![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Yes or No to the proposal | |||
| Yes |
|
41 | 50.62% |
| No |
|
40 | 49.38% |
| Voters: 81. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
Quote:
So, your goal is to put Urns in the hands of people who don't really want them in the hopes that they hit the market instead. Then, the optimal way to get an Urn goes from actually doing DS to instead buying the Urn using funds acquired by, say, farming prismatic scales in ST. Conclusion: Even if your proposal did lower Urn MQ prices by the logic you presented, that would only be because you're stealing urns from people willing to put in effort and handing them to people who log in once per day on an alt for 15 seconds for the sole intent of hitting a mini jackpot. That's a terrible trade. | |||
|
Last edited by Ruien; 08-08-2024 at 03:06 PM..
| ||||
|
#2
|
||||
|
Quote:
This change addresses the artificial scarcity created by a few guilds controlling the camp, which drives up prices. By increasing supply through fairer access, we can stabilize prices and make the urn more accessible. The goal isn't to reduce the effort required but to ensure that effort is rewarded fairly, promoting a healthier and more inclusive community. This system would still require engagement, just without the need for 24/7 camping. In summary, the proposed system aims for balanced gameplay, fair access, and a healthier community. | |||
|
#3
|
||||
|
Quote:
Urn simply being available to more people who want to put in the effort means less would be inclined to pay 250k for one. The small amount of players farming urns more or less has a monopoly and could dictate whatever price they wanted. Once a price expectation is established it tends to stay there unless there's any large mismatch of supply and demand and multiple sellers pressed to sell. | |||
|
#4
|
|||
|
This could change the price. The urns are not being awarded to the people who value them the most in platinum right now, they're being awarded to the people who are most willing to help hold the camp 24/7 with friends. Plenty of people getting urns likely would not be willing to pay 250k for one.
If all the Urns hit the market, it would cause the demand curve to drop some because you instead allocate the urns more to the people willing to bid up the price in plat, which then takes them out of the bidding and exposes the lower valued part of the demand curve. The loss would be that it would no longer be possible to guarantee an urn without spending plat in a fixed amount of time. Regardless, the actual win here would be that a roll based system means you don't have to waste everyone's time holding a camp nonstop, you just show up for 5 minutes 100 times or so until you get your urn. The total amount of work necessary from everyone involved to get the same amount of urns go down a lot.
__________________
Jayya - 60 Rogue, Officer <Auld Lang Syne>
Sanctum Low Man Vindi Kill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyZfNjvsDRE | ||
|
#5
|
|||
|
also this thread is fail w/o a bush towers vote option
| ||
|
#6
|
|||
|
imagine using the word equitable in a conversation about EQ
people are soft as shit | ||
|
#7
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#8
|
||||
|
Quote:
Consider Quarm I heard they do a lot of hand-holding and equitable things there. | |||
|
#9
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#10
|
|||
|
This discussion seems to be a bit stuck due to a similar issue to what I mentioned in passing earlier — you seem quite good at completely ignoring things that are explained in great detail, or else mentioning them and then redirecting discussion away immediately as if they were resolved.
1) Even if I thought change was a good idea, /list isn’t it. List is actually so much worse than even the status quo — the list system is probably *the single most toxic system on p99* and the most detrimental to player health that you claim to be concerned with. Instead of allowing for people to swap out and help each other, one single character must be online and active for the entire camp period, which is absolutely insane. I did the list for Summon Corpse when ST tried to lock it down before Sky opening, and I was literally playing 12h/day and swapping out with an IRL friend for the other 12, and maintained our spot on the list for TWO FULL WEEKS. I still wake up sometimes in sweats thinking I missed an afk check. No person should be subjected to that kind of trauma. As you can see too, all it did was advantage guilds that had shared credentials for bots they could pass out and share the effort. Since the item in both cases is essentially free to trade (or MQ) there is no problem just using any random shared bot for this. Continuing to mention /list as a viable alternative makes it impossible for me to take your posts seriously. 2) Multiple people have tried to explain some Economics 101 concepts but you still appear to not get it. The supply is fixed. The demand is larger than supply. Changing who gets the item does not affect the price. Maybe with an example it would be easier: * Players A, B, C are a farm crew. * Players D-Z want urns for SWC. In the case where players A/B/C each get an urn over the course of a week: * 3 Urns are sold with 23 prospective buyers. In the case where players A/B/C don’t even play, and D/E/F get urns there are multiple outcomes as well: * D/E/F all use their urns for SWC. Zero urns are sold this week. Players G-Z are buying but the market supply is empty. * D uses urn and E/F sell. 2 urns are available for 21 prospective buyers. In either case, there are still a ton of buyers and very limited availability. Thus in both cases, the price is actually likely to go up since the urn:buyer ratio gets worse! Unless you think the drop rate of urns matches the number of prospective buyers, the price will not drop significantly or possibly at all. This example still works even if we limit the interested parties down to D-M or something, it really doesn’t matter unless the supply meets or exceeds demand. 3. Random is bad for all the reasons people have mentioned, which it hurts me to repeat, but in summary: * there are no enforceable prerequisites to roll * the drop is not guaranteed, in fact statistically from our large sample set it seems closer to 20-25% — even if I was rolling against 10-20 people like at ring 8, winning for a 25% chance is dumb, it’s random on top of random * it would need something like the scout/angry agreement that everyone rolling must help with the kill, which is difficult to enforce (I see people /q at both every time already) and if you’ve done scout much, you can see how hilariously badly it can go even in a relatively safe environment, while DS is train central and can be an exceedingly difficult recovery In conclusion: my opinion is that the only rational option for change would be an equity based system like URN, which is very similar actually to how my current group operates, just with more open membership. I’d probably be fine with that. However, I don’t ACTUALLY think anything needs to change other than having the current player agreement clarified and more consistently enforced. Sure, Castle is holding it now, but I say this as their direct competition: good for them! They organized well and they’re doing something impressive as a group in an MMO. Eventually they’ll get tired or slip up or realize that very few people ever actually camped there for more than 12 hours and it will go back to trading hands on the regular. And hey, it seems like a bunch of them are getting urns to use for their quest (not resale), so literally the only thing that would change if you got your way is which people got their SWC, to random people instead of people putting in effort. We care about this… why? | ||
![]() |
|
|