Fund Raising

[Some Canuck]

I'm new to this forum, so I'm sorry if this has already been a topic of debate. I'm sure this isn't an issue on the larger shards like Atlantic, but being from a sparsely populated shard I'm finding it difficult to generate city funds for trade deals. Has there ever been a discussion about scaling the cost of trade deals based on the number of registered citizens of a particular city or even by the number of votes cast in the previous election?

Thanks

 

[Lord Lew]

I don't think it would be an easy code, as every shard is a copy.

Maybe find alternate ways to raise gold, maybe hold a pvp competition, have an entry fee, and half goes to the city treasury and other half to the winner? Maybe a raffle, or an auction with a set percentage going to the city?

Need to think outside the box and be creative!

 

[Some Canuck]

It's not really a matter of finding alternatives. Well, perhaps i can phrase that better, I've looked for alternatives within the resources and population at my disposal and my options are severely limited. As a point of reference, there is a shard wide hunt put on every Friday evening by one of our other city's Governors. Last nights turn out was (drum roll) ... 3. 3 governors to be exact.

This essentially renders this aspect of the Governor's system unusable on my shard.

I understand the intent, that this is to be a sink to remove gold from the game. However to attempt to drain the same amount of gold from each shard will only further hurt the smaller shards that are already struggling to keep players engaged.

Perhaps, once at the beginning of each election term the King on each shard (EM insert name here) could negotiate a rate with all the trade guilds (Mesanna) to bring the costs down to an appropriate and usable level.

 

[Dot_Warner]

The buffs are a MAJOR thorn in the side of many governors, as we tend to be the ones footing the cost out of our own pockets. If we don't, people complain.

Gold from the purchase of town banners and titles feeds directly into a city's coffers now. While there is the potential to fund a trade deal here, most people bought banners and titles when they first came out ages ago. So this change is likely to be a poor revenue source, especially on smaller shards.
Depressingly, the devs seem completely unwilling to budge on the price of the trade deals. Nor will they accept the notion that the deals should require a citizen to pay a bit to help maintain them. (Talking something like 20-50K a pop) I think it should be at least partially funded by the citizens who use it, no "free rides."

Scaling the deal price wouldn't need to be shard specific... The town stones know how many citizens they have, how many voted, etc. All they need to do is mine that date and generate some usage statistics. Ex: How many citizens total (or how many active in a given timespan, active being one or two logins), how many using the buff, how many donating (could even go so far as using how MUCH is donated per week) then step the buff price accordingly.

Ex: 500 total citizens, 75 active in the last month, 40 using the buff, 6 donating an average of 15K a week each. So this week's deal price is 1.25 mil or some such.

Make a max price of 2mil, min price of 250K.

However, I personally believe that the buff system needs an overhaul, as the current design fails to take human nature into account.

I would change the system so that the citizen choses the buff THEY want and then pays a fee. Make little quests for citizens to gain the favor of the trade guilds, thus unlocking the buffs they can choose from.

The stones can still eat gold per week (or better yet, month), but the citizens pay a bit each time they use a buff, helping to defer the cost.

This would help counter the problem of there only being a few "good" buffs. Most people want SDI, SSI, MR, or FC. It really limits participation outside of cities that offer those buffs, which only hurts the system overall. People changing loyalty to another city just for the buff is a failure of the basic system.

 

[TandaBSK]

I'm not sure which shard your on, the most money we've raised has come through auction of items and donation from the wealthier players on shard. It's taken 3 of the 3 months terms to get some of that built and networked on Great Lakes, but it has been a struggle and the cost wouldn't be manageable at all without the help of some of the larger scale vendors/ merchants on our shard. We have hosted some hunts to raise funds, but we are typically 7 or so of 9 Governors and maybe 1 -3 other shard players generating like 25k to 50k per participating city. Doesn't come close to Buff costs OR prizes given for other events hosted.

 

[Some Canuck]

I play on Lake Austin, and before everyone jumps on the bash Lake Austin bandwagon. yes i know, a shard whose active player list mostly hovers in the single digits. And yes, I won my election by 1 vote. no i don't mean it was a close race. I won with 100% of the vote. I'll let all the mathematicians out there in the aether calculate how many votes my opponent garnered. Sufficed to say that i certainly don't put myself on the same tier of stature as the governors of the larger shards.

So now that that is all out in the open. The problem arises from failing to take into account the drastic population differences between shards and making no provision for it in this new system. Please don't get me wrong, I think that the intent and spirit of this system is brilliant. Unlike other games they can't just keep adding levels and harder creatures to fight, and I'm glad for that. I tried games like that, and i think they're grind-tastic.

So back to the issue at hand, we've got the makings of a great system that has a tremendous amount of potential but suffers from one huge flaw. It fails to recognize that what several dozen players can fund on 1 shard, is left to quite literally a single player to fund on another shard. This will leave the system unusable by most of even the well established veterans thus negating it as a gold sink as partially (or largely) intended. Also without veterans to fund deals, it leaves it completely inaccessible for new players on my shard. For all the complex math that goes on every time a Mage casts a spell or a Warrior swings a sword, i have trouble believing that developing a mathematical formula for appropriate Trade Deals pricing would be so difficult.

