Best Of
Re: Upcoming Economy Rework and Goals
Hope it's not too late to add some thoughts to this.
Sorry for the length but this is a very important subject for me. I've played Lusternia for years, with several breaks. Every time I return, what gets me back into it is designing things, crafting them, and selling them in my shops. It's actually a huge draw for a lot of players, whether they're vocal on the forums about it or not.
Maybe other MUDs and MMOs don't have decay, but they also don't have a robust system for designing unique items, crafting them, and selling them in shops. This is one of the wonderful features of Lusternia, and I, for one, don't want Lusternia to be as flavorless as your run-of-the-mill MMO.
If replacing stuff really bothers you in this one game, you can find a design you like, slap a rune on it, and never think about it again. That's fine! But please don't take away the option for those of us who do enjoy shopkeeping (and periodically shopping for new designs). Surely we can find a balance that suits both types of players.
Automation
Saran mentioned mercantile vs artisanal type trades. I agree with this observation. I feel that we've been trying to force a union between two different objectives, and it has caused tension.
I think we should lean into that difference and separate them out more fully so people can pursue their goals more clearly.
For a start, all the basics should be sold by NPCs. The only experience I have from other MUDs is Achaea. They had an NPC on the side of a public road who sold basic curatives. She sold them far more expensive than the going rate from other players (like 400gp for a vial of healing potion when the going rate from players was 50), but it was an option, at least. For some people, it was a last resort when they couldn't get anyone else to serve them, while others had lots of money and didn't want to bother tracking down a player with the appropriate trade (just like some people in this discussion).
This could also help during off-peak times and if the playerbase ever dips as low as it was a couple of years ago (though hopefully it never will). The introduction of packaged artisan goods came while I was dormant, during that very low point of activity, and I think it was a step in the right direction towards optional self-sufficiency. It didn't do away with artisans serving you one-on-one, it just offered an alternative for those who didn't want that or couldn't find it.
Same with being able to buy your own deactivated cube from a shop. It used to be such a pain to find a jeweller who could make one! I was surprised a similar method wasn't applied to enchantments and other services.
Kerith has an awesome set of totem rings - a different design for each totem spirit. She stocked a couple of each in her Seren shop, expecting someone to buy them and have enchantments put on them, like she had done, letting them choose which enchantment they wanted on which totem spirit. Except nobody has. Because it's such a pain to find an enchanter to do that.
And now, if you don't like a design, you can just hide the ring, so people buy based on the enchantment rather than the design, which makes designing jewellery feel pointless. It also makes it feel pointless to shop for designs that actually suit your character, which devalues the rich RP that Lusternia is known for.
But if you could buy the designs you want and then go rub a cube or whatever to apply the enchantment you want... both sides would be satisfied. And it would be easier for enchanters to recharge that cube every thousand uses, than to figure out which designs to apply them to, find a jeweller to make them, and have 50 rings taking up space on their stockroom floor (let alone actually trying to serve customers in person).
Another thing that could be automated is mending/repairing. If the players who hate to replace their clothing and jewellery could pop into a shop, do something automated like recharging from cubes to extend the life of their item, and be on their way... that'd be a lot less hassle for them than tracking down a tailor or jeweller.
And let's face it, nobody does track down a tailor or, especially, a jeweller - because not only is it a hassle, but it's not cost effective. It's far cheaper to buy new than to repair jewellery, and in some cases, the same could be said for mending. I'd definitely support lowering the cost for those services. Make it cost something reasonable and put it on an automated thing in a shop. Then tailors and jewellers are more likely to actually make money off those services, while being able to focus on creating new designs. (Also, please automate things like padding, pockets, and knots.)
I propose:
- NPCs or shops sell basic goods - pipes, tinderboxes, vials . . . basically all the things you can currently make in Arts.
- If that would devalue the Arts skill too much, make it a miniskill. It already feels kind of niche, since paintings and such aren't used as much as they used to be and, well, not everyone is into art. It already feels like those parts were forced in as afterthoughts; iron buckets aren't very artsy!
- Then, if people want their items to look nice and personalized, they can apply sorcelglass. Artisan pipes should also be sorcel items. It feels more intuitive and consistent, anyway.
- They can then apply runes if they never want to have to replace the things. I mean, people are doing that anyway. Just... make it more automated.
- Allow runed items to be sorcel'ed over, so if they change their minds or a new design comes along, they can replace the design they have. This would also encourage people to keep making new designs.
I would also support designs instead of items. Basically what I said about buying basic items from NPCs and then applying sorcelglass - just extend that concept to everything. Buy a plain grey dress from NPC, apply the design you want to it.
I would also support designs instead of items. Basically what I said about buying basic items from NPCs and then applying sorcelglass - just extend that concept to everything. Buy a plain grey dress from NPC, apply the design you want to it.
