Economy Q&A with Hermann Peterscheck

[Tikigod]

This thread is to discuss the Q&A that was set up between Hermann and JGERadio to answer a range of economy questions from the community.

Announcement: Here

Q&A: Here

[Merc]

Thanks for the links Tikigod. There were some very well thought out questions in that interview.

I have been a strong proponent of the "there must be item loss to make a thriving economy". I am beginning to see where they are trying to go with their current idea of no item loss and everyone wanting the next best thing.

1. Having production facilities that only produce a certain item (same item can't be produce at many different locations through the universe).
2. Higher level items requiring significantly more raw materials than lower level items.
3. The continued need (in more significant quantities) for even the lowest level raw materials in the highest level items.
4. Having the manufacturing facilities for higher level items being long distances from where the materials are mined.
5. Items being created by players will be better than the basic items purchased from NPC vendors.
6. Being able to sell raw materials to stations for their upkeep and for faction incentives (this is a form of item/raw material loss provided that you can not purchase raw materials from stations or NPC).

My concerns still are:

1. That people will get to a certain level and get comfortable with a certain ship loadout. Hopefully there will be enough varieties of items that tweaking a ships loadout will take a lot of thought through trial and error.

2. That through the continued introduction of the next best item new people joining the game will be in a vast hole that might they might not be able to get out of before they get sick of being blow to pieces by the long term vets. (don't get me wrong i don't want the new guy to be on par with someone playing the game for a year; however, the continued survival of the game will require a new influx of players throughout its course). This will be a trick balancing act for the devs.

This was a very informative Q&A and look for to similar ones on other topics especially the death penalty, piracy and ins and outs of advancement.

Well i'll comment more later.

[Scalding]

Hermann,

Here's the thing, the real sticking point: In the real world, there are few producers and many consumers. In the real world, if I want to produce something and sell it, I can look at the market and determine that it is saturated and produce something else.

In the game world these things are exactly reversed: There are a similar number of producers and consumers, and the producers cannot choose to build something else, because there's a limited list of items.

Here's what happens:

Initially, there's a rush for people to increase their ability to producer higher level items. (Using the word level here may not be correct, but should give the proper idea.) These people either harvest or buy the resources, and spam the items. From this point onward it will always be more profitable to sell ore than to sell products, because the products already exist and everyone who wants one has them or can build them from the ore. In addition, ore is versatile in that it can be used to create many different things, but once a thing has been created that versatility is gone.

This produces an enormous barrier to entry for those that come after the first wave of producers. For those people have to compete in a market where the ore is rare and products are plentiful; the market is inverted and new producers cannot profit.

[Sykosys000]

If Hermann really believes that sort of economy will work in a player driven world than to be honest there is no point even discussing the economy as it will fail as there will not be demand as all ND will do is continually saturate the market with newer stuff.

This does not promote a player driven economy. Its lazy and promotes nothing of value if ND really want a rich player driven economy.

New players wont suffer, if anything there will be absolutly NO incentive to sell new players items as they can constantly get them from higher leveled players who are done with their item.

I cant wait to find out who Hermann is in game and kill him like crazy. Its the only retribution I will get to his articles which are at this point so unbelievable.

[Dantos]

Originally Posted by Merc

Thanks for the links Tikigod. There were some very well thought out questions in that interview.

I have been a strong proponent of the "there must be item loss to make a thriving economy". I am beginning to see where they are trying to go with their current idea of no item loss and everyone wanting the next best thing.

1. Having production facilities that only produce a certain item (same item can't be produce at many different locations through the universe).
2. Higher level items requiring significantly more raw materials than lower level items.
3. The continued need (in more significant quantities) for even the lowest level raw materials in the highest level items.
4. Having the manufacturing facilities for higher level items being long distances from where the materials are mined.
5. Items being created by players will be better than the basic items purchased from NPC vendors.
6. Being able to sell raw materials to stations for their upkeep and for faction incentives (this is a form of item/raw material loss provided that you can not purchase raw materials from stations or NPC).

My concerns still are:

1. That people will get to a certain level and get comfortable with a certain ship loadout. Hopefully there will be enough varieties of items that tweaking a ships loadout will take a lot of thought through trial and error.

2. That through the continued introduction of the next best item new people joining the game will be in a vast hole that might they might not be able to get out of before they get sick of being blow to pieces by the long term vets. (don't get me wrong i don't want the new guy to be on par with someone playing the game for a year; however, the continued survival of the game will require a new influx of players throughout its course). This will be a trick balancing act for the devs.

This was a very informative Q&A and look for to similar ones on other topics especially the death penalty, piracy and ins and outs of advancement.

Well i'll comment more later.

# 2 is a big concern of mine as well. I like WoW and all, but i HATE having to slog though tons of content that doesnt matter to actually get to the point (the current level range 60-70, 70-80 ect) to start doing things that matter. I just forsee, as you said, new players being forced into a giant hole and having to climb out to be able to compete in one of the main, if not THE main focus of the game. WoW can get away from it because its mainly a pve game, with pvp tacked on, here where pvp is a main feature, im not sure how it will work.

