BDCKoolaid

Are damage and decay strong enough to sustain a healthy economy?

Recommended Posts

If damage rates were to be increased, I think so are the improvement rates.

This is a doubled edged sword. People would not have to spend as much time maintaining equipment, which in market terms will make a high QL piece cheaper.

This may seem bad for the crafter at first, but mind that they wouldn't have to spend as much time and materials, so not a big loss there if tweaked correctly. On the other hand, the tools are more affordable, and with increased damage, picking up a new, more affordable tool from a crafter instead of doing maintenance may become a more lucrative alternative. Similarly, make enchants less RNG based and give channelling some bloody meaning as a skill...but up the enchant decay aswell, as that will make high enchants easier for a skilled priest. Similar effect as mentioned before.

 

My general gist is that hamfisting more chores in won't neccessarily make people spend more money, and I don't think that should be the goal. Rather, create incentives for more, smaller scale trades to be done, causing some more circulation of ingame funds in little increments. Basically trading more often for pocket changes, rather than seeing the relatively rare sale of a good tool for "big money". Wether the total money being spent increases by this is written in the stars, and like I said, not my goal either. I think a healthy economy's mark is not exactly that much money is being spent, but that it is being regularly spent and somewhat evenly among its participants in both directions. (But fully satisfying the latter constraint is a bigger and different conversation.)

 

And I'm putting "big money" in quotes because the rampant market saturation has killed big money from tool trade. Perhaps a faster circulation of both funds and wares could take care of that, too.

I like @Jore's idea as a second layer to this to ensure that equipment actually circulates and has a lifespan, though I have to say just on its own, put into the game as it is now, it would feel more like a looming apocalypse.

 

Especially with some tools having sentimental value. The signature of an (online) friend on it, or just having any other kind of history with it. Putting a deadline on those will upset a few people. For these cases, I think it'd be fine to let priests mend items even at their very core, restoring even the secondary damage value. It's magic after all. This would have to be more expensive in such a way that it's only worth it for rares+, items with imbues (given that they won't decay faster. that would probably be unreasonable seeing as we aren't talking about making bloods more available, too) or said sentimental value.

 

Keep in mind that I'm spitballing these ideas at an advanced hour and I should seriously be sleeping right now, so I may even get some qualitative aspects wrong here or can't be bothered to think it entirely through, so pick this apart as you like.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Flubb You left a lot to unpack there. I like the sound of it all on paper. Not sure how it would turn out in practice though. 

 

I'm definitely getting the vibe that the vast majority of commentors are on the same page with decay of items (atleast offdeed) needing to be strengthened significantly. 

 

As for damage rates, which would probably affect the economy more than decay, aside from boats that is, everyone seems to be a little more back and forth. And rightfully so, as it's very tricky even on paper to get right, and we all know that a good idea on paper can still be an abomination when implemented.

Share this post


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

 

Especially with some tools having sentimental value. The signature of an (online) friend on it, or just having any other kind of history with it. Putting a deadline on those will upset a few people. For these cases, I think it'd be fine to let priests mend items even at their very core, restoring even the secondary damage value. It's magic after all. This would have to be more expensive in such a way that it's only worth it for rares+, items with imbues (given that they won't decay faster. that would probably be unreasonable seeing as we aren't talking about making bloods more available, too) or said sentimental value.

 

That was one thing i thought of but didn't take a moment to flesh out. I like your extension of it; making it possible for priests to mend the more severe damage. That could be done in any number of ways, whether it be with spells, some kind of rare item, rare rolls during imping(either successful or unsuccessful,) or perhaps another use for the Restoration skill. Would just have to be careful to not make it so easy that it negates the point behind the system to begin with haha. 

