Thoughts On The Wurm Economy

[KaiH 1,126]

just a minds game here, a "what if" so to say

1. instead of weapons/armor/tools/[everything not coverd by deed protection] living forever through repair - give those items a tiny chance to break on use (remove full loot on pvp maybe?)
2. instead of the flat-out 1% shatter chance after a channeling fail - scale the shatter chance on the number of unique enchants on the item and add this chance to the break chance of 1.
3. add the increased decay of houses for inactivity to carts and ships (i am not sure on this one)

[Wargasm 1,928]

5 hours ago, KaiH said:

just a minds game here, a "what if" so to say

1. instead of weapons/armor/tools/[everything not coverd by deed protection] living forever through repair - give those items a tiny chance to break on use (remove full loot on pvp maybe?)
2. instead of the flat-out 1% shatter chance after a channeling fail - scale the shatter chance on the number of unique enchants on the item and add this chance to the break chance of 1.
3. add the increased decay of houses for inactivity to carts and ships (i am not sure on this one)

 

-1

[Kaldari 53]

8 hours ago, KaiH said:

• 1. instead of weapons/armor/tools/[everything not coverd by deed protection] living forever through repair - give those items a tiny chance to break on use (remove full loot on pvp maybe?)
• 2. instead of the flat-out 1% shatter chance after a channeling fail - scale the shatter chance on the number of unique enchants on the item and add this chance to the break chance of 1.
• 3. add the increased decay of houses for inactivity to carts and ships (i am not sure on this one)

1. It would certainly go some way towards reducing the number of items floating around, but I feel it would add 'nuisance value' and detract from the 'fun' of playing Wurm. And people would likely have to carry multiple tools, because we all know what kind of sense of humour the RNG has

I would imagine that the risk of losing all their gear is something that makes the pvp more exciting for those who do it. (Not my thing, so I can`t say for certain)

2. I agree with this. Remove the 1% so an average caster has a very small chance of shattering on their first enchant, a good caster has a very small chance on their second, an exceptional caster has the small chance on their third. Rewards the caster for the time and effort of skilling up, without crippling lesser casters. And if someone wants the reward of a supertool with multiple high enchants, then the risk is having it blown to dust.

Edit: In theory it would benefit the casters because lower skilled ones could create highly enchanted tools, then sell them on to better casters to try their hand at adding second enchants.

3. No reason why it shouldn`t be in. Although have the bigger ships decay slower than the smaller ones, given the effort and materials required to build them.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Kaldari

[Audrel 2,223]

On 2/6/2016 at 9:19 AM, FranktheTank said:

That doesn't fit your argument Audrel, if anything is lends more to my argument that being able to train everything is more important because of the reasons you listed.

Limiting skills is a sure fire way to actually kill the game.

 

:-) My comment was /sarcasm. If they ever did that, I would leave the game so fast...

 

[Arkonick 557]

Why not do this to the system. All Items but house, boat's, carts ...etc of this type be repairable. 

Every thing else all tool's, weapons, an armor have to be Finalized like a house does. Until it gets finalized it can't be used. Once the item is finalized it can't be imped anymore. It can be repaired but never improved this would cause the item to eventually vanish and a cause for this stuff to have a market again while eating up the massive storage of these item's. It gives crafters a reason to make another using mat's again also helping decrease stock piles of mat's rotting in BSB's and crates for ever.

 

The items need a modifier added to them to calculate durability of the item based on the ql of mats used and not the ql of the over all tool it self. Pick axe example: ql of handle + ql pick axe head at creation = durability modifier of item. This durability can not be altered for item once created. This modifier will help determine how much damage is done to the item upon use against the other Item's QL.  So if the item has a lower Durability and used  on a item of higher ql it will deal more damage to the tool.

 

This makes it vital to imp item components before creation. Right now people just make pick head make shaft regardless of ql and snap them together then they work on imping the pick axe up in ql. The only reason one would imp the head up would be to earn the weapon head smithing skill. Most bypass this cause the head ql an shaft ql don't matter in the final product it just determine  the success chance of creating the item nothing more.

 

What this does is add to the craftsmen ship of the item. You can buy a 90ql pick axe with woa and coc but if the durability is crap it would take more damage per swing causing this item to decay more rapidly. This add would also make it take longer to the craftsman ship and slow down the high rate of products being flooded in the market do to the durability being taken in place.

 

You don't go to the store and by a pick axe made of plastic cause it's ql looks nice. It's like buying a rake you have the poor man special at the store for 10 bucks then you have several others going up in price. You buy the 10 dollar rake go home the handle snaps off as if you would have bought the better Durability one made with better components you might have got to use that rake for a year before the head snapped off.

