Ryzom

1) If you see something in a merchant labelled "NPC item" does it mean:

a) It came from a player who had exceeded his or her "maximum number of items sold to players" limit?

OR

b) It was generated by the Ryzom game-system?

I hope a) is true, it would mean Ryzom has a 100% player-driven economy.

2) What if no one in a region was making heavy helmets, or if no one in a region was looting Bodoc horns? Would these items be absent from the merchants of that region? Or would the Ryzom game-system start generating items that no player in a region was crafting, looting, or harvesting?

3) Do the Ryzom devs decide the minimum price of each item or does player supply and demand have something to do with it?

Thanks,
Amphiaraus

ark014 wrote:1) If you see something in a merchant labelled "NPC item" does it mean:

a) It came from a player who had exceeded his or her "maximum number of items sold to players" limit?

OR

b) It was generated by the Ryzom game-system?

I hope a) is true, it would mean Ryzom has a 100% player-driven economy.

It is b), however, the quality and lack of stat boosts on 'NPC' items is such that no one buys them, so it's basically a 100% player driven economy in practice.

2) What if no one in a region was making heavy helmets, or if no one in a region was looting Bodoc horns? Would these items be absent from the merchants of that region? Or would the Ryzom game-system start generating items that no player in a region was crafting, looting, or harvesting?

In the case of animal drops, yes, crafted items only exist up to q100 as 'NPC" items aside form random gear on hawkers (which is again of very low quality compared to crafted goods).

3) Do the Ryzom devs decide the minimum price of each item or does player supply and demand have something to do with it?

Thanks,
Amphiaraus

It's not quite that elaborate, but the game system determines the minimum price, the players through observations of the economy and relative worth of goods set their markup (i.e. profit if you buy it).

Also, for the most part, the items on the merchants are not always the best gear a crafter can make, we'll often put things there to adverstise that we craft item x, y or z, but for the best gear, contact a crafter you've seen with gear on the merchants, or better yet, ask around, not all of us put anything for sale on the merchants anymore very often.

The community is such that if someone doesn't know someone that crafts something, they'll often ask around, guildies and the like and find a crafter for you.

Once you become a valued repeat customer, you may even get discounts, or work out deals involving quartered or dug mats for the crafter to expandn their repetoire.

Sadly, I have to say my thoughts about this matter: the economy go badly in this game.

The dapper is a ver devaluated currency. Most of high level people have millions, and don't have where spend it. At high levels, the transactions go in materials, not in dappers.

The side effect of this is that high level mats, i.e., are not at sale in merchants. Same for good crafted items. A lvl 100 player can have the most expensive tattos and hairstile, all the melktoubs he wants (can) and an apartment.

So, I don't know how, but I think that something have to be done by the devs at this point, because is one of the weak spots of this game. And is a pity, because a good economy is the ideal complement for a game with so high harvest/hunting/exploring and political activity.

Does a good economy need to have a strong currency? What makes a barter/trade system worse then it?

ashling wrote:Does a good economy need to have a strong currency?

That question is a Joke, isn't it?

Well, in RL, the question is yes and not. The net value of a currency only matters in comparation with other currencies, basically a inflaction matter. But, AFAIK, when a lvl 100 (That is, much less than a 40% advance in game) can buy almost *anything* but they can't because there isn't market, there is something wrong. And when the practical difference between have 10M dappers and 100M dappers is, basically, the same, there is a problem.

ashling wrote: What makes a barter/trade system worse then it?

A barter system is good, and neccesary. But, in economy there are phases. The barter phase is previous to the coint economy. Much previous. Later come the "bank phase" (All of this very simplified). AFAIK, most of the games are in the coint phase, I didn't know a game with a bank phase implemented. But when a game has the instruments for a coint phase (That is, a currency and a market) and the main economy goes for a barter phase, something is wrong.

There will be *always* a barter market, but the main market must be using currency.

You migth like this, as some people would like a simpler character system (Like other games), and not this, more complex. But I feel that, a game like this, having their basis in a big society in a planet, without missions or instances, all player-driven... needs a strong and good economy, because is the final phase.

