Topic: Game economy

This is only a question to more experienced players and in no way a suggestion to Devs. Now my question...Would a game economy based on expensive must be used parishable items work ? Such as fuel, ammo other things you'd have to use simply to move or play.
Some games have a stagnant economy because thier expensive items are treasured by players and not put into situations where the player losses them..thus there is little demand fueling the industrialists to produce, the miners to mine and the pew pewers to sell loot.
if the major expense is bots and modules..why loss one ? However if i have to spend a good portion of any activities loot just to fuel the next activity it seems I'd be creating a demand in market.

2 (edited by Predator Nova 2011-07-12 02:10:54)

Re: Game economy

Yeah something like fuel is definitely good for the economy, as is any other money(nic)-sink. It keeps inflation in check and I fully expect the Energy System to be basically a big money sink. If you look at Eve, one of the most succesful virtual economies, it has tons of these, ranging from ammo to POS Fuel.

Nevertheless the Devs have to be careful about the implementation as it cannot be too tediuos. I'd rather have the big corps carry most of the sinks than the little guy having to grind half hour every day to keep his bot fueled.

This is my blob. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Re: Game economy

Predator Nova wrote:

Yeah something like fuel is definitely good for the economy, as is any other money(nic)-sink. It keeps inflation in check and I fully expect the Energy System to be basically a big money sink. If you look at Eve, one of the most succesful virtual economies, it has tons of these, ranging from ammo to POS Fuel.

Nevertheless the Devs have to be careful about the implementation as it cannot be too tediuos. I'd rather have the big corps carry most of the sinks than the little guy having to grind half hour every day to keep his bot fueled.

This is in no way shape or form a Nic-sink. It will not curb inflation.

*edit: Offensive comment removed. - DEV Calvin

Re: Game economy

Why isn't it a Nic-sink ? Nova's comment makes sense to me , could you post your reasons for why something like this wouldn't work ?
Spending nic on perishable items seems to me like it would take nic out of the game but more importantly the items would be in demand and players would quickly move to fill that demand thru production or however the item is originally acquired.

Re: Game economy

it's not a nic sink if no nic is removed, if it's player created and driven the nic circulates back into the economy.

Now, if you're talking about npc seeded orders, then yes, that would be a nic sink, and also detract a little from the sandbox.

Re: Game economy

If I have to refuel POS's again I'm quitting.  It was the reason I quit stEVE.  Game felt more like a job.

Re: Game economy

"blood for the blood god" is what i think of every time someone talks about POSes.

That and "Hmm.  Oh crap, lol, there's a POS in my storage container."

Ammo is already a nice consumable, and mining charges, and scanner charges, etc.  Adding more can very easily make it worklike, and one has to be VERY careful between 'encouraging retention' to a game and 'omg i dont wanna fuel this thing anymore let it rot'

----
I play MMOs. I need a signature which is deep, thought provoking, and devours bandwidth with the voracity of rabid weasels. It is also, by nature, vaguely sad with a tinge of my obvious internal, unfathomable loneliness. Like this, sad  , but at 1.3megs packed into 2 by 6 inches. ANIMATED.

Re: Game economy

Thing with fuel is that it would probably be manufactured  by corps who then use it, so apart from the manufacturing cost I dont think it would provide a meaningful sink and more of an additional logistical irritation that does not provide good game play.

I liked the way CCP integrated a rental cost for 0.0 soverenty, now that is a money sink and a reasonable one, it also meant that alliances needed pve money making corps to help fund their war effort.

I believe such a thing was suggested for PO in a dev blog, but as I recal the first outpost was free...  which just might mean the mass creation of alt-corps for anyone who might have the notion to dominate several outposts.

What PO really needs is just more players and more reasons to establish on Beta islands to encourage more pvp.

Re: Game economy

What Perpetuum needs is the Devs taking a good, hard look at why 5/6 of the Beta islands in game are completely empty and devoid of activity, with the remaining 1 being super-active and blockaded when there is epriton/hauling underway but otherwise mostly empty.

The biggest NIC sink in game is the fact that you LOSE your robot when you die, along with the modules. This is something that mainly happens on Beta islands, with some cases of AFK or unlucky people getting popped by Alpha observers.

There is no difference in mining capacity between New Alpha and Beta islands. The only "difference" is on the Alphas you mine titan, on the Betas you mine epriton. All other materials are available in irrational quantities for a 100% safe zone.

Therefore, there is no reason to implement fuel and other perishables, it is more reasonable, simple and logical to PROMOTE players to risk their existing perishables (bots, ammo, modules) on Beta. The current way of promoting - epriton, higher level missions & NPC's, higher facilities - are obviously not working.

