I've been looking at what type of economic structure to select for my current concept, and I had a rather important question.
Should I run it in a fashion similar to EVE Online, where the location of the item matters in who can buy it and how they can get to it, or should I run it as a more global system, where you get whatever you buy, even if the seller just put it on sale 10 seconds earlier, on the other end of the universe?
If I run a global system, there's the problem of establishing access points. This game is a sandbox, where everything outside the starting zone is built and run by players (or NPC's that players 'hire' to work for them). Placing access points would become a nightmare, but I've heard people say that a localized economy system would be too easy to manipulate or gouge.
Gouging in a game is a viable game mechanic. If someone manages to control a market in a small area that's instant content for people who like to mess with markets as they compete for control and lower the prices anyways. Also by having local markets you open up a whole slew of logistical problems and soloutions.
Alright. I have a rather interesting twist on it though. Let us say that we have three races and each rach has it's own currency. Would you add a Universal Currency to the mix or would you leave the Three that are already in place?
Well if players can build things then they could just build auction houses like anything else, you could make it where auction houses have to be spaced out more so you don't have 3 right next to each other, because that is pointless. Or it could be one per town, build jointly by the community.
But I am all for a global market, it may not let a few people live out their merchant fantasies of transporting goods from point A to point B to make a profit but everyone else benefits by having a considerably more efficient market.
I think we’re putting the cart before the horse.... How can you make decisions like these until we know where money comes from? Where auction houses are located, how many there are ect. The wisdom of these decisions cannot be judged in a vacuum. Each decision is driven by the system as a whole and the form of that system follows its function.
Why would you intermingle currencies? If there are three realms why would any actively trade with the other two if they oppose each other? A system with local and global currencies has the potential for exploitation, depending on how it's implemented.
The truth is you can take virtually any bit sized idea and make it work in the context of a larger system, but until you know what that system is, judgments are meaningless.
I have lots of radical ideas but out of context they look silly. Thats why I designed the whole thing for you all to judge (see the sig).
Peace....
You make a valid argument Talinguard. If there is only a finite amount of $ in game per cappida then that would shurly effect the economy as a hole just as a endless "faucet and drain" system would exemplify any explotations the players can mannage to utilize.
As far as intermingeling currencies, if the game is a true sandbox with multiple races, then I beleave that multipule currencies can allow such player activities such as bootleging, inter-racial trading, etc. Just as it occures in the real world, while two cuntries are at war with each other does not mean that parties of one cuntry or the other can not trade goods to the oppossition through proper chaneles or not. A good example of this would be things such as the American Proabition, or Defence Contractors like Bowing and Lockhead Martin. While the Proabition took place soley in America the currency conserns where in USD, however with large Defence Contractors every thing is subsadized by a secondary currency used by both parties in the form of Credit.
While it's possible to intermingle currencies, the point I'm trying to make is that the primary goal of any system should not be how realistic it is. Just because it’s a sandbox game doesn’t mean that, as a rule, these types of transactions, by default, should be possible.
Having said that I believe that virtually anything is possible, the challenge for us as game designers is not just to make it possible, but to make it something that makes the game better.
I agree that the idea of a game where currencies are intermingled is a great one, but after having spent years designing my own economy I realize how difficult that is. One of the hardest things for people to understand is that the lack of constraint in the game world, things designed to make the game less tedious, leads to certain freedoms and we have to be carful not to judge the game world though the "glasses" of the world we live in.
Players will exploit anything and everything to gain a competitive advantage. If I erect a giant dam of interwoven rules and concepts to fend players off, all it takes is a small crack and the whole thing tumbles down, figuratively speaking. The more complex the system the harder it is to stem the tide. I think that intermingled currencies would, in most circumstances lead to increased complexity relative to the improvement it would provide in game. I don't like to be negative and I truly believe that almost anything is possible, but someone is going to have to substantiate this idea for me a little more.
So the challenge is, how to make a system that intermingles currencies in a way makes the game better (not worse or the same), and doesn’t lead to exploitation and not draw away too much time and resources from those that are trying to create the game.
I'm up for it, but I'm gonna need some help....lol
Why not do both? Have all the auction houses linked together so players can see what is for sale everywhere in the world. It would also allow them to bid/buy the item, even if it is on the other side of the universe, but require the player to travel to the auction house on which the item was placed to pick it up.
