...
This thread was posted while I was away on a business trip and had somewhat limited (by time and events) access to check everything out, so I'll just throw in my own bits and pieces some may have already been addressed, discussed, dissected, whatever.
First of all, let's get the first issue out of the way... There willNEVER in the history of humanity EVER be an economy real or virtual that is equal in terms of how much everyone has and FAAAR too much evil has been done in the world (real and virtual) in order to try and create this equity of outcome. Just because a player has 1 billion or more gold and another has a thousand doesn't mean the economy is out of balance. Unless you know WHY these two have the amounts they have, then you cannot judge the economy just on "Player X has a lot more than Player Y".
The being said, the question becomes what makes the UO economy seem "broken"? I think the problem people have is that the numbers keep getting bigger and they would rather see them back to what they were years and years ago. The main reason the numbers are big is because UO uses only a base unit of currency. It does not use a graduated system the way many other games do (although the potential of one was given both in the Prime games which told you about copper and silver but ditched them as "unimportant to the Avatar" (Ultima 6 discussion with Terri at the Britain Mint as source) and in UO with the Rats in the Sewers event that dropped copper coins as the most common, silver as uncommon and gold as rare). So basically, the pure number is not "hidden" behind terminology.
The problem with big numbers is that the number can become so big that it no longer has meaning. In my line of work, I've experienced this feeling in the time I've been at my job. At first, the sight of hundreds if not thousands of real gold and silver coins, then tied to their metal value was an amazing sight, but after dealing with SO MUCH of it, the numbers now no longer have any real meaning behind them. That I think is what a lot of the problem is mentally with UO's economy... the prevalence of the "big number" 10s to 100s of millions for something instead of 10s to 100s of thousands. And just like in real life, the more of a currency it takes, the less value is seen that the currency holds (basically look at the US Dollar at the current time compared to metals, oil, or even closer to home, your weekly grocery bill).
So what about functionality. Well, as we know the UO system is built on the Faucet/Sink method. Gold is introduced through gameplay events that generate it within the world and removed through gameplay events that delete it from the world.
Everything else (player-to-player interactions) simply shuffles existing gold around (including gold sellers at their basic existence).
Lastly, of course, is the problem with exploiting (scripting, duping, etc) that unnaturally widens the effect of the Faucet, however, that is an issue that must be dealt with on its own. I think this thread is more based on the idea of the economy itself and what to do with it and less on the effects of exploiting, so aside from this mention I'm going to leave it out.
Personally, I think the problem with the current system is that the Sink/Drain portion is not nearly wide enough compared to the Faucet and this has been made worse by the fact that the faucet in many areas has been widened even further (by a factor of 10 or more for treasure/SOS chests for example)and there is talk of widening it even more than that, but by comparisons, the actual added sinks to counter this have been few and far between. The cost of the new boats is one, but a limited one. Gems for imbueing were one for a time while everyone was training up, but after the masses who want to run imbueing have hit their needed max level, the drops from standard gameplay fill this without an issue.
Also, there have been previous sinks that have been rendered obsolete and unused. LRC negated the VAST gold sink that was the need for reagents for spellcasting... by extension, Chivalry uses gold directly, but really the amount used is miniscule. Secondly, the change in how houses charged for rebuilding took out a potential sink as well.
Some ideas that have been rattling around in my mind:
1. Gold loot adjustment: Here I will SOMEWHAT disagree with Vex/Phoenix. I DO believe that SOME monsters need to have their gold drops lowered. Mid to upper end creatures that can be killed in a few hits with the right slayer weapon, EoO, and other templates; that spawn quickly; and have well over 1000 gold as loot need to be relooked at. I can see raising the gold on the lower end creatures that newer characters need to get "up to speed", but there should be a better limit against those (including myself) who can gold farm with efficiency. This is also an issue with the equipment loot (what used to be called magic items, but really IMO can't be called that anymore) in that it has become more of an issue of quantity over quality.
On the one hand, newer players need more "guided" loot to bring them forward while more experienced players need less "junk". Thus raise the lower end and drop the upper end.
2. Gold as an intangible: I know it's been discussed, but I find myself in this camp as it reduces if not eliminates the issue with dupes, makes trades between characters easier, and tends to prevent gold from passing on through being left in IDOCs (which does happen).
3. Houses: Here is an area that gold could be drained and not in the way many people have proposed. I'm NOT talking about a house tax or "rented" features or even one-time purchased deco items. I'm looking at the building/rebuilding issue. Right now, as long as you retain the same number of used tiles in a built house, you incur ZERO cost in rebuilding the structure. Use less and you get a refund, use more and you incur a cost. IMO, this could be done much better. Once a house is built and committed, a timer should start to give a player up to a day to make any changes to the design as desired under the above system (same = even, more = cost, less = refund). After this timer,any change should cost the player the appropriate amount per tile changed or added. Removed tiles would NOT refund any gold at this point. The idea is that players would have a cost to rebuild a house.
4. LRC reaching 100+ was a mistake (as would have been the Cap/Proficiency system to limit it). I'm not entirely sure what level LRC SHOULD be able to reach, but there should remain a need for reagents or tithed gold. So yes, here I'm calling for an LRC percentage nerf. Pick a top % be it 50, 75, 80, whatever and (unfortunately due to artifacts) cap at that level, BUT at the same time rebalance the values in the needed manner so that the current levels of LRC are needed to reach the new cap.
5. Shard-wide Vendor system: One of the factors that have people up in arms about the economy is the "Luna Effect" where everything is based on the (often overvalued) prices seen on Luna vendors. The ability to find other vendors with the same items for sale at lesser prices (i.e. competition) would go a LONG way in helping the mental aspect of the problems UO has with its economy. Like it or not, it's 2011, not 1999 and most players do NOT find it enjoyable anymore to spend hours combing the world to try and find the item they are wanting to buy at the price they are seeking when there are faster options available (both in and out of game).
