 50 on your first char that's not really being influenced by any of the current gold sinks or the inflation, the spending power of new people is heavily affected the actual gold value / inflation, for that reason alone it's worth it to fight inflation, even before it reaches stupid heights where the limits of the used number system are reached (e. g. 2147483647 aka the reason for the 200p cap per char on live)
You miss the point that few people have the mounds of gold hoards some have.
They probably have been hovering with a couple platinum and are constantly buying the necessities.

The ones with mounds of gold will continue to farm and make more mounds with your ‘tax’ making no dent in their coffers while the many are taxed out of their comfortable neighborhood.

Welcome to the USA
Tue 8 Oct 2019 10:58 AM by Keelia
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 10:20 PM
Keelia wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:45 PM
Because the community asked for you to create a gold sink? I must have missed that post.

I don't think the player base would ever ask for a gold sink in any game and yet every game has them, almost as if it were a good thing that the ingame currency has some value.

It’s a dying free shard and you’re concerned about the economy now? That’s like trying to bail out a already sunk ship.
Tue 8 Oct 2019 11:47 AM by florin
Keelia wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 10:58 AM
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 10:20 PM
Keelia wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 8:45 PM
Because the community asked for you to create a gold sink? I must have missed that post.

I don't think the player base would ever ask for a gold sink in any game and yet every game has them, almost as if it were a good thing that the ingame currency has some value.

It’s a dying free shard and you’re concerned about the economy now? That’s like trying to bail out a already sunk ship.

For Every single addition or change, staff should ask - will this attract new players or bring back old players? Simple as that.
Tue 8 Oct 2019 11:51 AM by Keelia
florin wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 11:47 AM
Keelia wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 10:58 AM
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon 7 Oct 2019 10:20 PM
I don't think the player base would ever ask for a gold sink in any game and yet every game has them, almost as if it were a good thing that the ingame currency has some value.

It’s a dying free shard and you’re concerned about the economy now? That’s like trying to bail out a already sunk ship.

For Every single addition or change, staff should ask - will this attract new players or bring back old players? Simple as that.

So did they ask that when they created a needless gold sink? How does that even come close to retaining players or bringing players back?
Tue 8 Oct 2019 12:05 PM by florin
Keelia wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 11:51 AM
florin wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 11:47 AM
Keelia wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 10:58 AM
It’s a dying free shard and you’re concerned about the economy now? That’s like trying to bail out a already sunk ship.

For Every single addition or change, staff should ask - will this attract new players or bring back old players? Simple as that.

So did they ask that when they created a needless gold sink? How does that even come close to retaining players or bringing players back?

It was like they way they did the charge change - hey here’s a qol/nerf.
Repairing durability is nice - effectively hiking the price is theft.
Tue 8 Oct 2019 3:00 PM by Jafeeio
gruenesschaf wrote:
Tue 8 Oct 2019 9:36 AM
While that is largely true, as soon as something exists that players need and hence want to trade for (feathers, rogs, bps here or the actual drop items / alchemy drop ingredients without a feather / token system) something has to be used to trade with and the ingame currency should be the logical choice. If no sink exists at all, you will end up with gold having no value as nobody needs it and hence prices ever increasing or some alternative currency being used as it happened in lots of games.

Given that you will make a somewhat static amount of gold if you level from 1 - 50 on your first char that's not really being influenced by any of the current gold sinks or the inflation, the spending power of new people is heavily affected the actual gold value / inflation, for that reason alone it's worth it to fight inflation, even before it reaches stupid heights where the limits of the used number system are reached (e. g. 2147483647 aka the reason for the 200p cap per char on live)

I really enjoyed Jewelcrafting for that reason. It's both a Platinumsink and a Feathersink (for the playerbase as a whole) while also providing something fun and different to do for the crafter and supplying the community with awesome ROGs at the same time. ROGs especially are incredibly hard to price and I always ended up pricing them "to sell" instead of squeezing out the last drop of profit. Whenever you have a sink that involves player interaction (even indirect) everyone wins I think.

