Economy

[Schrodingers Cat]

What if there were a cap on starting player accounts that could be "upgraded"?  A flat fee to open up the larger account and/or a recurring fee for these accounts.

Or another idea:  What if Nobles and Templars (and other prominent political people with power) could assist commoners by opening "joint" accounts.  Basically the commoner and the assisting political figure would both have access to these accounts, with of course the political figure paying some sort of fee for the service.  This would give political figures access to more funds and in the event that one of their 'investors' die or disappeared or whatever, they'd get they would still have access to their money.

I think the ideas here with changes to the banking system is to eliminate the 'invisible' nature of player's bank accounts, and at the same time draw in people that money is usually associated with (nobles/templars/merchants).  It isn't to punish indy's but to make it more difficult to easily hold onto large amounts of wealth/coins without assistance from political figures.

[musashi]

What if there were a cap on starting player accounts that could be "upgraded"?  A flat fee to open up the larger account and/or a recurring fee for these accounts.

My main problem with ideas like these is that it doesn't seem like it would fix the problem, but rather, just draw it out a bit.

What I mean is, if you put a mini barrier in the way like ... needing to pay to open up larger accounts, you're really just moving the goal posts back a bit further. So now, instead of 5 days played compulsive resource farmers being silly rich, it's 10 days played compulsive resource farmers that are.

It also would likely have the undesirable side effect of making the casual players feel that much more behind the 40+ hours a week players, and that's not a direction I'd like to go in.

Or another idea:  What if Nobles and Templars (and other prominent political people with power) could assist commoners by opening "joint" accounts.  Basically the commoner and the assisting political figure would both have access to these accounts, with of course the political figure paying some sort of fee for the service.  This would give political figures access to more funds and in the event that one of their 'investors' die or disappeared or whatever, they'd get they would still have access to their money.

I think the ideas here with changes to the banking system is to eliminate the 'invisible' nature of player's bank accounts, and at the same time draw in people that money is usually associated with (nobles/templars/merchants).  It isn't to punish indy's but to make it more difficult to easily hold onto large amounts of wealth/coins without assistance from political figures.

The idea is to make it more difficult for people without political standing to hold onto large amounts of wealth without risk or difficulty.

I suppose a joint system like that could work but at first glance it seems a little over complicated to me when a noble could simply hold the money in his account and dole it out to the minion when the need for it arises. Though I suppose a system like that could hold merit should the two players' play times not sync up well.

[Synthesis]

Well, I have to admit that most of your posts so far, musashi, have been tl;dr.  I briefly skimmed the first, and to quote the great George St. Pierre, "I was not impressed by your performance."  But since I now have insomnia secondary to probably the worst conjunctivitis I've ever had, I'll go ahead and start building a quote pyramid with you.

I haven't responded to many individual posters in this thread because a) I don't think the topic is really worth spending a lot of time attacking (because I don't agree with the fundamental premise that there is a problem at all) and b) refuting much of it concretely would require examples containing IC info regarding my past characters.

You did seem to feel like it was worth spending a lot of time attacking when you wrote the long post of yours earlier that got rebuked for not being based on sound reasoning or actual examples of routine happenings in game. You also have been posting quite a lot in this thread from the get go before this particular suggestion was even brought up. So I can't help but feel like you're changing gears here and trying to play like it's not important to you, now that you have to backpedal.

I'm not sure any of my posts thus far have been long, especially by my standards.  One of the main reasons I hadn't responded to you so far (beyond the tl;dr issue) is that I didn't think your posts were sufficiently logical to address without spending copious amounts of time nitpicking them apart...something I didn't have the time to do earlier, as I was sort of trying to get some studying done.  So please, don't take my not engaging you previously as some sort of victory.

Suffice it to say:  I play independent-type characters almost exclusively, and the types of interactions that the loss of banking code would pose a detriment to are far from "rare" or "uncommon": they're the ordinary way things get done when you're unclanned.

I'm sorry. I don't suffice to say. This is a totally general enough topic that you could provide examples, espcially if they were not rare or uncommon. They should be universal enough that breathing a word about them would not reveal sensative in game secrets about your previous characters of old.

Okay, fine.  I've played several successful independent characters who have hired the Byn to do various things.  I have, with previous characters, paid off the Guild, the Sandas, the Red Fangs, the Allanaki Templarate, the Tuluki Templarate, the Akei'ta Var, the Dune Stalkers, and untold numbers of rogue Whirans who enjoy believing they are the lord and master of whatever particular zone they are spamcasting in.  I have employed (or attempted to employ) numerous other independent characters, but this is generally an exercise in frustration given the high PC turnover rate, especially among newbie characters.

These interactions are typically much more expensive than they are for clanned characters.  For example, I had a Tuluki templar confiscate well over 5,000 'sid in coins/gear.  Average payment to keep Guild burglars out of your apartment has been around 500 'sid, although perhaps I've been over-paying in the attempt to placate them.  Average bribe to a templar: 500 'sid per templar every few weeks. Average bribe to a militia PC:  100 'sid whenever they want it (this can be more expensive than bribing a templar if you have a militia PC with high playtimes). Price of a Byn contract: 1,000 'sid minimum, usually, and it goes up from there.  Price of a difficult/risky assassination contract: 5,000 'sid.

If banks were abolished, where would people find the coins to pay off large sums like this?  Carrying around 5,000+ coins is foolish, and yes, coins are heavy.  5,000 coins in inventory drops my current PC from "light" encumbrance to "heavy, but manageable."  Another 5,000 to VERY heavy.  Another 5,000 to unbelievably heavy (at or over maximum encumbrance).

