62 replies to this topic

[Lutrafs]

His Idea

The problem with this is it doesnt help lower the costs cause all it does is lower the amount of gold coming into the game, it doesnt remove gold from them game.

[Undjuvion]

His Idea

The problem with this is it doesnt help lower the costs cause all it does is lower the amount of gold coming into the game, it doesnt remove gold from them game.

its a good idea in its own right for what it would do, no idea will solve every problem, this will according to estimates make it so 25% of the gold coming into the game each day wont need to be sunk, other ideas would take care of that, this idea would have a huge impact though.

[Lutrafs]

His Idea

The problem with this is it doesnt help lower the costs cause all it does is lower the amount of gold coming into the game, it doesnt remove gold from them game.

its a good idea in its own right for what it would do, no idea will solve every problem, this will according to estimates make it so 25% of the gold coming into the game each day wont need to be sunk, other ideas would take care of that, this idea would have a huge impact though.

In that right yes it would partly fix the issue. But I dont know about you or anyone else but I am tired of the partial fixes for the game. Hell if memory servers me right thats why many players stop playing.

But for some constructive feedback, why not change gold income in game to what savanc suggested, but also remove gold from creatures for a week to get gold going out of the game, maybe even longer then a week.

In the same aspect though if you decided to remove gold from the game, I do think it should come back gradually as to prevent a sudden influx of gold in the market place. As well that the gradual increase should be based on how much gold is actually spent during this time.

[grimnok]

Lowering the supply of gold rewards those who are currently stockpiling gold. It doesn't make FSP any more affordable in real terms, except those who would be below the gold cap. If a level 400 person currently takes X creatures to earn enough gold to buy FSP, it will still take X creatures after capping the amount of gold earned, once the market has stabilized, with potentially 10s of billions of gold being converted to FSP, if the market goes low enough.

To make FSP more affordable for the average player, you need to create new, interesting, and better ways to get people to spend gold.

[Undjuvion]

In that right yes it would partly fix the issue. But I dont know about you or anyone else but I am tired of the partial fixes for the game. Hell if memory servers me right thats why many players stop playing.

But for some constructive feedback, why not change gold income in game to what savanc suggested, but also remove gold from creatures for a week to get gold going out of the game, maybe even longer then a week.

In the same aspect though if you decided to remove gold from the game, I do think it should come back gradually as to prevent a sudden influx of gold in the market place. As well that the gradual increase should be based on how much gold is actually spent during this time.

i wouldnt be concerned if that happened for me personally, you also obviously wouldnt mind, how would someone that just signed up feel though with nothing and then gaining nothing, you could make it so only longer standing players were cut off, then would that open up the flood gate for complaints on discrminating against the loyal, i wouldnt cry foul if it became popular though.

[Undjuvion]

Lowering the supply of gold rewards those who are currently stockpiling gold. It doesn't make FSP any more affordable in real terms, except those who would be below the gold cap. If a level 400 person currently takes X creatures to earn enough gold to buy FSP, it will still take X creatures after capping the amount of gold earned, once the market has stabilized, with potentially 10s of billions of gold being converted to FSP, if the market goes low enough.

To make FSP more affordable for the average player, you need to create new, interesting, and better ways to get people to spend gold.

it is all theoretical, there is only really one way to see if it brings income closer to expenditure by a close enough margin, at worst itd make for an interesting day and at best reduces the gap between whats coming in over whats being spent.

[Lutrafs]

In that right yes it would partly fix the issue. But I dont know about you or anyone else but I am tired of the partial fixes for the game. Hell if memory servers me right thats why many players stop playing.

But for some constructive feedback, why not change gold income in game to what savanc suggested, but also remove gold from creatures for a week to get gold going out of the game, maybe even longer then a week.

In the same aspect though if you decided to remove gold from the game, I do think it should come back gradually as to prevent a sudden influx of gold in the market place. As well that the gradual increase should be based on how much gold is actually spent during this time.

i wouldnt be concerned if that happened for me personally, you also obviously wouldnt mind, how would someone that just signed up feel though with nothing and then gaining nothing, you could make it so only longer standing players were cut off, then would that open up the flood gate for complaints on discrminating against the loyal, i wouldnt cry foul if it became popular though.