Comms
Aethertrading
I'm not going to pretend I understand market theories, or even how org stockpiles work. I've never been an aide to the trade ministry or anything like that. I will say what I've noticed as a crafter, though.
A lot of the discussion has been about overall scarcity, talking about the old mines we used to have, then getting rid of them because of hoarding... But the scarcity I'm seeing is very uneven and specific to certain commodities. In Serenwilde, a few comms are sold out as soon as they're stocked. It's usually cloth and leather, which are used in ridiculous quantities by aethertraders. And since tailoring items are more profitable than the other aethertrades, it's the most popular.
This unevenness has made it impossible for me to keep my shops stocked. It makes me sad when my regular customers ask when I'm going to restock because their favorite gown needs replacing and I can't find enough cloth to sew it. When we can't do basic things like that with our trades, something is very wrong.
I wasn't here when aethertrading came out, but it feels like it was a half-formed idea that hastily got shoved into the game without the consequences being considered. Only a quarter of the trades can participate, and even those three are unevenly profitable. And there seems to have been no adjustment made for the enormous impact it's had on certain commodities.
I propose:
I wasn't here when aethertrading came out, but it feels like it was a half-formed idea that hastily got shoved into the game without the consequences being considered. Only a quarter of the trades can participate, and even those three are unevenly profitable. And there seems to have been no adjustment made for the enormous impact it's had on certain commodities.
I propose:
1. Make it available to all trades,
2. Make them equally profitable so people don't choose their trade based on that alone (and yes that does happen),
3. And either
a) increase the supply of the comms most likely to be needed (although then people would just use designs that feature other comms and deplete those instead), or
b) reduce the amount of refining needed (and if that means reducing the payout accordingly, that's fine)
Aethertrading is nice (I guess?), but I feel like yet another competitive get-rich-quick scheme for a select few is less healthy for the game than making sure the trades work as intended at their basic level.
How comms are acquired
In Achaea, they came out with a system where you could gather comms from the wilderness. I wasn't playing much at that point so I really don't know the details. I believe gathering was a skill you could learn. For Lusternia, I think it makes sense to be a low-level ability in a common skill like Environment.
You could have metal ore sites scattered around the mountains, wood to be gathered in forested areas (but without actually cutting down trees, just gathered as a resource), animal goods to be gathered from farms, fruit collected from orchards... and if enough of those places don't exist in the game already, there could be a new area that contains all of them.
However it's carried out, I think it makes sense to have it a simplified process that's accessible to everyone. Then things like crucibles would just be extra, maybe for those who want to aethertrade.
Orael's questions
1) Is the economy actually a problem for everyone or just a certain subset of players (like newbies etc)?
I would say it's a problem for the majority of players. No, not everyone - people for whom money is no object can always buy their way out of this problem like any other problem - but enough of us that it needs to be addressed. Also, even if it were "just" a problem for newbies, it would still be a problem - unless you're okay with us never acquiring new players who want to stick around...
I would say it's a problem for the majority of players. No, not everyone - people for whom money is no object can always buy their way out of this problem like any other problem - but enough of us that it needs to be addressed. Also, even if it were "just" a problem for newbies, it would still be a problem - unless you're okay with us never acquiring new players who want to stick around...
2) Should trading and economy be pushed as a viable gameplay route (ie, Merchant players that can make money as their IC identity and role)
- Is this currently an option?
I hope I answered this adequately above.
I hope I answered this adequately above.
3) Is there a route to allows players to both engage or not-engage as they see fit (ie Opt-in?).
- Is this a worthwhile path?
I think there is, and I think it's worthwhile to do so.
I think there is, and I think it's worthwhile to do so.
4) Would a better option just be just to nuke the economy and not even worry about it and only fix the commodity issues and call it a day?
- This option would be along the lines of just making basic supplies available in a shop. People can choose to have shops, but they'll have to understand that literally nobody has to or will engage with them outside others that choose to. The only worry about a glut of things would be to preserve db space rather than any economical issues?
If you're okay with losing about half of your already-small playerbase and seriously piss off a lot of people who have poured their time, energy, and money into this community for years... then sure, go for it. But if you want to put in the effort to find a balance, I honestly think a solution that satisfies everyone is very doable.
If you're okay with losing about half of your already-small playerbase and seriously piss off a lot of people who have poured their time, energy, and money into this community for years... then sure, go for it. But if you want to put in the effort to find a balance, I honestly think a solution that satisfies everyone is very doable.
Kerith
3
Re: Upcoming Economy Rework and Goals
When you look at something like Fiber in the context of a multiplayer game it's also an example of where loot drops/incidental generation are pretty useful and just why people trade things at all.Jolanthe said:If you take any lesson away from Stardew Valley, it should be utility balance in commodity design. Fiber is an excellent example of this - don't need it for much other than a few scarecrows early game, and it can be tempting to sell it off for early profit even though it's just 1G per. But come mid-late game, depending on your set up, you might not be able to get enough fiber: especially if you want to fish a lot and build worm bins or wild bait.
