Curse

Fox Mulder · Jan 01, 2007, 06:02 AM // 06:02

The Merchant could carry silver bars (SB) worth 100g & gold bars (GB) for 1k. These prices would never fluctuate. 110k = 100k + 10 GB. What do u think?

Not A Fifty Five · Jan 01, 2007, 06:47 AM // 06:47

wont happen. for the mega rich ectos give more value per space. More like Platinum bars for 10k maybe

Or Just do away with the silly concept of 100k per character and 1 mill for storage. Does anyone here know why anet does that? or is it simply for people to buy more accounts for storing money?

Kool Pajamas · Jan 01, 2007, 07:21 AM // 07:21

The cap is there to prevent inflation. I doubt this would happen.

Malice Black · Jan 01, 2007, 07:36 AM // 07:36

Never happen. This wouldn't solve anything and only increase the amount of accounts being bought for storage.

100k+ecto is fine so why try something different?

Hand of Ruin · Jan 01, 2007, 07:55 AM // 07:55

it would only work if you could sell back to the merchant for the same price you bought it as, otherwise the market would become flooded with them and people would undercut the merchant so they could get their cash back to spend on things like runes, materials, armor ect... from traders.

Ectos are fairly stable, so I think the system is ok as it is.

Trophy Hunter · Jan 01, 2007, 07:27 PM // 19:27

The idea is nice.
I would like to see an item valued 100k like a "traders sigil" that you can only supply from a specific merch for gold and you could sell it to that specific merch for the same amount. I believe it for 4 reasons.

1) Each of these items will have a specific ID code number(1-10^100k or more) so anet could easily track their use and probably their missuse(item dublication)

2) I have come many times accross people that don't want to give ectos for trade because they really need them or don't want to feed with cash resellers. Especially at hight bids trades at guru. They instead risk the chance to get scammed by proposing 2-3 trades of 100K+100K+xxK. I Think its not fair.

3) Guys the ectos market really sucks. Many American or not European players tend to make european accounts just to have access to uw and fow(favor based). They experience huge lags just to get ectos for trades. Also the whole ecto market is manipulated by ecto re-sellers.

4)You want to buy something and have the gold for it. Why you should involve the stupid ectos in the deal? Gold based deals are the fairest deals.

Fox Mulder · Jan 02, 2007, 02:35 AM // 02:35

Fisrt, There would be no need for players to spam trade or "Search" for ectos!
Second, SB & GB would be bought from the Merchant & sold right away so there'd be no need for more storage space & no undercutting by resellers.
Third, You mean inflation like 100k + 40 ectos for a mini bone dragon 4 weeks
ago? Now they are going for 100k + 10 or less! I say its deflation after NF came along with the new & so called better stuff for sale.
A fluctuating commodity like ectos is no way to buy & sell anything!

amish lifeguard · Jan 02, 2007, 03:00 AM // 03:00

Fox, the bone dragon's price went down because more came into circulation. And when people aer spamming to buy ecto, they are most likely buying them for fow.

mrvrod · Dec 23, 2007, 01:12 AM // 01:12

imho, GW economy has gotten WAY out of control. i think it's too late for GW but in GW2 i would love to see some economy changes.

i'm an old D&D player and i'll give you a quick rundown on their economy:
10 copper pieces = 1 silver piece, 20 silver = 1 gold, 5 gold = 1 platinum.
(for GW2 i would keep the 1 = 1000, so 1000cp=1gp etc)

the important pert is this...a large sack was 16cp, a backpack was 2gp, a two-handed sword (highest dmg) was 30gp, and even the best armor (plate mail) was only 400gp!

why are we paying 100k + xxe for the next new thing? because even everyday items such as a superior salvage kit cost 2k!!! Lockpicks cost 1.5k!
in D&D only a thief could use a lockpick kit to open chests, but at least his kit only cost 30gp, and his chances of succeeding and retaining went up with the appropriate allocation of points in the related attribute!

i hope anet scales back next time around.

JeniM · Dec 23, 2007, 01:21 AM // 01:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trophy Hunter

3) Guys the ectos market really sucks. Many American or not European players tend to make european accounts just to have access to uw and fow(favor based). They experience huge lags just to get ectos for trades. Also the whole ecto market is manipulated by ecto re-sellers.

