I think most important is defining the problem, as was mentioned early in the thread. I've seen a lot of numbers tossed around that are suspiciously round. What are the actual numbers we're talking about. How much gold really is in the UO economy, and what is the rate that gold is currently entering it. Do the developers/GMs/whatever know, or have a means to know, how much gold is in the game? Is there a "tally gold" button or whatever that will add up all the gold in the world? Does anyone have data concerning the ratio of the amount of gold to its purchasing power, and how that has changed over time?
It is true everyone here, excepting possibly the OP, is working with imperfect information. Still, there does seem to be a general perception of high inflation among players.
On the other side of that, is the disparity in the amount of gold for certain accounts bad? After all, veteran accounts are rewarded with veteran awards that, by definition, are generally not available to newer accounts. There isn't any true scarcity in the game, as you actually don't need as much gold as people complain they don't have to play the game. Your character can't starve.
Disparity in of itself is not a bad thing. Players who have played longer should have more wealth either in items, real estate, gold, or some combination thereof. For my part, I wouldn't suggest players should all have the same amount of anything, gold or otherwise. Some players probably play so they can see what a castle filled with as much gold as it can hold looks like. They should be able to do this.
I think there is a perception that some parts of the economy are closed to significant portions of the playerbase. I started UO recently. two days ago I was chatting with a PvP guy and he asked me if I was interested in PvP. I said sure, but my interest isn't enough. That's ok to a point. I should expect to earn my gear and experience. Having it handed to me on a silver platter would be no fun.
But PvP in UO is a little more complicated. Here this guy is giving me advice on templates and then turns and says he spent 60 some-odd million on his PvP suit. I haven't even finished adding up the cost of scrolls (stat/skill) and I need 60 million+ more? I realize you guys have been at it for a while, but take a moment and listen to how that sounds. Perception is everything in every economy -real or virtual.
Even as gold as gone up in quantity, the NPC prices haven't changed as far as I can tell. Knowing that, can it actually be argued that the economy is *deflationary*, since you're continuously adding gold, but the price to obtain goods from NPCs hasn't changed, which means you have more purchasing power?
You could make the argument, but the goods in high demand that are driving the inflation do not originate from NPC resources. Sure, potions, magic scrolls, and a smattering of misc. products come from NPC's that people do consume, but these goods have been insulated from the inflation because NPC's always have it in stock, always sell at a fixed low price, and the products are made by lots and lots of crafters filling the demand on an as needed basis.
My opinion, for what its worth, is to 1. gradually make the economy on all the shards more "siege-esque". Make it so new tagged accounts or accounts that have two or three years of cancellation time can purchase more goods than other accounts from NPCs. 2. I know this sounds stupid, but increase the gold drop from lower tier monsters, as one of the developers suggested. This will give lower skill players a chance to enter the economy, but probably won't be worth it to more established players with more reliable sources of gold.
Earlier in this thread I was trading posts with someone and it spurred me to read up on Siege. It is interesting that Siege players do not seem to have the same perception of their economy as those on production shards do.
I think there is a case for the idea that things should wear out, and wear out often. There is also a very good case for putting production of goods into the hands of players rather than depending on the RNG to fill demand.
As I understand it, on Siege, virtually all gear is produced by another player and the RNG is only a supplement to high demand goods. This makes good sense if for no other reason than the fact that an RNG cannot possibly know if a population wants to wear green sashes or purple ones.
On production shards, it is the RNG that determines how available a given good is. As tastes and tactics change, the RNG is oblivious to the new set of conditions and we get a bunch of "high end crap" nobody wants and not enough high end good stuff nobody can get. I don't get the impression Siege experiences what I am calling the tyranny of the RNG quite like the other shards do.
Finally, I think they should revalue the currency. I KNOW this probably won't effect real spending power. The fact is, however, I'm playing an RPG, and it sort of breaks my suspension of reality to have to accept that my character is carting around thousands of gold to purchase things. I like the idea that for sundry purchases my character will drop a few base metal coins in someone's hand. Bank checks aren't too much better. Since it has almost become the case anyhow, the million gold check should just become a fiat currency if nothing else changes.
This final point is why I'm against virtualization. I like the idea of physically moving gold around, or at least checks, to make purchases, no matter how much trouble it causes.
I am not a fan of virtualization either. I would like to point out though, that because UO gold does not possess any intrinsic value, it is, by definition, fiat currency no matter what form it takes. (checks, coins, or virtual)
If you could smelt it into gold ingots, well that would be an interesting development.