Yes, those are large amounts of 'sid as far as the documentation is concerned, but they aren't large amounts when you consider the ACTUAL state of the ACTUAL economy.  The price of a single meal that will fill you from "a little hungry" to "full" in a tavern, with enough booze to get you buzzed is around 200 coins in Allanak (and actually, buying scrab steaks in the Gaj is currently cheaper than buying just about anything at all from the grocer).  A single piece of armor in Allanak can run you over 500 'sid.  500 to replace a mount stolen by a d-elf.  When one of my previous characters had his matched set of armor stolen by a burglar, it cost over 6,000 'sid to buy it back from Salarr.  Now, according to the documentation, these sorts of sums are ridiculous.  6,000 'sid to replace a slightly-better-than-average set of mercenary armor is just plain retarded, when the "average" Zalanthan supposedly gets by on 300 'sid a month...if the docs were strictly correct, it would take an average mercenary's entire pay for 20 months (7 IC years) to get a full set of decent gear.  Also, as a PC, you better be eating only 1.5 times a month, or you're screwed, according to the docs!  Furthermore, my current PC spends about 1,100 'sid every 125 IC days just on RENT.  That comes out to...I don't know...around 400 I have to spend to keep rent updated every time I log in and bother to pay.  If I decided to stop hunting, grebbing, and crafting, the 15k I have in the bank would be gone or drastically depleted within an IC year.

But to address musashi's anti-bank suggestion directly.

#1:  It would be a huge pain in the ass.

Again, without actual examples of how this would be a huge pain in the ass, this statement says nothing other than personal opinion, which you have already admitted is slanted since you don't think there is a problem to begin with, despite the fact that a majority of other players tend to think there is. Yes, a majority, and not just in this thread alone, but in the fact that these kinds of threads continue to come up, posted by different people nearly every time, as the months roll on.

See above for encumbrance penalties--pain in the ass (and if you haven't experienced combat-related encumbrance penalties for yourself, I highly recommend you go out and try fighting at heavy, but manageable sometime).  

The main pain in the ass is that it will tightly bind together crafting/grebbing activity with expenses.  Currently, I can greb up 5,000 or so 'sid in a couple of RL weeks then just chill and do whatever the fuck I feel like doing (like actually interacting with other PCs) for the next RL month or so.  Without a bank, every time I log in, I will have to greb/craft/etc....then go pay my rent to get rid of the excess, then go purchase food immediately to get rid of the excess, then go pay my other miscellaneous expenses immediately to get rid of the excess, and if Templars A and B and Militia PCs A, B, and C and the Guild guy and the Red Fang guy aren't online at the time, I'm stuck holding a fucking fat sack of cash until I can catch up to them, which may take a RL week or more.  Is that concrete enough for you?

#2:  It's a clunky workaround to the fundamental "problem," which is that some characters have more money than some players think they should have.

This strikes me as another attempt to dismiss the concerns of a vast majority of players without cause because your minority opinion happens to be different. You also fail to provide an example of how its clunky. The general feedback seems to be that it would be anything but. Simple, very very effective ... these are the kinds of opinions most folks posting on the thread have used, and examples have actually been offered up to support them. So it's only fair that if you want to be taken seriously, you need to have actual examples yourself that are not red herrings, strawmen, or hyboles like your last post contained.

It is clunky because it imprecisely targets the source of the problem.  That's pretty much all I meant by that.  It's like chemotherapy vs. surgery:  if you have a solid tumor in an easily accessible location with no important anatomical structures nearby, there is no reason to start giving systemic chemotherapy to get rid of it, when you can go in and surgically remove the damn thing.

The "problem" as I have seen it stated is that some folks have more coins (and can make more coins) than some folks think they should have/should be able to generate.  As I stated previously, the anti-bank fix does nothing to change this, the fundamental basis of the complaint.  Instead, it imposes a pain-in-the-ass (see above) restriction on the entire playerbase in the vain hope that folks will decide to stop making tons of 'sid.  And I believe I've previously explained why the anti-bank suggestion will fail at that, as well.

#3:  It wouldn't even fix the "problem."  The ability to rapidly generate coins would still remain, thus instead of hoarding wealth, people would just spam(whatever) to generate it rapidly whenever they need it.  Need someone assassinated? Spend 5 RL hours spamcrafting.

But the ability to rapidly generate coins isn't the problem. The ability to hoard them is. This really strikes me as another strawman. Sure, if you need someone assassianted you can spend 5 RL hours spamcrafting to get the money to do so, but that isn't the problem people were talking about. The problem was that a commoner could triple whatever a templar was able to offer, on the fly, out of their personal savings, because of how much money they were able to amass. Under the proposed system, that would be much less possible since the templar would have the ability to amass 50k and the commoner would really only be holding onto 10k at best barring unsual circumstances. So actually ... yes, the problem would be fixed. Or at least way closer to being fixed than it is now.

Again, I've never seen a situation in-game, or complained about on the boards, where a templar's or noble's plans were seriously thwarted solely or in large part by a mountain of 'sids coming from an independent, unclanned character.  Theoretically the possibility exists, I suppose, but who in their right mind would seriously piss off a templar just to scrabble a bunch of coins from some indie nobody?  If you take that deal, you deserve whatever shitstorm you walk yourself into, and that has been my point and several other people's point as well:  stop stressing about massive quantities of 'sid, because their usefulness in the political arena is limited at best.

As to the ability of nobles/templars to employ people, the Staff have never stated an intent to shoehorn players into employment by any clan or House.  If anything, the addition of poop scraping, cotton picking, obsidian mining, and salt foraging signals a desire to maintain the independent, unclanned character as a viable concept.  If your GMH Agent or noble or templar can't convince people to join the clan with 'sids, COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER.  If you're a Salarri, offer people free badass armor.  If you're a Kadian, offer them...well...yeah, nobody really gives a crap about what Kadius sells, so maybe you had better stick to the coins.  If you're Kuraci, give 'em a free tent and a brick of spice (tents are stupid cheap and easy to craft, btw, so this is nothing more than an opportunity cost for a real merchant).  I mean, seriously...the list goes on and on and on.  There are a million things in this game more important than 'sid, and really I'm tired of trying to come up with compelling examples of all of them when it's obvious some people in this thread are merely being obstinate for the sake of rhetorical advantage.