Shadowbane had a similar problem, you have to trudge through tons of pointless mob camping to level, to get to what the game was about, the pvp!

Heard good things, and bad things.
One this sounds sort of what could turn into a gear grind... (it all depends on how much more powerful the next item is) Do I really want to strive days/weeks to save up for an extra 2-5% damage/shields? Or am I good now?
Was good to hear that mining/trucking/items need to be moved around, and that basic raw materials will always be needed.


However as the interviewer stated the initial rush of goods will throw things off balance **** to get rich quick a person would just need to be a miner in the beginning as everyone is going to need said xyz materials. Why even get into production to make money if the market is flooded, and you can't move anything? Just be a miner.

I suppose you could assume if everyone is mining that there would be less demand for ore thus driving the price down. However if there is an influx of both miners, and producers neither will move items, and things will become stagnant.

Have to wait, and see how this gear "need" economy goes. I'm some games getting newer gear can be fun: DAOC it was fun because there was a custom crafting system. Or the reason to get new gear was aesthetics. Hopefully there will be something similar in JGE, I don't want a WOW where everyone looks the same, and you know what the best item is until a newer dungeon is introduced.
God I hate PVE raiding for the most part. Especially when it becomes nesasary to compete in pvp.

[Jaydo]

These are one of the few things in life that is so stupid that it hurts.

[Heli0s]

Originally Posted by Jaydo

These are one of the few things in life that is so stupid that it hurts.

I agree.

That interview is fail, and I am sorry because once beta hits the code monkeys will have to get back to work making an economy that doesn't blow Blizzards male organ.

"The whole concept of modern economics is based on people getting the next better thing, even if they don’t actually need it."

No.

"Again I would look at real world economies."

Who's? Why don't you get someone from the University of Chicago Economics or somewhere to tell you how bad your system fails, and then to draft an alternative? Does anyone with even a six year olds grasp of supply and demand work at ND?

"I agree that if you have a flood of people, you will get a glut of raw materials. This will, in turn, drive the price down and then cause people to look for alternate materials to trade in which then reduced to amount of raw materials, driving the price back up."

I cannot understand this sentence. You apparently agree with us, and then midway through your second sentance say, "Just kidding ***holes, you're wrong"

"Another thing to keep in mind is that we can control the rate at which raw materials enter the game, regardless of the number of players."

So the real world economies that you're basing JGE's economy off of have a magical overlord god that controls the number of materials entering the game? Wait..what? How is that remotely player controlled?

"Finally, remember that not all players are playing on one server, so we can make sure that the availability of raw materials per shard is reasonable so as not to destroy the economy."

Jesus. You realize that just because there are less people doesn't mean the problem is fixed right? If I say, whoever runs the fastest to the 40 yard line their economy dies, and me and you get in a race, just because I beat you to the line, doesn't mean your economy doesn't blow the **** up a few seconds later then mine. We both lost in the long run.

It's a temporary fix, and a ****ty one at that.

Stop make excuses. Your economy model sucks, so fix it.

While I can be shrugged off as 'He's never played' or 'He doesn't know the whole story', I cannot help but looking at a problem when I see one. If I see a man with an axe buried in his chest, i'm not going to stick a fracking bandaid on his forehead and tell him he's fine. I'm going to send his unlucky personage to the hospital because "I think something may be wrong"

[Edion]

Usually I'm just a yelling idiot on these forums, but here's an unusually serious response:

Isn't it just a little presumptuous to assume an economy will eat dirt simply based on the one fact we know, which is that you don't loose things when you die?

For all we know, there are a BA-JILLION crafting trees and no one could ever make everything they wanted for a ship without 5-boxing for months straight! And we know everything has a space in the world, maybe you'll want to have a fleet of decked out ships in every significant station to save time on trucking. Hermann also inferred a treadmill (of sorts), aren't all us MMO players *****s for that one more stat?

On top of all this, there's the towering fact that this game is about murdering dudes in space! if you wanta game that revolvs around the economy, go play the stock market.

Actual, there is a loose system that you aren't seeing. You own a station that makes the blasters with a green trail (1 hp damage and 16 rounds per second) The Octavians want that, so they come over and claim that piece of space with with green trailed blaster manufacturing facility. ow, if that is the ONLY green trailed blaster manufacturing facility, you might have them on your ship, but I doubt that everyone that wants the green trailed blaster will be able to get one. But, the Octavians have the station, so either you have inflation, or you have a public outcry to retake the green trailed blaster station. You could say the same idea for ore fields to a degree, an any of the higher level weapons.

Also, I agree with Edion. You could need to have 10 alt characters just to know how big the tech tree really is, although I would suspect there is at least 3 tech trees (ships, shields, weapons) that may branch from there, like weapons branching into lasers, projectiles, missiles, and (maybe) mines/bombs. Then each one of those splits, like missiles splitting into anti-fighter or torpedoes. Keep this up and you need a lot of crafters to saturate every inch of the market, and by then, new players will come.