 

While there are some interesting thoughts and ideas throughout this thread, really any kind of changes would upset a lot of people. Of course the argument of helping the economy is there,  but it just isn't something the devs probably look at with importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

increasing decay on off deed items for people that haven't logged in for 3 months same as houses, sure whatever

increasing any kind of decay or damage otherwise for the sake of muh poor poor economuh is an awful suggestion geared at serving virtual wallets over better gameplay

 

i don't know why this always has to be said.  if you want to improve something, find ways to add benefits without ruining something else.  add something new to encourage or improve trading, improve merchants, add some kind of in game auction house like runescape's ge, good.  making things worse than they are to force trading, terrible.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for off deed lock picking on Freedom, clean up the Abandoned ships and carts, wagons, been asking and asking forever. Suggestion were made for public parking garages underground in Starter towns. Also I think the economy could use  a boost in new rare resources, would love to see green and blue slate added, rose marble, maybe add some new tree types like yew for bows, cork trees, glassblowing would be nice, WURM has such huge potential, would love to see more mob variety, anything to help the economy, maybe increase the three Rare, Supreme Fantastic into a broader spectrum Masterwork, Rare, Supreme, Artisan, Fantastic, Legendary, Mythic? Maybe even a few levels before Masterwork. Maybe add careers where at 99 skill you choose a Career and pick 5 skills and those 5 skills are the only ones to ever go above 100. Or some sort of rune. runes, gems that allow an item or spells to go higher, more rare monster parts maybe. Alchemy could use tons of work with new potions, poisons, etc, ink for scrolls so priests could scribe one use spell scrolls. Limitless Ideas

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BDCKoolaid said:

 

 

our reading comprehension is almost as bad as our grasp of the law of supply and demand.

 

And after further thought, I think after 4 straight hours of chopping vegetables, you have amassed a metric ton of chopped veggie. Having 50 damage on a knife, which seems like a lower ql knife to me tbh, seems like a very balanced trade off for the sheer amount of chopped vegetables you produced.

99woa, glimmer rune (speed) 2.5s timer per action. 5760 veggies if you chop non-stop. No stopping to refill inventory, regen stamina, drink, eat, etc. With a 100ql veggie giving 2.4999 favor that is only 14,400 favor. A hard casting session can go through that. I went through over 2000 favor on ONE woa cast today with my 92 channeling vyn priest, in domain, with high enchanting bonus and journal bonus, just to get a 95 woa.  So, in theory, I could cast 7 casts with the RNG I had today. 

 

A tad short of a metric ton.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MrGARY said:

increasing any kind of decay or damage otherwise for the sake of muh poor poor economuh is an awful suggestion geared at serving virtual wallets over better gameplay

 

Totally on your side there. Hence I brainstormed something that doesn't just punitively increase damage so you'll better run off to a crafter (and that will only pretty much benefit the top dogs of that branch of crafting). It's more of a paradigm shift to short lived but more easily made tools, giving more opportunities for trade, not making it essentially the better option. It would also shift away from spending hours at a time just for maintenance and break it up in more, shorter sessions of maintenance, because being tied to the forge or workshops for possibly several playsessions could be quite a drag.

 

I agree that any changes should benefit the economy organically and more as a side effect. That doesn't mean we cannot explicitly humour the search for options that would have this side effect, though.

Yet as OP said, there's lots to unpack in my previous rambling, so it may (will likely) be horrid to get it right in implementation or not even work out the way as described.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I want to play high maintenance game.. wurm is already casual, not much reason to compete(the chill mode of the game is a reason many play it*).

 

I don't want to imp an armor to 92ql or 96 just to go out hunting and return -8ql down on all pieces, 'great for the economy', not so great for my pocket or time spent improving my stuff.. it's a game that takes TIME .. HUMAN TIME... to do stuff like improving the armor.. this is not ark.. to lurk around pick 5 rocks and go to a crafting/repair bench and hit 'repair' with instant fix to best durability(*coughs* quality) at the cost of few easily found resources.

 

This is not entropia.. lets not make it such universe where you need a ton of money to start off.. and than constantly have to pour money at stuff to keep them around, wasn't any of that part of the reason rmt's gone?

RMT gone.. ok.. many hype it.. but I do not see a lot of traders of weapon casts or too many people hoarding whole variety of priests, some do but do not sell, how are you as new player going to get a decent weapon than?

 

QL drops well enough at start as your repairing skill is trash, that alone fixes your issues, rest is ondeed you pay to not get ..... by the decay rates, you pay to not waste time with that... again.. you pay... to not waste time.

 

Maybe start damaging more things that are offdeed, but end there, whatever is ondeed is obviously cared for.. there could be a "call" to push inactive 6m+ boats offdeed but that's about it..