I would much rather the "problem" be addressed directly, if the Staff actually think that it's a problem.  (And no, I don't think anyone has concretely demonstrated situations where an independent "nobody"'s massive amounts of coins were able to thwart the ambitions of a noble or templar.)

Staff have already stated it is a problem, so again ... it's really not like idea that everything is a-ok is even up for debate. We have established that something is fishy. That's why they're tweaking things, as Nyr said they were doing in response to emails, and it's why Vanth said that it was difficult to fix this "OOC problem that affects the IC economy".

And you seem to be assuming that unless a nobody indie is able to "thwart" the ambitions of a noble or templar, then everything is cool, that's really just moving the goal post.

Most of the complaints in previous threads about the economy were not complaints that nobles and templars were being thwarted, but rather, that they were unable to offer monatery incentive to commoners because commoners were by and large, better off financially than they were and were scoffing at the idea of being paid what the noble could afford to pay them.

Or that people were only joining GMH's to learn the crafting recipies and then going indie to make way more money than they could make as part of a powerful clan. These were the complaints of the people actually posting in the threads, and they're legit complaints. Just because you choose to ignore them and think up a situation I don't think anyone has actually seriously commited to, and decide that unless that can proved, there is no problem ... doesn't actually make it so.

And frankly, being unable to properly motivate would be minions because the minions make more than you, is really about the same as being "thwarted". The end results are strikingly similiar. The noble/templar doesn't get to do what they wanted to do because their resources didn't square up to what commoners already had.

See above, I pretty much addressed all of these concerns.

[Sinna]

There are a million things in this game more important than 'sid, and really I'm tired of trying to come up with compelling examples of all of them when it's obvious some people in this thread are merely being obstinate for the sake of rhetorical advantage.

Then why are you so darn worried about it, Synth?

Your arguments against removing banking suggest you feel like you are having something taken away from you that you enjoy in the game  - and that sucks.  No one wants their enjoyment of the game infringed upon.  But I wish you could just step outside of yourself / your character for a moment and look at game balance about what Armageddon is supposed to be (via the docs). 

Really, if you can greb up and amass 5K coin in a few RL weeks and feel like that's a good representation of what a commoner's life is like on Armageddon, I think it might be wise to pause a moment and think back on the whole theme of the game.

In the end, it sounds like you aren't really considering the valid points in the suggestions offered - but that's often the problem with debates, no one listens because everyone's too busy trying to score points.

[Qzzrbl]

Templars/Guild/Militia/Tribals/Rogue magickal extortionists only charge so damn much coin because they know you indies are such juicy little goldmines.

They probably wouldn't bother your indie commoner so much if it weren't so common for indies to rack up several thousand coins in a short amount of time.

[Synthesis]

There are a million things in this game more important than 'sid, and really I'm tired of trying to come up with compelling examples of all of them when it's obvious some people in this thread are merely being obstinate for the sake of rhetorical advantage.

Then why are you so darn worried about it, Synth?

I'm not "so darn worried about it."  I'm presenting arguments against it because I -know- there are other people who feel the same way I do, and I don't want the bandwagon-jumpers to out-shout the people who don't think the original complaint has much merit, and I'm doing this currently primarily because I'm bored.

Your arguments against removing banking suggest you feel like you are having something taken away from you that you enjoy in the game  - and that sucks.  No one wants their enjoyment of the game infringed upon.  But I wish you could just step outside of yourself / your character for a moment and look at game balance about what Armageddon is supposed to be (via the docs). 

Really, if you can greb up and amass 5K coin in a few RL weeks and feel like that's a good representation of what a commoner's life is like on Armageddon, I think it might be wise to pause a moment and think back on the whole theme of the game.

If you bothered to read my post, you'd notice that what the docs say is the average commoner's lifestyle is a far cry from what the average PC faces "on the ground."  The average independent PC has a minimal apartment (250 'sid every 125 IC days), and if you're not around Tuluk, you probably have to pay for your own water (runs about 1 full waterskin every IC day you spend in the desert, comes to about 45 'sid base expense plus 20 'sid stabling fee every time you leave the gates).  So at -minimum-, you're looking at about 50 'sid you have to make every RL day just to pay your rent, and every time you go out the gates, you have to make at least 65 just to cover overhead.  If you go out the gates 1 time every login session, that is 115 'sid you -have- to come up with to maintain a bare minimum, and this is assuming that you can actually kill and cook your own food.  Further, this isn't taking into account the intermittent cost of paying d-elves not to kill you (or the cost of replacing whatever they stole from you).  Most d-elf players I've met out in the wastes have been fairly reasonable of late, so this amounts to about 500 'sid every couple of weeks, which averages to about 35 'sid every RL day over time.  So now we're up to 150 'sid you have to greb every time you leave the gates to cover what amounts to minimal costs over time.  1,500 'sid saved up will only let you go out and come back empty-handed 10 times.  That's what...a week and a half or less of playing for a high-playtime player.

It has been stated time and time again that the average PC is not the average Zalanthan, unless you WANT to be the average Zalanthan...in which case you might as well idle at the corpse pile until you die of dehydration, because that's what's happening to the average Zalanthan in Allanak.

In the end, it sounds like you aren't really considering the valid points in the suggestions offered - but that's often the problem with debates, no one listens because everyone's too busy trying to score points.

How exactly am I not addressing points when I specifically took the time just now to address every point musashi's made (and he seems to be the anti-bank champion at the moment)?  I won't agree that they are -valid- points, but at the very least I've addressed them and explained why I think they fail.

While we're guessing at each other's intentions, I'll hazard a guess that most of the people complaining about indies are players of GMH agents, nobles, or templars who somehow feel stymied or disadvantaged because boo hoo, they can't get what they want, and darn it, the docs say that they should be able to get whatever they want. 

[Synthesis]

Templars/Guild/Militia/Tribals/Rogue magickal extortionists only charge so damn much coin because they know you indies are such juicy little goldmines.

