Caravan raiding

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

Yeah, this might work, if the only other penalties remains as just gear decay and progression system stuff. I could maybe see a problem of avoiding gold all together by just trading through a mediary, but we don't know enough about the game to say for sure if that's possible.

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

Just so you know, edited pings never ping people. You seem to like adding them post factum, but no one gets pinged with those.

NiKr wrote: »

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

Yeah, this might work, if the only other penalties remains as just gear decay and progression system stuff. I could maybe see a problem of avoiding gold all together by just trading through a mediary, but we don't know enough about the game to say for sure if that's possible.

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

Just so you know, edited pings never ping people. You seem to like adding them post factum, but no one gets pinged with those.

For this to work, it would imply that the game's economy can determine the cost of repairs consistently.

I'm not saying you can't build a system that does that, even with what Intrepid seems to want, but I am saying that it is inconsistent and open to some relatively easy manipulations while adding some complexity to their 'World Economy Tracker' or heavily simplifying gear repair costs.

I've tried this one before. It's not really understandable to most players, so it tends to get a negative reaction.

Azherae wrote: »

For this to work, it would imply that the game's economy can determine the cost of repairs consistently.

I'm not saying you can't build a system that does that, even with what Intrepid seems to want, but I am saying that it is inconsistent and open to some relatively easy manipulations while adding some complexity to their 'World Economy Tracker' or heavily simplifying gear repair costs.

I've tried this one before. It's not really understandable to most players, so it tends to get a negative reaction.

I've considered that at first, but then read the suggestion as just "whatever caravan value was - that's the lost cost", no repair costs or anything of the sort. Shoulda mentioned that this probably wouldn't work for PKers, unless we purely calculate the loot costs (median within the node of the killing).

And considering that some mats from the caravan will just be deleted on destruction, the attackers would pay out more than they got. Though considering that I'd probably keep to the "BHs can only track high ranking caravan attackers".

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

For this to work, it would imply that the game's economy can determine the cost of repairs consistently.

I'm not saying you can't build a system that does that, even with what Intrepid seems to want, but I am saying that it is inconsistent and open to some relatively easy manipulations while adding some complexity to their 'World Economy Tracker' or heavily simplifying gear repair costs.

I've tried this one before. It's not really understandable to most players, so it tends to get a negative reaction.

I've considered that at first, but then read the suggestion as just "whatever caravan value was - that's the lost cost", no repair costs or anything of the sort. Shoulda mentioned that this probably wouldn't work for PKers, unless we purely calculate the loot costs (median within the node of the killing).

And considering that some mats from the caravan will just be deleted on destruction, the attackers would pay out more than they got. Though considering that I'd probably keep to the "BHs can only track high ranking caravan attackers".

I really don't like making posts that are just 'this doesn't work either' here, so forgive me for this one.

This doesn't work either.

Azherae wrote: »

I really don't like making posts that are just 'this doesn't work either' here, so forgive me for this one.

They're always appreciated, because I'm not that good at deeper economic consequences, so if your experience and extrapolation of this system based on that experience says this wouldn't work, I'm not gonna really argue, cause I haven't thought deeply enough about this suggestion to even come up with an argument

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

I'm referring to something that does require a modified 'FFXI parallel', or rather, any game you've played that sounds similar.

Epic Damascus Blade requires 1 Damascus Ingot to repair.

Damascus Ingot is made of Damascus Ore + High level crafter + some other stuff.

Damascus Ore only drops from a boss that no one can guarantee a kill-rate for.

Damascus Ingots sell for 'whatever the guild monopolizing the boss decide to sell it for that week'.

What is the 'value' of 10% gear damage on your Epic Damascus Blade when you use it to defend a Caravan?

What if no one has sold a Damascus Ingot on the open market literally ever and it's only ever been traded?

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about, not intended to be an attack on your suggestion or system. It has an easy solution - 'Assign a value to Damascus Ingots anyway'. I don't like it, I think it's a terrible solution. But I feel like your suggestion is hard to get right without taking it.

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

Ah, well if you are assuming that the game will not have a sophisticated Market system, then I don't really have a point, I was just basing it on stuff I've enjoyed.

If they go the 'basic averages' route and somehow make it work in a free trade Fantasy game without turning it into BDO, I think your suggestion's completely fine and I fully support it. A little less fun for me but if it suits the game, I'd still like to see it.