I do get damage on my boat as I sail.. not much but I DO NOT SAIL MUCH.. I'd not like to imp a boat to ql92 and after going to a rift or ros somewhere.. to return home with well damaged boat, repairing and finding it to be now ql85 boat..

 

how much is too much, wurm takes quite some time to play it.. more, way more than any other game.. you can do an event or 2 in 2 hours in most games.. in wurm you need 4 hours to just prepare for 1.. and maybe double that time to do the event and get back.. oh well if you partied hard... you'll have an after party of imping or sending stuff to be improved once again.. 'not' true?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+ 1 for increased decay for certain items (such as boats that haven't been used in at least 1 year or close to it). By use I mean any form of interaction with said boat, including managing it by the owner.

 

-1 for increased decay for economic reasons. Let me explain why. This isn't a game like diablo, or runescape or WoW., where you can make hundreds of gold in a few hours just by  farming mobs. Then you can go to an NPC and buy whatever you need or from another player.

The money we get from selling to tokens or being lucky of selling stuff on merchants is laughable at best.

Simply put, the gold that I would theoretically earn in WoW classic for example would stay in WoW and have its own inflation there.

 

In Wurm, if RNG is nice to me and spend hours hunting or foraging, I could make 2-3 silvers per a 4 hour session. In reality most of us would make more in 4 hours of RL job work. Wurm's economy is tied to the REAL economy we have right now.

 

My biggest issue with the current system is the fact that it doesn't have a separate currency we can earn that isn't tied to the current real life market. We buy silvers with Euros/dollars/etc. We even consciously equate them with 1 euro = 1 silver.

I would see this as basically forcing people to spend more silvers in game just to maintain certain things, or spending more hours to maintain them.

In other games, the issue of items "being in game forever" has been long solved by making items such as armor/shields/tools character bound. Some things are tradeable, some are not.

In wurm 99% of things are tradeable. Can you imagine how it would be if apples grown 50 years ago would still be viable for consumption now? The impact on apple farming and its industries would be insane. No waste = less consumption.

 

If we have a separate currency in game, that is 100% earnable (can't buy it with silvers) then that's fine. Earn it by hunting, imping, grinding etc, spend it at NPCs like you do it in 1000 other MMOs. That system works for a reason.  You could try jumpstarting the economy with that.

 

But right now, the Wurm economy is pretty much stagnant due to a lot of factors that have been poured over the years in what I could describe as academic detail by now : lack of decay, lack of demand, too little consumption, money that's spent on upkeep is "gone forever", too much competition that drives prices down, different real life living wages (a silver in France is actually worth less than a silver in Bulgaria), too few silvers earned in game by doing limited boring actions, lack of organized events (by the devs) that drive prices up and down (holidays in RL have a huge impact on the market for example. Certain activities in other games, such as opening a new "raid" or "dungeon" that requires a specific item such as fire resistance potions change the value of them), the impact of the pvp market tied to the pve market (chaos is linked to freedom obviously), no item sinks other than saccing them, slow decay, etc. The current Wurm economic model is pretty out dated and it honestly doesn't encourage growth. I'm not saying we should change base game mechanics to fit the economy but rather adding new mechanics on top of the old ones to try upating the model.

 

Increasing decay would mean just adding more "chores" to the game. Going with my previous example , imagine if in RL someone would sell you a T-shirt that would only last for 3 months, afterwards it would lose its thread, its colour, the fabric would be damaged and you'd be forced to buy another one every 3 months. That would only put more pressure on you for something that can be done at a higher ql for roughly a similar price. We can add item sinks to the game without increasing decay on certain items.

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

-1 I remember years ago when  items on a deed with 30 days+ upkeep become protected from decay and was a massive success .there is no way i could say yes to more decay/damage  just to force people to either pay someone to imp them or do it yourself, taking up the fun time to do chores. There is even players out there living on non deeded  buildings, that would decimate them, and all the looters would swarm to those un-deeded  buildings.

Edited by Toecutter
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

-1 I remember years ago when  items on a deed with 30 days+ upkeep become protected from decay and was a massive success .there is no way i could say yes to more decay/damage  just to force people to either pay someone to imp them or do it yourself, taking up the fun time to do chores. There is even players out there living on non deeded  buildings, that would decimate them, and all the looters would swarm to those un-deeded  buildings.