They probably wouldn't bother your indie commoner so much if it weren't so common for indies to rack up several thousand coins in a short amount of time.

True, and I think that's a good thing.  It is perfectly reasonable that criminal elements would charge unaffiliated persons more, since there is less inherent risk of angering truly powerful organizations when doing so.

However, this is a double-edged sword:  criminal elements charge indies more, which in turn forces indies to make more, which in turn causes criminal elements to charge more, which in turn forces indies to make more...you see where this is going?

[Qzzrbl]

Any criminal/corrupt politician worth his weight in ssnd knows better than to overcharge when extorting for two reasons:

1) Charging too much drives victims away-- meaning you won't see another coin out of them unless you decide to chase them down.

2) Killing victims that don't have the money to pay up = 1 less person paying up.

I see it leading to criminal elements charging less to indies, and perhaps focusing more on organizations and clans, 'cause that's where the real money's gonna be at if the change goes in.

That's what my experiences in Zalanthan Organized Crime  has taught me at least.

[Flawed]

Then why are you so darn worried about it, Synth?

Your arguments against removing banking suggest you feel like you are having something taken away from you that you enjoy in the game  - and that sucks.  No one wants their enjoyment of the game infringed upon.  But I wish you could just step outside of yourself / your character for a moment and look at game balance about what Armageddon is supposed to be (via the docs).  

Really, if you can greb up and amass 5K coin in a few RL weeks and feel like that's a good representation of what a commoner's life is like on Armageddon, I think it might be wise to pause a moment and think back on the whole theme of the game.

In the end, it sounds like you aren't really considering the valid points in the suggestions offered - but that's often the problem with debates, no one listens because everyone's too busy trying to score points.

Some people are saying MAJORITY players think this and that, where I really don't see majority of those visiting GDB  posting save the select few.

Also, grebbing is not the only way to earn sids. I had many social tavern sitting, non merchant pcs who never step out of the city and acquire  over 20k in the course of a couple of months' play. From aides to the stealthy, bribes, blackmails, threats, gifts, etc.

I agree that there is a problem with the economy, but I feel taking off bank account is like having painkillers because your stomach is hurting. You might not feel the pain for a while, but it is still there, and you will have to deal with it sooner or later.

I believe you have to remember that as a new PC, you want to get paid for your efforts to do tasks. But as a veteran PC, you want to get paid for the time you spend on the said task.   The minor difference has a big impact.

I lean towards Synth. Sids is a new pcs/noobie 's starting currency. After some playing days, it is favors, status, politics, connections which are being sold/exchanged. In order to pay for your piece of gossip, I'd buy your wares and sing of it to others, give you something juicy in return, offer you the name of that master assassin, and so on.  From experience, a nobody just offering 20k to the assassin/templar to get someone killed should not work. In fact, if you do that, in most cases I'd take the payment first, kill you, and then deliver your head to the said person for more favor.

Without bank, I see super inconvenience for the off peak and awkward plots. Personally, I enjoy clanned pcs most often, so it won't bother me much.  Perhaps another suggestion might work? Fixing one unrealistic aspect of the game with another unrealistic change just does not settle well to me.

[Qzzrbl]

The main problem I've seen with the economy thus far, is that there's an NPC organization that will hold an unlimited number of coins completely safe and unable to be stolen from. An organization that will do this free of charge and for any nobody who walks up and drops coins on the table.

I personally would love to see the economy based more around trading/bartering rather than raw coinage, for commoners at least. Couple that with the lack of a free iron vault available to anyone and everyone, and I could see things balancing out fine.

This isn't about where the majority stands, it's about a known problem that needs a solution that makes sense.

[musashi]

I'm working right now. But I will address the points made when I get home in a few hours. Please be patient.

[Sephiroto]

Who in their right minds would keep any money there (except briefly, to transfer sums from north to south or vice versa safely)?

That's actually a great reason to have Nenyuk around.  It probably costs them a lot to move coin around, stockpile it and guard it.  I can imagine VNPC caravans transferring vast sums of coin between noble houses or even from one city to another.

[Thunkkin]

The only thing I've found in this thread so far that could be damaging to the in-game economy is hyperbole.

Well, I have to admit that most of your posts so far, musashi, have been tl;dr.  I briefly skimmed the first

it's obvious some people in this thread are merely being obstinate for the sake of rhetorical advantage.

If you bothered to read my post

I usually agree with you, Synth, but this is becoming a bit rich.  

Also, IF capping or restricting bank accounts had the effect of lowering inflation, then it would cost less to be raided and less to buy things from PC merchants.  For the rest, if a society is living in squalor, if you want to go it alone ... mounts, armor, weapons, and food SHOULD be expensive.  According to the docs.  (And according to any comparison with pre-modern civilizations in RL).

[ianmartin]

We keep getting back to the point of realism.  Let's think about it, Bill gates scratched and scrimped, and he was a nobody, a high school droput, but GUESS WHAT!!!!!!!,  he's the richest man in the world. 

Why then is it NOT realistic for a commoner to amass some of that massive wealth. 

We, the PC's are not the average bloke you see chilling in zalanthas, we are playing the cream of the crop, the ambitious ones, not the lazy bastards lying in the streets and begging for sid. 

I see no reason why someone cannot have 30K in their bank account.  There's only SO much you can do with that, and it's none of anyone's dam business what they have or what they have stockpiled.  Leave it be and if you don't like it, then play your own way and stop infringing on someone else's enjoyment.  What's realistic for Bill Gates is not realistic for Joe the Plumber.

[Jdr]

The simple reason is, America is a free capitalist democracy. Allanak/Tuluk are a despotic monarchy.

[Cutthroat]

Why then is it NOT realistic for a commoner to amass some of that massive wealth. 

We, the PC's are not the average bloke you see chilling in zalanthas, we are playing the cream of the crop, the ambitious ones, not the lazy bastards lying in the streets and begging for sid.

