The Case for Trade with No Economy

Feedback and Suggestions
30

I’m going to ignore this as it appears to say that players enjoying things is bad.

This will always be a problem/tension between those who have more time to play & those who have less. Other tension points include those between higher skilled players and lower skilled players, but I don’t think you’d countenance removing all the difficult stuff from a game.

It was, which is why I included the link as well so you can see for yourself if you don’t believe me.

31

I think you have outdone yourself. I’m not sure I even need to argue against this. Other people can simply read this, see how arrogant, out of touch, and unrealistic it is and see how you defeated your own thread.

If this was supposed to be “The case for trade with no economy,” case settled: It lost.

32

Nah, you lost because you can’t defend your position at all.

Players are capable of trading items to one another with no economy, its a simple fact. The economics part is totally separate, and a plague for online games due to the bots/RMTs it draws to the game. Its their business to make RL money off your game’s economy, and they don’t give a F if they ruin the game or its “economy” so long as they make real $.

You eliminate that by separating Trade from Economy. Keep the trade, ditch the economy. The idea is super simple, even a cave man can do it (Damn you Geico marketing…)

Again, the people who cannot be uber traders outnumber uber traders 1000 to 1. This is proven time and time again in every game, including PoE. There are, what? 10? 20? Streamers for PoE that are “prolific” and showcase the most uber builds? How many players does PoE have? 200k? 20/200,000 is pretty slim.

Last Epoch doesn’t need those 20 people. Stop making it out like not having an economy will turn “meeelions” of players away from LE. It will turn away 20, tops. Good riddance.

33

It’s called the “Pareto Principle.”

This is all perfectly natural. It’s not any indication that anything is wrong. Usually it’s quite the opposite.

Also, I’ve defended my position just fine.

Ignoring the arguments doesn’t make them go away.

But sure, keep up your argumentum ad nauseam. I’m sure it’ll work out eventually. :roll_eyes:

34

That’s because PoE went overboard and took the power level to a stupid step.
Awakened gems are insane and most people can only get them through the market. SSF builds as mostly “generic” builds that don’t need four or five “hard to get” uniques.
As long as LE doesn’t make T6 & T7 needed to make the builds work it will be fine.

It’s not and I’m going to tell you why.
Although I like the idea of a share “dump”, because my guild does it in PoE between themselves, it only works because it’s our guild.
Even if you could only withdraw a T6 item if you deposit a T6 item you would be let with the crappy T6 that are useless. Trust me on that. The worst people will always ruin the joy of everyone else, just because they can.

It might seem strange but I like D3 system where you could trade freely with people who you were in a party with. Maybe here we could have a “in your friend list for more than a week” kind of thing. It’s going to be a complicated thing anyway.

2 Likes
35

Your problem (and really, the problem with others in this thread) is that you are acting small minded.

“People will be bad, so the idea is bad.” (Then you stop thinking)

I mean, I can literally, ad hoc, address anything you throw at me here.

  1. Someone puts in junk T7 and gets good T7 (or Item Level 80 for Item level 80).
    Fix:
  • If someone takes the item you donated, you get a cool temporary buff for that character (say, an hour long buff - could be XP bonus, or loot bonus, or defensive/offensive bonus, whatever)
  • However, if no one takes the item in a week (or whatever timeframe works), then it reappears in the inventory of the very next character you log into the game (to prevent the exploit of dumping crap into the bin and then deleting the character).
  1. People will clean out all the good stuff and vendor it to be jerks
    Fix: Limit withdrawals. Don’t care how - but some limit. Off the cuff here… lets say, 1 of each item slot (meaning 2 rings and 2 weapons, 1 of everything else) and 5 Idols) can be withdrawn each day, resetting at Midnight EST (or whatever time). This is in addition to the participation requirement I posted in the OP.
  2. People will hack accounts to bypass the limit.
    Fix: none needed, if account hacks are happening, it has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the Trading System design… I mean, seriously, WTF were you even thinking mentioning that as if its some “counter argument” to a trading system design.
  3. 0.001% of ARPGs players like Trading Economies
    Fix: Kick them to the curb, and gain more players than you lose because your game has tons of content coming out every month because the Devs aren’t wasting time on Economy stuff and are making cool new things.
  4. More than 0.001% of ARPG players like Trade Economy!
    Fix: Uh, no they don’t. They like TRADE. i.e. being able to Trade for a rare item they need for their build with other players. Again, I keep saying this - Trading has nothing to do with an Economy. Separate things. Stop trying to conflate them.
  5. If there was no economy, that would be bad, because there would be no economy.
    Fix: o.O

That pretty much addresses everything posted in this thread, I think, but if I missed something, let me know.