Increase decay off deed / off building. Don't touch it otherwise.

if its off deed and not inside a building, increase decay exponentially. If its in a non deeded but complete building (Enabled permissions) it remains as it is currently.  On deed remains the same as it is now. 

 

Anyone with a building off deed is not affected. They can have their off deed home with their stuff inside and not have to worry about their stuff falling apart in record time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

decay is rng.. raising it will cause SOME HAVOC.... so.. we might need a new system... if you drop a sprout offdeed on a tile.. say it's gone in 1 week at ql5.. 2 weeks for ql100, end of story... we could really use some math behind this... when damage updates on this doesn't really matter.. nobody complains if a thing doesn't damage for years offdeed(wait this topic does) but.. some math for decay rather than rng.. system could be more useful to know that this random thing you see on the ground will be gone in a week.. you get to decide when you see it .. if it's worth picking it up.. and sacrificing/tossing in trash heap or selling to token/etc to get rid of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-1 increased decay overall

+1 increased decay on off-deed items/structures for owners not logged in since a long time (3 months for example)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to poke my head in as Devil's advocate again, after a bit more thought and reading through what people have said:-

 

A lot of the notions discussed here rely upon variations to decay changes impacting the economy in a positive way.  That is, it would encourage money to move among all player groups to some degree, preferably as@Flubbsays, in small transactions?

 

One is compelled to ask; if decay were increased, would you be more likely to buy  from players of middling skill (70) compared to players of higher skill (90)?  For, surely, that would be a requirement for economic revival, rather than re-establishing newer players paying for the subscription of older ones?

 

One has to ask, how would this change impact free players, whose skills are capped at 20, who will likely have a drastic hit to QoL as a result?  These players are our lifeblood, and with the advent of steam we will see a large influx of free players who have the potential to become paid players.  If their possessions rot too quickly, would this have a negative impact on retention rate (remember, re-imping back up to 20 is tricky when you're a free player)?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly NO a big fat no you want the economy to function better so that you can line your pockets with virtual currency at the expense of people's enjoyment and rl currency?

Lets break it down why turning decay time from a few months to a few weeks would leave wurm a barren wasteland
1. You suggest a 2 week to 6 month decay rate on buildings based on quality, You know what this will do to newbies who dont have a deed yet? they already worry enough that their stuff will get stolen by some long time player who is a ass and decides to troll newbies(it happens far more then you would expect)
2. You want boats to decay between 1 week and 3 months off deed? What about those who park their boats off deeds as they live further inland are they not allowed to have boats? Or should they pay more money to fund yet another deed just to park their boats? 
3. You want to increase tool damage but have you ever done a 20 hour mining session and watched the quality of a supreme pickaxe drop from 98 down to low 80's if not way lower? Same goes with other tools 20 hours of actual action time usage will degrade the quality a lot. The reason you don't see a active economy in tools really is because there are enough people who can self maintain their high ql tools and those who cant know someone who can already so the only market that exists is new tools for new players or replacements/upgrades with the occasional imp for a random person


Anyway you look at it it wont help the economy it will just make wurm more of a grind for those who can self sustain and more costly for those who cant while offering nothing much in return but annoyance and anger for newbies and casuals and only really benefiting a small tiny portion while pissing off a bigger part
You want a better working economy? Get more players now with the reselling of accounts gone the old joats will die out in time and if we can keep getting the slow but steady supply of new players we do in a while it will balance out where supply will drop and demand will go up in comparison

So in short the idea itself only serves to line the pockets of those who spend countless hours trying to make silver and grind skills for the sake of silver while it will ruin it for the majority of players who dont park everything on a deed or dont have a deed yet or cant self sustain


And ill leave you with a scenario just to show you how bad it can be if say that whole idea thing becomes a thing

