Curse

Yawgmoth · Apr 01, 2010, 08:54 PM // 20:54

Wow, imnotyourmother, /applause, /congratulate.

You have found some random dependancy between some irrelevant, quite inaccurate and most importantly meaningless numbers and stick to it as if you had just discovered The Grand Formula that rules GW drops and economy.

Why is it 12 gold in PRE? Because gold drops and many other drops are dependant on mob's LEVEL (scaling up with every level) and NOT based on how many players are supposed to team in that area.

You assume that the game was supposed to be played with a party of 8 when there are more 6 man areas in Prophecies. Also you forget that Pre, especially northlands, is a 2 man area not 1, so your MATH fails because you forgot to divide your pre drop by 2.
If you'll say pre is easy solo then I'll say 8 man areas are also easy solo, in many ways.

Again, this has completely nothing to do with the topic of gold limits as it should be about the expected rates or time at which players can produce enough gold to fill the cap.

Zahr Dalsk · Apr 02, 2010, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Anet not knowing shit about economics and thinking that if they put a limit on the amount of money players can have, they'll some how keep things reasonable or something.

It had the opposite effect.

Lycan Nibbler · Apr 02, 2010, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Answer:- Its a number anet chose, just like they chose the max level to be 20, the max unruned att level to be 12 and the total att points to be 200. They chose them. If you want to store more, go buy a mule - losing or gaining on ectos when you have 1 Mil+ doesnt matter anyway now does it?

Just using up my 5 free posts for the day ^.^

Wefta · Apr 02, 2010, 01:15 AM // 01:15

I would probably say that it was to make the economy of the game run smoothly.
I mean if everyone had over 1 mill in their storage which they never use.. wonder what would happen to their economy system in-game where the money is going in loops.
Thats my guess at least

Martin Alvito · Apr 02, 2010, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Every game has a hard-coded cap due to the way computers store data. A game where data is stored on the user's computer can have large caps that players will never hit, because disk storage space is cheap these days. However, if you start storing data for several million accounts, extra bytes of data get expensive quickly. It looks like item stacks require a byte (2^8), inventory gold requires four (2^27) and stash gold requires four (2^30).

Data storage has gotten much cheaper in the last five years, so creating a tight cap probably made more sense then than it does now. The game was not designed around having ultra-rare items or having much of an economy, which is probably the other reason that the cap is low. Unconditional weapons were removed quickly, it took a while for players to realize that certain q7/q8 items actually provided tangible marginal benefits, and there were no miniatures, tonics or other collectibles aside from weapons and crafting materials.

That said, removing the cap would lead to absolute economic chaos. The entire GW economy has built up around the existing hard caps on storage. Curing that would be worse than the present disease; removing the caps would make a lot of players very, very upset.