Please regulate the economy

"

Aranéïde#3664 wrote:

That is just not true, player are not arbitring anything, players are acting as they should in a free economy : they act the way they success at making the most wealth for themselves. They are selfish agents and that's why none of them should have the amount of power some of them actually have. The notion of arbitrage is relying on the idea of an objective for balance which is the objective of absolutely no player. No one should play "the arbitrage game" but the game devs crafting the experience.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. What I meant by arbitrage is the activity of players playing with currency pairs to ensure that all prices are as efficient as they can. Of course they are doing it for their own interest. If we would go for exchange rates that are mandated, fixed and set in very low frequency by the game developers, ceteris paribus, you would end with useless currency and useful currency.
There are issues with the economy but free exchange is not one of them.

"

AliquamGames#5952 wrote:

"

Aranéïde#3664 wrote:

That is just not true, player are not arbitring anything, players are acting as they should in a free economy : they act the way they success at making the most wealth for themselves. They are selfish agents and that's why none of them should have the amount of power some of them actually have. The notion of arbitrage is relying on the idea of an objective for balance which is the objective of absolutely no player. No one should play "the arbitrage game" but the game devs crafting the experience.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. What I meant by arbitrage is the activity of players playing with currency pairs to ensure that all prices are as efficient as they can. Of course they are doing it for their own interest. If we would go for exchange rates that are mandated, fixed and set in very low frequency by the game developers, ceteris paribus, you would end with useless currency and useful currency.
There are issues with the economy but free exchange is not one of them.

Fair enough, but I would like to highlight that I never mentionned fixed rates anywhere I believe. What I want is solutions to limit how much a single person can amass relative to another person. I want regulations to ensure a better wealth distribution overall. I don't know what is the best way to ensure this, the only thing I know is that the absence of any regulation is definitively not it as the problems that are there are the exact same problems that where there in the free economy of POE 1 10 years ago. So instead of just perpetuating something that is broken, I would love if they took the opportunity of the release of a new opus to actually try to fix these issues that have been plaguing their game for so long. For me it's a big black spot on an overall great game otherwise, and I think that is a shame.

I want to make playing the economy game much less profitable and make palying the game much more profitable.

Player driven economy that resets every 3 months is fine(imo). Probably better than some static regulated implementation.

The problem is botting and duping or other exploits. Which they hopefully resolve in EA.


But what about players who want no part in the "economy" and just want to play the actual game? SSF. Except SSF is still balanced around trading. Hopefully they also address this at some point.

"

Aranéïde#3664 wrote:

"

AliquamGames#5952 wrote:

"

Aranéïde#3664 wrote:

That is just not true, player are not arbitring anything, players are acting as they should in a free economy : they act the way they success at making the most wealth for themselves. They are selfish agents and that's why none of them should have the amount of power some of them actually have. The notion of arbitrage is relying on the idea of an objective for balance which is the objective of absolutely no player. No one should play "the arbitrage game" but the game devs crafting the experience.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. What I meant by arbitrage is the activity of players playing with currency pairs to ensure that all prices are as efficient as they can. Of course they are doing it for their own interest. If we would go for exchange rates that are mandated, fixed and set in very low frequency by the game developers, ceteris paribus, you would end with useless currency and useful currency.
There are issues with the economy but free exchange is not one of them.

Fair enough, but I would like to highlight that I never mentionned fixed rates anywhere I believe. What I want is solutions to limit how much a single person can amass relative to another person. I want regulations to ensure a better wealth distribution overall. I don't know what is the best way to ensure this, the only thing I know is that the absence of any regulation is definitively not it as the problems that are there are the exact same problems that where there in the free economy of POE 1 10 years ago. So instead of just perpetuating something that is broken, I would love if they took the opportunity of the release of a new opus to actually try to fix these issues that have been plaguing their game for so long. For me it's a big black spot on an overall great game otherwise, and I think that is a shame.