If our current commodities are too inflexible to balance out in this way, then maybe reimagining them really is the best route. We don't really need all these varieties of cooking comms when the majority of them are just used for food and aetherpotions (and aetherpotions are mostly just fruit as is, which is deeply annoying with how heavy reliance is on fruit anyways). Just consolidate it all into a blanket food comm or animal/plant based food comms. And do we really need a pair of villages dedicated to specialising in rope (hemp)? Like it can be kind of thematically cute, but if villages are going to be such a heavy influence on commodities then it seems silly to put emphasis on one with few practical applications outside of hammocks and hunting/trapping. Rope's only started to get used up due to refining, and even then it was because it was so plentiful and dirt cheap compared to other textile alternatives.
It's something you end up with in abundance by doing other things (i.e clearing out space on your farm), but also other people can make greater use out of it than you necessarily can so people trade it (they could be at different points in progression or focused on different activities for example).
As long as people are always doing the loot drop activity it'll always be entering the game so you can trade for it which will cut into your profits, but if you want to save money you can try generating it yourself it just means time away from other stuff.
In Lusternia, you could have astral/grimkeep/influencing/etc factored in by giving them loot drops because they're activites that players are always going to be doing.
Saran
2
Re: Lack of Raves VI: Rave Today, Tweet Tomorrow
o You may now CLOTHING ORDER <article1> <article2> [<article3> ...
<articleN>]
- This will order your clothes in your description.
aaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAA (and I cannot stress this enough) AAAAAAAAAAHHH!!!!!!
Oh my gosh I'm pleased as a plum.
Eritheyl
5
Re: Small(er) scale pvp
Not to mention, huge turn-off in those situations where you're the only person about from your org. Guess what, even your allies are going to hurt you! Yeeeeah no. Forcing 1v1v1etc only hurts the smaller orgs.
Do like the concept of thinking outside the box at least.
Do like the concept of thinking outside the box at least.
Sapphira
5
Re: Small(er) scale pvp
This would make it impossible to participate in duels, wargames, FFAs and the like for people who have to manage enemies currently. Also, why would I want to hit my international allies with my meld?Chogan said:Remove enemy lists, make all enemy-wide effects automatically hit everyone that's not a member of your city. Likewise ally effects only hit city members.
Eritheyl
1
Re: Could lusternian lore benefit from being codified and made accessible to new players?
Isser said:Could lusternian lore benefit from being codified and made accessible to new players?
Yes.
Jatius
1
Re: Upcoming Economy Rework and Goals
If you take any lesson away from Stardew Valley, it should be utility balance in commodity design. Fiber is an excellent example of this - don't need it for much other than a few scarecrows early game, and it can be tempting to sell it off for early profit even though it's just 1G per. But come mid-late game, depending on your set up, you might not be able to get enough fiber: especially if you want to fish a lot and build worm bins or wild bait.
If our current commodities are too inflexible to balance out in this way, then maybe reimagining them really is the best route. We don't really need all these varieties of cooking comms when the majority of them are just used for food and aetherpotions (and aetherpotions are mostly just fruit as is, which is deeply annoying with how heavy reliance is on fruit anyways). Just consolidate it all into a blanket food comm or animal/plant based food comms. And do we really need a pair of villages dedicated to specialising in rope (hemp)? Like it can be kind of thematically cute, but if villages are going to be such a heavy influence on commodities then it seems silly to put emphasis on one with few practical applications outside of hammocks and hunting/trapping. Rope's only started to get used up due to refining, and even then it was because it was so plentiful and dirt cheap compared to other textile alternatives.
If our current commodities are too inflexible to balance out in this way, then maybe reimagining them really is the best route. We don't really need all these varieties of cooking comms when the majority of them are just used for food and aetherpotions (and aetherpotions are mostly just fruit as is, which is deeply annoying with how heavy reliance is on fruit anyways). Just consolidate it all into a blanket food comm or animal/plant based food comms. And do we really need a pair of villages dedicated to specialising in rope (hemp)? Like it can be kind of thematically cute, but if villages are going to be such a heavy influence on commodities then it seems silly to put emphasis on one with few practical applications outside of hammocks and hunting/trapping. Rope's only started to get used up due to refining, and even then it was because it was so plentiful and dirt cheap compared to other textile alternatives.
Jolanthe
2
Re: Make it Count
I moved it for you! Also, can I just say, I really like how the practice of linking all these various logs into a single thread that signals a story arc.
Terentia
7
(c) Iron Realms Entertainment 2012.