As I said, 5/6 Beta islands completely empty and devoid of player-life. This is the biggest issue for Perpetuum to fix.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Game economy

I think thats more down to the cohesive nature of politics and that its a LOT easier to defend one place with lots of people. If it bothers you then decare one of the betas a safe zone from Novablob and police it from undesirables in much the same way hoop did and watch the population rise.

You cant complain about an island bieng dead when you actively try to stamp on people who move there.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: Game economy

Syndic wrote:

The biggest NIC sink in game is the fact that you LOSE your robot when you die, along with the modules. This is something that mainly happens on Beta islands, with some cases of AFK or unlucky people getting popped by Alpha observers.

Well unless you bought the robot from an NPC Order its not a NIC sink though. No NIC is "lost" when your Bot is blown up, in fact if your Bot was insured you even have more NIC than before.

But you are right when you say that beta-islands are not "shiny" enough. Although one has to be careful when changing stuff.

Re: Game economy

well, from my perspective - im not going to "ninja-mine" epriton on beta island for two reasons:

1. my mining equip is almost blind, while beeing a shining beacon on the map (80/80 masking/detection)
even heavy investments in masking and masking equip is canceled out by a small bot with a standard detector.
2. my hauler is the same
3. mining epriton is, as far as i remember similar, to harvesting: i fill up a sequer in a few minutes, which means, i have to move that sequer through chocepoint every few minutes, leaving a trail to my mining operation.
4. the market worth of the epriton is huge, but i dont need it for NIC, i need it to build stuff.
and then, take a look at how much epriton is worth there:
if im on alpha, i need more then 3 sequer loads (more then a lithus) for a SINGLE combat heavy mech, not counting the modules on it.
now try to build up a stock of lithuses that you could afford to lose while doing that:
you  need even more epriton for a single lithus then one could haul... you need to survive several tranports to be able to replace the hauler...


conclusion: the reward is not worth the risk for someone who cannot afford to bring 10 guards per miner/hauler

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Game economy

Jita wrote:

I think thats more down to the cohesive nature of politics and that its a LOT easier to defend one place with lots of people. If it bothers you then decare one of the betas a safe zone from Novablob and police it from undesirables in much the same way hoop did and watch the population rise.

You cant complain about an island bieng dead when you actively try to stamp on people who move there.

I can give you some instructions in politics.

Lesson 1:

When someone you declared war on presents themselves as "extended blue family" and hides behind fledgeling corporations, after you've previously explained the situation and offered unconditional support to these fledgeling corporations, and strongly recommended to them NOT to get involved; you don't just ignore your enemy happily farming on a Beta island. You come over, gun them down, along with everything that gets between you and them.

Nobody forced the corp in question - FOOM - to go blue with 62nd, or to squad-up with them and try to shoot at our guys. Nobody bent their arm behind their back or put a gun to their temple.

As we've stated elsewhere (SovNov Statement of Intent) we're quite happy to help out new corps get settled on Beta, help them take outposts, advise them how to stand on their own two feet without being affiliated in any way with us. That is not the point. The point is that we are neither *** or stupid to just watch while our enemies hide behind new-corps they NAP-ed and live & farm on Beta.

The same will happen with this M2S/62nd/FOOM/ATG push to form up on Hokkagaros. In two weeks time we'll be back to Jelan shooting vomit-balls on the forums because his toys fell out of the pram.

ZUBO wrote:
Syndic wrote:

The biggest NIC sink in game is the fact that you LOSE your robot when you die, along with the modules. This is something that mainly happens on Beta islands, with some cases of AFK or unlucky people getting popped by Alpha observers.

Well unless you bought the robot from an NPC Order its not a NIC sink though. No NIC is "lost" when your Bot is blown up, in fact if your Bot was insured you even have more NIC than before.

But you are right when you say that beta-islands are not "shiny" enough. Although one has to be careful when changing stuff.

Its a NIC sink because production-NIC is going out of the game. Those bots aren't cheap to make, those modules aren't cheap to make, and those prototypes aren't cheap to make. Its the most consistent NIC-sink, the more lost the more needs to be produced, the more NIC changes hands in capitalist corps etc.

Also, the benefit of this inherent NIC sink is that it doesn't require development time by itself since its already present in the game.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Game economy

Jita wrote:

You cant complain about an island bieng dead when you actively try to stamp on people who move there.