I see this argument used a lot for other reasons, including money-making. Average in this case is not lazy begging bastards. Let's take a look at the documentation:

What you know - Allanak

The life of an Allanaki citizen is one of strife--expensive and degenerate living conditions, a nearly omnipotent ruler and His Templars watching your every move, and no place to hide except the burning wastelands outside the city gates. Highlord Tektolnes inspires a silent paranoia in all of his subjects, and thus has remained unchallenged during his multi-millenial reign. Most Allanakis are slaves belonging to the nobles and Templars, and the commoners are usually of the merchant class or soldiers in Tektolnes' army. The rest of the population earn their living in less honest ways.

What you know - Labyrinth

life is a constant struggle in the 'rinth. Resources, food, and money are scarcer here than in any other city in the Known World. Naturally, this leads to "competition" for whatever is available in the alleys.

What you know - Red Storm Village

Life in the village is grim. People can make a quick coin by gathering spice, but it is often a fruitless and demanding task. The mixture of elation and depression on the faces of the spice hunters as they come back into the village after a long day sifting through the sands mirrors the bittersweet nature of life here.

About the North

You probably grew up in an apartment or tenement in the labyrinthine Warrens, the commoner housing quarter in the southwestern part of the city...

Tuluk

South of the Merchant's District lay the Warrens, where the poor and the slaves resided

Although our PCs may or may not be average, we are still playing our PCs amongst NPCs and vNPCs that are similar to our characters. We're playing in a setting where certain economic situations are expected for broad castes and classes of people. To play the exception in so many ways is to disregard the setting. It's too bad that it's almost necessary, though, given how skewed things can get.

I don't agree that removing banking entirely is the way to handle the problem here, but I do feel that it becomes a problem for the game in general when the most fun thing for players is "get rich quick", when there are so many other things to get involved in. You even say yourself that "there's only SO much you can do with [a large amount of money]". So why gather it?

Let's look at the economy problem a different way. What is the problem with other aspects of the game that makes money-hoarding appealing?
- Is it the high prices on goods that are worth having?
- Is it the infinite demand on easily-obtained things to sell?
- Is it the lack of better things to do IG?

Fix what makes large amounts of money necessary and I think you will find less people hoarding it.

[Synthesis]

Any criminal/corrupt politician worth his weight in ssnd knows better than to overcharge when extorting for two reasons:

1) Charging too much drives victims away-- meaning you won't see another coin out of them unless you decide to chase them down.

2) Killing victims that don't have the money to pay up = 1 less person paying up.

I see it leading to criminal elements charging less to indies, and perhaps focusing more on organizations and clans, 'cause that's where the real money's gonna be at if the change goes in.

That's what my experiences in Zalanthan Organized Crime  has taught me at least.

I don't disagree with any of that, but there is, by necessity of lack of complete information, a disconnect between what the criminal player thinks is fair (i.e. will not increase the desire to spam<whatever> for the victim) and what the effects of the encounter on the victim will actually be.

[Nyr]

The simple reason is, America is a free capitalist democracy. Allanak/Tuluk are a despotic monarchy.

Very true.  Silver lining, though:  the invisible hand of the Zalanthan market really could be invisible!

Bill Gates (while not the richest man in the real world anymore--fun side fact!) would only be able to do something with that cash in Zalanthas if he had social or political power as well.  Obsidian coins and assets in Zalanthas mean nothing without social or political power.  It is not realistic for a commoner to obtain masses of wealth in normal cases.  You become a target flush with money that you shouldn't have, and you should be aware of it.  There have been exceptions, and those exceptions turned those commoners into forces to be reckoned with socially and politically (Pearl, anyone?  The Ironsword clan?).  I could go on about this but I think I did once before, in a discussion about enforcing coded weight limits in apartments last year (and the underlying mentionable that "apartments are not meant to be warehouses").  I'm just linking to it rather than quoting from it, though.  It does go off on a tangent in one direction related to that thread.

The code of the game can assist this to some extent, but the code is not to be relied on as a babysitter.  We are a mix of code and role playing.  Even if changes are made, players have a responsibility to do their best to adhere to documentation.  We are discussing some options on the IDB, though.

[Synthesis]

The main problem I've seen with the economy thus far, is that there's an NPC organization that will hold an unlimited number of coins completely safe and unable to be stolen from. An organization that will do this free of charge and for any nobody who walks up and drops coins on the table.

Why is this a problem, exactly?  When Nenyuk takes your coins, they aren't just sitting on them and doing nothing.  Ostensibly, they are paying master artisans and their House employees with it all, and using it to turn massive amounts of profits by investing your coins in whatever their projects are.  They're using it to keep their favorite templars happy, using it to pay the city-states to hold on to all that property they rent out, and using it to keep the criminals off their backs.  They're the most ingenious Greater Merchant House in the Known World:  they don't even have to SELL ANYTHING to get people to give them their money (for at least the half of their business model that concerns the banks).

To me, it seems like people think it's "a problem" because a) they somehow believe that mass quantities of coins will somehow have political effects that just simply do not happen (except in very rare cases like Pearl and Ysania, and those cases are hopelessly intermingled with political power those characters acquired over probably decades of in-character time); b) they want there to be more poor commoner PCs so they can have the economic leverage to force them to do things; c) they want more people to carry around coins so they can steal them more easily?; d) they are taking a literal interpretation of the docs that doesn't match with the reality of the game as coded and played.

These are the 4 points I see recurring again and again, and I know I've addressed them all.  At this point, it's merely a matter of perception, and the only thing that can happen is degeneration into "uh-huh" vs. "nuh-uh."  Maybe the Staff will agree with the perception that the economy is somehow broken.  If they do, I certainly hope they do something more exhaustive and creative to fix this perceived problem than simply getting rid of the banking functionality.

I personally would love to see the economy based more around trading/bartering rather than raw coinage, for commoners at least. Couple that with the lack of a free iron vault available to anyone and everyone, and I could see things balancing out fine.

This isn't about where the majority stands, it's about a known problem that needs a solution that makes sense.