Our lovely wurmian bobby is still new to the game and he just build his house and is working on getting his skills up while building up his little place while foraging for food and hunting easy mobs while running from spiders and trolls and such
After a few what seemed like long days of work he finally has a 2x2 house with a small garden where he has some vegies and cotton planted and a horse he found/got for cheap
He has a mine a cart dragged by bulls is working on his rowboat because he lives a few minutes walking from water so he build a hut there as he is afraid someone will steal his row boat
A few days go by he gets distracted of his almost finished boat and low ql 1x1 "shipyard" as he grinds some more skills kills some more things gets some coin from killing and butchering and buys some better gear as he notices how quick his starting gear gets down in ql and asked in ca help and got told thats just how fast tools decay which irks him a bit but hey its a new game maybe its always been the norm
He harvests his crops makes himself a bed expands his farm he is now 1 week into the game his 1x1 shipyard is already high on damage and so is his boat
He comes back to his boat in the weekend works on it some more and notices it needs a lot of rope so he plants wemp and continues on with his day not knowing his starting house and shipyard and boat will disappear soon as he doesnt know that he only has 2 weeks of time to repair his newbie stuff
So he tends his fields mines some ore skills away hunts away slowly expanding his place logs off for a day or so to play something else and comes back and finds his house with open walls or gone and the tools he had bought and stored in a chest taken away he freaks out runs around checking up on stuff and finds his boat gone too and for most that would be the quit wurm and dont come back as why bother
Even if he doesnt quit he will be pissed off and upon learning that unless he buys silver to buy a deed and premium time to grind his skills higher then 20 he will go "why bother i need to pay a sub sure thats normal but pay to keep his stuff safe from a game mechanic designed to line the pockets of a select few that wont go over well for anyone and will most likely make him quit there and then


tldr increasing decay and damage in an attempt to increase the sale of objects will not work and only drive away new players who can not benefit from the high quality/deeds to protect their assets it would only serve to destroy the economy more by imposing a game mechanic that tailors to increasing transactions vs a better game to play for all and in the end of the day this is a game we play to play not a game we play to hoard silver for what ever reason so no i dont want any of those changes at all as it will ruin the game on the grand scheme of things and is bad for the economy long term

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that I believe that the decay to off-deed items outside of a building should decay slightly quicker than the norm is now. I think a building that is off deed should start taking exponential damage based on the time period. so after a couple of days it may have a couple of low ticks of damage depending on ql, but after a few months, it should really be ramping up the damage ticks on the building and once a building breaks, then the items that were inside I believe should start following the same notion. Across from my deed is an abandoned deed. Has been that way for a while. In my 2 months over here, I have not seen a full point of damage happen to those walls. The deed has been down for quite some time as my neighbors tell me. Why should an off deed building and item be able to stand the test of time for years before it finally blows up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 To increased decay of offdeed walls and buildings.

 

To those of you thinking increased decay/damage/enchant decay on tools is going to bolster the economy, you're idiots.

Share this post


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

I will say that I believe that the decay to off-deed items outside of a building should decay slightly quicker than the norm is now. I think a building that is off deed should start taking exponential damage based on the time period. so after a couple of days it may have a couple of low ticks of damage depending on ql, but after a few months, it should really be ramping up the damage ticks on the building and once a building breaks, then the items that were inside I believe should start following the same notion. Across from my deed is an abandoned deed. Has been that way for a while. In my 2 months over here, I have not seen a full point of damage happen to those walls. The deed has been down for quite some time as my neighbors tell me. Why should an off deed building and item be able to stand the test of time for years before it finally blows up?

But it does do that though damage ticks increase with the more damage that is on a wall as damage=lower ql=bigger tick of damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pretty much maintain myself all my tools, items etc and vary rare pay someone else to do it for me and i believe this is how most of the established players roll. Changing this will make me waste more time on this kind of stuff and perhaps forcing the less established payers or the new players to pay more often, i guess. Same goes for off deed stuff, if the off deed dmg/decay have to be increased at least make it if the owner is not logged of certain reasonable time because why make it even more burden to the new players to start and stay around on their own without joining some random village.