Well there are 5 islands empty, not just one.  No matter how big an organisation is it could never lock down them all 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

This is the nature of beta islands though, there will always be someone trying to stamp you out of existence yikes

15

Re: Game economy

The problem with the game economy at its current state is the following:

Most of the stuff isnt worth it.

A T2 hardener on a assault or light (not ewar) costs three to six times more then the robot itself.
Does it help you to withstand three or six equal bots that dont have a hardener? -> no

This is valid for ~65% of all fittings and robots we have ingame.

Other fittings are barely worth it or mandatory because you wont be competetive without.
But if they are mandatory/useful and expensive then you either:
*) dont want to sell em on the market
*) sell em for a good price so you can build one or two more

If you go to beta then you risk losing "all" that stuff within seconds but the reward you may get doesnt cover that loss.

Its a balancing issue which leads to three things:
*) the market doesnt offer certain items
*) certain items dont sell
*) people are not willing to risk their (hard to replace) stuff

Its better then it was ~3/4 months ago but its still a long way to go.

Re: Game economy

Dune Runner wrote:
Predator Nova wrote:

Yeah something like fuel is definitely good for the economy, as is any other money(nic)-sink. It keeps inflation in check and I fully expect the Energy System to be basically a big money sink. If you look at Eve, one of the most succesful virtual economies, it has tons of these, ranging from ammo to POS Fuel.

Nevertheless the Devs have to be careful about the implementation as it cannot be too tediuos. I'd rather have the big corps carry most of the sinks than the little guy having to grind half hour every day to keep his bot fueled.

This is in no way shape or form a Nic-sink. It will not curb inflation, and anyone who thinks like you is a complete ***.

Can you please explain that a bit further? Im just as stupid as Predator Nova and do not understand you.

Affiliated with CIR, Not actively playing, not neutral

Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. - Winston Churchill

Re: Game economy

Syndic wrote:

I can give you some instructions in politics.

Lesson 1:

BLAH BLAH BLAH ZERG BLAH BLAH BLAH. ZERG ZERG DERKA DERKA DERKA JIHAD!!!!
BLAH BLAH IF DONT ZERG DERKA DERKA BLAH BLAH

FOOM MAKE ME ANGRY DERKA DERKA DERKA DERKA

As we've stated elsewhere (SovNov Statement of Intent) we're DERKA DERKA DERKA

http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq18 … ICRAGE.jpg


Game economy seems to have picked up, we're making tons of money selling t4 mods from kills.

Re: Game economy

Production does seem to gobble a bunch of nic in terms of actual cost charged by npcs to use the facilities. So building bots is a sink of sorts.

As far as the mineral and component costs of modules, I agree that they're way out of whack relative to the cost of the bot. If a single mod on my bot costs as much as the entire bot and that mod is not a god button of some kind, then something is out of whack.


As an aside I'd personally like to see a system for quick and easy purchase of temp blue on beta islands. So you'd show up, mine, do your building on the island and then haul it off to whatever market hub you want. Shoot a blue and you get turned red instantly.

Corps could turn it off, but it'd be a great option for those who want to build little open market zones in beta.


Mara Kaid wrote:
Syndic wrote:

I can give you some instructions in politics.

Lesson 1:

BLAH BLAH BLAH ZERG BLAH BLAH BLAH. ZERG ZERG DERKA DERKA DERKA JIHAD!!!!
BLAH BLAH IF DONT ZERG DERKA DERKA BLAH BLAH

FOOM MAKE ME ANGRY DERKA DERKA DERKA DERKA

As we've stated elsewhere (SovNov Statement of Intent) we're DERKA DERKA DERKA

http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq18 … ICRAGE.jpg


Game economy seems to have picked up, we're making tons of money selling t4 mods from kills.

I enjoyed this post and hope to see others of a similar nature in the future.

Re: Game economy

Syndic wrote:
Jita wrote:

I think thats more down to the cohesive nature of politics and that its a LOT easier to defend one place with lots of people. If it bothers you then decare one of the betas a safe zone from Novablob and police it from undesirables in much the same way hoop did and watch the population rise.

You cant complain about an island bieng dead when you actively try to stamp on people who move there.

I can give you some instructions in politics.

Lesson 1:

When someone you declared war on presents themselves as "extended blue family" and hides behind fledgeling corporations, after you've previously explained the situation and offered unconditional support to these fledgeling corporations, and strongly recommended to them NOT to get involved; you don't just ignore your enemy happily farming on a Beta island. You come over, gun them down, along with everything that gets between you and them.

Nobody forced the corp in question - FOOM - to go blue with 62nd, or to squad-up with them and try to shoot at our guys. Nobody bent their arm behind their back or put a gun to their temple.