I'd love (And sure a lot of people too) that have 10M of dappers could be a real archievement, to be proud of, and not a natural phase in the mid live of all characters.

I know that a economic change could be very hard and difficult to balance, but is sad for me see the merchants empty, with only a few mats and a few (and bad) objects.

mithur wrote:That question is a Joke, isn't it?

Nope I'm afraid not

mithur wrote:A barter system is good, and neccesary. But, in economy there are phases. The barter phase is previous to the coint economy. Much previous. Later come the "bank phase" (All of this very simplified). AFAIK, most of the games are in the coint phase, I didn't know a game with a bank phase implemented. But when a game has the instruments for a coint phase (That is, a currency and a market) and the main economy goes for a barter phase, something is wrong.

Is it though? Is the currency phase really that much better for everyone then a barter system? Is it just better for the rich few that end up rising to the top and having 90% of the wealth?

mithur wrote:You migth like this, as some people would like a simpler character system (Like other games), and not this, more complex. But I feel that, a game like this, having their basis in a big society in a planet, without missions or instances, all player-driven... needs a strong and good economy, because is the final phase.

I like the complex character system here, if I didn't I'd play one of those other games. Your not trying to imply I dislike complexity because I'm unconvinced that a coin and market system is better then a barter and trade system are you?

mithur wrote:I know that a economic change could be very hard and difficult to balance, but is sad for me see the merchants empty, with only a few mats and a few (and bad) objects.

How hard it might be isn't why I question. I question because I honestly don't know if it is better.

Sure the merchants are empty but with the current system you have to go out and find the crafters to make your stuff, you have to talk and deal with them. It is less conveniant then going to the merchant and being able to buy what you want there but it builds more interaction between the community as more direct trading starts going on between hunters and crafters and harvestors all looking to get the items they want or need and not fixating and making the most dappers for their efforts.

For all I know there are a few crafters on Arispotle who could load up merch with wonderful items if only there was a fast and efficient way to do it.
Indeed atm you can put stuff on merch but if you craft Armors or jewels you'll spend more time putting everysingle crafted item on merch than it took to do the actual craft.
In my opinion as long as we wont be able to stack armor or jewels sets in a one only Item merch will stay empty.
Maybe creating a Guild sell interface could also incline people to sell more to players than to NPCs even while grinding.
So perhaps before we start changing Atys's economy we could think of a few ways to actually create business among players other than 'place an order onto a crafter friend'.

ashling wrote:What makes a barter/trade system worse then it?

(In veery simple terms) In theory, precisely, the currency appears to overcome the limitations of the barter/trade system, as a "universal" compensation means in either side of the trade. In other words, the trade system is limited by the traders "needs". Quoting wikipeds: "The use of money provides an alternative to barter, which is considered in a modern, complex economy to be inefficient because it requires a coincidence of wants between traders, and an agreement that these needs are of equal value, before a transaction can occur. The efficiency gains through the use of money are thought to encourage trade and the division of labour, in turn increasing productivity and wealth."

Ex: If I make boots and I need a sword, the sword crafter may not need my boots, or we do not agree on how many boots I should craft to get that living sword. Of course, I can always ask the sword crafter what he needs (e.g. pants) and try to find someone who crafts pants and needs boots, but the process is... let's say not as efficient as if I am able to give the sword maker something which we are confident he'll be able to use to get what he needs. For this, everyone involved needs to agree on the universal meaning of the currency and its value. Of course, this may not be a "bad thing" since as you state, it favors MMRPG player interaction, but the drawback is that you may not be able to satisfy your needs: I want a supreme PvP jewel set, no matter what I try, I can't get it. In a perfect world, one should be able to buy it with dappers, whatever it's price would be w.r.t. its value.

Economy has been an interesting aspect of the game for me (there have been interesting posts about it months ago, discussing the roots of the problem such as lack of money sinks, lack of "luxury items", unlimited resources, lack of decreasing demand from merchants, etc. but I can't dig them at the mo) and I agree it needs a serious revamp, but it is complicated.

iphdrunk wrote:(In veery simple terms) In theory, precisely, the currency appears to overcome the limitations of the barter/trade system, as a "universal" compensation means in either side of the trade. In other words, the trade system is limited by the traders "needs". Quoting wikipeds: "The use of money provides an alternative to barter, which is considered in a modern, complex economy to be inefficient because it requires a coincidence of wants between traders, and an agreement that these needs are of equal value, before a transaction can occur. The efficiency gains through the use of money are thought to encourage trade and the division of labour, in turn increasing productivity and wealth."