 

Edit: You could also make it so that wagon an cart wheels and yokes have this durability system. This would make it so a market opens up for wagon wheel axles and yokes that can go bad. Then all your wagon/cart would do is go in a broken state where you either buy a new one or make a new one and add it back to the cart. 

 

The point of this system is to make a lot of items in the game have worth and value and a reason to be created again and again.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Arkonick
Addition stuff

[Darmalus 631]

I am strongly opposed to "randomly shatter" mechanics.

One, the value of something includes it's expected lifespan, and the expected lifespan is going to be based on how victimized I feel by RNG. Nice heavily enchanted QL 99 sword, I'll give you 10c for it because it might shatter the first time I use it on a cave bug.

Two, you aren't making these changes to a new game where no one has already invested time in the game. Your dragon scale chestplate you spent serious money on shattered from a mountain lion's love tap? Too bad! I can almost see the population count crash into the ground after that. I certainly wouldn't bother staying.

 

The game and items are already established, taking stuff away won't stimulate the economy, only build resentment. Give people a reason to remove stuff from the game voluntarily. Rework the personal goal/mission system so you get missions to scarifice or surrender to the king X number of Y QL swords, or enchanted items of power Z. Or going with the Item Spirit idea and have a goal be to sacrifice a certain amount.

Whatever the method, you need to make people see participating in the economy as a good thing, not punish them for not participating. This isn't the real world where you have no escape, in Wurm you can walk away to something better if you don't like it and it will be Wurm that suffers, not them.

[Lancelot 765]

The solution to the current downturn in the market value of items is  not so much in game mechanics, but in the low player base.

There have been some changes to skill gain over the last few years which generally have made it easier for a player taking up a skill like weapon smithing, for example, to attain a saleable product in a shorter time span, meaning that there is now a flood of items in that area. I have seen the same happen to the boat market. When I started playing in 2009, a knar or caravel would cost upwards of 50s, a corbita would set you back 30s. Now you are lucky to get 7s for a knar.

The real issue is not the player base, but advertising. Rolf needs to advertise the game now.

[balthasar 3]

Haven't been playing all that long but in my short amount it's easy to see how the game economy could become a mess.  One thing that jumps right out at me from a player's perspective is the method of finding what your looking for.  There's a couple of ways that I've seen to find the item I'm looking for.  You have the wtb & wts sale forum, the in game trade chat and some merchant stalls scattered around.  All three of these seem very poor at brings buys and sellers together.

 

Most other MMO's have implemented an auction house of some fashion.  With Wurm this could be done with a twist.  Players that are looking to buy bulk could ride off to the market and put out a contract to be filled.  This contract could include variable's like quality level, delivery required and the time required to fulfill.  If someone signs on to fill the contract but fails to fulfill there end of the deal they receive a bad contractor rating.  Players could also haul their load of crops, dirt, lumber to the market and list it for sale if there's no contract out there for there goods.  These same markets would be where other artisans could take there good (weapons, armour..etc) for sale

 

In all cases the market is just a way to either put out a contract or list your goods for sale.  The delivery of products is still handled by the players in game unlike the auction house's in other MMO'S.  

 

I could see someone put out a contract for 1k dirt and another player signing on to fulfill the contract.  But also needing to put out his own contract to facilitate the delivery.

 

I know this can all be done within the game.  But currently the economy in the game is so fractured since it relies on forum posts and in game chat.

[Audrel 2,223]

1 hour ago, balthasar said:

Most other MMO's have implemented an auction house of some fashion.  With Wurm this could be done with a twist.  Players that are looking to buy bulk could ride off to the market and put out a contract to be filled.  This contract could include variable's like quality level, delivery required and the time required to fulfill.  If someone signs on to fill the contract but fails to fulfill there end of the deal they receive a bad contractor rating.  Players could also haul their load of crops, dirt, lumber to the market and list it for sale if there's no contract out there for there goods.  These same markets would be where other artisans could take there good (weapons, armour..etc) for sale

 

This has been suggested so many times I can't even remember the count on it. It's also been ignored every time.

 

Instead of doing it like WoW where it shows up everywhere in the game world, it could be done like EVE where you can see it listed but you have to travel to its physical location to buy it and pick it up. EVE-Style cargo contracts could open up opportunities, although sailing is much faster with the new course plotting (not that it is slow by any means in EVE unless you are crossing the galaxy).