For example things that i think should be considered in such a formula:
Number of Votes cast for the current election
Number of Candidates
Number of Characters that are citizens of a City
Appropriate minimum cost assuming 1 vote is cast for 1 candidate and 1 character is a citizen.
Appropriate maximum cost so that high population cities that are full of new players aren't hit with outrageously high costs.

Heck if you wanted to get really involved, wouldn't the Guild or Arcane Arts give a better rate to Moonglow the city of Mages rather than the mining town of Minoc? This would also make certain cities far more lucrative. But I'm getting slightly off topic again.

To respond to Dot Warners comments: I think the vast majority or your post is extremely valid. I think the only point you and i differ to any large degree would be:

>>> "I would change the system so that the citizen choses the buff THEY want and then pays a fee. Make little quests for citizens to gain the favor of the trade guilds, thus unlocking the buffs they can choose from".

While yes i agree it would be nice, i think the spirit of this system is that it is intended to be a social function of the game. In my opinion there aren't enough components in game that require a legitimate group efforts anymore. Of course i am aware that me making a statement like that, from a certain point of view; appears to contradict everything else i've written. I would assert that a system could and should be deemed broken if it that can be funded by 2% of shard 'A's population without issue and shard 'B' cannot fund it with 80% of their population. You've essentially told the population of shard 'B' to vacate their home and move to shard 'A' if they wish to experience everything this game has to offer.

Before this system slips away into the vacuum of ultima lore along side such features as Order vs Chaos (yes i've been around that long) I wanted to lend my unsolicited two cents. If anyone is getting the idea that i'm complaining, please understand that's not my intent here. I want to be a voice for positive and constructive change towards amending a system that i believe has only just missed the mark on opening an intriguing new facet of game play.

And for those few of you that remember back as far as i do: relax, patch 16 is not going to ruin the game

Thanks for reading my rant.

 

[Dot_Warner]

The problem with wanting trade deals to be a social aspect of the game is the fact that they were never properly designed to be that. We weren't give the tools to make it social in game. We had bulletin boards with two way communication...we asked for a way to announce events...the two way boards went away and we got the current announcement boards. The only 24/7 social part of the system went poof, since global chat requires you to be logged into it and paying attention AND be willing to wade through the usual gutter talk. Making people go outside the game to communicate not only breaks immersion, but few people are likely to care enough to bother doing so. Social aspects should revolve around run things, not which city has +5 SSI.

We've given the devs ideas on what we need to be better governors, more social, etc.; they just need to implement them.

Having the trade deal be some big group effort is a nice idea, but would never work well in the current framework. Human nature also gets in the way here: unless someone HAS to contribute to get something, 90% of them won't. Right now, the cities with the best deals get the most citizens (either A. because there actually IS a vocal majority, or B. because nobody bothers to say anything). Those cities with an unpopular deal? Well, they only get paid attention come election week. If a citizen could chose their own deal, then they could actually be a citizen in the city they want, and the deals become the perk they were meant to be and less of an annoying hot-button issue.

Also, its less than .1% of a shard that pays for the deals. On most shards, in the cities with deals, its most likely the governor paying for it out of their own pocket. It was this way until very recently on GL (MoA held an auction and Hearts Desire donated ~10mil to each city). However, the problem still remains: 52,000,000 gold a term is enough to burn a hole through most people's pockets.

 

[Riyana]

While yes i agree it would be nice, i think the spirit of this system is that it is intended to be a social function of the game. In my opinion there aren't enough components in game that require a legitimate group efforts anymore. Of course i am aware that me making a statement like that, from a certain point of view; appears to contradict everything else i've written. I would assert that a system could and should be deemed broken if it that can be funded by 2% of shard 'A's population without issue and shard 'B' cannot fund it with 80% of their population. You've essentially told the population of shard 'B' to vacate their home and move to shard 'A' if they wish to experience everything this game has to offer.

The problem with one buff per city isn't that it's a group effort--the problem is players will switch cities to keep their preferred buff if the governor of their current city changes or doesn't renew it. Players become loyal to trade associations rather than to cities.

Of course, you can flip that around too. If you could choose your own buff, it's entirely possible (and probably very likely, especially on lower population shards) eventually everyone wanting a buff would migrate to a single city.

 

[Pandora_CoD]

Bottom line here on this thread is:

a) Thanks for the city banners and titles adding to the city coffers but still not enough for the lower populated shards. We need "PAY PER USE"!!! And most folks agree that they'd be willing to pay to use a city buff. So what gives? Why hasn't this been tested at least on TC?

b) Add back another bulletin board next to the current one you have that allows us that 2-way communication that you have now removed. @Kyronix what stopped your original idea on this from going forward? I rather liked that idea. Since we cannot get that right now, please add the original boards NEXT to the current ones. We need both of them.

c) Governors need statistics on their city. We need information such as # of citizens, # of buffs used this week, # of votes cast for an election per candidate, etc. etc. Brainstorm some ways that this can be done.

 

[Kyronix]

With Pub 86 we'll be introducing a new method of funding the cities in the form of trade orders. Trade orders will allow players to deliver goods between cities in exchange for resources and other rewards for themselves, as well as monies for the city treasury.