Have you played GW's in the last few months? The favor system changed to be world wide so everyone has equal access

Personally i think the GW economy is too far gone to help now

Lady Raenef · Dec 23, 2007, 01:23 AM // 01:23

I think you should just be allowed to carry more gold rather than being so limited.

Ansgar Two Hand · Dec 23, 2007, 01:34 AM // 01:34

With this talk about inflation - I will use an example that I have used before.

Lets say you walk out your back door, and see your neighbors dog. For the sake of conversation (bear with me here), you take a shovel, walk over, and beat that dog over the head. The dog dies, and a bag of gold appears. Next time you walk out your back door, the dog is back. You do it again. More gold.

You're going to spend a lot of free time beating that dog to death, aren't you?

Obviously, though, you're going to be dumping gold into the market, lowering the price of gold and eventually effecting other prices. But this is ok, since markets can absorb - in fact, *need*, a bit of increase in the money supply.

But what if EVERYONE does this? You'll soon get rampant inflation. They can try all they want, but as long as you can just walk out, whack some bushes and kill a couple critters and get a bag of gold, you're going to have inflation problems. You can move the problem around a bit by having new shiney things to covet (thereby devaluing previously coveted shiney things, effectively making them cheaper for those who still covet them), but the economy is fundamentally flawed.

The game is a lot of fun anyways, though, and they could probably find at least a partial solution if they really worked at it. This isn't really a gripe, it's just telling it like it is for those who haven't had occasion to think about it.

In the meantime, I'm going to go whack more random helpless wildlife to fund a new axe.

Edited to add:

This is hilarious.

Quote:

The idea is nice.
I would like to see an item valued 100k like a "traders sigil" that you can only supply from a specific merch for gold and you could sell it to that specific merch for the same amount. I believe it for 4 reasons.

1) Each of these items will have a specific ID code number(1-10^100k or more) so anet could easily track their use and probably their missuse(item dublication)

Dude, look in your wallet - this is why modern "currency" is not synonymous with "gold"

JeniM · Dec 23, 2007, 01:38 AM // 01:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki Moonlight

In my opinion, read the date it was posted...

Sorry first time i've noticed someone dig up an old thread to not agree with it

holababe · Dec 23, 2007, 02:31 AM // 02:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Raenef

I think you should just be allowed to carry more gold rather than being so limited.

That would just make inflation worse.

MithranArkanere · Dec 23, 2007, 05:00 AM // 05:00

The 100k limit is there for SOMETHING. Just deal with it already.

P.D.: In D&D 3.5, anyone can open locks and use lockpicks, you just need points in that skill. That's more logical.

Div · Dec 23, 2007, 05:34 AM // 05:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox Mulder

The Merchant could carry silver bars (SB) worth 100g & gold bars (GB) for 1k. These prices would never fluctuate. 110k = 100k + 10 GB. What do u think?

The merchant sells these things called lockpicks that are worth more than your gold bars and the prices never fluctuate. At least if you want to suggest additional stuff on top of 100k, make them worth like 50k each or something.

Tender Wolf · Dec 23, 2007, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Personally I'd love to be able to get FOW armor without all those expensive ectos and shards, but I don't see it happening. Plus, if this were to happen, I detect some ticked off people who already have FOW sets, especially multiples because of what they spent on it.

Fallen Hunter · Dec 23, 2007, 05:43 AM // 05:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tender Wolf

Personally I'd love to be able to get FOW armor without all those expensive ectos and shards, but I don't see it happening. Plus, if this were to happen, I detect some ticked off people who already have FOW sets, especially multiples because of what they spent on it.

I think you misinterpret the OP's intentions. There was no suggestion of removing anything from the game - just providing an item with a preset value to use for trading values above 100k, as an alternative to ectos.

Tender Wolf · Dec 23, 2007, 05:57 AM // 05:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallen Hunter

I think you misinterpret the OP's intentions. There was no suggestion of removing anything from the game - just providing an item with a preset value to use for trading values above 100k, as an alternative to ectos.

Oops! I'm sorry, my bad. hehe Okay now I get it. I still say /signed.

Chris Blackstar · Dec 23, 2007, 07:46 AM // 07:46

how about just making ectos price fixed at say 2K each forever.

it's the players who need to be greedy, that have destroyed this game with 100K+ectos bullshiit