[sweatygopher 88]

1. Adding anything that is skill based  makes the problem worst.   The issue is high skill level players, eventually everyone gets high, and then the new players are left in the dust feeling helpless.  What we need is a way to make the economy lively for new and old players alike, and for that to happen the new mechanics added have to be based on time, not skill.

 

A solution to this would be -

Bringing back different woods affecting the look of items, but requiring the full item to be made with a specific type of wood from start to finish.  This would create a wood economy, that would allow new players a level of competition with bulk goods.

 

Further more, skill should not determine ore or wood quality.  Instead, finding high quality nodes or wood should be the important factor.  The whole mining system needs to be revamped, so that ore is more scarce.  Right now you find a vein, and you're set for a long time.

 

It seems silly that there is a skill involved in finding high quality wood.  Furthermore, trees not requiring care to be high quality?  They most definitely should require care!  Trees are susceptible to all sorts of diseases and problems.

 

As far as farming goes, fertilizer should be introduced.  Farmers should have to spend a weeek fertilzing their fields after excessive harvesting to get high quality crops again, and that fertilizer could come directly from the new players and their cows,chickens, cats, excess waste food, etc... thus making a use for all those animals no one cares to tame.

 

I mean really, there's a lot of ways to fix this problem but the issue is that Rolf isn't even reading these forums, nor does he care.  I've seen countless suggestions that were solid over the years and none of them to this day have been implemented.

 

Next, you need a way for the new players to catch up to the old players.  I would recommend a mentor program, make it beneficial for the mentee and mentor to partner up.  You can't expect new players to grind for two years just so they can start producing 90ql gear and compete in an over saturated market.  WU has shown us that people really just want equal footing, and don't care if they're the best.  Those that do, that small .1 to 3.0 ql difference should be enough to toot their horn!

 

Edited February 8, 2016 by sweatygopher

[rixk 830]

41 minutes ago, sweatygopher said:

Next, you need a way for the new players to catch up to the old players.  I would recommend a mentor program, make it beneficial for the mentee and mentor to partner up.  You can't expect new players to grind for two years just so they can start producing 90ql gear and compete in an over saturated market.  WU has shown us that people really just want equal footing, and don't care if they're the best.  Those that do, that small .1 to 3.0 ql difference should be enough to toot their horn!

 

Catching up is the problem in the first place.. that has caused the problem, that Rolf has made it easier and easier for new players to catch up.. noone seems to realize, that when everyone can make 90ql items, then they will become useless.. there was once market for 50ql items, things were made easier, that didn't mean, that now everyone started making money with 50ql items.. just the bar was raised, which new players had to aim. And that is how it goes..

The only commodity in Wurm is time... how much time you have to spend on something and how valuable your time is.

[sweatygopher 88]

Well that issue rixk you will run into with any skill based system.  That is why ultimately on survival games, you need a mix of RNG and skill and the resources have to scarce enough to create demand.  Right now, there are sooooooo many resources.  Soooooooo many crafters at high level skill.  Whether it's today, or next year... inevitably the market reaches this point if the system is not designed to recycle old resources/product in a way that is productive and not harmful to gameplay.

 

 

Right now the whole system is extremely flawed.  Not only is it SUPER easy to get high ql resources, and mass quantities of it... but as you level up your skills, the actions become faster!!  This means, not only can you create higher quallity gear you can make it easier too!  When in reality, the higher quality gear should take more time and effort than the lower quality, but it doesn't.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2016 by sweatygopher

[balthasar 3]

17 hours ago, Audrel said:

 

This has been suggested so many times I can't even remember the count on it. It's also been ignored every time.

 

Instead of doing it like WoW where it shows up everywhere in the game world, it could be done like EVE where you can see it listed but you have to travel to its physical location to buy it and pick it up. EVE-Style cargo contracts could open up opportunities, although sailing is much faster with the new course plotting (not that it is slow by any means in EVE unless you are crossing the galaxy).

 

That's indeed what I hoped to get across in my ramblings.   In my mind until it becomes easier to see whats out there for sale of what others are trying to buy we're just peeing in the wind here.

[enoofu 206]

22 hours ago, Audrel said:

 

This has been suggested so many times I can't even remember the count on it. It's also been ignored every time.

 

Instead of doing it like WoW where it shows up everywhere in the game world, it could be done like EVE where you can see it listed but you have to travel to its physical location to buy it and pick it up. EVE-Style cargo contracts could open up opportunities, although sailing is much faster with the new course plotting (not that it is slow by any means in EVE unless you are crossing the galaxy).