Adding public use functionality to the new announcement boards wasn't feasible given the time available to complete that task. Opening anything like that up to the public requires many checks and balances, and doing it with the way our gumps work is even more challenging. The primary goal was to give Governors something town crier-esque without adding unnecessary spam. The announcement boards are that. As I stated elsewhere, I do think we need better in game methods of communication, but please understand that this is by no means a simple task nor is it a top priority given that we've all been successfully communicating and organizing with one another for nearly 17 years in the absence of such a tool. That being said, it's still on my wishlist along with more direct ways of advertising the goings on within the realm.

As far as stats, it's something we can look into for a future update to the city stones.

 

[Pandora_CoD]

With Pub 86 we'll be introducing a new method of funding the cities in the form of trade orders. Trade orders will allow players to deliver goods between cities in exchange for resources and other rewards for themselves, as well as monies for the city treasury.

Adding public use functionality to the new announcement boards wasn't feasible given the time available to complete that task. Opening anything like that up to the public requires many checks and balances, and doing it with the way our gumps work is even more challenging. The primary goal was to give Governors something town crier-esque without adding unnecessary spam. The announcement boards are that. As I stated elsewhere, I do think we need better in game methods of communication, but please understand that this is by no means a simple task nor is it a top priority given that we've all been successfully communicating and organizing with one another for nearly 17 years in the absence of such a tool. That being said, it's still on my wishlist along with more direct ways of advertising the goings on within the realm.

As far as stats, it's something we can look into for a future update to the city stones.

Again, why not a pay-per-use buffing system? You are building a new thing with trade orders... that's great, but ... give us pay-per-use on the buffs. Problem SOLVED. We keep asking and asking, but we don't get a "why not" answer and you can speak geek to me, I run my own technology firm.

I get that it is not easy to facilitate things like "City Heralds" that spew announcements, etc. etc. but we already HAD a bulletin board that was push/pull --- why not just add that back in along with the board of today? Can we just have another board added nearby the one of today that was just like before?

Thanks for looking into providing statistics on the cities, that would be most helpful to Governors.

 

[Kyronix]

Again, why not a pay-per-use buffing system? You are building a new thing with trade orders... that's great, but ... give us pay-per-use on the buffs. Problem SOLVED. We keep asking and asking, but we don't get a "why not" answer and you can speak geek to me, I run my own technology firm.

I get that it is not easy to facilitate things like "City Heralds" that spew announcements, etc. etc. but we already HAD a bulletin board that was push/pull --- why not just add that back in along with the board of today? Can we just have another board added nearby the one of today that was just like before?

Thanks for looking into providing statistics on the cities, that would be most helpful to Governors.

Pay per use doesn't fit. If we were going to have something that you just dropped an arbitrary amount of gold on to get a buff, we'd do that instead of making it part of the Governorships. I can see allowing individuals choose the buff they get, but charging the individual just doesn't fit. The city's treasury is meant to be something that can serve as a rally point for encouraging play. What method of play is employed in order to facilitate the raising of those funds is entirely up to those participating. Making it just a pay per use does not encourage the community that Governorship's are intended to foster. I understand that some people like to play away from larger groups, or maybe aren't able to be online the same time as their friends in some cases. As a result the upcoming trade orders are geared towards being to play something by yourself (smaller ambush style encounters that you can solo while delivering the order), whilst still providing for the community at large (there are big payouts to the city stones for deliveries). Those are the types of solutions that provide another menu item on the buffet of activities in Britannia, rather than just dumping gold somewhere.

We can look into putting the old style bulletin boards somewhere near the offices. These would have to be placed manually so it'd be on a requested basis.

 

[TandaBSK]

@Pandora_CoD "you can speak geek to me" that line should be in a teenage summer flick... need to get my mind back on business. lol
@Kryonix I am watching this with hopes the new system helps. I'd love to get more people involved in the fundraising not linked to a Governor run event. "Whats in it for Me" is a big part of this ordeal. It is rather pointless to give out 5-10m in prizes to get people to come to a fundraiser, and mob hunting does generate some but not enough to sustain this. Old styled bulletin boards near Governor's offices... done as a Governor's Request then I take it? Possibly? Thank you btw for not throwing up your hands, screaming and chucking this all.

Also I would like to chime in for some sort of city stats. If the old search for UO guilds etc is coming back in some altered form could the city loyalty be listed with the character like their guild affiliation?

 

[Speranza]

but charging the individual just doesn't fit.

Then who is supposed to pay for the buff?

• The citizens?
  
  • Then make it pay-per-use. Taxes are supposed to be spread among the populace and only right now only the "rich" are taxed by buying titles.
• The Governors?
  
  • Why penalize the pockets of 8 people who are already taking time and effort away money making aspects of the game to be governors to help their citizens? Maybe I should just start buying some gold from Nails.....

