Who killed econ

[Coffey]

Originally Posted by PaulG ....... I'm confused with your proposal for non-red PvP, what is the incentive to non-red PvP if there is no reward what so ever? Why hit the player that gives nothing when the npc gives you something? More people will find a greater interest in PvP... I'm not closing the door on better rewards. The teaching PvP or learning PvP is very rewarding in itself, It can be more so when the teacher and student are not risking their ship. Much more reward can, as Fodderboy says, quickly become an exploit. If you are expirenced and you attack a flagged player in the Non red zone then you should be doing it with the aim to help that person learn the game. To PvP costs me ammo and repairs so you're proposing a system that costs me doubloons but doesn't give me an income? Exactly! Your part in this system is to teach PvP or learn PvP, or sell ammo and repairs to those that are using it. If you have no interest in these activities then you should be left alone and leave those in this OS self flagged PvP alone too. The system is meant to not interfere in any huge way, with regular, fair game play. Now I know I've complained that the rewards are already low but that's partly my fault because I don't see the point in selling marks that I will use in the future. The only real problem with the skirmish and the group system is that fails to alert players that they are active. Unlike the cumbersome skirmish system,.... The Skirmish System: cons: 0 risk. (boring, players take to many unnecessary chances and may be less competitive) No reward.(boring, players take to many chances and may be less competitive) Cumbersome setup and wait. Large scale PvP is usually unorganized and lopsided. The re-spawn points get camped. No RvR element (the system I'm Proposing will still let participate in flipping ports, at least until the red zone appears, This will generate the RvR interests and begin the RvR learning process. The new player can choose whether to stay for The Burning Sea or if they don't feel they are ready they can then go.) Pros: Shows that PvE players are interested in PvP Shows that a large reward isn't necessary to encourage PvP Fast re spawn . . The main problem with risk is that if you wait until you hit level 50 to try it out it is going to cost you a fortune in repairs, ships and fittings. Most of these items are over priced in game in my opinion. You can start learning PvP at any level at your own pace...in other words OS str rules doesn't compensate for the loss of a ship. To not have to replace a good ship means that will have a lot more money to spend on the other things. You will have a faster re-spawn time. .

Your points PaulG are perfectly valid but you aren't looking at what it takes to get to the end game. IMO most people are not PvPing because of the huge rewards in the game. They are PvPing becuse its fun. I learned to PvP in Rift. There was 3 stepping stones to to level 50 PvP. Paultry rewards and no penalties. It was a lot of fun to learn PvP in that game. Although it had issues that they were fixing; imbalanced maps, crossteam AfK. The end game PvP was horribly handled and thats why left looking for a different game. I came here this game has great end game PvP but its a poor process to get there, now I do econ, fleet and missions all things I use to hate doing.

This idea is just one plan and it has it's pros and cons. The underlying principle of a lack of PvP Consumers ratio to Econ Producers that is what is relevant to the debate of this thread.

[PaulG]

Just to clarify, do you fleet, do econ and missions because thats what you enjoy doing or are you building a "war chest" to enable you learn to PvP?

What has stopped you attempting PvP so far?

Why does the skirmish system not work for you, if you have a society surely this is a excellent arena to practice?

Why is that low risk activity should reward when high risk activity does not?

If there were more "carrots" obtainable from PvP do you believe it would be more popular?

[Maryart]

Originally Posted by PaulG The main problem with risk is that if you wait until you hit level 50 to try it out it is going to cost you a fortune in repairs, ships and fittings. Most of these items are over priced in game in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Coffey [*]Remove Dura Loss from Out of red PvP (reduces the main cost of learning PvP)

PvP costs are an issue indeed. Let`s look at an example.

Newbie learns to PvP. He does 5 fights a day and sinks 2 times/day (as a side note he is gong to continue sinking after his newbie period is over cuz victorious fights mean 50% of the participants sink). Let`s assume he does it in vanilla Minerva, using Armor planking, Heavy flanked armor, Lightweight halyards, Precision gun tackle, Runner`s rig and Speed gun rig. Throw in ammo and consumables and like and it comes out for about 1 mill by AH prices for his weekly spending.

What is one million on AH prices? Let`s assume a fine fleeter or a good carebear does 200 k/ gaming hour. Excluding insurance offsets the fact that not everyone gets the 200k/hour rate. So it`s about 5 gaming hours a week for chores. PvPers may correct my estimates as Im just starting on PVP.

The next question is how much production time does it take to build what the guy needs. To make things more simple (avoiding estimating production hours for the “small” stuff (fits, ammo, consumables) and taking into account I do not make minis) I just threw in my excel how much production hours would it take to make a 1 million worth of Hermes Packet Boats.