Again, known problem perceived by some.  I simply do not agree that it is a problem.  The fact that people have a "free vault..." so what?  What exactly is BAD about that, beyond the obvious "aw, it makes it tough for my burglar?"  Yes, they can amass tons of coins if they want, but what are they going to do with them?  A ton of coins for your average independent is like having an stockpile full of bullets, but no guns to shoot them from.

And moving to a pure barter system is just stupid.  It might make a neat April Fool's joke next year, though.

[Boggis]

It's really too late to look at the economy at this point but if I had to I'd start by looking at clan salaries as my base. Assuming that these groups are the major employers in the land I'd base the prices of things around what a clan member gets paid. Food and drink prices would be reduced greatly. A bottle of whiskey would no longer cost you more than 10% of your salary. Apartment rent likewise for basic hovel-like apartments. Weapons, armour, etc. would also be lowered some in line with the average person's earnings though I'd like to make these things coveted so a person would have to save for each piece they wanted.

Then I'd drastically cut the earnings from mining, salting, hunting, etc. until they come more in line with clan salaries. I'd make it so especially risky hunting / grebbing got it's due reward but no more racking up tons of 'sid easily. I'd cut back on merchants abilities to make piles of coin by selling piles of crap. I'd close the loopholes that can be exploited to make tons of 'sid from certain shops. Subguild tailor in a certain location would no longer be the tap of infinite wealth. Sorry 'bout that elementalists too. I'd make it so that organised hunting / grebbing / merchanting would still be a nicely profitable enterprise for a group but solo working these angles wouldn't make you a rich man unless you worked some risky high-end stuff. Groups would have to be registered with the territory they work in and pay tax / bribes.

All in all I'd cut your average character's ability to make large amounts of coin off at the knees. I'd leave noble stipends as is so they can make use of coin as an asset. Synthesis rightly points out that coin is not really an asset in this game. It should be though. One of the reasons it isn't is because there's a total glut of easy coin available and it takes away something which should be a useful lever for rich characters. It would also help to make clans more attractive to people as they'd at least be getting paid an average wage instead of having to live in a world where prices are completely inflated due to certain groups' ability to reap masses of 'sid very easily. Also receiving clan gear would be a valuable, coveted thing given the reduced amount of easy 'sid floating around.

[musashi]

Whew, ok home from work. Lets see now.

I've played several successful independent characters who have hired the Byn to do various things.  I have, with previous characters, paid off the Guild, the Sandas, the Red Fangs, the Allanaki Templarate, the Tuluki Templarate, the Akei'ta Var, the Dune Stalkers, and untold numbers of rogue Whirans who enjoy believing they are the lord and master of whatever particular zone they are spamcasting in.  I have employed (or attempted to employ) numerous other independent characters, but this is generally an exercise in frustration given the high PC turnover rate, especially among newbie characters.

These interactions are typically much more expensive than they are for clanned characters.  For example, I had a Tuluki templar confiscate well over 5,000 'sid in coins/gear.  Average payment to keep Guild burglars out of your apartment has been around 500 'sid, although perhaps I've been over-paying in the attempt to placate them.  Average bribe to a templar: 500 'sid per templar every few weeks. Average bribe to a militia PC:  100 'sid whenever they want it (this can be more expensive than bribing a templar if you have a militia PC with high playtimes). Price of a Byn contract: 1,000 'sid minimum, usually, and it goes up from there.  Price of a difficult/risky assassination contract: 5,000 'sid.

If banks were abolished, where would people find the coins to pay off large sums like this?  Carrying around 5,000+ coins is foolish, and yes, coins are heavy.  5,000 coins in inventory drops my current PC from "light" encumbrance to "heavy, but manageable."  Another 5,000 to VERY heavy.  Another 5,000 to unbelievably heavy (at or over maximum encumbrance).

If banks were abolished, where would people find the coins to pay off large sums like this?

I assume what you mean to ask is: If banks were abolished (for grubby commoner PC's only), where would people store the coins to pay off large sums like this?

Because you would find the coins to pay off these large sums the same places you found the coins to pay them off with the past characters you are referencing. Restricting banking to powerful clans and the people that head them would have zero effect upon anyone's ability to actually earn money. It would only detract from their ability stockpile it.

It's really cool that you spent all that money creating interaction within the gameworld, moving and shaking things along and giving other PC's things to do, but I don't see where having to carry your coin with you or risk leaving it in your apartment would have any affect on your ability to shell out any of the payments you mentioned above.

Take a look at how the math works out for all the money said your character was spending:

Tuluki Templar Taking your gear and coins: 5,000
Bribing thieves to leave your apartment alone: 500 (but lets make it 1,000 just because)
Bribing templars: 500 (but lets make it 2,000 for good measure)
Bribing militia soldiers: 100 (but lets make it 3,000 because you said that can get more expensive than templar bribes)
Byn contract: 1,000 (but lets do another 3,000 since those can get even more expensive)
Assassianation contract: 5,000

Your total: 12,100
My total after upping the numbers even more: 19,000

19,000 coins. This is still below the 20k, 30k, 80k figures that independant crafters with high play times are able to stockpile under the current system. This kind of activity could very nearly be afforded entirely by a noble or templar's monthly stipend.

I can't help but feel like what you just explained is how commoners don't need to have disproporinately large amounts of money to really move and shake things around in the gameworld.

19,000 coins however, would be pretty heavy, no doubt about it.

But unless your character lost his gear and money to a templar (thus having to go buy new stuff), bribed those guild thieves (for the whole month), bribed another templar (several times), bribed a militia soldier (even more times than the templar), took out a contract with the Byn, and had someone assassianted all at the same time, before he could even try to go make some more money ... ... it's really unlikely that you would have ever had to actually worry about the weight of 19,000 coins.

It's more likely that your PC paid that money out in parcels, and if that were the case, then even if he didn't have a bank account, he would have never been forced by circumstance to shoulder 19,000 coins around with him all at once.