 

[Pandora_CoD]

Pay per use doesn't fit. If we were going to have something that you just dropped an arbitrary amount of gold on to get a buff, we'd do that instead of making it part of the Governorships. I can see allowing individuals choose the buff they get, but charging the individual just doesn't fit. The city's treasury is meant to be something that can serve as a rally point for encouraging play. What method of play is employed in order to facilitate the raising of those funds is entirely up to those participating. Making it just a pay per use does not encourage the community that Governorship's are intended to foster. I understand that some people like to play away from larger groups, or maybe aren't able to be online the same time as their friends in some cases. As a result the upcoming trade orders are geared towards being to play something by yourself (smaller ambush style encounters that you can solo while delivering the order), whilst still providing for the community at large (there are big payouts to the city stones for deliveries). Those are the types of solutions that provide another menu item on the buffet of activities in Britannia, rather than just dumping gold somewhere.

We can look into putting the old style bulletin boards somewhere near the offices. These would have to be placed manually so it'd be on a requested basis.

Thank you Kyronix for your fast response, but I still beg to differ... there is nothing that will take away from a Governor's intent to foster community because that's the entire reason a lot of us run for the office; certainly not pay-per-use.

 

[Pandora_CoD]

@Pandora_CoD "you can speak geek to me" that line should be in a teenage summer flick... need to get my mind back on business. lol

*in her best Elvis voice*

Thank ya, thank ya very much.

 

[Merus]

Pay per use doesn't fit. If we were going to have something that you just dropped an arbitrary amount of gold on to get a buff, we'd do that instead of making it part of the Governorships. I can see allowing individuals choose the buff they get, but charging the individual just doesn't fit. The city's treasury is meant to be something that can serve as a rally point for encouraging play. What method of play is employed in order to facilitate the raising of those funds is entirely up to those participating. Making it just a pay per use does not encourage the community that Governorship's are intended to foster. I understand that some people like to play away from larger groups, or maybe aren't able to be online the same time as their friends in some cases. As a result the upcoming trade orders are geared towards being to play something by yourself (smaller ambush style encounters that you can solo while delivering the order), whilst still providing for the community at large (there are big payouts to the city stones for deliveries). Those are the types of solutions that provide another menu item on the buffet of activities in Britannia, rather than just dumping gold somewhere.

We can look into putting the old style bulletin boards somewhere near the offices. These would have to be placed manually so it'd be on a requested basis.

Better a system that is completely ignored on small population shards. WIN-WIN!

 

[Dot_Warner]

With Pub 86 we'll be introducing a new method of funding the cities in the form of trade orders. Trade orders will allow players to deliver goods between cities in exchange for resources and other rewards for themselves, as well as monies for the city treasury.

As a result the upcoming trade orders are geared towards being to play something by yourself (smaller ambush style encounters that you can solo while delivering the order), whilst still providing for the community at large (there are big payouts to the city stones for deliveries). Those are the types of solutions that provide another menu item on the buffet of activities in Britannia, rather than just dumping gold somewhere.

I like the idea of this, but will reserve judgment until I can test it. (Please put this on TC for a while before publishing!) I also like that the person doing the "quest" will get something out of it for themselves! Always play into human nature!

Adding public use functionality to the new announcement boards wasn't feasible given the time available to complete that task.

Well, this is a clear case of the dangers of publishing without testing. We would have railed against this on TC, but we never got that chance. A publish put out without time on TC (Origin doesn't count) is never a good idea. Ever.

We can look into putting the old style bulletin boards somewhere near the offices. These would have to be placed manually so it'd be on a requested basis.

If you expect us to waste one of our two requests per 6 month term on these, you're going to get an unpleasant backlash. I strongly suggest these just get placed as a matter of cause on all shards in the exact same places, see it as a gesture of goodwill.

Pay per use doesn't fit. If we were going to have something that you just dropped an arbitrary amount of gold on to get a buff, we'd do that instead of making it part of the Governorships. I can see allowing individuals choose the buff they get, but charging the individual just doesn't fit. The city's treasury is meant to be something that can serve as a rally point for encouraging play. What method of play is employed in order to facilitate the raising of those funds is entirely up to those participating. Making it just a pay per use does not encourage the community that Governorship's are intended to foster. I understand that some people like to play away from larger groups, or maybe aren't able to be online the same time as their friends in some cases.

Pay for use does fit. If you don't require payment for something beneficial, most people will simply take it without giving anything back. Its human nature. It'd be nice if society functioned on an altruistic level where everyone towed their fair share, but this isn't utopia. The trade deals are a service that people should chip in for. Nobody said that the payments had to match the deal price, but it would be nice if they made a small dent in the overall price. The trade deals are like having your cake and eating it too; its free and you can't be made to chip in. You can't have a strong community if the majority leeches off the minority (IRL political parallels aside). Its kind of like the museums that forgo an entrance fee and put up a donation box instead. If there wasn't a docent there to give the evil eye to those who just walked on in, most wouldn't even give their pocket change. Hence the current problem with the treasuries. (Hopefully the Orders eliminate this entirely.)

It really must change to choosing your own buff though....

You pretty much have a ready made in focus group here, I encourage you to interactively use it!

 

[Kyronix]

I like the idea of this, but will reserve judgment until I can test it. (Please put this on TC for a while before publishing!) I also like that the person doing the "quest" will get something out of it for themselves! Always play into human nature!



Well, this is a clear case of the dangers of publishing without testing. We would have railed against this on TC, but we never got that chance. A publish put out without time on TC (Origin doesn't count) is never a good idea. Ever.