Thats the problem, everyone wants to whine and maybe even give out partial fixes, but no one wants to help solve the problems.

Its simple there is too much gold in the game, and people want it gone but dont want to spend their gold to sink it. So the next best thing to do is cut off all gold income into the game for a portion of time, that way everyone has to spend gold. Make it like a global event where we have to spend so much gold in a certain amount of time to get any back.

[grimnok]

Lowering the supply of gold rewards those who are currently stockpiling gold. It doesn't make FSP any more affordable in real terms, except those who would be below the gold cap. If a level 400 person currently takes X creatures to earn enough gold to buy FSP, it will still take X creatures after capping the amount of gold earned, once the market has stabilized, with potentially 10s of billions of gold being converted to FSP, if the market goes low enough.

To make FSP more affordable for the average player, you need to create new, interesting, and better ways to get people to spend gold.

it is all theoretical, there is only really one way to see if it brings income closer to expenditure by a close enough margin, at worst itd make for an interesting day and at best reduces the gap between whats coming in over whats being spent.

The part about rewarding current gold holders is not, in any way, theoretical. If you make gold more valuable by reducing the incoming supply, you reward those who are stockpiling it. Reducing the cost that shows up in the marketplace is not what helps people acquire FSP, it's reducing the amount of stamina/effort required to acquire FSP.

If the amount of gold coming is reduced by a 1/3, and the price of FSP comes down by a 1/3, that's not helping the average player earn FSP.

[Undjuvion]

Lowering the supply of gold rewards those who are currently stockpiling gold. It doesn't make FSP any more affordable in real terms, except those who would be below the gold cap. If a level 400 person currently takes X creatures to earn enough gold to buy FSP, it will still take X creatures after capping the amount of gold earned, once the market has stabilized, with potentially 10s of billions of gold being converted to FSP, if the market goes low enough.

To make FSP more affordable for the average player, you need to create new, interesting, and better ways to get people to spend gold.

it is all theoretical, there is only really one way to see if it brings income closer to expenditure by a close enough margin, at worst itd make for an interesting day and at best reduces the gap between whats coming in over whats being spent.

The part about rewarding current gold holders is not, in any way, theoretical. If you make gold more valuable by reducing the incoming supply, you reward those who are stockpiling it. Reducing the cost that shows up in the marketplace is not what helps people acquire FSP, it's reducing the amount of stamina/effort required to acquire FSP.

If the amount of gold coming is reduced by a 1/3, and the price of FSP comes down by a 1/3, that's not helping the average player earn FSP.

you are correct but theres always someone gonna strike it rich in life, not saying that is a fair thing though and really couldnt be prevented if this went into effect, one point you make is where i would like things to head ... that being if fsp did reduce by 30% in what they cost in gold the average player may not benefit but someone level 50 would.

[4gottn4ver]

yea like some are not manipulating MP to drive it up higher cost per dot.



a jump from like 238K for a single dot to almost 42M for 167dots :shock: after some time I am sure gonna cost like 400K per dot if not higher. so enjoy this low MP as it stands only gonna get much higher. :|

[2good4u222]

yea like some are not manipulating MP to drive it up higher cost per dot.



a jump from like 238K for a single dot to almost 42M for 167dots :shock: after some time I am sure gonna cost like 400K per dot if not higher. so enjoy this low MP as it stands only gonna get much higher. :|

Ugh

People are obviously manipulating the market. The evidence is right there, so why allow PvP protection (at all) to be used in combination with the MP?

[Wesleysdf]

yea like some are not manipulating MP to drive it up higher cost per dot.



a jump from like 238K for a single dot to almost 42M for 167dots :shock: after some time I am sure gonna cost like 400K per dot if not higher. so enjoy this low MP as it stands only gonna get much higher. :|

Ugh

People are obviously manipulating the market. The evidence is right there, so why allow PvP protection (at all) to be used in combination with the MP?