I suppose you could say, "Alright. But you never know when you're going to have to bribe someone.". This is true, however if there was no banking system available to average commoners, it isn't hard for me to imagine that the people playing templars and militia folk would adopt less of a "pay up right here right now" mentality, and would instead shift to something more closely resembling extortion, where you can agree on a price with them now, go earn that money, and pay them a bit later.

If you got into a bribe bidding war with a GMH family member or a noble or someone who was in a position to drop a large sum of money out their bank account right here right now, sure you would lose out because you couldn't deliver immediately. But that's the whole point of the suggested change. Commoners should not be in a position to drop more money on a whim than a politically connected aristocrat.

Yes, those are large amounts of 'sid as far as the documentation is concerned, but they aren't large amounts when you consider the ACTUAL state of the ACTUAL economy.  The price of a single meal that will fill you from "a little hungry" to "full" in a tavern, with enough booze to get you buzzed is around 200 coins in Allanak (and actually, buying scrab steaks in the Gaj is currently cheaper than buying just about anything at all from the grocer).  A single piece of armor in Allanak can run you over 500 'sid.  500 to replace a mount stolen by a d-elf.  When one of my previous characters had his matched set of armor stolen by a burglar, it cost over 6,000 'sid to buy it back from Salarr.  Now, according to the documentation, these sorts of sums are ridiculous.  6,000 'sid to replace a slightly-better-than-average set of mercenary armor is just plain retarded, when the "average" Zalanthan supposedly gets by on 300 'sid a month...if the docs were strictly correct, it would take an average mercenary's entire pay for 20 months (7 IC years) to get a full set of decent gear.  Also, as a PC, you better be eating only 1.5 times a month, or you're screwed, according to the docs!  Furthermore, my current PC spends about 1,100 'sid every 125 IC days just on RENT.  That comes out to...I don't know...around 400 I have to spend to keep rent updated every time I log in and bother to pay.  If I decided to stop hunting, grebbing, and crafting, the 15k I have in the bank would be gone or drastically depleted within an IC year.

Could you please tell me, where exactly you found it in the docs that commoners are supposed to get by on 300 coins a month? This entire paragraph is based around that, and I don't know where it the docs it says that. Unless you are talking about the fact that some monthly wages for clanned employees only total out to about 300 coins a month. In which case clanned employees have no room and board costs and are almost always supplied with equipment to do their job as well as the raw materials to work their trade. Similiar to how in the real world military wages are lower than civilian sector wages in the same field, but the benefits that compensate make up for it.

See above for encumbrance penalties--pain in the ass (and if you haven't experienced combat-related encumbrance penalties for yourself, I highly recommend you go out and try fighting at heavy, but manageable sometime). 

Here, I think you're just being over dramatic. I mean, when you go out from the city to fight stuff, you'll almost assuredly have a mount that you would have packed these coins onto because they're heavy. To try and claim that this is going to actually affect anyone's fighting ability is just bogus.

Maybe you don't have a mount, but then you probably also don't have enough coins to to make the weight of them a factor. Or if you do, then you should spend some of them to go buy a mount.

The main pain in the ass is that it will tightly bind together crafting/grebbing activity with expenses.  Currently, I can greb up 5,000 or so 'sid in a couple of RL weeks then just chill and do whatever the fuck I feel like doing (like actually interacting with other PCs) for the next RL month or so.  Without a bank, every time I log in, I will have to greb/craft/etc....then go pay my rent to get rid of the excess, then go purchase food immediately to get rid of the excess, then go pay my other miscellaneous expenses immediately to get rid of the excess, and if Templars A and B and Militia PCs A, B, and C and the Guild guy and the Red Fang guy aren't online at the time, I'm stuck holding a fucking fat sack of cash until I can catch up to them, which may take a RL week or more.  Is that concrete enough for you?

Is this concrete enough for me? Well, here's my problem with the example.

Most PC's don't just run out and spam greb for a couple of RL weeks straight and then chill for a RL month doing nothing but interacting with other PC's. Most PC's want to improve their skills, and many of those skills either directly or indirectly tie into making money.

If someone is, for example, playing a ranger ... the norm, as I have seen it, is that nearly every IG day they are logged in they will head out and do a bit of hunting, do a bit of grebbing, do a bit of crafting, just to try and improve thier skills so they can become more codedly competant. But since all of that ends up earning them resources along the way, they also end up making money off of it. Skill gains and income are very closely bound together more often than not, especially for no name commoners with no clan backing.

To me, this example of yours, like the last one, seems over dramatic compared to how most people play.

It is clunky because it imprecisely targets the source of the problem.  That's pretty much all I meant by that.  It's like chemotherapy vs. surgery:  if you have a solid tumor in an easily accessible location with no important anatomical structures nearby, there is no reason to start giving systemic chemotherapy to get rid of it, when you can go in and surgically remove the damn thing.

The "problem" as I have seen it stated is that some folks have more coins (and can make more coins) than some folks think they should have/should be able to generate.  As I stated previously, the anti-bank fix does nothing to change this, the fundamental basis of the complaint.  Instead, it imposes a pain-in-the-ass (see above) restriction on the entire playerbase in the vain hope that folks will decide to stop making tons of 'sid.  And I believe I've previously explained why the anti-bank suggestion will fail at that, as well.

You seem to be under the impression that the problem is that some folks make more coins than some other folks think they should be making. This is incorrect.

The actual problem has been clearly identified.

Please allow me to remind you of what the problem is by quoting Vanth.

As is often the case, the heart of this issue was (IMO) captured in a nutshell on the first page of the thread:

The schism between clannie and independent only becomes wide for high-playtime players. 

If Salarri Hunter Amos and Independent Hunter Malik both play 10 hours a week (2 a day, 5 days a week), they probably make about the same amount of 'sid, but Amos has a better deal because of clan perks.

If Amos and Malik are both on 40 hours a week (and yes, quite a few of you play that much), then Malik is much, much more wealthy, because he is making money per RL time period rather than per Zalanthan time period.