If you expect us to waste one of our two requests per 6 month term on these, you're going to get an unpleasant backlash. I strongly suggest these just get placed as a matter of cause on all shards in the exact same places, see it as a gesture of goodwill.



Pay for use does fit. If you don't require payment for something beneficial, most people will simply take it without giving anything back. Its human nature. It'd be nice if society functioned on an altruistic level where everyone towed their fair share, but this isn't utopia. The trade deals are a service that people should chip in for. Nobody said that the payments had to match the deal price, but it would be nice if they made a small dent in the overall price. The trade deals are like having your cake and eating it too; its free and you can't be made to chip in. You can't have a strong community if the majority leeches off the minority (IRL political parallels aside). Its kind of like the museums that forgo an entrance fee and put up a donation box instead. If there wasn't a docent there to give the evil eye to those who just walked on in, most wouldn't even give their pocket change. Hence the current problem with the treasuries. (Hopefully the Orders eliminate this entirely.)

It really must change to choosing your own buff though....

You pretty much have a ready made in focus group here, I encourage you to interactively use it!

You wouldn't have to waste a request on the board if you really want one, just talk to your EM about it and they can pass along the request. We are happy to entertain requests so long as they don't get out of hand. It was just out of hand in the beginning and we were literally inundated with requests that were all over the place and weren't why we did this in the first place. If it's something meaningful that ties into the shard's events, we're pretty willing to add it to growing library of additions (Edit to add...of course there are restrictions on everything, and deco for the sake of deco isn't a prudent use of our time...). We've built the City of Trinsic's market square up almost a half dozen times now, and that's pretty neat.

I think the trade orders will help to fund the treasuries pretty well. The amount of money that is required to fulfill the orders is relatively small, as they are generated in real time from the inventories of shopkeepers throughout the City, and the payoff when you deliver them is pretty hefty in comparison.

 

[BeaIank]

Okay, colour me curious, @Kyronix.
Will those trade orders require the character to have fighting skills at all to complete them?
I'd much rather take my polite and harmless crafters and resource gatherers to go do such quest than taking my bloody thirst, armed to the teeth to do them.

 

[Dot_Warner]

You wouldn't have to waste a request on the board if you really want one, just talk to your EM about it and they can pass along the request.

Please let the EMs know this then. As it stands now, we're extremely limited in what we can request (and there appears to be very little consistency from shard to shard, btw) and it tends to take an inordinate amount of time to get "approved," let alone setup (at least a month). Since you're reading this, I'd suggest that gates to player events get the green light if announced far enough in advance - they'd be a massive boon!

We are happy to entertain requests so long as they don't get out of hand. It was just out of hand in the beginning and we were literally inundated with requests that were all over the place and weren't why we did this in the first place.

That is completely understandable. Best I can suggest is careful management of player expectations, this is where increased communication is key. Your posing here is a good way to help with that!

If it's something meaningful that ties into the shard's events, we're pretty willing to add it to growing library of additions (Edit to add...of course there are restrictions on everything, and deco for the sake of deco isn't a prudent use of our time...). We've built the City of Trinsic's market square up almost a half dozen times now, and that's pretty neat.

You're going to get asked for deco a lot. A LOT. Most of the cities look like they're abandoned - even the ones with lots of NPCs. They have no life to them, no color. We'd like to see plants around houses, random bits of trash (bring that back as a loyalty thing!), houses looking cluttered with possessions, etc. We want the cities to look lived in, not empty. For example, compare the lived-in look of Zento to the bareness of Britain. I could offer several dozen suggestions just for Britain... Speaking of, what do you think of Pandora's thread?

Some EMs like to decorate, others avoid it like the plague. Most of the governors would be happy to be able to go around their town and beautify it. Heck, find the EMs that like to deco and let them go crazy on an internal shard and patch that out to everyone. Since its in the map file, the impact on lag is negligible.

The library sounds nice, but I'm leery of it being relied on too much to satisfy players. The likelihood that where things wind up getting placed being the same on every shard I think grates on some of us as well. Yew on Great Lakes shouldn't look like Yew on Sonoma, or Vesper on Pacific look like Vesper on Atlantic.

We're also likely to want some of these things to stay around for a while, not just a few hours/days for an event.

But this also makes me want to stray into the desire for the ability to lock event props down...books.. etc...

I think the trade orders will help to fund the treasuries pretty well. The amount of money that is required to fulfill the orders is relatively small, as they are generated in real time from the inventories of shopkeepers throughout the City, and the payoff when you deliver them is pretty hefty in comparison.

Only thing I'd caution here is that there are very few things players need to buy from NPCs at this point. I honestly can count on one hand how many things I've purchased from an NPC in the last six months. Books, reagents and scrolls are about the only things I can really think of that NPCs regularly supply players. Having the same items on every shopkeeper of a specific type in every city might hamper this as well. Are you planning on making certain things unique to each city, or more scarce in a few than in others? I.e. ingots and wool naturally in greater supply in Minoc than in Jhelom? Some reagents naturally in greater supply in Moonglow than in Skara Brae? Weapons surplus in Jhelom and Trinsic compared to elsewhere?

There is potential for an actual economy here if done right...