As we've stated elsewhere (SovNov Statement of Intent) we're quite happy to help out new corps get settled on Beta, help them take outposts, advise them how to stand on their own two feet without being affiliated in any way with us. That is not the point. The point is that we are neither *** or stupid to just watch while our enemies hide behind new-corps they NAP-ed and live & farm on Beta.

The same will happen with this M2S/62nd/FOOM/ATG push to form up on Hokkagaros. In two weeks time we'll be back to Jelan shooting vomit-balls on the forums because his toys fell out of the pram.

You know, I was going to give you a thumbs up for your earlier post about the risk/reward issues that go along with operating out of beta islands - because you are right...

But then you had to go and bring [strike]politics[/strike] spin into the General Discussion. roll

Re: Game economy

AeonThePiglet wrote:

Production does seem to gobble a bunch of nic in terms of actual cost charged by npcs to use the facilities. So building bots is a sink of sorts.

As far as the mineral and component costs of modules, I agree that they're way out of whack relative to the cost of the bot. If a single mod on my bot costs as much as the entire bot and that mod is not a god button of some kind, then something is out of whack.


As an aside I'd personally like to see a system for quick and easy purchase of temp blue on beta islands. So you'd show up, mine, do your building on the island and then haul it off to whatever market hub you want. Shoot a blue and you get turned red instantly.

Corps could turn it off, but it'd be a great option for those who want to build little open market zones in beta.


Mara Kaid wrote:
Syndic wrote:

I can give you some instructions in politics.

Lesson 1:

BLAH BLAH BLAH ZERG BLAH BLAH BLAH. ZERG ZERG DERKA DERKA DERKA JIHAD!!!!
BLAH BLAH IF DONT ZERG DERKA DERKA BLAH BLAH

FOOM MAKE ME ANGRY DERKA DERKA DERKA DERKA

As we've stated elsewhere (SovNov Statement of Intent) we're DERKA DERKA DERKA

http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq18 … ICRAGE.jpg


Game economy seems to have picked up, we're making tons of money selling t4 mods from kills.

I enjoyed this post and hope to see others of a similar nature in the future.

Mods aren't out of line in terms of cost. In eve, a t2 hardner cost around 1 mil isk, and that's in a mature economy, while a frigate cost around 100k. Light bot = frig, assault = destroyer, mech = cruiser, and heavy mech = bc. This game doesn't have large gun or bs equivalent yet. Use t1 or t0 to fit that light bot, t4 is supposed to be expensive, and is never meant to be fit to light bots to begin with.

There need to be a cost curve on items for any mmo, where getting the best requires seemingly more effort than the benefits it gives. If top of the line items are cheap and easy to obtain, it would remove depth from the game.

As for renters...
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/34/2l95bfk.jpg/

Re: Game economy

I'm not talking about renters, I'm talking about a game supported version of what CVA wanted to do.

Price is less of a concern to me than capability. I eve, a t2 dcu gobbled more fitting, cost way more and wasn't really all that much better than the t1 variant (60% v 50%). If this game was tightened the performance gap I'd be pretty well content.

Re: Game economy

Syndic wrote:

What Perpetuum needs is the Devs taking a good, hard look at why 5/6 of the Beta islands in game are completely empty and devoid of activity, with the remaining 1 being super-active and blockaded when there is epriton/hauling underway but otherwise mostly empty.

The biggest NIC sink in game is the fact that you LOSE your robot when you die, along with the modules. This is something that mainly happens on Beta islands, with some cases of AFK or unlucky people getting popped by Alpha observers.

There is no difference in mining capacity between New Alpha and Beta islands. The only "difference" is on the Alphas you mine titan, on the Betas you mine epriton. All other materials are available in irrational quantities for a 100% safe zone.

Therefore, there is no reason to implement fuel and other perishables, it is more reasonable, simple and logical to PROMOTE players to risk their existing perishables (bots, ammo, modules) on Beta. The current way of promoting - epriton, higher level missions & NPC's, higher facilities - are obviously not working.

As I said, 5/6 Beta islands completely empty and devoid of player-life. This is the biggest issue for Perpetuum to fix.

It was the same in EVE. You can't force PvP. You only force non PvP people out the door. Right now, Outer Alpha is like low sec. None of the benefits of null, ie: no Epi and none of the benefits of high sec, ie: more outposts. Because every spawn in perpetuum is the product of a mission, you can't go to Beta and just mine. You either go to kill an Epi miner or go to be farmed trying to mine it.