It's really impossible to balance for this OOC factor in the IC economy.

The problem is that schism that developes at high play times which allows Malik to be making much, much more money than Amos, because he is making money per RL time period rather than per Zalathan time period. This is the problem. Clearly cut.

Now that we know what the problem is, imagine having no bank accounts for commoners.

What affect would it have on Amos and Malik at 10 hours played a week?
What affect would it have on Amos and Malik at 40 hours played a week?

The affect of having no banks to store money in would only be a serious barrier to Malik at 40 hours played. Amos has a safe footlocker to put excess coins in, and a salary in any case along with food and water and a place to sleep. Amos really wouldn't be seriously inconvienced by a lack of banks.

Malik at 10 hours played a week would probably be living hand to mouth, slightly less well off than his clanned counterpart, but making about the same amount of income, which would not be anywhere near the 20k, 30k, 60k disparity I mentioned up above. He would probably have around a large in his backpack at any given time, nothing nearly so heavy as to start causing him trouble or space issues.

Malik at 40 hours played however, would start to be seriously inconvienced by the sheer amount of coins he was making because he would need to have a place to put them all. Weight and space issues would serve as a natual barrier to him making more money in the same sort of way that weight serves as a natural barrier in keeping rangers and assassians from wearing silt horror plate mail.

Having no bank access for commoners would be felt strongest by Malik at 40 hours a week, the source of the schism, and felt very little if at all by anyone else. To use your example, this sounds a lot more like tagetting the tumor with surgery than with chemo.

The rest of what you wrote was written under the assumption that the problem was something else, so I don't think it applies and thus, didn't comment on it further.

[flurry]

Let's look at the economy problem a different way. What is the problem with other aspects of the game that makes money-hoarding appealing?
- Is it the high prices on goods that are worth having?
- Is it the infinite demand on easily-obtained things to sell?
- Is it the lack of better things to do IG?

Fix what makes large amounts of money necessary and I think you will find less people hoarding it.

I think prices are a factor worth considering, especially where it comes to more basic needs. Player perception of how much a commoner should have is going to be influenced by how much things cost.

However, I think the problem really begins when characters have much, much more than they need, to the point where it becomes excessive spending simply for the sake of excessive spending. At that point, the drive to amass coins can't really driven by prices anymore.

Even though I think there is a problem, I'm not sure I like the bank-related solutions. My concerns would be unintended consequences of that but also I wonder how to justify Nenyuk adopting those kinds of wealth-limiting policies.

But I do think it would be kind of interesting to look at the why and how of the genuinely huge sums of coins. Closing some of the "loopholes" or "tricks", as others have suggested, to eliminate easy money with little effort or risk, seems like a definite step in the right direction.

[Synthesis]

It's really too late to look at the economy at this point but if I had to I'd start by looking at clan salaries as my base. Assuming that these groups are the major employers in the land I'd base the prices of things around what a clan member gets paid. Food and drink prices would be reduced greatly. A bottle of whiskey would no longer cost you more than 10% of your salary. Apartment rent likewise for basic hovel-like apartments. Weapons, armour, etc. would also be lowered some in line with the average person's earnings though I'd like to make these things coveted so a person would have to save for each piece they wanted.

Then I'd drastically cut the earnings from mining, salting, hunting, etc. until they come more in line with clan salaries. I'd make it so especially risky hunting / grebbing got it's due reward but no more racking up tons of 'sid easily. I'd cut back on merchants abilities to make piles of coin by selling piles of crap. I'd close the loopholes that can be exploited to make tons of 'sid from certain shops. Subguild tailor in a certain location would no longer be the tap of infinite wealth. Sorry 'bout that elementalists too. I'd make it so that organised hunting / grebbing / merchanting would still be a nicely profitable enterprise for a group but solo working these angles wouldn't make you a rich man unless you worked some risky high-end stuff. Groups would have to be registered with the territory they work in and pay tax / bribes.

All in all I'd cut your average character's ability to make large amounts of coin off at the knees. I'd leave noble stipends as is so they can make use of coin as an asset. Synthesis rightly points out that coin is not really an asset in this game. It should be though. One of the reasons it isn't is because there's a total glut of easy coin available and it takes away something which should be a useful lever for rich characters. It would also help to make clans more attractive to people as they'd at least be getting paid an average wage instead of having to live in a world where prices are completely inflated due to certain groups' ability to reap masses of 'sid very easily. Also receiving clan gear would be a valuable, coveted thing given the reduced amount of easy 'sid floating around.

See, now that is a solution I can agree with.

The only exception I'd make is for merchants.  They should still be able to make substantially more than your average warrior/ranger/assassin/burglar/pickpocket, because really that's the only thing they're good at, and it's what the class is entirely aimed at.  At the very least, a merchant PC should make enough to be able to pay 2-3 independent grebbers to go do things for them...otherwise what is the point of the merchant class?  Because honestly, until you can mastercraft items, almost nobody wants any of the bullshit a PC merchant (who isn't clanned) can craft, because the vast majority of it is useless or crappy.

[Synthesis]

musashi, we can go back and forth with hypothetical scenarios all damn day without proving anything.  You wanted examples, I gave them to you, I don't agree with your counter-examples.

If all you've got left is arguing over hypotheticals, the discussion is basically over.  As I said, at this point it's merely "uh-huh" vs. "nuh-uh."

[spawnloser]

Some of the 'easier' ways to make money are veritably risk free, but they also generate a piddly amount of coins.  (Cotton picking, anyone tried it?)

Some of the 'easier' ways to make money are not low-risk.  Those tasks and my thoughts on them:

• Hunting - Some hunters have a hard time killing anything and/or skinning anything right after being accepted into the game. and playing an indie hunter could possibly be made too hard for someone to do without metagaming if it didn't have the returns it can have now.
• Salting - Too low-risk for the returns.  My suggestion, increase the number of NPC baddies.
• Mining - Similar to salting, but at least it has a cap on how much can be sold.