One thing I hope never happens again is the economic "system" (if you wish to call it that) in EverCra... er Quest .

What is so bad about this system, you say? Well, the whole economy seems to be based off selling animal body parts -- most of which don''t seem to have any use. What the heck is anybody going to do with rat ears? And why do the merchants pay endless amounts of cash for it?! I''m sure that some of the items have a bit of use, but the game certainly doesn''t give you any sort of hint as to what.

Of course, you can also make money off quests. But they certainly don''t seem to be easy to find, and the one NPC I did find with a quest told me that he wanted me to find some.. you guessed it! Animal parts! Yay!

--TheGoop

The economy of an RPG is a funny thing. It is one of those things in the game that a player has more control over than one would like. I like to think that the economy of a game is a function of what makes our economy tick. Money. How much of it there is in the realm will tell you what is happening to your economy. Take the everquest example. Five months ago I started playing on a server that just came up. People were still low level and a couple of popular items for use in a quest were going for 3gp each.(CB Belts if you are curious) Today there are many people on game and the same belts go for 1pp or 10gp. This is a direct function of free market economics where supply and demand work to set a price. The amount of money in the economy of the game allows players to buy or pay more for items, so the seller increases the price. If money were to become more scarce over time then the price would fluctuate normally along with the demand's ability to pay a given price.

Unfortunately in Everquest money is an unending supply. It is this way in all role playing games. Kill a monster get money. A good statistic for measuringthe economy is the availability of money in the economy. Too much money and you get inflation. Too little money and you get depression as people can't afford to live. Too much money and items like houses that were unatainable for a given level player, become atainable much more easily. Typically, there is no way for a player to lose the money they earned in anyway. This ammassed fortune causes inflation, screws up the economy, and makes the game more difficult for a newbie over time.

I have not worked out the solution, but I am getting a better grasp at what the problem is every day.

Oh also consider this. In most games, the player based economy is very dynamic, while the NPC based economy is static and unchanging. This is a serious dynamic that can either extinguish the use of shopkeepers in your game or make them the only option. When a player based economy gives less for an item than the NPC one, player will shun interplayer exchange in favor of NPC better rates. The opposite also holds true. I dare not say this but taking a lesson from our own governments, Taxes might be an answer to moderating your economy. They certainly are used that way in the US.

Kressilac


Edited by - kressilac on June 11, 2000 1:14:47 AM

Hey, Niphty, what''s the difference between a cliche and a timeless archetypal theme?

Delivery.

The Tyrant is an image that will never lose it''s importance so long as we still live in a world with tyrants. It about money, really. Yeah, you could play it out in a really crappy way; but you might also do it in a very intersting way. Just so long as you take nothing for granted!

As for the whole magic item thing, my stance is this. Every magic item should be extremely rare and exceptionally powerful. They would not readily find their way into the hands of insuitable characters, because they would be very carefully looked after, and dangerous to possess. So if some schmuck literally stumbled upon one, let him have it, and all the consequences that come with the power it holds... like people trying to kill him to take it! Players, I mean!

"With great power comes great responsibility..." =)

Quick point: you realise how many people have already tried to implement some sort of in-game economy? You realise they all failed, to a lesser or greater extent? There are ''real'' economists looking into how this all works in online games, and there are no easy answers because the world is so much different compared to real life. And some of those differences are necessary to make it a ''game''.

Example 1: If you kept the amount of wealth in the game equal, as more players joined, everyone would get poorer. This would discourage players and lead to people leaving. If you let the amount of wealth grow, the gap between richer, older players and the poor new players will also grow. In case you hadn''t noticed, this is a problem in the real world economy too, and no-one thinks it''s particularly fun here.

Example 2: In a game, money is nearly all for luxury items, allowing the player to choose what is fun for them. Whereas in real life, money is nearly all for essentials. Shift this balance in-game, and you are removing the player''s choice and thus limiting their fun. They play your game to do something fun, whereas they work in real life to pay the bills. Few people want to spend their leisure time paying the bills too...

Example 3: If a rich character doesn''t play the game for a month, how is the economy affected by the loss of their money? What if that player never logs on again? At which point can you ''reclaim'' that wealth and add it back into the system? What about gold hoarded in the bank? How does the system handle ''lost'' money, and how are prices affected when that lost money is suddenly poured into the system again?

Example 4: If you make the players have some sort of occupation in offline time, are you not perhaps punishing those who sit on your game for 12 hrs each day just talking? What about someone who creates a character, logs them off, and logs them back on 12 months later, drops the annual gold earnings, and logs their ''real'' character on to collect that cash?

Example 5: If you have some sort of ongoing costs while you are offline, like ''rent'' on some MUDs, is that not punishing the casual player who can''t afford to play much?