I got 48 production days. This figure is approximate as my excel is much better at counting db than hours (it excludes hours for things I buy instead of produce and it also excludes difference from port levels as well I do hope there`s no bugs). Maybe someone can come up with better estimates. Still this does give a general idea.

So to sink 2 times a day he needs to do daily chores for 45 minutes and at least 7 eco slots are needed to fulfill the pretty moderate needs of this one guy. Now take into account that he may choose a better ship or sink more often (take 4 mill weekly for ex). Add to the fact that not everyone does eco and those who do are not always fully utilizing their labor hours. We can easily come up to some 4-5 accounts necessary for serving this one guy.

The next question goes like are there enough players able to support 5-6 accounts monthly to provide FLS with the necessary profit. Those able to pay just for 1-2 accounts do need some FTP or Premium to have their fun, same for pure FTP if FLS believes it can profit from them (increased demand for BSN, more players in-game, chance to pull them into CC later).

Good thing for the game would be one account needed for the eco needs of a medium player instead of those estimated 5. This can be achieved by reducing production hour requirements for recipes. If this is done then we get less accounts for FLS to manage and maybe there is no such big problem if the labor nerf on FTP accounts comes live on 2.11. The question also remains if the grind time vs sink time ratio is good right now. It has to do with both db spent on recipes and time spent on hauling/production.

So this is more food for thought about the current eco capacity and the reason behind multi accounting as well as how much FTP should be healthy for the game.

[Coffey]

Originally Posted by PaulG Just to clarify, do you fleet, do econ and missions because thats what you enjoy doing or are you building a "war chest" to enable you learn to PvP? I don't mind these other activities. But only do enough of each to pay for each its a closed loop econ that neither helps nor hurts any aspect of the game. It was my intention to be able to afford learning to PvP. Thats the problem in a nuts shell. Can't justify the expense of learning PvP becuse we dont have enough PvP players to make Econ work. What has stopped you attempting PvP so far? I think the shock of losing Dura blinds you to the mistakes you make its almost like a minor post traumatic stress makes it hard to sort out the multitude of mistakes under those conditions. -throw on top of that the refitting time and the feeling that you have get the best equipment or you wont stand a chance (hassle) -also what ever you do, do not forget something simple.(like ammo) -then knowing that you may get attacked by superior numbers (2vs1 is till a gank on a newbie) attacked by vastly outclassed players (they are talking about putting the level limiter it might help a little (but losing a dura is alot of stick whether it stick hits you or you opponent the level limiter doesn't change that. High level level player will use low level alts to earn cheap MOVs for there other alts MOV farming(carrot exploit)). How many time do you think you can hit somebody with a stick before they realize that no amount of carrots are worth it. -and not even knowing how to deal with an assortment of broken mechanics that some veterans are exploiting (granted I know they are working on these, and I don't mind waiting) -the whole time you are a liability to your teammates -and you are giving MOVs to your enemy not just from you but if your teammates sink becuse of your mistake then that more MOVs as well. Now multiply all that times the number of times you sink while learning. Well sorry for the sarcasm, but whats not to love about that learning experience. The Dev team seem to have forgotten the hassle that takes place when you lose. They think that most PvE players aren't interested in PvP. @FLS Honestly, can you really expect the average PvE players to give PvP a fair shake under these circumstances. Why does the skirmish system not work for you, if you have a society surely this is a excellent arena to practice? as stated in my previous post under cons: - 0 risk. (boring, players take to many unnecessary chances or may be less competitive becuse there is no risk) -No reward.(boring, players take to many chances or may be less competitive)(a training system for this games PvP should allows for loadable items) -Cumbersome setup and wait. -Large scale PvP is usually unorganized and lopsided. The re-spawn points get camped. (Fodderboy rejected an in game billboard, I in turn responded to him with a billboard with drop down menus to get past the need to monitor player text impute. But then we were in the middle of the labor crises. A billboard would help us set up weekly events like PvP training.) -No RvR element(A learning experience could allow for an introduction into RvR. My system does anyways) -Soc mates can help this out a lot by just making it a fun group activity. But New Socs can be fickle and Old Socs are probably getting tired of new players coming and going all the time. [/LIST Why is that low risk activity should reward when high risk activity does not? I think I may have miscommunicated here some how. You won't need to reward low risk PvP, maybe loot-ables, of course, the main reward is success of learning how to PvP. (just remove the sticks) I am trying to avoid the exploitable carrots

Its your thread mate, I really didn't to mean derail by debating my solution. I guess I should have followed MaryArts example and posted a new thread elsewhere. (BTW Nice Skyscraper MaryArt. Good information, but it gave me vertigo, no offense, LOL)

[Maryart]

Originally Posted by Coffey BTW Nice Skyscraper MaryArt. Good information, but it gave me vertigo, no offense, LOL)

Getting High on Eco, LOL.