Originally posted by decade85
Why not do both? Have all the auction houses linked together so players can see what is for sale everywhere in the world. It would also allow them to bid/buy the item, even if it is on the other side of the universe, but require the player to travel to the auction house on which the item was placed to pick it up.
SWG and even Eve to some extent have done what your suggesting but those systems were specifically designed to incorporate the concept of world wide auction markets.
To simply make items available everywhere in most games might be better for the player consumer, it would make things worse for the player producer in most cases and would ruin the markets in most games.
Does that mean it can't be done?
It should only be done under the right set of circumstances and, imo, a game that can successfully implement your suggestion are more compelling, but most games are not designed to do so.
Understanding the beifits and drawbacks are really important.
I agree that most games are not designed to use this kind of system. Having said that I must mention that, IMO, we have nothing but a blank canvas in front of us where we can paint any kind of world we want. If we can dream of it then we should try to make it possible.
Yes there are constraints to what we want vs. what the player audience wants. And we should be very mindful of this, but in the beggining the Sistine Chapel was just an image in Michelangelo's head.
While I will never argue that games should be just that, games. I do find some enjoyment in knowing that I have accomplished what I have through my own actions. If that is spending hours to retrieve items from A.H.'s on the other side of the gaming world just to make my weapons stronger or get the best buffs, then I know that I made that trip for my own reasons, once it is done I feel a sense of accomplishment that had nothing to do with a quest.
I have probably gotten way off topic here, but there you have it.
Originally posted by arieschild
I agree that most games are not designed to use this kind of system. Having said that I must mention that, IMO, we have nothing but a blank canvas in front of us where we can paint any kind of world we want. If we can dream of it then we should try to make it possible.
Yes there are constraints to what we want vs. what the player audience wants. And we should be very mindful of this, but in the beggining the Sistine Chapel was just an image in Michelangelo's head.
While I will never argue that games should be just that, games. I do find some enjoyment in knowing that I have accomplished what I have through my own actions. If that is spending hours to retrieve items from A.H.'s on the other side of the gaming world just to make my weapons stronger or get the best buffs, then I know that I made that trip for my own reasons, once it is done I feel a sense of accomplishment that had nothing to do with a quest.
I have probably gotten way off topic here, but there you have it.
For the record I like the the auctions of SWG and Eve much better than WoW and games like it. I like it when players are faced with choices, trading time for money and the systems that sprout up to deal with them. I was just making the point that you have to think carefully about the design decisions you make.
i've always found local markets to be far more engaging and fun to play with than a large market. If it was up to me i would say have the major cities (capitals) linked in certain items (ones that are conceivably obtained in that other city).
That way its possible to send stone between the 2 mountain towns but you will need to transport it physically between the mountain town and the forest town.
just my 2c
Why not trash the currently used models entirely? Take a regional scheme for a ride.
With player built and managed cities it's often a guild (pick your favorite term) activity. I see no reason that a well established city couldn't have a freight dock complete with NPC caravans (could be a pretty advanced system). Smaller settlements may be forced to rely on PC pack mules (a quest generating system) as the NPC caravan routes would be a bit pricey to maintain. {fake edit} BTW, I would include a time function to the NPC caravans where distance is a factor.
Next Auction houses: forget them. Commodity markets would be a lot more fun. Good old buy and sell orders, similar to the Grand Exchange (OMG I'm actually using Runescape as an example) but with some added contract features like pickup/delivery destination. Now the network would only be as large as the system it is a part of, so if a guild has no trading partners the order would only cover it's territories. It could wind up as a global market, but being such a powerful political tool, I doubt it.
I'm just going to apologize now for the mess I've made in describing this idea.
Originally posted by ghstwolf
Why not trash the currently used models entirely? Take a regional scheme for a ride.
With player built and managed cities it's often a guild (pick your favorite term) activity. I see no reason that a well established city couldn't have a freight dock complete with NPC caravans (could be a pretty advanced system). Smaller settlements may be forced to rely on PC pack mules (a quest generating system) as the NPC caravan routes would be a bit pricey to maintain. {fake edit} BTW, I would include a time function to the NPC caravans where distance is a factor.
Next Auction houses: forget them. Commodity markets would be a lot more fun. Good old buy and sell orders, similar to the Grand Exchange (OMG I'm actually using Runescape as an example) but with some added contract features like pickup/delivery destination. Now the network would only be as large as the system it is a part of, so if a guild has no trading partners the order would only cover it's territories. It could wind up as a global market, but being such a powerful political tool, I doubt it.
I'm just going to apologize now for the mess I've made in describing this idea.
