AJBlack

How's The Current Market? - A Returning Player Question

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, CountZero said:

the only problem is that it will encourage mass deforestation

its not a problem, in my opinion landscape needs some places without trees

TRkarXq.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

trees are a bane on this world, the only good tree is a felled tree being wielded in the hands of a maniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well thats ok then :D nerf iron and all hail our new charcoal making overlords

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Set a skill cap at 50 or 30 or something - high enough that ppl can support themselves with stuff "that will do" but stuff that isnt great.

Allow players to take a per-defined set of skills over the cap. A player will choose the skill area depending on the thing they want to do most. For example someone who wants to blacksmith will be able to skill blacksmith, weapon/armor smith etc etc. But they wont be able to skill things they might need to create the materials they need - for example, mining, prospecting, maybe smelting will be in a separate group.

 

We had that in the beginning of the game. Removing the skill cap wasn't probably such a good idea, since it removed any need for community play (outside of pvp).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, CountZero said:

Set a skill cap at 50 or 30 or something - high enough that ppl can support themselves with stuff "that will do" but stuff that isnt great.

Allow players to take a per-defined set of skills over the cap. A player will choose the skill area depending on the thing they want to do most. For example someone who wants to blacksmith will be able to skill blacksmith, weapon/armor smith etc etc. But they wont be able to skill things they might need to create the materials they need - for example, mining, prospecting, maybe smelting will be in a separate group.

 

This will stop the problem of veteran accounts eventually being able to do everything themselves and not needing to trade.

This kind of thinking gets me furious.

You're seriously telling me that you would want to be caped like that?

The main selling point of this game to me is that with enough time invested I could do anything I want. 

And sorry to break it to you, it maybe looks like that on paper but this wouldn't increase trading ingame, it will either make people quit or prem up and grind bunch of alts untill we cover all we wanted and could with one account. The thing you suggest is utterly terrible game design because of which I only play wurm and no other games. Look where priest restriction brought us, nobody is buying enchants because everyone has priest alts.

If I want to invest 10 years in this game and want to have more than 10 100 skills it's none ###### buisness to restrict me for sake of some economy. I want to be both carpetner and smith, both farmer and fighter so sod of with such restrictions(only restriction should be time to do it), can go play WOW if I wanted that.

Edited by kochinac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, kochinac said:

 because everyone has priest alts.

not everyone has priest alts capable of enchanting. (mine can only bless)
we only get one char per account. i personally can't afford to prem 2 characters.
we tolerate this because it's more money for codeclub.
not everyone wants top enchants renewed every 6 months, not everyone needs supremes.
I only have rare tools for the tasks i do most often (4) and i dont grind so i rarely have to get them re-enchanted.

I agree with you on everything else, capping skills would be wurmageddon 2.
especially considering the work many folk have put into making their specialisms 99.**

Edited by Steveleeb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kochinac said:

This kind of thinking gets me furious.

You're seriously telling me that you would want to be caped like that?

The main selling point of this game to me is that with enough time invested I could do anything I want. 

And sorry to break it to you, it maybe looks like that on paper but this wouldn't increase trading ingame, it will either make people quit or prem up and grind bunch of alts untill we cover all we wanted and could with one account. The thing you suggest is utterly terrible game design because of which I only play wurm and no other games. Look where priest restriction brought us, nobody is buying enchants because everyone has priest alts.

If I want to invest 10 years in this game and want to have more than 10 100 skills it's none ###### buisness to restrict me for sake of some economy. I want to be both carpetner and smith, both farmer and fighter so sod of with such restrictions(only restriction should be time to do it), can go play WOW if I wanted that.

 

what a nice calm response to a discussion - I did mention that most people would not like it, I wasn't suggesting we should do this, just discussing ways you could make trade work.