Well, to a serious note I am just trying to give my contribution to the game well-being as a return for the exciting year I have had with this game and as honoring that Real World money other players have spent on sponsoring their and in this way also my gametime by selling me BSN through AH.

[Qew Qew]

Hi

I'm Qew Qew and I have a problem. I buy my mats as cheap as I can so I can provide ships to my friends as cheap as possible. if that means i need to have a couple of extra accounts to do it then i will. I dont care that my selling Slerks or HH for approx 300K is only approx 30K profit. I dont care that 950K HMCs are always 100K lower than AH prices.

Econ has died for many reasons. AH prices are crazy. Leather selling for 100DB when cost to make is approx 30. Rum selling for 150+ when cost to make is 65. People buying materials only to relist at higher prices.

Another issue is players not logging in consistently. if I am dependent on a player providing me 10 econ slots worth of iron ore each day and they dont login for 7 days then i need to find a new source to keep my line active. so what to i do? i just create an econ alt who I know will always be available to me.

Flooding the purses of all the players when Orleans/High Spirits/Pit fight/havana dailies paid close to 200K a day. Lots of people got rich quick, but less people did econ so prices went higher.

Raw mats are spread out across the map which will always entail sailing into the wind making a trip from CT/STJ area to PC/PR etc a 20 to 30 minute waste of time. If you aren't dual/tri/quad box hauling then why even bother doing econ? It isn't worth it to a player who has 10 hours a week to play to spend it hauling across the map at such a slow speed. It is easier to spend a couple of hours a week fleeting to make cash.


So, to answer your question everyone has killed econ. FLS for the game mechanics making hauling a pain, players for over pricing raw mats or buying/relisting stuff they dont make and societies/1 man production lines (like me) for keeping business in house.

but last time i looked, the game isn't just about econ. I would rather sell stuff to the PvPers cheaper to keep them in game than have people walk away cuz they cant afford to play.

but in the end it is all pixels. the mats and cash I have saved have no meaning outside of Qew Qew being logged in.

just my thoughts.

[Remus]

Originally Posted by Maryart I got 48 production days.

Hmm.

vanilla Minerva, using Armor planking, Heavy flanked armor, Lightweight halyards, Precision gun tackle, Runner`s rig and Speed gun rig

I make that 125 hours per dura at Infrastructure 9.

2 dura a day, that's 250 hours, or ten and a bit structure lots. This noob PvPer could very nearly sustain himself in ships using only his own econ if he so chose, at least as far as structure hours are concerned.

This person is cited as a high consumer. Given the number of econ players with multiple 10-lot accounts, my guess is that not enough econ is required in the game today to interest casual econ players, and without a diversity of producers the few large econ players can have a disproportionate effect on a server.

F2P is certainly the most important factor, for without F2P there would be fewer multi-account econ players, and it is reasonable for FLS to try to address this (but do tell us what you are doing before you do it!). But I wonder too how many LSBs are sunk in battle these days. LSBs used to absorb huge amounts of labour. When first and second rates werre removed recipe times were doubled (back to their original values) to compensate ... but P&P then effectively halved them again with port infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Morgan Newberry AH prices are crazy. Leather selling for 100DB when cost to make is approx 30.

A fine example. Leather is one of the few goods that can be made in 2 lots. If there is so much profit to be made selling on the AH, why aren't F2P players busy making and listing leather?

You are willing to spend your time running econ and hauling for the benefit of others. Good for you. Other people are not so altrusitic and want payment for their work. There is no right or wrong here; clearly there are not enough people in the altruistic camp for your liking. Personally I always like to be paid, unless I was getting something similar in return, such as mutual trade at cost within a society.

[PaulG]

I guess I'm reading this all wrong but it would appear that PvP is just too expensive. Even for those playing pirate that can scavenge and take command of free ships.

The risks associated with learning to PvP are so high that some players would like a less risky way to learn, but the risk free way to learn is not liked despite it seeming an obvious way to learn.

The reason skirmish is not utilised is because its risk free and somehow therefore boring, yet if used correctly it seems a very easy way to facilitate learning.

Low level PvP is damned yet it is a cheaper way to learn how to do it and the level 50 guys in their level 50 alts sailing BTS/lancer/expedition don't warrant a mention nor the level 50s in Slerks that farm new level 50s. Doing low level PvP doesn't prevent you from being clubbed, something made worse changing ship strength levels and it doesn't prevent you from facing an equally experienced player. I can assure you that rewards from low level PvP are miserly and pale into insignificance compared to fleeting or missions.