Don't think AH's will help, since Sellers are usually pretty active pushing items out.

 

Main thing hurting this game is Combat, and Decent combat in MMO's usually get players that don't like crafting to play.

[Zerocool 139]

On 2/8/2016 at 7:35 PM, Lancelot said:

Rolf needs to advertise the game now.

 

[hankrearden 144]

33 minutes ago, enoofu said:

 

Main thing hurting this game is Combat, and Decent combat in MMO's usually get players that don't like crafting to play.

 

This is the big reason right here, was kind of secretly hoping they take the WU money and get some real combat.

[Talohan 129]

Gotta agree with the PvP, PvE combat there for one reason the economy is suffering. With no real major things to fight over or a lot of major high power Mobs, the need for replacement weapons, armor, etc. and the mats needed for such things is at a real low point. And the only thing that is selling now is rares and bulks of building mats.

As mentioned before about EvE, the market there is driven by the need for replacement ships and parts or the mats to make the parts.

[Eltaran 79]

And yet people are opposed to stuff breaking - and I understand why: it wouldn't create demand, it would just create hassle as people playing long enough make everything they need themselves anyways. Your Shovel breaks? You don't go looking to buy a new one, you have to make a new one. Your weapon breaks? You don't go looking to buy a new one, you have to make a new one.

 

I now tend to think that Wurm is rather hopeless in that regard.

 

[Audrel 2,223]

2 hours ago, Talohan said:

As mentioned before about EvE, the market there is driven by the need for replacement ships and parts or the mats to make the parts.

 

Yeah, but it usually takes a player corp to do it. I mean you can do it solo but... the hours in the belts for that... hahaha

 

Edit: And the replacements are needed because upon killing your opponent, you destroy their stuff. Some thing survive but you don't run off with a perfect loot. You run off with scrap piles and a few survivors.

 

Edited February 9, 2016 by Audrel

[Volfgarix 2]

Didn't read the whole topic yet, but I want to ask a question:

What would happen if we removed the possibility to buy premium with in-game silver?

[fatboy 448]

Econ is doing just fine,  All i ever see is people selling silver's and gold. So if the econ is shot and dead, where is these people getting money from? Bulk goods market is toasted for now, but everything else is doing about the same as it ever has. Now if rolf would get off his rearend and advertise, then we would get new players and have a much much bigger econ we are used to.

[fatboy 448]

volf that idea would greatly  effect new players, very bad bad bad idea. most average players buy premy from the shop because its a better deal.

[Volfgarix 2]

12 minutes ago, fatboy said:

volf that idea would greatly  effect new players, very bad bad bad idea. most average players buy premy from the shop because its a better deal.

 

In my opinion it would improve market for the new players.

Less players willing to dig up 10 000 pieces of dirt = higher prices

Non-Premium players would go travel around the servers instead of slaving away days to get these 10 silvers.

 

There is thing with mailing. I think that if mailing became more expensive than now, it would give an opportunity for new players to work as couriers, they could have use out of these rowboats.

[Arkonick 557]

3 hours ago, Volfgarix said:

Didn't read the whole topic yet, but I want to ask a question:

What would happen if we removed the possibility to buy premium with in-game silver?

Well wurm would see another drop in player base but it wouldn't matter for that drop they didn't pay to begin with so no lose in profit's. But they might go buy WU so they could continue to play for free. Unless there only in wurm to squeeze wealth out of the game and in that case a % might start paying to continue and the other % would just quit altogether.

[Ayes 3,715]

Many of these suggestions either make the game more time intensive to accomplish the same things as currently, increase the cost of playing the game by having to re-purchase broken/worn out items, or trying to come up with ways for other players to be unable to reach high crafting levels that make them less dependent upon others for these items. Again, this is all *protectionism of a market currently held by highly skilled players trying to either dream up ways of making more coins or preventing others from leveling up as completion to themselves.

 

Now this is an even more onerous approach with Wurm Unlimited as competition with its much lower playing costs, higher skill leveling gains and faster action timers. I see little suggested in this thread that would make Wurm Online more attractive to play for retaining players not involved in the "economy" (translated = selling items to others).

 

Pursuing this varied approach will only make the game less attractive, encouraging players to leave the game sooner to WU and reduce these item sellers market further. Not that there is any real way to deter players departing to and preferring Wurm Unlimited now that the genie has been let out of the exclusive WO bottle; but, most of these Wurm "economic thoughts" will only make these players wave their fond goodbye to WO that much sooner.

 

Ahh if only the blind could see...

=Ayes=