Example 6: How do you handle natural resources? Do you make them limited, so that you could run out of ore or gems? This would prevent the amount of money in the system spiralling upwards. But would piss off Mr. Miner who just joined your game hoping to play an ore miner, but who found out the mines were all mined out months ago The alternative is to make the mines continually produce ore, but then you have infinite money, which means technically infinite wealth.


Now, I''m not saying the general systems we see can''t be improved. Just that a lot of people think setting up a realistic economy is easy. If it was that easy, economists might even agree how economics works in the real world, but they can''t even do that much.

Kylotan, Kylotan.. what to do with you?

Ok, let''s go in your order.
The quick point is dually noted. I realize how many people have attempted to make an in-game economy, but they failed. I''m willing to take my shot ;p

1: I''m sorry i failed to describe this out.. i meant a level of money based on several factors. First of all, is the number of characters in game. The money supply would grow, but it would stay within reasons. The system i was speaking of was closed, meaning no entry or exits. It was just to illustrate the point. The money supply would, of course, have to grow.. but it would grow slowly so that as more people arrived, the overall level of money did fall per person. This would result in helping to curb rich older players and poor younger ones, although the separation would always grow. I''m looking at ways to stop that, perhaps a higher tax on really rich people?

2:Never did i want the player to have to pay for things that aren''t a luxury. Taxes are merely a part of the world system, and nessicary. The player would have to pay the taxes willingly, or risk being hunted down by the IRS squad And like i said above, different tax brackets depending on ammount of money.

3:Games are paying games for the most part. A character which has a suspended account inactive for three months would have the money reclaimed back into the system. This way, if they pay for the character to be there, it''s there. However.. if they fail to pay for the character, they don''t have access.. so it''s nothing to worry over Three months is the minimum safe time for the character to be considered as not returning. Gold horded in a bank cannot be accounted for. If the person wishes to horde gold, let them. But they should also know that taxes on them will increase until it''s futile to hold the gold Lost money is not "poured" into the system. It''s dribbled. Never should you dump over a certain ammount in the system at a time. Instead, the ammount of money dumped per day will increase over a short time to make up the loss.

4:I disagree with the whole offline occupation thing. To me it''s not very realistic in most situations. I believe it could be implimented well, but i don''t see how it fits in to a ROLE PLAYING GAME, since half the time you''d not be playing the role of the character. This to me seems to negate the RPG purpose.

5:Ongoing costs like taxes or rent are understandable. If a high-level character leaves the game for a long time, they can submit a form asking for their account to be suspended for three months or whatever while they''re away. During this time they would suffer no taxes on wealth, etc. If the account is suspended due to failed payments.. then the account will still suffer losses until a period of three months has passed, at which time the character will be put into a suspended state like mentioned above as well as having their money dumped back into the system. This works well because it takes their money and dumps it back in all the while.

6:Natural resources are limited. But the limit will never be reached. The game will progress many years.. but think about the ammount of time the earth has been being mined. We still have resources. Prices go up slowly over time because we realize the resource might one day run out. This will not affect things overall. There will be a push by younger miners to get into mines close to town. This will crowd out older miners who can adventure further. This way you keep them moving. I will also support some form of mining guild in this way. The guild will regulate the mining of things. That way players can check the guild to see if they are in need of miners to work. But, most miners were poor people who didn''t get much done in a lifetime. Therefore, the whole mining bit is a bit odd. Do you allow characters like this? Should you limit the number to keep money among miners well enough for them to live comfortably? If you ask me.. people back then mined on someone else''s property. This meant someone hired them to do it. This would be great to keep too many miners from forming up. The guild regulates the number of members to keep the iron ore at a good level to keep the prices right (see OPEC.. hehehe). It all trickles down. You do have to limit people though. If you really want to be a miner, well.. go out and try to mine on your own, but i doubt you''ll get far. Make friends in the business and work your way in That''s roleplaying! whee!

J
p.s. let''s all agree to disagree?

Look up John Meynard Keynes,
everything you should ever need to know about economics (also in respect to war) -> "The economic consequences of peace" (i guess that´s what it was called).

quote: Original post by Niphty

First of all, is the number of characters in game. The money supply would grow, but it would stay within reasons.
...
The money supply would, of course, have to grow.. but it would grow slowly so that as more people arrived, the overall level of money did fall per person. This would result in helping to curb rich older players and poor younger ones, although the separation would always grow. I''m looking at ways to stop that, perhaps a higher tax on really rich people?

Richer players will just hoard their wealth, meaning the game gets progressively harder and harder for new players.

quote:
2:Never did i want the player to have to pay for things that aren''t a luxury.

