Crafting/The Economy/ And PvP

So I was talking to a friend of mine about the long term success of this game and I really don't understand one fundamental thing about crafting and the economy. If there is no loss of gear/items through death and looting (normally found in PvP), how do you sustain an economy? What will the point of crafters be other than the ones making consumables (alchemy)?

So I buy one set of GM gear and other than an occasional, minor repair bill I never need the service of a crafter again? I'd like to hear what others think about this because without some form of looting I see no way to maintain a robust, player driven economy. And for the players like me, who want crafting to be difficult and a fully integrated part of this game, how would this work without looting?

 

I assume you have not read the numerous posts on this very - hotly debated - subject. I would avoid them myself, if I was brighter. As a crafter and a strong PvE player and one who abhors most PvP, please understand that I am biased, and others may have a very different perspective.

In short, items degrade. Yes, they can be repaired at ever increasing costs, but at some point, it might just be cheaper to buy new gear. I think SotA has potential to be one of the more balanced game economies we have seen in recent years. Particularly if crafting skill leads to ever increasing item quality, marks, enchantments, whatever. Would you rather have your old iron longsword that you have become attached to and repaired often, or a newly crafted jeweled mithril light shedding longsword? Surely there will be those who favor one or the other. Of course we don't know how all of this will play out yet. It is possible that things will be totally screwed up, but I doubt the dev team would allow that to continue.

Looting items however, does not foster economy. What does the PvPer do with 100 sets of armor? He sells them. If items don't degrade, looting will not save the day. Only deterioration will foster economic/crafting growth. But that is my opinion. I'm sure others will tell you how the only way to solve any problem is with full loot open PvP at all times. But then again, I won't be gaming with them.

Hope this helps more than it inflames.

 

Thanks for proving my point. There are transactions still happening. Since I doubt the person that just died, is getting his gear back from the guy who killed him. Also, in many PvP battles bodies aren't looted.

What about PvE? When you die and can't get back to your body? You need to buy new gear. Or when you die and the liche lord loots your body and you can't kill the liche lord. You have to buy new gear. Just because things aren't necessarily coming out of the game doesn't mean transactions aren't taking place.

What about all the extra resources that need to be gathered to make a new items? That's more economy for the gatherer or crafter. When people die, either PvP or PvE, items leave the game in a lootable system.

This I can see as a somewhat valid point but I've never seen a game where it costs more to repair an item than it does to buy a new one. And that still doesn't account for all the economy being created as people lose and need new items. Just because items may not come out of the game due to looting/decay (which they often do), doesn't mean someone isn't making money off of it...

And I understand you aren't trying to inflame. I just want people who are obviously biased to try and look at things objectively. (And if you abhor PvP you probably won't flag for it so looting would never affect you other than bring you more business xD)

 

Hmm, perhaps we are arguing over semantics. I am in favor of items being removed from the game (decay) just not so much for the shuffle of looting alone. If they decay AND get looted, fine, that is another whole argument for or against looting. My point is that when a character gets multiple sets of stuff they sell, on a resell vendor if possible. So, in fact, a looted character may buy back his own sword from his killer's vendor. (if that was all in place) This alone does not require a new sword to be crafted in the game, hence no growth from crafting. Sure, things are shuffled, but rearranged is not growth.

If the bodies aren't looted, then it is not looting driving the need for new items, but decay - again. Which is in fact MY point. Decay good. Looting is uncertain as to benefit to the economy.

Beyond that, I don't care what the PvP crowd chooses to do. I won't be PvPing so whatever works for them is not really any of my business ... except of course if it effects my business. $$$

 

This seems like one of those use a hammer to catch a fly solutions. You might hit the fly, but you will smash everything else in the room.

Using PvP to drive the crafting economy at the player level doesn't make much sense. Because wars aren't fought at the player level. Crafting and PvP should work together at the faction / guild / town level.

 

I think Jivalax makes good points, although obviously in many cases, someone won't be buying back their old weapon and instead will be buying a new one.

Personally, I've always been uninterested in the use of crafting to make gold in the game. I think that turns crafting into a form of a job... and obviously, in some cases, literally.. as people sell items for real cash. I appreciate crafting for role-playing, and I think it also adds to gameplay too just in case there are rare recipes that pop up that would require crafting skills. So for example, you find some type of magic ore, and you need someone to make it into a weapon.

 

I will certainly give you that one mate, I absolutely agree decay should be part of the game. If we agree on nothing else, I'll agree with that.

I'm not saying just PvP though, I suppose my OP could have been more thorough but I just wanted to get the discussions going. I can't even count how many times I died in UO during PvE, got back to my house, geared up to try to recover my body just to die again. That also drives the economy.

I wish more of the PvE crowd thought like you mate xD

 

Most people will be crafting for themselves, master craftsmen who will be spending time & money will be few but their premium goods will be much in demand. The only sector I forsee having a glut on their hands are speculators & hoarders. No sympathy for them at all, balancing the economy for those two segments is a waste of time.

 

This is the worst of all possible outcomes. That they make PvP such a toxic mess that people just opt out completely and don't care. PvP should be interesting to everyone, even those who don't directly participate.

I look at PvP as like Civilization, combat is one of many paths to victory...I can outproduce, out-tech, out-culture, etc. I realize that there will be some people who simply don't care about any competition at all - where this is more of a social experience than a "game" - but otherwise the generally notion of PvP should be as inclusive as possible.

 

@PrimeRib,

I liked the idea of Civ as a series moving away from conquest only options, and I like it, in general.. but, the way its implemented, trying to win a culture-only or tech-only victory sure is pretty boring to me. The only way they've been interesting in the games is that they sometimes force you to go to war with another Civ to slow down their advance, so you can get ahead of them.

 

I actually prefer winning those ways. But the point is, for a game like this, you're really just one guy. And your guild is maybe running one city. And there's possibly some larger alliance of faction. And if you want your job to be experimental crafting all day (improving the city's tech level) go for it.

The point is that some of the game is about taking territory from other player guilds. But much of the game is also about improving that territory through gathering and crafting. It should all work together. While you may personally choose to ignore a few elements of the equation, they should still be important to you. The group that captured some hill might be helping you get access to some iron mine which helps make better stuff.

 

I think I see where you are coming from here, and it is not so different from my point of view. If PvP becomes toxic it surely affects my gameplay and I am not in favor of that. But if the PvP crowd wants a particular style of loot, or to fight barefoot, what difference is it to me? I don't want to be PvPing directly. Supply arms for those who do, sure. Help guildmates do all they want, yup. Own a village somewhere, why not? As long as it is healthy and fun for those doing it. I don't want to. So, since I don't want to, why should I force my idea of how it should go on those who actually want to do it?

Now, I do agree we don't want to let it slip into something that will drive players away. We don't want something where PvP is the only option (though we have been told that will not happen). What I think we all can agree to (griefers aside) is a style of PvP that most of the PvP players will enjoy and pay for. But, as long as they are having fun (not just one PKer, but most of the PvP crowd) and it isn't affecting my gameplay, I don't get much say in it.

And, as long as there is decay, even rschultzy and I can agree on something.