+1

[Savanc]

Does anyone ever read the description on PvP protection?? Players with 41 mil don't have PvP protection. :wink:

When I had PvP protection myself I'd buy the gold at these prices and bank it. Whenever the MP would drop again I'd sell it again. So in my case I was keeping the MP from going very high or very low. 8)

[Ringhal]

I found that player. He wasn't using any PVP protection and was also opted in the ladder. He was also out of my range :evil:

[2good4u222]

Does anyone ever read the description on PvP protection?? Players with 41 mil don't have PvP protection. :wink:

When I had PvP protection myself I'd buy the gold at these prices and bank it. Whenever the MP would drop again I'd sell it again. So in my case I was keeping the MP from going very high or very low. 8)

But there are always ''those'' people. Always.
Who ruin the whole concept of an idea just to gain enough reward in order to pay off PvP protection and remove themselves from PvP altogether.

[4gottn4ver]

Does anyone ever read the description on PvP protection?? Players with 41 mil don't have PvP protection. :wink:

When I had PvP protection myself I'd buy the gold at these prices and bank it. Whenever the MP would drop again I'd sell it again. So in my case I was keeping the MP from going very high or very low. 8)

that is true but also there is the other bit I have seen many times an I am sure alot of others have as well. if you look further down below the 41M in gold for 167dots you'll see some up for a few million gold for 20 some dots. which are spaced out an well under the max amount to be protected by PvP Protection of 10M on hand in open. get a few ppl together as a group to post ones like that at a higher amount each time while protected can easy drive up MP. I seen a few times MP have something like that about 4-6 request that way all spaced out some for higher amounts.

if I am not mistaken awhile back when PvP Protection first came out and protected 100% on XP/ gold from attacks the MP wasn't anything like it has been since a cap was placed on it of 10K per lvl up to a max of 10M in open.

[Savanc]

I've actually never wanted to drive up the MP. Buying a lot of gold at decent prices and then hoping the MP will go down. That way I could sell some gold at lower prices.

I really don't understand why people would spend 41 million to drive up the MP a little bit... :?

[celendais]

I've actually never wanted to drive up the MP. Buying a lot of gold at decent prices and then hoping the MP will go down. That way I could sell some gold at lower prices.

I really don't understand why people would spend 41 million to drive up the MP a little bit... :?

Its simple not? Big time scavengers want high gold to FSP ratios since caves are a place to convert gold to FSP....

[Savanc]

But that person will have sold all his 41 mil gold at high prices himself...

Selling 41.75 mil for 250k per FSP is quite high.
I wonder how many FSP he will buy that are higher priced, because a few players with PvP protection will quite soon have snatched up all this yummy-priced gold. 5 players with PvP protection can easily take 41.75 mil from this player while still remaining in PvP protection.
Maybe he can buy gold at 255k worth 50 FSP, but that would be a new record that I have seen (and I have watched the MP a lot the last few months).
50 FSP * 255k each = 12.75 mil
That means he net sold 29 million gold and gotten 117 FSP for them. So that's a price of 247.8k per FSP...

This guy can't do it for the profit...
His 41.75 mil gold won't last long enough with a few PvP protected players around... :roll:

[kevon218]

As I said, it isn't a give away. It would take say, 25-50 entries to obtain the potion. You will be losing money more often than not. It is a mere participation booster and gold sinker. Think of it as a consolation or participation award. There may be many opportunities for rewards, but often winning them is not the case.

There are many opportunities for winning the ladder too - should they get bonus prizes as well ?

Where are the bonus prizes for levelling ?

I'm sure you see where I'm going with this ? - leastwise, I hope you do

back to this idea, even though you all said no to it, what if the three people who didnt win the arena got put into a second bracket to get the points,
if you win the arena, then you dont get these points
the second bracket is just a quick bracket(Less time in between each battle)
the potions will cost a lot of these points so it will be hard to get and you have to be in the top 4 but not winner so its not abused
this was just to expand on the idea so its not as bad

btw i like the idea of lowering the gold cap