I wasn''t necessarily referring to your system, by the way: just to the futility of trying to simulate a full economy in a game. (And, more to the point, trying to simulate a 20th century economy based on numerous social issues, international trade agreements, and moral values that are simply not present in games.)

quote: Taxes are merely a part of the world system, and nessicary. The player would have to pay the taxes willingly, or risk being hunted down by the IRS squad And like i said above, different tax brackets depending on ammount of money.

You just contradicted yourself. Are you saying taxes are a luxury? Or that you don''t actually have to pay them

Remember, technically the government could just raise taxes and pay for our food and accommodation itself. What we would have left is disposable income. Any kind of taxation system, whether explicit taxes, or implicit accommodation/sustenance costs, is eating into the ''disposable income'' and reducing the player''s feeling of control over their character.

quote: 3:Games are paying games for the most part.

There are about 2000 non-paying MUDs on the internet, and barely 10 paying MMORPGs. But I digress...

quote: A character which has a suspended account inactive for three months would have the money reclaimed back into the system. This way, if they pay for the character to be there, it''s there. However.. if they fail to pay for the character, they don''t have access.. so it''s nothing to worry over

What if they''re paying for access but not playing? Do youstill take their money away? Or what if they''re playing a little, but not enough for anyone to notice, and therefore their money is ''lost'' from the economy? (ie. someone who just comes on to chat.) If you balance your economy based on how many people you have in the game, it''s always going to be skewed by those who have money yet don''t spend it somehow.

quote:
6:Natural resources are limited. But the limit will never be reached.

You do like these contradictions, don''t you!

If the resources are effectively unlimited, then they are infinite. Otherwise they are finite. If the world will never run out, it counts as infinite for 99% of purposes, including economical ones.

quote: but think about the ammount of time the earth has been being mined. We still have resources. Prices go up slowly over time because we realize the resource might one day run out.

Only when we know these resources are limited or hard to come by. Value is a function of rarity and effort required. If a resource is getting more and more easily procured (more and more players are acquiring the relevant skills, and more of these items are therefore ending up in player hands) then the perceived value will drop. You need to enforce some sort of rationing yourself if you want value to rise.

quote:
(snip long mining stuff)
If you really want to be a miner, well.. go out and try to mine on your own, but i doubt you''ll get far. Make friends in the business and work your way in That''s roleplaying! whee!

That''s annoying for the person who has no friends and finds it hard to get into the game. Remember, if your game says they can mine ore, some players will want to mine ore! Not be turned away because the quota of miners is already allocated. In real life, their wish would be considered unreasonable, but in a game people want to get their own way, because the game is entertainment.

quote: p.s. let''s all agree to disagree?

That''s not the point of the forums, is it?

Semi-radical idea alert: I think the best economy would be one with -no- currency. Let players barter for their goods. You -automatically- force them to place their own values on items, instead of trying to give objects some artificial numerical value to be expressed in a number of coins. Therefore, supply and demand rules will apply directly. All you then have to do is ensure that newbies can always get the items they need to play the game effectively, and the player-run economy will fluctuate and balance itself.

I''m not sure how well you could integrate NPC merchants into all this, but if you needed to, you could simply set them up to trade things on a one-to-one basis, with no regard to value. Load them up with 10 random items, and allow players to swap with them. If you balance your system well so that an item that is useless to one person is a useful item for the next person, the items available will change quite nicely.

Kylotan, i love you ;p you''re such a charming bastard, yet a nice guy, too

Ok.. you want my opinion.. no money would suck, the players are there because they want to have fun. and yes, taxes suck. But, it''s a real world.. a real place, and a real system. If the monetary system is taken out, you lose a lot of options (NPC shops as you noted). So perhaps you just let the players deal with reality of it. You explain the taxes are to keep the money in the system from becoming outragously undervalued Since the coin would be what is used, the coin would be made by some form of mint. That mint would be run by the lord of the realm. The money itself might be made of gold or something else. Not like our money now, paper with gold backing it. So, what do you say about that? Since the coin itself IS worth something, and there is a limited supply of it, it could work out, as long as you keep redistributing the wealth to lower people. it''s in our nature to horde limited things. So perhaps taking it away is best? who knows? it''s just a try and see kinda thing
And MUD''s.. aren''t exactly the kinda game i was speaking of. MOO isn''t my favorite language I mean a real game, not a game based off several other people''s design with other ideas implimented.

J

quote:
Only when we know these resources are limited or hard to come by. Value is a function of rarity and effort required. If a resource is getting more and more easily procured (more and more players are acquiring the relevant skills, and more of these items are therefore ending up in player hands) then the perceived value will drop. You need to enforce some sort of rationing yourself if you want value to rise.

