Should Coins Have Weight Associated With It?

SPO? It might. It would be like adventuring in a true thriving world. Players would be no different than optimally programmed NPCs.

 

Well if we have a good thief class perhaps it could cause us to have to think and be prepared for losing coins. Like going to the bank occasionally to put your cash away, but it isn't because of weight, but theft. Not a popular analogy, but I like the idea of thieves in SOTA. There are other ways to do risk and reward, and also ways to add to challenge that has us have to think and plan ahead. Of course the not too popular idea for reagents being needed for combat. I am not against it though. In UO it is was just part of the game to get them since you needed them. We get a chance to discuss all of this now, which is great, but in games that already have things in place, it is just part of the game.

 

Coins = 58,599,402,204,802,048 (who cares?)
(Coins * .00001 = weight)
Weight = X lbs.

It's a formula that works no matter how many coins you have because it's just one object that is always stacked - coins.

 

Maybe I read it wrong, but I assumed from the start that the encumbrance limits would be raised accordingly so that a change like this would only affect the very very wealthy. This could easily be implemented to cause zero extra lag (i.e. the game knows exactly how much any stack of coins weighs instantly, coins don't have to be an item - no difference in how they are tracked in game is needed at all). Someone happening on a huge treasure should have a real puzzle to solve to get it back to his/her residence or bank. No one has yet said it needs to be a realistic weight any more than any other item has realistic weight in the game.

The point is, it would add a new dimension for people who collect hoards of gold coins (wouldn't affect anyone else). If we are really going to have a player based economy, something like this would add a new dimension to the game and the only way it would affect the lion share of us is by opening opportunities for us to find that buried chest before the purple llama arrives to carry it off (or if we have no virtue, intercept the slowly moving llama on the way back).

 

No. I already have enough trouble carrying around hundreds of arrows and reagents, even with max lifter (I doubt that this situation will change, even when the developers get around to improving archery...) If coins had weight, I would always be poor (In the wilderness, all of that precious (and heavy) gold will do you very little good when facing a mob of enemies...)

 

This is a moot point! Gold is only found in a lootable mob, once it's picked up its locked to your characters paper doll, Therefore it can contain no weight. If it were to be a carried item, it would be subject to exploit as is the case in multiple games. Sorry to diminish your topic, but it can never carry weight or be looted in PvP.

 

I see. You Don't want realism, you want realism.
I still say no

 

Then why bother if it's just a formula? The evolution of currency in the real world, started with heavey coins which became so bulky they moved to paper... And then the wealthy needed more room, so someone came up with banks... When the Banks became full, they moved to Accounts with plastic cards...

I think we should look at it this way, my portfolio has this amount and I can use my ATM to access it, I don't need to carry it around with me....

 

The benefit to having weighted coins is that you can't convert your wealth to coins and walk freely around an otherwise regional economy. If you have weightless coins, you don't really have to worry about encumbrance the same way as you would if coins weigh something - which is a very important thing to consider. Because now you can't just move all your furniture from one side of the map to the other buy simply "buying more" when you get to the other side of the map. Now you have to find a way to transport your coins to the other side of the map. This makes your wealth regional to where you've worked to make it regional.

If you want to create a player made "note" system, be my guest. I think that would be fantastic. But making coins weightless will negatively impact the economy.

 

If the world of New Britannia can have little robots running around, I don't see how having imaginary credit cards would break immersion; I can only see weighted gold as being a nuisance with no game-play benefits.

If players could pick-pocket other players, on the other hand... weighted gold might then have an interesting impact on game-play.

 

Thievery is planned for episode 2 (or maybe 3 depending on stretch goals).

 

I vote no due to the already extremely low storage levels for low tier backers and new players.

 

This reminds me of the player-minted currency that I saw discussed not too long ago - local currency valued much higher than generic 'game gold' would be much more meaningful in a game where the generic gold becomes a burden.

However, if gold coins are going to have weight and therefore (implicitly) substance - I should be able to smelt them down to ingots, perhaps also extracting impurities of silver and similar which are present in most coinage

 

Yes, coins should have weight.

 

I agree with you on this statement.

 

That's a pretty weak argument, my wealth is coins... So what you're saying is I can not spend my coins in a foreign region, I need to carry them in first, then I can spend them... What??? This whole idea of weighted coins is laughable, the system is already set up, why change it? there are better things to work on than to change everything all over... It's completely Loony' Toons...

As far as my furniture is concerned, I'm all ready hamstrung moving everything from one region to the next (provided I move out of one region to another), without forcing me to move my coins (wealth) aswell...

Ah, I see where this is leading, you want players to have lots of gold on their person to steal, haven't you heard? There's no full loot, not even in PvP, I don't mind loosing the resources I've gather (as they already have weight), I like the current banking system and don't see any reason to spend precious Dev time changing it...

 

We're in pre-alpha. Nothing is "done".

As for weak arguments, I'll rest my case and let others decide which argument is the weaker of the two.

 

So we're having this discussion again are we? Is that 1 million gold in your pocket or are you just really, really happy?

I don't believe in weightless money.. especially when it comes in the form of metal coin. Though I don't particularly care to go through the debate again. I don't like catering to convenience just because. This is what banks are for.

 

Games are meant to be fun, so if you add something to a game, its purpose should be to provide even more fun.
Why do we have electric fences, radio stations and magic? Because they are fun.
Reading this thread, I get the impression that some people have a different working definition of the word "fun".

Perhaps we should each ask ourselves this question: do I think the added frustration that would come with weighted coins will increase the amount of fun that I shall experience?

I am prepared to accept that there may, perhaps be some counterintuitive way in which this added frustration would result in an overall increase in the amount of fun. I am open to a compelling argument that describes how the imposition of constant additional encumberance will somehow lead - perhaps through emergent gameplay - to me enjoying the game more. So far all I see is that if I visit a small town somewhere I won't be buying much there because of the limited amount of gold that I'll be carrying. The result of that trade imbalance will be empty villages and skyrocketing urban property prices.
That will be great for people who have large POTs, and those who settle in cities, and devastating for rural economies.

I think that argument will have to be pretty compelling.

 

I am afraid this will introduce the checks! Like the "0 gold" check rare...