To the OP, we cant develop the econ here because the game isnt developed. I'm more concerned with the bottle necks I am seeing that are forcing this game to evolve in to EVE on the ground. I sense a Jita is coming and will be controlled by the beta power blocs. Nobody likes a WoW clone and an EVE clone won't fare much better.

Re: Game economy

Syndic wrote:

What Perpetuum needs is the Devs taking a good, hard look at why 5/6 of the Beta islands in game are completely empty and devoid of activity, with the remaining 1 being super-active and blockaded when there is epriton/hauling underway but otherwise mostly empty.

...Or we can take a look at it ourselves and perhaps come up with an interim solution.

Currently, PVP in Perpetuum is largely unsatisfying for any but the oldest players with mechs. Many Corps. have made an effort to do Light/Assault-only roams and gotten beaten down by overwhelming numbers of larger bots. Yes...these roams were on someone else's island but that was where they were likely to find some action.

While I don't want to permanently change the sandbox nature of this game, I wondered which Corps would agree to a temporary, self-enforced ban on mechs for one island only. This would be a gentleman's agreement but with the understanding among those signing on to it that they would all immediately end other combat on this island to "punish" anyone who brought over something other than a light or assault.

The agreement would not extend to industrials. Mine on the chosen island at your own risk. It also not be in force for any Corp. engaged in an incursion there.

If enough Corps. signed onto this, it might be possible to get the devs to either post a TP-in pop-up screen warning outlining the agreement or even, if the response included a high enough percentage of the current player base, to build-in an exclusionary mechanic (or even add one new island for this purpose!).

BTW - This is personal proposal and not a one made by my Corp.

Re: Game economy

The problem with PvP isn't the game. It's the people. I go out nightly to beta islands just to find other people to shoot at. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. While I agree with Robbie that there is a slight imbalance of EP right now, I disagree that we should make a PvP island of lights and assaults. We just need more of the newer players out on these islands doing stuff.

It seems to me I am in the minority of X-Eve players that look for PvP while logged in. I run the "golden triangle" maybe an hour after I get off work and then I have enough Nic to by a bot, fit it all T1 and then head to beta islands looking for a fight. Sometimes people from my corp follow me, poor bastards, or I head out alone exploring and roaming.

Most nights I roam for hours and maybe see 1 person. Sometimes, like tonight, I lead 10 people to slaughter. It is mostly just me roaming empty islands though because 99% of the people that play this game, just like all PvP sandbox games, the populace is scared little sissy girls that cry when their stuff goes boom. So they make NovSov alliances and camp gates and undock far superior mechs and rub their e-peen off each others e-peens but will never go it solo.

Now, I'm not knocking those the legitimately like to mine or rat...  that is just not me. There is a reason I play PvP games. I like to confront other players and have fun. If I kill them, even better. I'm an A1 alpha male personality. I like to plant my foot in the ground and dare others to step on it. Always have and always will.

So in closing I would just like to say to the community. Go to betas more. Risk vs. reward is nothing when what you are risking is fun. You will win no matter the outcome.

Re: Game economy

Robbie wrote:
Syndic wrote:

What Perpetuum needs is the Devs taking a good, hard look at why 5/6 of the Beta islands in game are completely empty and devoid of activity, with the remaining 1 being super-active and blockaded when there is epriton/hauling underway but otherwise mostly empty.

...Or we can take a look at it ourselves and perhaps come up with an interim solution.

Currently, PVP in Perpetuum is largely unsatisfying for any but the oldest players with mechs. Many Corps. have made an effort to do Light/Assault-only roams and gotten beaten down by overwhelming numbers of larger bots. Yes...these roams were on someone else's island but that was where they were likely to find some action.

While I don't want to permanently change the sandbox nature of this game, I wondered which Corps would agree to a temporary, self-enforced ban on mechs for one island only. This would be a gentleman's agreement but with the understanding among those signing on to it that they would all immediately end other combat on this island to "punish" anyone who brought over something other than a light or assault.

The agreement would not extend to industrials. Mine on the chosen island at your own risk. It also not be in force for any Corp. engaged in an incursion there.

If enough Corps. signed onto this, it might be possible to get the devs to either post a TP-in pop-up screen warning outlining the agreement or even, if the response included a high enough percentage of the current player base, to build-in an exclusionary mechanic (or even add one new island for this purpose!).

BTW - This is personal proposal and not a one made by my Corp.

Size restricted teleporters could be fun somewhere down the line. Some teleporters could have decayed worse than others and only be capable of transporting bots up to 4m hit size.