Ex: If I make boots and I need a sword, the sword crafter may not need my boots, or we do not agree on how many boots I should craft to get that living sword. Of course, I can always ask the sword crafter what he needs (e.g. pants) and try to find someone who crafts pants and needs boots, but the process is... let's say not as efficient as if I am able to give the sword maker something which we are confident he'll be able to use to get what he needs. For this, everyone involved needs to agree on the universal meaning of the currency and its value. Of course, this may not be a "bad thing" since as you state, it favors MMRPG player interaction, but the drawback is that you may not be able to satisfy your needs: I want a supreme PvP jewel set, no matter what I try, I can't get it. In a perfect world, one should be able to buy it with dappers, whatever it's price would be w.r.t. its value.

Economy has been an interesting aspect of the game for me (there have been interesting posts about it months ago, discussing the roots of the problem such as lack of money sinks, lack of "luxury items", unlimited resources, lack of decreasing demand from merchants, etc. but I can't dig them at the mo) and I agree it needs a serious revamp, but it is complicated.

I had a thought on how to bring a variable value to dappers, and create a "money sink", its not a new thought though i've seen it mentioned many times before: have the merchants sell q150, q200, and q250 mats like they do with q50 and 100, but have the price change with the amount of volume being bought. simple supply and demand, when people are buying up mats instead of harvesting them the price would go through the roof for them, so at that point the dapper has value again and we have a benchmark for the value of a mat that we dig. some days a q250 basic mat might cost 6000 dappers...all the rich crafters flock to the bargain, but by the end of the day the market has pushed the price to 11,000, making it too costly and forcing them back out into the fields to dig. after a while things will balance out. crafters will start selling items on the merchant for more dappers to buy grind mats with, and harvesters may start selling mats at just under market value

bgraz wrote:I had a thought on how to bring a variable value to dappers, and create a "money sink", its not a new thought though i've seen it mentioned many times before: have the merchants sell q150, q200, and q250 mats like they do with q50 and 100, but have the price change with the amount of volume being bought. simple supply and demand, when people are buying up mats instead of harvesting them the price would go through the roof for them, so at that point the dapper has value again and we have a benchmark for the value of a mat that we dig. some days a q250 basic mat might cost 6000 dappers...all the rich crafters flock to the bargain, but by the end of the day the market has pushed the price to 11,000, making it too costly and forcing them back out into the fields to dig. after a while things will balance out. crafters will start selling items on the merchant for more dappers to buy grind mats with, and harvesters may start selling mats at just under market value

Yeah, but for that working, the 6000 or 11000 dappers has to have some value (And now it hasn't any value). Then, that price changes will come alone (I'll see my wages, and I see that there are a lot of (i.e.) shaft >q150 at 3000 piece. So I put mine at 2800. But if I see that there aren't cheap shaft, I put mine at 6000. and, once (or more) at day, I return to a hawker or vendor to recheck and change (if neccesary) the price.

But the system fails because there aren't a real value for dappers. Yes, there are needed more money leaks.

I think that the first leak must be the trainers: at low level each 10 xp vuy from them, must cost at least 1.000-10.000 dps. At high leves much, much more (Even 1M Each 10 xp at 240-250). And when you get a title, you'll need go to the Royal Office (i.e.) to confirm it and can use it, being some titles more costly than anothers.

And, BTW, the equipment must have less live, IMHO. Usually you overgrown the low level equipment before it breaks (Except the picks for harvest).

And the melktoub food must cost at least four times. That could make that a low-mid level char like mine (100/50/120/130) can't have two packers and a mount (Or only if the character *really* work for it). I think it's excessive.

And luxury items, that the PC could show everywhere. Some PCs could take the wealth as an objective, and that could be good fo economy. But for that, some external signs of wealth are needed.

And so on...