 

[TandaBSK]

Here's something I haven't seen suggested, NOT that I couldn't have missed it I am not as valiant a board warrior as some. Remember the Virtue armor sets? Each Crown city with a governor save Vesper has a corresponding dungeon, what if by supporting your city and hunting in the anti-virtue dungeon some how kicked into the town treasury? Not sure what it could be, a loot item or stealable or daily rare some resource that spawns as loot that could get turned into the city system? I don't want to impact having to revamp the whole monster loot system... that seems way to extreme. And unlike Pandora... you can speak geek to me but I likely won't understand it. haha

What other things do we have tied to our specific cities? I know I use to gather reagents on Moonglow and Magincia as a newbie, Mined in Minoc, Britain and Delucia, Lumberjacked in Delucia (Ter Mur now too but that didn't exist back then) Jhelom was a favorite spot to sell smith crafted items the npc's didn't seem to tire of getting them there as quickly, Skara Brae & Moonglow I picked tons of cotton it brought lots of gold back then. I GM'd magery, alchemy and inscription back in 99-2000 without a warrior! just sheering sheep, picking cotton, selling bandages and scavenging.
I sheered a lot of sheep in Yew and until Heartwood and roleplay I didn't go there for much else. Trinsic I've never found a use for (Sorry Ra'Dian GL's Gov.) There has to be other stuff we did and do that is unique to why we visit or use certain cities that might be the hook to bring folks in. What's special to any of you that draws you to a town?

@Dot Warner , your right I rarely buy anything from an NPC, liquor, books, bags, blank runes, misc food for rp stuff. Most of the crafting supplies if I don't gather or have hoarded from working skills I buy from players. I try to find new players if I can. The more gold I've earned and saved the less likely I am to spend the time and buy reagents or blank scrolls, to work a vendor up to the 999 spot. I know many of those who sell this stuff do so by questionable means, but it takes hours of my day to gather 5-10k of each reagent or scrolls. You know most of us who can afford it pay the premium/mark up to buy in bulk. There still needs to be an NPC economical way for Newbies to get a start and foothold.

Rambling thought, once upon a time long ago, Minoc had a Governor's/Mayors Storehouse, it was player run, but like a guild house it held bulk in as many resources as could be managed. What if the King had a store house (maybe divided up by city specialty you get reagents imported from Moonglow or New Magincia for example), that you could earn the right to shop at (complete a quest, buy your way in what have you) and paid premium (mid to high range vendor price) to buy in bulk? This could be split between cities & the crown. Pull out some of the purchasing redundancy and specialize NPC vendors to their cities, I think for new player sake any tailor (for example) should still buy say wool or cotton etc. Limit this to a 1x month admittance per one account bound ticket/token, like a shard shield, maybe a gold limit... you can spend NO more than say 5 or 10 million per visit. Specialty items like barbed leather, colored ingots, colored boards still can only be obtained in game. I don't want to cut out vendor income it'd be cutting my own throat for funding Minoc, but maybe there is a solution than can mend many holes.

While I love to support the new players, I for one would be more inclined to give the game back my gold IF in exchange I got time savings, knew the items were legit in their creation, and it went to support building communities and restoring the economic balance to a degree.

 

[Aurelius]

The city's treasury is meant to be something that can serve as a rally point for encouraging play. What method of play is employed in order to facilitate the raising of those funds is entirely up to those participating. Making it just a pay per use does not encourage the community that Governorship's are intended to foster..

So maybe have the scale or duration of the buff link back to the number of citizens who chose it, or the funds of the town that supplied it, and the loyalty/title levels of the buff users? Instant reason to be a citizen AND bring friends in to strengthen the benefits of being a citizen as well as boosting town funds in the process.

 

[Darius Bloodbain]

I play on Lake Austin, and before everyone jumps on the bash Lake Austin bandwagon. yes i know, a shard whose active player list mostly hovers in the single digits. And yes, I won my election by 1 vote. no i don't mean it was a close race. I won with 100% of the vote. I'll let all the mathematicians out there in the aether calculate how many votes my opponent garnered. Sufficed to say that i certainly don't put myself on the same tier of stature as the governors of the larger shards.

So now that that is all out in the open. The problem arises from failing to take into account the drastic population differences between shards and making no provision for it in this new system. Please don't get me wrong, I think that the intent and spirit of this system is brilliant. Unlike other games they can't just keep adding levels and harder creatures to fight, and I'm glad for that. I tried games like that, and i think they're grind-tastic.

So back to the issue at hand, we've got the makings of a great system that has a tremendous amount of potential but suffers from one huge flaw. It fails to recognize that what several dozen players can fund on 1 shard, is left to quite literally a single player to fund on another shard. This will leave the system unusable by most of even the well established veterans thus negating it as a gold sink as partially (or largely) intended. Also without veterans to fund deals, it leaves it completely inaccessible for new players on my shard. For all the complex math that goes on every time a Mage casts a spell or a Warrior swings a sword, i have trouble believing that developing a mathematical formula for appropriate Trade Deals pricing would be so difficult.

For example things that i think should be considered in such a formula:
Number of Votes cast for the current election
Number of Candidates
Number of Characters that are citizens of a City
Appropriate minimum cost assuming 1 vote is cast for 1 candidate and 1 character is a citizen.
Appropriate maximum cost so that high population cities that are full of new players aren't hit with outrageously high costs.