Regulating max wealth posessable by single actor is a huge Pandora's Box. What if this blasted capitalist just makes an array of accounts to fill each other up to the cap but utilises all of their wealths in unison to manipulate the market? What about a legitimate non-capitalist player who reaches the cap? You would be creating far more issues.
And why do you think wealth disparity is an issue? Without difference there is no wealth nor achievement, there is participation reward.

"

FruitLord#0833 wrote:

Player driven economy that resets every 3 months is fine(imo). Probably better than some static regulated implementation.

The problem is botting and duping or other exploits. Which they hopefully resolve in EA.


But what about players who want no part in the "economy" and just want to play the actual game? SSF. Except SSF is still balanced around trading. Hopefully they also address this at some point.

I concur on your point on SSF. I was already advodcating for a proper balanced SSF experience 10 years ago (and I would likely play only this if it would exist).

"

AliquamGames#5952 wrote:

Regulating max wealth posessable by single actor is a huge Pandora's Box. What if this blasted capitalist just makes an array of accounts to fill each other up to the cap but utilises all of their wealths in unison to manipulate the market? What about a legitimate non-capitalist player who reaches the cap? You would be creating far more issues.
And why do you think wealth disparity is an issue? Without difference there is no wealth nor achievement, there is participation reward.

Well right now they can manipulate the market from a single account. Does it make it better ? I don't feel so. Sure it's a huge pandora box, but what better experimentation place than a resetable economy in a video game ? Let's try something, if it doesn't work then let's try something else next time. Until we find something that works.

Participation reward for sure, but that reward should more or less similar for everyone given the time they invest in the game. It's absolutely not. Far, far from it. And there is also what kind of participation you want to reward. Reward engaging with the game mechanics ? Sure. I'm all for it. My issue is that currently you are better rewarded for NOT engaging with them and for engaging with the market mechanics instead. There is no way this can create an healthy place.

I can 100% assure you that I made far many more divines by not playing the game but the market in the past few days. Up to a point where it felt I was actually losing time by playing the game. This is an issue for me.

From where comes the notion that spent time should result in achievement?

"

Aranéïde#3664 wrote:

I can 100% assure you that I made far many more divines by not playing the game but the market in the past few days. Up to a point where it felt I was actually losing time by playing the game. This is an issue for me.

So not just the one account controlling the market then

If your goal in game is to get the most currency, then playing the market is one way to achieve that. Mine's not to treat the game like a second job.

It's like that couple of days in settlers where the most lucrative way to earn currency was to endlessly buy chisels off Kirac: tedious, sure, but some people did it, until eventually the price of chisels normalised and it was no longer worth doing. The reason it happened is because chisels were in high demand and the supply wasn't immediately obvious to a lot of people, so the middlemen took over for a bit.

"

MSMagu#0469 wrote:

A Guy posted a good solution for this, just make people use Divines, the problem right now is no one is using divines, if instead of randomizing the numbers of the gear it changes its attributes tiers(with the higher the tier of the Gear higher the chance of getting 'high' tiers) this would make people try to use divines, even with this much inflation people are still not using divines, this show how 'useless' beside currency divines become.

says who?

I used like 50 divs on my items

"

AliquamGames#5952 wrote:

From where comes the notion that spent time should result in achievement?

This is a far bigger question than what I could answer in a few lines. One way is to say that time is the only thing that matter in a capitalistic environment, as you are payed for your time and you are paying other people for them time to save yours, I don't know if this is the most appropriate answer here, but if I push it a bit further then if I invest my time in something, I expect something from that time invested.

This thing will (hopefully and this is what make people interesting) differ from person to person. Everyone can define what is achievement for them. For me, I expect to be able to experiment with most if not all the systems a game has to provide, because I enjoy to see what I can build within the system. If some part of the system is somewhat inaccessible, or very tedious to access, because of very bad repartition of wealth (that's for trade league) or because of not being designed to actually be accessed given enough investment (that's for current state of SSF) this is a huge source of frustration for me.