I see the potential in many of the ideas that people lay out here, but for this any many other ideas like it, it ends up creating more questions then it does provide answers because of the lack of context.
Originally posted by Talinguard I see the potential in many of the ideas that people lay out here, but for this any many other ideas like it, it ends up creating more questions then it does provide answers because of the lack of context.
I tend to leave out context if I think the idea is highly adaptable. For example, the freight docks could be connected by: warp gates, magic portals, caravans, trains or airplanes to fairly similar out come. The real differences are whether you 1) want them to be attack-able and 2) what setting you are using.
See my goal was to get people to think beyond the either/or situations we are so accustomed to. The details would tend to tie the idea to a specific setting (or even to a specific game), even if the underlying concept could be universally applied.
Within the idea, I could scale costs and risks (even who is taking a risk) to match a game's requirements. Likewise, the vocabulary can change to suit the setting. I like that flexibility.
For my game's virtual world, I will be using a player driven vendor system. A player driven economy were everything is player created will also be sold by players. simular to SWG in many ways,but revamped to fit my game's virtual economy. When you first create your avatar and log-in for the first time, a player will be without any equipment. So where will he go? he will go to the vendor NPC or machine. he will find helpful items that he can use. now at this point he may not be able to afford these item's! so he will have to run some quest. when he gets the money he will buy what he needs to improve his chances with more challening mission's. after some time he might pick up crafting. it's at this point he will start selling basic starting equipment while he gain's skill to make more advanced items and selling them in the global vendor.
At some point he will advance enough to place his own vendor's and register it on the world map. now instead of allowing players to sell their goods "globaly" my system works for my players. it creates a sense of achievment, and allows them to set-up multi vendors for specif item's and gear to be sold. so a gloabal generic vendor on each of my planets allows new players to get gear item's. while a more localized player driven vendor system allows a player who has a range of quality gear/item's to be sold at the price of his choosing. indeed the generic global vendor allows local vendors to sample some of their goods and is good advertising for them. it meshes very well for what i'm planning and it's a system that has it fault's. but for now it the model I will be going with.
Originally posted by arieschild
Alright. I have a rather interesting twist on it though. Let us say that we have three races and each rach has it's own currency. Would you add a Universal Currency to the mix or would you leave the Three that are already in place?
If the intent id for the three races to trade goods, then the best direction would probably be one universal currency for all. Inidividual currencies may add a bit more realism, but there really is no other gain to it. The inconveinence and confusion it would create as players try to make simple transactions would really get in the way of the enjoyment of the game for most.
As for the rest, Talingard drives home a very strong point:
"I think we’re putting the cart before the horse.... How can you make decisions like these until we know where money comes from? Where auction houses are located, how many there are ect. The wisdom of these decisions cannot be judged in a vacuum. Each decision is driven by the system as a whole and the form of that system follows its function."
Originally posted by Nirodragon
I've been looking at what type of economic structure to select for my current concept, and I had a rather important question.
Should I run it in a fashion similar to EVE Online, where the location of the item matters in who can buy it and how they can get to it, or should I run it as a more global system, where you get whatever you buy, even if the seller just put it on sale 10 seconds earlier, on the other end of the universe?
If I run a global system, there's the problem of establishing access points. This game is a sandbox, where everything outside the starting zone is built and run by players (or NPC's that players 'hire' to work for them). Placing access points would become a nightmare, but I've heard people say that a localized economy system would be too easy to manipulate or gouge.
Local is the better option in my opinion, if you have the population base to support it. Eve does. Most do not. I would say for the smaller population bases or dead games, go with global.
War. Local is important if you want to simulate a logistical supply chain which could be interdicted in a war.
Economically. There are so many people playing cargo hauler in Eve Online (local), like I did once, that the profit margin is reduced to such a low level mine-grinding would be be a better way to earn $$$$$/Time. Cargo hauling was extremely dull. It certainly followed the laws of supply and demand, the supply of cargo haulers is up, the demand is low therefore profit was low; still doesn't make it fun.
Global is possible, but it should probably include some sort of virtual postal system with a wait time and a cost. It would be nice that players could offer some sort of competing service.
I don't know who told you localization systems are easy to gouge, but that is completely dependent on your game structure. If you give a player 3 character slots and there are 3 main AH and they all share 1 storage system, then it is the same as having a global system. On the other hand, if those 3 characters don't share a storage system and have a 5 item AH limit, then it becomes a much more daunting task.