36

*Citation Needed
(As well as a reality check)
You may not like it, but you don’t get to dismiss the huge number of players that do. It’s dishonest and incorrect.

“Oh, hacking’s not going to be a problem, bros. Trust me.”
Riiiiight…

Um, yeah.

The two are definitionally linked.

  • Economy:
  1. the wealth and resources of a country or region [or organization], especially in terms of the production and consumption of goods and services.
  • Trade:
  1. the action of buying and selling goods and services.
  2. [to] exchange (something) for something else, typically as a commercial transaction

It’s not a conflation at all.

You have yet to make a good case for this system. You have ignored many points or made poor arguments to address them. The idea would be wildly unpopular because you fundamentally don’t understand (or refuse to believe) that players do enjoy game economies. You also fail to understand that your system would make LE unsustainable and non-competitive in the market.

Seriously, it’s a very poor idea that has been very poorly defended.

37

Nothing you just posted changes anything. So, I have no need to rebut.

38

That’s because you still have a self-defeated argument.

Also,

39

Summary of the entire thread:

Z: Trade idea involving no economy (no profit).
You: Not having an economy would be bad, because then, there would be no economy.
(That’s basically it in a nutshell, but lets continue)

Z: Yes, that’s the point, economies are bad for hard, tangible, measurable, provable reasons: Bots and RMT.
You: You can’t stop bots and RMTs.
Z: Uh, yeah you can, by my idea - no economy. That’s literally its point.
You: People like economies.
Z: No, people like trading, and most games have trading with an economy. The economy part is objectively bad (proven above - bots + RMT).
You: But the 1% who enjoy economies would be sad and quit and it would doom the whole game.
Z: There is no evidence losing the people who really like economies in ARPGs would negatively affect the game overall. Its likely to attract more people than it loses.
You: No, 99% of all players would quit.
Z: Hyperbole much?
You: I made arguments you didn’t refute.
Z: Pretty sure I got them all.

Again, just point out anything I didn’t already shoot down, and I’ll address it. Maybe I missed something?

40

The surest way to tell that you don’t have an argument is how you straw-man basically everything I (and others) said, trying to put words in my mouth and misrepresenting the counter-arguments.

If you’re going to be that delusional and dishonest about it, sure. Keep digging that hole. You’re just making yourself look the fool. Everyone else can see right through it for exactly what it is.

41

Saying its a straw man doesn’t make it a straw man.
Saying its delusion and dishonest doesn’t make it that either.

You can’t list a single point I haven’t shot down. I guarantee any reply to this post will also contain no denotation thereof, either.

42

No, saying it doesn’t make it so, but it is by definition.

I’m done with this thread. I don’t see anyone getting on board with this idea as you have presented and “argued” for it.

43

lol. Even if you want to be Jesus, you gotta make sure there are people who wants to follow you.

2 Likes
44

I was actually pretty careful to use the words “acting small minded” and not “are small minded”.

Always criticize the behavior, not the person.

45

Yes. And I’m saying does anyone want to behave in the way you consider not small minded?

2 Likes
46

Ok. Let’s see.

Yup. Hyperbole much. [edit: while we’re at this, maybe you can let me know where you get your 0.001% figure from]

Any evidence that not having an economy will attract more than it loses then?

And you know this because…?

3 Likes
47

So Jerle just criticized your behavior and then you’re trying to tell him to always criticize the behavior? Which. Is. What. He. Did. To. You.

Between that ‘small minded comment’

and this:

I decided we were all in a troll-raid or the OP came in thinking their poop smelled better than everyone else’s and when everyone else points out “no it still smells like poop” the OP just continues to scream it doesn’t.

Either way, I’m not seeing, or buying at the market, any constructive idea in the original statement.

2 Likes
48

It’s fine to post opinions on the topic. Attacking other people’s opinions or reasoning is not constructive.

Topic locked, try again next time.

2 Likes
49