Originally Posted by ModTerrik

Which as I said, you avoid your hyperinflation by controlling supply. Either by limiting the amount of gold that can be bought total (you get on a waiting list to purchase 100k for $50 and within a week you have it) or by pricing it high enough so that only the rich can afford it (much like Bill Gates Leer Jet).

Originally Posted by MoriaOrc

That's similar to #1 (although not as bad for gold-buyers I'll admit). But it has the same problems. Either the limit is very low, and the economy is protected but gold buying only works for "the basics," or the limit is high enough that it takes a few weeks, but the inflation still kicks in.

Number crunching for this policy:
500,000 active GW players (this is a conservative estimate, considering 5m copies sold as of February)
20k cap/week/player
10% players buy gold
-----------------
1,000,000,000 new gold that will be spent into the economy in one week.

Originally Posted by Omnidragon42

I'd like to say something about this statement. Learning about skill timing, chaining certain spells, aggro patterns, and baiting interrupts certainly are skills you gain while killing the same mobs over and over.

Originally Posted by GW GF

Honestly, money or no money, I don't really care how they do it.. I just would love to see MMORPG's (especially GW) more accessible for all.

It would be so cool if more working adults would play online.. it would mean more fun and larger variety of games for all.

However, until MMORPGS figure out a way to not take up so much darn time, the masses will never be able to play. SO if Anet really wants to strike it big, they will find a way to make everyone happy. I think that many valid concerns and suggestions have been brought up.

Please please please Anet... please find a way that I can enjoy a MMORPG that appeals to everone and doesn't take up too much time to advance. Heck, I can log off my computer and go play a game of Rock Band online but I like GW better.

Just my 2 cents

Originally Posted by Avarre

Guild Wars isn't about the same aggro patterns or same build of chained skills or same situations. An experienced player is one that can adapt to constantly changing situations, not one who performs the same area with perfect consistency. A robot can do that.

Originally Posted by MoriaOrc

It would likely be the opposite. If they don't customize the items on creation, then some players would probably try to sell them on the market for gold (increasing supply that much means lowering costs). Even if they customize RMT items, then it will still lower demand (also lowering costs).

Of course, then they would have to assign fixed values to player-traded items. Easy enough for trader items, but if they want to sell weapons or weapon mods, then it means assigning prices to items that don't currently have a set in game price.

Originally Posted by AshenX

The examples you give will have a good chance of controlling the severity of inflation caused by selling gold but will not in fact eliminate the inflation. By the very nature of what you are discussing Anet would be adding gold to the market without necessarily taking anything out. Gold would become more plentiful and so worth less in the GW economy.

The basic approach being suggested here is one that has been tried in the real world with disastrous results...We don't have enough money to pay our bills ? Just print more !

Attempts to control the fall-out from the implementation of this suggestion will (most likely) run afoul of a couple of problems:

1) where do you draw the line ? If the goal is to create an absolutely fair situation by allowing someone who doesn't have the time to farm for gold to purchase the gold from Anet while keeping the cost of the gold up to (hopefully) minimize the impact on the economy then what about those without much time or sufficient real world money to afford high gold prices. If fairness is in fact an argument for gold selling then the prices would have to be kept low in order for it to be achieved. If gold prices are low then any attempt to control inflation will fail.

2) Not only those without sufficient time to farm will buy gold if it becomes "legal". Farmers will likely find prices going up enough to warrant at least an occasional gold purchase themselves. If they are already farming as much as the can or are willing to to achieve the levels of income they desire then the devaluation of their current stocks of cash will drive them into the gold purchasing market as well.

3) Reducing the value of something that another has worked very hard for is actually less fair than saying that you have to spend alot of time farming in order to get a particular item in game. If you increase the amount of gold on the market then the gold already on the marked is devalued. In other words everything that the farming community has worked hard for will actually be worth less. They will be able to buy less with the gold and ectos that they have applied countless hours and ingenuity to acquire. In my opinion it is far less fair to take from them than to say that you should have work as hard (or put in as much time) as they did in order to have the same reward.

Please note that we are speaking about in game situations and so I am referring to in game work (or time) and am not at all deriding the real world work you do to accumulate the real world money which you wish to spend on GW gold.

Originally Posted by AshenX

Sorry for one post right after another but I had an idea that could help those wishing to use real world money to increase their GW income while (perhaps ?) limiting the impact on the GW economy.

Introduce new minipets, items, etc that can only be purchased for real world money.

By purchasing these items (priced in such a way as to create some degree of rarity without getting too ridiculous) you could have a commodity with (potentially) real purchasing power in the game. The addition of a new minipet might have a minor impact on the value of pre-existing ones but not to the degree of allowing you to purchase those with real world money.

This would not actually add currency to the GW economy but would rather add a means of redistribution of current GW gold stockpiles from the very wealthy (in game) to the less (in game) affluent.

Honestly I havent thought this idea through completely and I am sure that there are flaws and draw-backs that I just havent seen as of yet, but...there it is.

Originally Posted by Omnidragon42

The main problem is that you're trying to achieve "Fairness". Nothing is fair. GW is a game where item acquisition is determined by ingame effort. Real life is a game where item acquisition is determined by working at a job or exploiting the welfare system. If I could acquire a $500,000 house by spending say, 5 mil ingame, would that be fair to people who take 30 year mortgages to buy one?

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

GW would turn into Rich > Skill, Time rather than supposed Skill > Time.

My idea of where money ends up in an economy is in the hands of those who know how to use it well, which usually end up being the wealthy or the hoarders, and you're wanting to spend it, so I bet you're no hoarder. The only reason people would buy it is to spend it, and if they're spending it, it's going to end up in the hands of the already wealthy, and just destroy the economy more.

Plus, that's like GW saying, "We didn't like other people making money by selling in-game gold, so we decided to ban them all and do it ourselves!"