I really don't want to derail this thread any further but I do think everything is already linked to Feathers with platinum as a necessary evil to buy mats.
Wed 9 Oct 2019 8:33 AM by iamsaitam
Well if you want to get to the rich in real life, you need to target their assets.. why not increase rent prices for villas and such?
Wed 9 Oct 2019 9:47 AM by chewchew
Mhmm I dont see if gold-sink is really so much needed.
Templating to get ready for rvr seems still pretty easy here.
Recently moved over from alb to hib and it didnt look like buying stuff for my template (crafted armor/weapons and a few rogs) has gotten more expensive (for the rogs it even felt cheaper). Only the price for feathers was a little bit more expensive, but I think its because of less epic raids or instance runs maybe!? not sure if a gold sink would help there.
Imho if the costs for getting a basic template for starting rvring and maintaining rvring doesnt increase, there is no problem with some players having too much money.
On the other hand if the new gold-sink methods cause troubles keeping up rvring w/o pve its a bad thing for old and new players alike.
Wed 9 Oct 2019 11:20 AM by Keelia
chewchew wrote:
Wed 9 Oct 2019 9:47 AM
Mhmm I dont see if gold-sink is really so much needed.
Templating to get ready for rvr seems still pretty easy here.
Recently moved over from alb to hib and it didnt look like buying stuff for my template (crafted armor/weapons and a few rogs) has gotten more expensive (for the rogs it even felt cheaper). Only the price for feathers was a little bit more expensive, but I think its because of less epic raids or instance runs maybe!? not sure if a gold sink would help there.
Imho if the costs for getting a basic template for starting rvring and maintaining rvring doesnt increase, there is no problem with some players having too much money.
On the other hand if the new gold-sink methods cause troubles keeping up rvring w/o pve its a bad thing for old and new players alike.

The feather thing on hib is a joke. They still one of the easiest realms to run DS. You can run it in under 25 with a solid group of experienced players.
Tue 15 Oct 2019 11:31 PM by Tyrlaan
This change kills all crafting except alchemy. Where people had to replace/SC armor at some point (weapons less since most people would run weaponless templates anyway and use ROG MPs for the LT proc) - and it even gave reason to mingle with other players - they now go bulk repair the only set of gear they´ll ever wear in a game thats unlikely to attract new players and saturated with fully templated alts already. Where other games add stuff to keep their players busy, Phoenix strips the game down to a skeleton. Weird concept.
Wed 16 Oct 2019 12:44 AM by gruenesschaf
Tyrlaan wrote:
Tue 15 Oct 2019 11:31 PM
This change kills all crafting except alchemy. Where people had to replace/SC armor at some point (weapons less since most people would run weaponless templates anyway and use ROG MPs for the LT proc) - and it even gave reason to mingle with other players - they now go bulk repair the only set of gear they´ll ever wear in a game thats unlikely to attract new players and saturated with fully templated alts already. Where other games add stuff to keep their players busy, Phoenix strips the game down to a skeleton. Weird concept.

Aside from weapons, a total of 7 chest pieces (chests, usually also a feather item) were below 50% durability making the removal of durability loss a non issue in practice.
Wed 16 Oct 2019 6:56 AM by Lipsi
i don't know to what extent the new repair cost has been tweaked since going live but it feels now very much reasonable and affordable.
Or am i just getting used to ?
Tue 22 Oct 2019 12:23 AM by stewbeedoo
I understand the need to manage inflation in the ingame economy.

From my perspective this was already achieved through a "stealth-nerf" in that rather than each char being able to hold 200P the entire account can now only hold 200P. This effectively reduces the possible account wealth by a factor of 10.

I appreciate the elimination of dur loss on items, but I played a zillion hours on live on 1 bow and it is still not worn out (ok it is 3% after RR11).

My goal is to RvR and cover my expenses through kills. I do not want to PvE to fund my RvR.
Tue 22 Oct 2019 1:30 AM by gotwqqd
stewbeedoo wrote:
Tue 22 Oct 2019 12:23 AM
I understand the need to manage inflation in the ingame economy.

From my perspective this was already achieved through a "stealth-nerf" in that rather than each char being able to hold 200P the entire account can now only hold 200P. This effectively reduces the possible account wealth by a factor of 10.

I appreciate the elimination of dur loss on items, but I played a zillion hours on live on 1 bow and it is still not worn out (ok it is 3% after RR11).

My goal is to RvR and cover my expenses through kills. I do not want to PvE to fund my RvR.

Can you use the exchange merchant and store coins to override this 200 max
This topic is locked and you can't reply.

Return to Tavern or the latest topics