 

i agree with gary here, having auction house or trading post or whatever like that would help the economy way better even on long run then this dmg/decay tweaks

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here let me add this to my reason why damage to gear should not be increased period

https://i.imgur.com/yLLvHh6.mp4

 

This was done on a 19 repair account with under 20 blacksmithing/smithing you can see the ql drop from 88.77 to 85.95 with only 5 damage on it so thats 2.82 ql loss for 5 points of damage which isnt that hard to get as a newbie on a chain set when all your fights last forever and you are left with little health left as your stats and skills suck
The damage came from 3 brown bears and a spider and a goblin

And you guys want to increase this for the sake of "more" trade transactions? I really do believe that if you really want to make the economy better in a game like wurm in its current state mrgary's idea is best so far and dont hate on it because "oh i dont like it" give a great reason why not you want a better economy an AH will give you a better one with people having better access to trade gear/services/objects

But in the end of the day increasing decay and damage for the sake of artificially increasing the effort needed to improve gear again wont do anything but drive away those who dont want to invest a lot of silver/time into wurm
There are plenty of games that show that making something harder for the sake of a specific thing does nothing but give the game a bad name just look at fallout 76's increase in item damage to create a problem and then sell a solution in the form of a repair kid they still get ###### on till this day

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Here let me add this to my reason why damage to gear should not be increased period

https://i.imgur.com/yLLvHh6.mp4

 

This was done on a 19 repair account with under 20 blacksmithing/smithing you can see the ql drop from 88.77 to 85.95 with only 5 damage on it so thats 2.82 ql loss for 5 points of damage which isnt that hard to get as a newbie on a chain set when all your fights last forever and you are left with little health left as your stats and skills suck
The damage came from 3 brown bears and a spider and a goblin

And you guys want to increase this for the sake of "more" trade transactions? I really do believe that if you really want to make the economy better in a game like wurm in its current state mrgary's idea is best so far and dont hate on it because "oh i dont like it" give a great reason why not you want a better economy an AH will give you a better one with people having better access to trade gear/services/objects

But in the end of the day increasing decay and damage for the sake of artificially increasing the effort needed to improve gear again wont do anything but drive away those who dont want to invest a lot of silver/time into wurm
There are plenty of games that show that making something harder for the sake of a specific thing does nothing but give the game a bad name just look at fallout 76's increase in item damage to create a problem and then sell a solution in the form of a repair kid they still get ###### on till this day

lol, love it... "it's funny cuz it's true..." as they say...

Edited by Finnn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Tor said:

I pretty much maintain myself all my tools, items etc and vary rare pay someone else to do it for me and i believe this is how most of the established players roll.

This lol. Giving more mantaince to things won't force me to pay others to do it, it will just annoy me and make me quit game..

Also other aspect, most of tools in Wurm are things I slowly upgrade towards perfection, they have to be made of steel, rare and better, have 100 enchants, imbues and my signature, it's a play goal for me in Wurm. Giving the time invested in creating such items it's out of the question for me that they be perishible in any way, and me being forced to replace them often with other unsignificant tools just for the sake of economy is bulshit... It's pain enough when they drop enchant power by point or two that i can not easily restore that since enchanting is retarded..

imo Wurms economy problem doesn't lie there, one could argue that Wurm don't have economy problem, just lack od players to sustain it. Recently i made thread about useless things in Wurm, and i think that much bigger problem is that beside insane amount of skills actually only few are economicly justified and everyone has them.

Imping my tools and weapons back to high 95+ql after month or 2 constantly using it, sure. other than that its not worth playing the game...

I've imped my mallet to 99ql and after year or 2 of usage, maybe even more(when was personal goals removed?) it came to 98ql, most wonderfull expirience not having to imp that back and was worth spending several days to imp it is  all i can say.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/8/2020 at 11:36 PM, wipeout said:

3. You want to increase tool damage but have you ever done a 20 hour mining session and watched the quality of a supreme pickaxe drop from 98 down to low 80's if not way lower?

 

Seems that the damage on use comment really upset the bourgeoisie in the crowd. 😁

 

I think one big problem is that people see their items as an investment of silver and get extremely upset at the thought of that investment not being worth the exact same as it always was, in spite of MANY hours of HEAVY use. That seems more artificial to me than the concept of wearing out something you use heavily.