 

 

The kind of no limits sandbox game we currently have that you like is great - but its that nature that prevents there being any kind of interesting economy. Im not saying one is better than another. I am saying that they are mutually exclusive.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

what a nice calm response to a discussion 

 

 

I said it gets me furious :P

yeah it's not about you, sorry for that, even reread your post after i posted, i realized that you are not defending it so might have been overreacted towards you so i do appologize for anything personal in my post. But still i'm extremly mad at that concept and thing that it should never goes to that even for the sake of economy, like i think it should never got to having skill decay again. I am on other side against character trading although i understand peoles reasoning about that, but personaly never liked it and i think economy would be much stronger without it as it would allow natural sink for vet accounts, even the time they don't play is enough to open space in market for new active players. To some extend i agree with but i don't think going to such extremes is neccesity.

No need to reinvent the wheel with economy, with more players activly playing economy would get better, as like i mentioned Wurm has that unique beauty in game design that only true restriction is time. In that notion i agree with some of the people that skilling maybe became too easy.

As for the steel i simply adore steel and my dream when i started was to manufacture steel tools not iron ones, it's not worth considering effort vs money, but i still do it just for my own fulfilment, enjoying in road i had to go and skills i had to grind to get to somewhat steady steel production for me. What is interesting is natural raising bounds, like when i started nobody even thought of making steel tools, now people do it because iron became boring and to easy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2019 at 6:23 AM, Retrograde said:

trees are a bane on this world, the only good tree is a felled tree being wielded in the hands of a maniac

I think you got lost in the forest of OT to make this post; but along those lines I must say that trees are the best part of Wurm. Better that this type of tree killer was felled than the trees. I have most likely planted more trees over time than they have cut down anyway. It's just that when this type of slaughter is advocated more maniacs (good labeling) join the cause, more trees shed their tears of sorrow to water the sproutlings under them. Anyway, WU is a better choice for tree hugging as some servers seem to cherish their presence.

 

=Ayes=

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 10:43 AM, CountZero said:

wurm is not a game that can really have an economy. In order for an economy to work, ppl need to need/want things they cant or wont make/get for themselves.

I think a big problem that we have in terms of a Wurm "economy" or "market" is that there is no precise definition of it layed out beforehand so that the issue can be addressed accurately. Everyone seems to have their own idea of what this means so they go off on their own interpretation of it. In the terms you have stated, yes Wurm can have an "economy" because many people will prefer not to create and obtain items on their own game time so they will purchase them from others. I see no problem with this *if* anyone with sufficient effort could do this on their own if desired and no skills or abilities that are gained over time are artificially designed to decline to benefit this "market".

 

The big bugaboo here is when players come up with schemes to benefit their specific ability to dominate some aspects of this "market" because then it comes at the expense of increasing the costs of playing the game for all the others. The "market/economy" should always be secondary to the opportunity of all players to become participants within it or not without increasing their game playing costs disproportionately, which unfortunately I think many of these player suggestions to improve the "market/economy" do (increase costs). Then fortunately on the other hand few are ever adopted as being beneficial to the game anyway.

 

=Ayes=

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ayes said:

I think a big problem that we have in terms of a Wurm "economy" or "market" is that there is no precise definition of it layed out beforehand so that the issue can be addressed accurately. Everyone seems to have their own idea of what this means so they go off on their own interpretation of it. In the terms you have stated, yes Wurm can have an "economy" because many people will prefer not to create and obtain items on their own game time so they will purchase them from others. I see no problem with this *if* anyone with sufficient effort could do this on their own if desired and no skills or abilities that are gained over time are artificially designed to decline to benefit this "market".

 

The big bugaboo here is when players come up with schemes to benefit their specific ability to dominate some aspects of this "market" because then it comes at the expense of increasing the costs of playing the game for all the others. The "market/economy" should always be secondary to the opportunity of all players to become participants within it or not without increasing their game playing costs disproportionately, which unfortunately I think many of these player suggestions to improve the "market/economy" do (increase costs). Then fortunately on the other hand few are ever adopted as being beneficial to the game anyway.