This is object inflation. In the real world, your equipment does not play nearly as important of a role in your survival and prosperity. Since equipment is inherrently more intertwined with power in a MMORPG, one could say that as the value of that equipment drops it becomes easier to obtain. In obtaining better equipment, it becomes easier to attain more money at a faster rate.(killing more advanced monsters...) Now that the money is coming in faster, it only stands to reason that additional seemingly rare pieces of equipment will become more common as their values drop. The cycle is pretty viscious and as I said in the other thread, it can ruin a world.

What to do about it is something of a large dilemma. Kylotan, you mentioned that high level players hoard their money. This is far from the truth. As soon as a player reaches a point where they can have everything in the world at anytime, I would venture to say that more of them give away money than retain it in a hoard. If they do not give away money then they give away equipment or spells or other things that make lower people more powerful. Asheron''s Call built a feudal system around this to facilitate it and it is quite sucessful. EverQuest has players in guilds that regularly contribute to the lower levels. Hell most guides on how to play a cleric tell you to heal others at a whim. I therefore disagree with your statement that the increase in money finds its way into the hands of the rich and stops there.

Now to offer a solution from a content standpoint. What if you were to offer so many options to the player that they never had enough money to get everything they want. How about offering the ability to gain clerical spells from an NPC, mail services to send notes and send email to the internet, scribing costs, spell component costs, pet costs, item repair costs, etc, etc. It could be balanced in such a way that these costs increase as you gain in levels providing you with more to spend than you can earn. If it is on a usage basis, then the person who plays little or plays alot gets affected the same way. What do you think? You could even tie these services in with the index Niphty mentioned to increase their value or worth as the economy increased.(Stamps go up from time to time)

Kressilac

Kressilac, again you bring out some good points here even things i hadn''t yet thought about.

You also sparked a thought or two about the items that i hadn''t thought about in a while. Object inflation is very real. It''s also very easy to stop. More expensive items are more expensive to care for. This is pretty obivous in cars.. if you don''t believe me, try it The reason is simply.. parts for a rare or uncommon car are more expensive because of less demand for said parts. Therefore, to fix a rare metallic sword is gonna be expensive. Common iron swords might not be worth fixing, and should be sold back for a few pennies and a new one bought. The old one will be recycled hehe. This keeps the prices of these common items relatively low. Now, say you''ve got some special armor, and every attempt to fix it has failed. This means the armor will eventually get so banged up that only a gnome could wear it. At this point, the player sells the armor to the armorer, who can keep it to try and fix at a later time.. or melt is down and use the metal to fix other suits like it. Repairs are expensive!!! This is because of the time that is needed to repair something. Again.. cars are a major equivilent here. The time it takes to assemble a car affects the price. However, repairs require something the be disassembled, fixed, and reassembled. Three steps. Ring mail armor.. several rings linked together. If you get stabbed or ran through.. some rings will be broken. In order to get this fixed, the person must remove the old rings and reinsert new ones. This is a time-intensive task. perhaps the old rings can be reused? this means the value of the repair is less. If the old rings can''t be reused on this suit, but can be reused by metling down and used elsewhere.. then the repairer has gained a small ammount of value off the item to be repaired. All of this changes the cost of the repair job. For instance.. most major car parts (starter motor, alternator) have what is called a "core charge" applied to them. This is money which the people charge you unless you bring them the old piece. Since the old piece can be rebuilt, they knock off 20 bucks from the price. This is far less than the actual price of the piece, but the sheer fact that it takes a long time to repair said piece is the reason it''s only worth 20 bucks to them. This means they don''t have to spend time making new ones with factory machines, as rebuilt ones are just as good in this case. This does make a difference in price, though. The shopkeepers should be aware of this.. hehe However, you will have to set formulas to do things like that, and it gets complex.
With rare items hard to fix, more of them will break and be lost. Those that''re sold and are unable to be repaired will be melted down when the time comes to fix a sword like it. But only the guy who bought the sword will be able to repair it. So.. you should keep up with a list of items in the shop, both those publically avalible, and those under-the-counter things hehe. That could make for interesting plot stuff later on

In short.. make sure rare items will stay rare. You should have a reason why they''re rare. If only a few exist.. then keep it that way. A creature with a more powerful weapon will only be able to produce so many of them. And often as they run short on supplies, the weapons get lousy. They become more brittle and are often of lower quality than the ones that were made when supply was high. This is a very real factor to life and economy. Just keep these things in mind.
And, kressilac.. if you''ve got more specific stuff you''d like thoughts on, feel free to ask. You can even email me if you like, as it might be a bit easier way to bounce ideas around without skeptics hehe.

J