Heck if you wanted to get really involved, wouldn't the Guild or Arcane Arts give a better rate to Moonglow the city of Mages rather than the mining town of Minoc? This would also make certain cities far more lucrative. But I'm getting slightly off topic again.

To respond to Dot Warners comments: I think the vast majority or your post is extremely valid. I think the only point you and i differ to any large degree would be:

>>> "I would change the system so that the citizen choses the buff THEY want and then pays a fee. Make little quests for citizens to gain the favor of the trade guilds, thus unlocking the buffs they can choose from".

While yes i agree it would be nice, i think the spirit of this system is that it is intended to be a social function of the game. In my opinion there aren't enough components in game that require a legitimate group efforts anymore. Of course i am aware that me making a statement like that, from a certain point of view; appears to contradict everything else i've written. I would assert that a system could and should be deemed broken if it that can be funded by 2% of shard 'A's population without issue and shard 'B' cannot fund it with 80% of their population. You've essentially told the population of shard 'B' to vacate their home and move to shard 'A' if they wish to experience everything this game has to offer.

Before this system slips away into the vacuum of ultima lore along side such features as Order vs Chaos (yes i've been around that long) I wanted to lend my unsolicited two cents. If anyone is getting the idea that i'm complaining, please understand that's not my intent here. I want to be a voice for positive and constructive change towards amending a system that i believe has only just missed the mark on opening an intriguing new facet of game play.

And for those few of you that remember back as far as i do: relax, patch 16 is not going to ruin the game

Thanks for reading my rant.

I believe my shard mate brings up some very valid points. Especially the point of tuning back the cost based on city
citizen population so less populated shards have a usable system the same as higher populated ones.

 

[Some Canuck]

I see a lot of very good suggestions and some extremely valid points being brought up thus far. I am glad to know that I'm not the only one that has been struggling.

But let's not lose sight of one of the primary goals of this system, it's supposed to be a gold sink! just like insurance, the void pool, the casino and a host of other "features". Lets face it, there is simply too much gold in game and the economy is probably irreparably broken. Removing gold from the game has always been a tricky issue due to the fact that savvy players avoid gold sinks like the plague and the less than savvy complain about the cost (yes I'm aware which category I belong under) . No matter what sink is introduced, you'll never be able to target those gold farmers that have storehouses full of cheques. The only players that would funnel their earnings into a sink are the ones that probably can afford to. If I had more time I could probably go back and phrase this all a little better, but this is slightly off topic and I'm doing my best to not highjack my own thread. So I'll end this part by saying; If there are only 5 player citizens in a city then 2 mill gold is an unrealistic goal as a gold sink.

So, having said all that and despite the fact I started a thread that appears to dump all over the trade deal system. Let me confess something unusual; I don't mind paying into a gold sink... kinda. If I pay 2 mill out of my pocket and it provides enjoyment for an appropriate number of people than that's great, mission accomplished. But if I pay 2 mill and it gets fewer than 4 uses, well that's a little lopsided and that type of gold sink will never get utilized making the entire endeavour little more than redundant computer code.

Yes I am firmly behind the idea of one trade deal per city. This is after all supposed to be a social game. Yes some players will become attached to trade deals and shift their city loyalties with the trade winds and that's fine. But for those of us that have set up shop and are passionate about breathing life into a particular city again, it's as Kyronix has pointed out; this is supposed to be a rallying point for the populous. And besides if you're a citizen of a city and you don't like what the governor's up to. Campaign against them in the next election!

So now that I've; less than eloquently, got some things off my chest on with something constructive. Has the idea of vendors placed by governors (similar to faction vendors) with the proceeds going to city funds ever come up? Not that I think this would be a huge amount of income, but every little bit helps and it may encourage player traffic to banks other than Luna.

I recognize that my rants are becoming more haphazardly written with every subsequent post, so thank you for indulging me.

 

[Dot_Warner]

oWhile the trade deals may be intended as gold sink, it is one of the most poorly thought out, designed and implemented gold sinks in UO...EVER. One of the best gold sinks would be the taxidermy kits. An item that ultimately confers no benefit other than added deco. Right now, due to human nature being what it is, and Kyronix being unwilling to recognize several millennia of social history, we have a gold sink that the governors are expected to pretty much be solely responsible for. That is a failure of both logic and design.

Yes I am firmly behind the idea of one trade deal per city. This is after all supposed to be a social game. Yes some players will become attached to trade deals and shift their city loyalties with the trade winds and that's fine. But for those of us that have set up shop and are passionate about breathing life into a particular city again, it's as Kyronix has pointed out; this is supposed to be a rallying point for the populous. And besides if you're a citizen of a city and you don't like what the governor's up to. Campaign against them in the next election!

Uhm... No? You can't have a stable system where citizens shift with the winds based on the trade deal. The trade deals, as they currently exist, are a major design flaw in the system as it is - the majority of people aren't participating in the system for the community aspects, they are in it for the buff. That's it. RPers are in it for community, the average players...notsomuch. (Look how many non-governors go to the monthly meetings, the number is pathetically small - even on Atl the number is tiny.) This is why choosing your own buff would take a lot of the OOC city-hopping out of the equation.