 

=Ayes=

 

Imo a good, simple game economy for a game like wurm is one where a large range of items are actively traded between most ppl. Basic materials, simple everyday items, excellent every day items, luxury goods and "rare" stuff. If the economy just consisted of only end game rare items with such and such enchants etc then i would call that ****

 

I agree about market dominating, a good simple game economy for wurm should consist of producers selling their items directly to earn the money they require to pay for the things they need. As soon as you get people hoarding money, playing games to manipulate prices etc you get problems. Middlemen can also be trouble - however innocently they may be playing (sometimes its fun to just be a trader) - this kind of play style can damage an economy in a small game like wurm.

 

No easy answers to any of it :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts:

 

A lot of us have their preferred suppliers who we go to without announcing it on Trade channel. If i need to buy something, after playing the game for a while i know who to turn to. People have reputation in our own eyes and i know that if i need X for tomorrow, "this" guy will deliver it to me, drop it off at the usual spot, send me something CoD and i will pick the cost whenever i can. It's a two way trust and over the years i have been functioning this way. I know for a fact that more people do because our alliance does that as well. If someone joins and asks where they can buy a supreme handlebar with ribbons and a bell, multiple existing members will say "just give X a shout, you'll have it within 2 days and cheap too.

 

Understandably, people who are entering the market for any reason (new player, someone changing their profession for a while and has excess stock, good loot from a disbanded deed) will have a hard time finding people who don't have their "go-to-guy" already and this is because the current player base is well established. Most of us play the game for years and we simply don't need to look at the Trade channel for anything, we already know a person who will give us a discount, who will deliver on time, who will go out of their way to make the trade a pleasant one. Those are the sellers we stick to. 

 

Coincidentally, those are the sellers who survive on the market and don't burn out because they have a well established customer base so even if they don't get sales from advertising on Trade, they still get returning customers outside of public channels.

 

As for selling things, i don't sell anything, in my years in Wurm i have sold one item in total (and traded all my SP for clay but i also have a supplier who is always there for me when i need him and will drop what he's doing to dig more clay for me, speaking of business relationships). Thus, i can't say exactly what it looks like from the seller point of view but i would imagine it's pretty much the same. There are people out there who have no problem making their sales just because they have returning customers.

 

Bottom line is this: With majority of players being long term here, for many the Trade channel could not exist, they already know who to go to for the things they need. Influx of new players would move the market for sure, some of new players would be willing to invest money instead of time to build their awesome castle or to be able to kill that troll which was bullying their village for days or to have a nice and fast boat. Not all of them but those are the players who fuel the market. Those are the players who are happy with prices going down as well. If my silver coin can get me 12 packets of smokes instead of 10 because people are undercutting each other? I'm delighted with that.

 

There is nothing wrong with the market. There simply isn't enough new buyers to keep all the sellers happy.

 

One "solution" comes to mind. 

Hypothetically i'm looking to buy 50k bricks and i'm a new player. I have to keep spamming Trade channel about it and wait for someone to fulfill the order, ideally - in one trade. To avoid running to the dock multiple times if nothing else.

Should someone respond to the WTB advert, it's going to be one person satisfied and the rest of brickmakers upset that they can't sell theirs stock. It's about the timing, it's about luck, it's about demand, it's about the established relationships again. If one of those things could be eliminated, a lot could change in the dynamics of the market. 

 

Take out the Timing factor out of the equation. I need bricks - i get bricks. Someone makes a sale, i get to build, everyone is happy. There is at least one deed on Exo that sells bulk materials via merchant+keys+pens and there are player merchants for selling smaller goods. This still means i have to travel though and it's not something i enjoy so i will naturally go to my "guy" and have the materials delivered, at a price lower than currently on the market and i'll get the crates for free. The choice is obvious here.

 

Consider however something that was suggested countless times and bashed in to oblivion even more times probably.