It would seem we are just all accumulating doubloons for the sake of accumulating doubloons.

Some are doing everything in economy because they can't wait for others to do economy for them and we baulk at paying anyone a profit despite the other players being expected to pay us a profit in return, I'd just like to point out that for example an effective leather setup ties up 6 econ slots.

Buy orders have the ability to plug gaps in economy but we don't use them because we would have to pay someone a profit on their goods.

As we can't depend on others to do economy we price everyone out instead.

[Daisy Duck]

Originally Posted by PaulG I guess I'm reading this all wrong but it would appear that PvP is just too expensive. Even for those playing pirate that can scavenge and take command of free ships. The risks associated with learning to PvP are so high that some players would like a less risky way to learn, but the risk free way to learn is not liked despite it seeming an obvious way to learn. The reason skirmish is not utilised is because its risk free and somehow therefore boring, yet if used correctly it seems a very easy way to facilitate learning. Low level PvP is damned yet it is a cheaper way to learn how to do it and the level 50 guys in their level 50 alts sailing BTS/lancer/expedition don't warrant a mention nor the level 50s in Slerks that farm new level 50s. Doing low level PvP doesn't prevent you from being clubbed, something made worse changing ship strength levels and it doesn't prevent you from facing an equally experienced player. I can assure you that rewards from low level PvP are miserly and pale into insignificance compared to fleeting or missions.

Yes, Paul.
You are right, waiting to learn pvp once 50 is near impossible due to the expensive costs. It dos'e not take long to burn 1mill in pvp loses & thats about all a new player has by the time they have lvled to 50, top this with a new player having to compete with vets ( lets face it most players pvping are vets) = new player gives up trying pvp.

I'm not sure the risk free skirm would help learn pvp, playing under real pressure of losing is a different kettle of fish.

Low lvl pvp is a good way to learn pvp & it's cheap as chips, just lvl up to 18 out fit your ship with everything, all the best you can get, & go for it, yes it pays little but you gain alot of exp.

Play your cards right & you should not get clubbed by a 50 in a expedition etc, even if you get tagged you should be able to get out, just always try to tag them first with your prefered wind.


Ducky.

[Fooooo]

Originally Posted by PaulG I guess I'm reading this all wrong but it would appear that PvP is just too expensive. Even for those playing pirate that can scavenge and take command of free ships. The risks associated with learning to PvP are so high that some players would like a less risky way to learn, but the risk free way to learn is not liked despite it seeming an obvious way to learn. The reason skirmish is not utilised is because its risk free and somehow therefore boring, yet if used correctly it seems a very easy way to facilitate learning.

The costs may be too high im not sure, I have been slowly gaining money by doing 1 or 2 fights a day, usually losses as I use capMC / TigreMC and seem to find bundleboats or refits every time =\ , then a few fleets. I could see more active or higher ship class players losing much more.

For me its more the time & hassle of sailing back to the area, or if I forgot to stack fittings or run out of repairs meaning I have to go sail somewhere to buy more b4 I can go try again, an just the whole mechanics of the OS I don't typically like.

So in a sense that keeps me from doing as much OS pvp (and learning) as I would otherwise.

I would use the skirmish system more if it were more structured , like If say every hour there was set battles that were announced to the 2 nations its created for, that people can queue up for.

Sort of like the battleground systems of other mmo's I guess. You could have loss and no loss arenas etc etc.

You also wouldn't really need much reward to get newer players using that constantly other than db's and some tokens to get vanity items or something.

The main reason is ease of use, it would not be "player" created, the servers would do that every hour etc, so everyone KNOWS you can fight on the hour every hour and don't have to deal with buggy os, sailing around etc etc. Much easier for newer players to get experience that way.

The thing is these type of ideas were shot down when the skirmish system was first brought up as people were afraid everyone would go there and there would be no OS pvp or RVR anymore.


For the eco I don't know who killed it but im sort of on board with the people who would like no trading between accounts, only AH trades etc.

However that opens up whole other problems and people can still get around it etc soooooo.........

Other then that, I don't think there is enough profit in eco, and as others have said, theres no middle men, nobody making say hulls or rigs etc, the shipbuilders just do that themselves which I see as a problem.

I almost think the shipbuilders should be sourcing EVERYTHING from other people, ie if you build a shipyard, all remaining eco slots can only be shipyards also.....although that severly restricts things and people would just make more accounts so it wouldn't really work.