For example, it would be like if your city's mayor got to decide whether you ONLY received water, power, sanitation or food for the week. Not because they're some moustache-twirling villain, but because of an arbitrary rule. An exaggerated example to be sure, but fitting. Giving you the choice which of those four things to pick is a better option.

The trade deals will never be a 'rallying point,' people's play styles vary too greatly from day to day and character to character to ever easily fit into such a limiting system.

 

[TandaBSK]

@Some Canuck
Not sure if the "faction vendor" convert to a "governor vendor" has been broached on the boards, I'm sure it's been thought of, and I believe some form of vendor or npc % to the stone has been discussed I think. Don't sweat the rambling, we all do it.

I've sent many gold sink ideas off to mesanna who was requesting them, along with new veteran reward ideas. We'll have to see if anything comes of any of it.

 

[Matthias O'Hare]

I've quite frankly avoided this forum after the failure that was the 'one vote per shard' response. It was not a well thought out response, as it did nothing to stem the vote trading. Vote trading is alive and well, and still deciding the outcome on any meaningful shard. I've continued to support the governors by donating and holding events, but really didn't want to have anything to do with this...

...but you've managed to draw me back thanks to the Trade Orders plan that was hinted at. Once again, a good idea that can be fun and offer countless hours of fun if done right. Though I think Trade Order deserve their own thread since it sounds like it will have moving parts that need to be discussed away from distraction.

However, I think Tanda offered one of the best ideas I have heard yet.

Here's something I haven't seen suggested, NOT that I couldn't have missed it I am not as valiant a board warrior as some. Remember the Virtue armor sets? Each Crown city with a governor save Vesper has a corresponding dungeon, what if by supporting your city and hunting in the anti-virtue dungeon some how kicked into the town treasury? Not sure what it could be, a loot item or stealable or daily rare some resource that spawns as loot that could get turned into the city system? I don't want to impact having to revamp the whole monster loot system... that seems way to extreme. And unlike Pandora... you can speak geek to me but I likely won't understand it. haha

Rewarding cities with a small percentage of the gold that drops in their anti virtue town would be a brilliant idea and produce a small, but steady stream of donation. A steady stream that could become a nice flood from time to time if that city organized a hunt into their respective dungeon. Vesper may not have a counter virtue, but I am sure we could find a dungeon for them... or maybe tie them to something like pirate ships since they are merchant? I don't know, I'm just spitballing. This is an idea that needs to get serious discussion, because it could help us move past the funding debate that we've been stuck in since the system started.

 

[Cephas [V]]

A quick dovetailing idea to complete the above thought: couple New Magincia and Vesper with Fire and Ice, along with the other 7 classical anti-virtue dungeons. I would recommend studying gold drop rates first, as there seems to be a lot more gold to be had in Hythloth than in Wrong nowadays.

 

[Riyana]

I've quite frankly avoided this forum after the failure that was the 'one vote per shard' response. It was not a well thought out response, as it did nothing to stem the vote trading. Vote trading is alive and well, and still deciding the outcome on any meaningful shard. I've continued to support the governors by donating and holding events, but really didn't want to have anything to do with this...

...but you've managed to draw me back thanks to the Trade Orders plan that was hinted at. Once again, a good idea that can be fun and offer countless hours of fun if done right. Though I think Trade Order deserve their own thread since it sounds like it will have moving parts that need to be discussed away from distraction.

However, I think Tanda offered one of the best ideas I have heard yet.



Rewarding cities with a small percentage of the gold that drops in their anti virtue town would be a brilliant idea and produce a small, but steady stream of donation. A steady stream that could become a nice flood from time to time if that city organized a hunt into their respective dungeon. Vesper may not have a counter virtue, but I am sure we could find a dungeon for them... or maybe tie them to something like pirate ships since they are merchant? I don't know, I'm just spitballing. This is an idea that needs to get serious discussion, because it could help us move past the funding debate that we've been stuck in since the system started.

One vote per shard was a terrible way to handle a problem that it didn't seem like the devs even understood, and it made it all potentially much worse. I think the only reason there hasn't been as big an uproar over voting shenanigans lately is that many people have just given up on the system. Even people who were very excited about it and threw a ton of effort into it have been getting frustrated. After the one vote per shard then the bulletin board change, I'm not sure I want them to "fix" anything anymore with this system.

But as for the dungeon idea--I think that a better way to do it would be for declared citizens hunting in ANY dungeons (or a select few that would be the same for all cities) to have money put in their city stone as they hunt. If it's each city with an individual corresponding dungeon, some cities are going to get a lot of kickback and some almost none, and it does little to encourage people to actually declare citizenship. If people hunting in Shame (a very popular dungeon) sends money to Trinsic and people hunting in Hythloth (does anyone go to Hythloth??) sends money to Skara Brae, Trinsic will always be sitting pretty and Skara Brae won't even if Skara Brae has 100 citizens to Trinsic's 5. This would also eliminate any need to assign Vesper and New Magincia a dungeon/hunting area.

This way it would reward cities with active citizens without requiring that anyone go out of their way. Governors could still organize hunts, but they wouldn't be limited to a single dungeon that may or may not have any appeal to them and their citizens.