Equivalent of Auction House in some other popular games. Forget the realism for a second, forget the "we should travel and meet new people and blahblahblah". The population is so thin at this point that to make that purchase i would most likely go to the seller, see no one on the way, meet the person for that one trade and forget about it. Talking purely about the market and not realism or any social side of buying a brick, if i could open a menu, check the prices, place an order (could be fulfilled by wagoner for example) and have the stuff delivered to me with 100% guarantee of not being scammed or any other unpleasant surprises - i would gladly give up a bit of realism.

Then there's people who say "but that will make the prices drop even further because of those vicious undercutters who want to sell their stock asap!". Well, that is a business opportunity, no? Buy out the cheap stock and resell with profit? How low can someone drop their price before it gets unsustainable too?

Plus, an auction house would invalidate most of the existing buyer-seller relationships and level out the playing field between veterans who can't keep up fulfilling their orders for frequent buyers and a new starter who is trying to pay for his first premium. I would probably rather go to AH, have everything i need charged and delivered by the system, even if i had to wait for the wagoner to deliver it.

 

On a side note, if this would use existing wagoners and people would be queued behind other player's orders - there would be much more wagoners, even if private, to go around. A nice money sink for CCAB. There could also be additional sink of a small tax on each sale so that people could potentially prefer to travel to save a few copper on the purchase.

 

I'm no economist but someone selling bricks at 50c per thousand to be on top of the list would be the least of my worries. Buy them out and resell at 1s per thousand.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If wagoners would be employed for an auction house style infrastructure, I think it could be done all via a new UIs only. Cast Courier or Dark Messenger on a depot to link it up to the "auction house system", if you want some wogic-y/magic-based explanation for how this sort of communication can be facilitated in "medival times".

Instead of sealing a delivery, put crates loosely into the depot for sale, right click the depot and mark whatever crate for sale with its price.

A depot wouldn't be able to be used conventionally while it has items for sale in it(That'll likely just be too much of a hassle codewise), but that's easily solved by making 2 depots. The extra coding for wagoner behavior shouldn't be particularly difficult since the items are already available in the structure required for pickup.

Similarly, any waypoint can be used to order stuff to. No new assets and only 2 new UIs needed, it works pretty much like wagoners do already except even more asynchronously, so no huge coding work to bridge the gap between the new and old functionality either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i gues thats something else to consider - this entire time iv been talking about trading and a economy - iv been thinking of it as another aspect to gameplay - like building a building or hunting animals or making this and that. A part of the whole experience - where as other people see an economy as simply a means to an end. They don't see it as gameplay but as a tool to assist their gameplay. This is where the auction-house/no auction-house debate pops up.

 

Another reason why the "economy" is such a difficult topic, since it would have to be implemented with a view to fulfilling a purpose/objective, and since and economy's can fill different purposes - which do you choose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CountZero said:

i gues thats something else to consider - this entire time iv been talking about trading and a economy - iv been thinking of it as another aspect to gameplay - like building a building or hunting animals or making this and that. A part of the whole experience - where as other people see an economy as simply a means to an end. They don't see it as gameplay but as a tool to assist their gameplay. This is where the auction-house/no auction-house debate pops up.

 

Another reason why the "economy" is such a difficult topic, since it would have to be implemented with a view to fulfilling a purpose/objective, and since and economy's can fill different purposes - which do you choose?

 

Fair point.

I didn't consider that as market doesn't appeal to me at the slightest. It's more of a must and a chore for me personally but i agree. There are people out there who enjoy the sole activity of trading rather than the outcome, be it coins or items.

In that regard an automated market system might take away that pleasure. Or not, if the sales would be taxed in a balanced way maybe? Very hard to predict the outcome in that regard.

 

There are many things one person can't consider but that's why we are discussing those things. 

 

On another note, us wanting or not wanting functionality to be implemented, ultimately means very little. It's up to CCAB to make a call on that and i'm sure that Staff gets to see many more different angles of this than one player would, like in this case. I would personally never consider market as an important part of my gameplay but in the same way someone else might have zero interest in teraforming and think of it as something that unfortunately has to be done, while i think it's one of the best things in Wurm.

 

Edit:

 

Corrected the autocorrects >.<

Edited by Locath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now