 

I wish I could go buy a new car from the dealership and turn it back in a few years later with 300k miles on it and get all of my money back for it 😁

Edited by BDCKoolaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BDCKoolaid said:

 

Seems that the damage on use comment really upset the bourgeoisie in the crowd. 😁

 

I think one big problem is that people see their items as an investment of silver and get extremely upset at the thought of that investment not being worth the exact same as it always was, in spite of MANY hours of HEAVY use. That seems more artificial to me than the concept of wearing out something you use heavily.

 

I wish I could go buy a new car from the dealership and turn it back in a few years later with 300k miles on it and get all of my money back for it 😁


Oh i dont care myself about that my mindset is "any silver i buy from the wurm shop is money i threw away for virtual pixels and is worthless" my issue with the idea of increasing damage for the sake of economy is that it will only drive more people to grind blacksmithing to high skills in order to not waste silver for constant imps on heavy use vs increase income for blacksmiths who already have high skills because more people request imps on tools

I really dont care that i loose multiple points on my supreme pickaxe after countless hours of mining what i care about is "oh hey the economy isnt up to snuff some players arent able to support their deeds anymore by just the silver they used to make and cant keep their accounts prem via silver anymore lets make changes so that we can give those people more money" like even setting aside how it would affect me and my tools(it just means more imping sessions for me really) it will affect new players the most and thats my main and biggest issue with this idea

A new player wont have 90 bs they wont have 70+ repair skill they wont have the will to dump silver into the game constantly in order to keep their tools at high ql to enjoy the higher success percentage and speed they will quit the game when they find their house blown up within 3 weeks time they will ###### when they spend a few hours mining and get told "it used to not be the case but the devs made it this way because the economy was "bad" so now we all suffer"


From the standpoint of gameplay it is a horrible idea for new and old players alike i can keep repeating the same things i said or include more examples but really if you want the game to get more people that complain about it and tell their friends to avoid it then you do idea's like this or like fallout 76's repair kit bs

So again in short
1. I can self sustain my tools so i personally will just have to do more imping sessions
2. it will affect newbies the most
3. It will just create a lot of upset people and drive away potential players weakening the economy even more
4. it wont benefit the economy as much as make the game a ghost town

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

Seems that the damage on use comment really upset the bourgeoisie in the crowd. 😁

 

I think one big problem is that people see their items as an investment of silver and get extremely upset at the thought of that investment not being worth the exact same as it always was, in spite of MANY hours of HEAVY use. That seems more artificial to me than the concept of wearing out something you use heavily.

 

I wish I could go buy a new car from the dealership and turn it back in a few years later with 300k miles on it and get all of my money back for it 😁

 

That's a pretty unfair and uncharitable interpretation imho.

What I see people being "afraid" of is maintenance becoming a sysyphean workload that overtly detracts from the rest of the game.

That's why I spitballed that if (if, because I actually agree with the rest mostly) damage would be increased, so would improvement rates so one would roughly maintain just as much as they do now, just in more, smaller sessions.

After writing that, however, I thought of my own mining sessions went and wipeout absolutely has a point. Breaking maintenance down into more smaller sessions will, depending on tool usage and location, inevitably create an overhead of running back and forth between forge and work station.

Etherdrifter and wipeout also raised a fair point with how newbies are affected by this, and why this aspect would upset the "rich" or the veterans because their assets are "under attack" is beyond me.

 

The primary "investment" that people are worried about is their continuous investment of time, not the investment of silvers that happened in the past. It feels like you're wrongly asserting which object is being protected because you framed the question as one of economic matter and view the answers as such. But the general sentiment I get from the thread is that the OP question is widely considered a malformed one, as people are rejecting its implicit premise.

 

Perhaps it's more conducive to take a step back and ask instead: "Should the economy be regulated via decay and damage at all?"

I think for decay we have a diffuse "Eh, sure".

For damage, it's a resounding "no".

 

Now, I could put the devil horns back on and ask what gameplay relevance item damage has if its economic implication has to be discarded entirely (artificially, as you would perhaps say, and it certainly would be arbitrary to delineate this in such a black and white manner), but that's probably taking the pondering a bit far.

But I think it's fair to say that, while item damage certainly has economic implications, item lifetime, management and maintenance requirements have different implications aswell that affect the game far more consistently and with greater gravity than the odd trade being done based on its effect, and that their importance easily overshadows the meaning of item damage in economic terms.

  • Like 4

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