Tweet
Yet another thread about absurd prices and gilsellers, omfg!
Anyway...
What if square were to sell items (not gil!) themselves in order to fight the gil sellers and constant rise in prices?
Think about it... if square were to sell a Ochiudo's Kote for 50 bucks (out-of-the-ass ammount, dont quote that <.<):
1. Gil Sellers would not overcamp the NM, only legit players.
2. The price for it would probably stop rising exponentially due to point #1.
If item#1 drops in price (or simply doesnt keep rising), the whole economy will, in time, recover and be more realistic towards a real economy, since Gil Sellers would be wasting their time selling the gil since you can just buy it for cheaper from square.
The OKote is an example, don't flame me over an example, thank you...
So let's think about it again, what if this doesnt really help the economy, since people are still greedy to sell their shits for higher prices... atleast we would confirm once and for all if the Gil Sellers are really the root of our problems and we could probably anihilate them all if square did the selling themselves.
Another thing we would benefit from is that since a Gil Seller has to sell the gil, the gil itself will just add to the economy, and will probably never be eradicated, or atleast not anytime soon... buying the item directly from a source that doesnt add that gil to the economy would be the only means to stop the gil overflow, only square has the power to create an item without any gil involved.
Bought items are bound to you... you cannot sell them, but no one other than you needs to know that, i guess.. some system for items that have your tag on it but only you and square know of it, can't trade, can't sell on AH, can't bazaar, can't send through del. box, can drop or sell to NPC.
I could see people going like this:
Bob: ahha n00b, put that item on bazaar so i can see you didnt buy it!
Joe: erm.. orz..
Bob: ahhaaah :D /kick nub
Me: hey bob, so he bought the item.. why do you care? just as long as he doesnt harm the economy for the rest of us, that's fine with me, i actually bow down to his choice over buying the actual gil /bow
Bob: boobs!
Me: ... :D
I know i know... the economy would still be fucked up from greedy people, but i think it would be more realistic... nowadays the economy shifts alot, because stuff like a weskit suddenly goes from 3mil to 20mil (for example) but this would NOT happen if the economy was realistic and not run by IGE who decided to drop their gil prices... what would happen is, another example... Silk Thread rises 2k because suddenly the supply was lacking and someone raised the price, then, and because the economy has to follow, Silk Cloth would have to rise atleast 2k in order to maintain the balance, THAT is a real economy shift.
Another idea:
Silk Thread (i use this example since it's such a popular item) has been selling for 10k per stack (EXAMPLE!) for the last week, the AH could keep track of that ammount, and whenever someone deviates from that price, they pay extra tax, simple, the longer an item stays up for the same fluctuation of prices, the more it closes in on a fixed price that square didnt label, it was purely created by players...
Something like this...
John puts a Silk thread stack on AH for 10k.
Bob buys it for 10k.
Carl puts another stack for 10k.
Bob buys it for 10k.
John decides it's a good investment time-wise, and since there's competition, he decides to undercut a bit, he sells for 9k.
Bob buys for 9k.
Carl doesnt settle for less so he keeps selling for 10k.
Bob buys for 10k.
Richard now decides he will outsmart everyone else and puts it up for 15k just because it is in low supply, because he is disrupting the economy since the last transactions were considerably cheaper, he pays 15% tax +5% for the sudden rise in price.
Richard removes the item because he thinks the +5% tax is ridiculous... and if he sold for more it would prolly still nail him enough profit, so he puts it up for 30k, and because of that he will have to pay a tax of 15% +15% for the sudden and unnecessary rise in price, richard is pissed as he has lost alot of gil on tax.
The +Tax% would be a calculation of how much you deviated from the price the item sold the most, that is something square would have to think deep and hard about.
The current fixed taxes are stupid imo, in real life tax reflects the economy, and it fluctuates as markets change, and you pay more tax the higher you sell something for, in ffxi that tax should fluctuate aswell but since it is also a very different situation, tax should fluctuate on items themselves based on the prices they usually sell for, not in a global way that makes people undercut for a lower tax.
This way, after like 100 stacks of silk thread that sold from 8k to 30k, the AH would calculate an approximate value (bolded below) at which you would pay only the city-based tax.
< less tax | 8k--------------19k-------------30k | more tax >
About undercutting... you can sell stuff for less if you want and no penalty is applied, it's mainly your loss since you still pay a city-based tax, selling for less would be dumb.
So in essence the key would be to define a tax based on how much an item has been sold taking into account the prices and for how long those prices were kept.
Unfair to new people who had no say in the economy growth? Isnt that how it is in real life? You open up a store and you are forced to sell stuff for a Recommended price or atleast a price that doesnt deviate so much that no one would buy it in your store, however it is also true that not everyone pays tax in the real world, but that's another issue we will not bring to a gaming forum.
Maybe there's inconcistencies (sp) on my views as im no expert in economy or whatever, but it just ocurred to me and in essence it does make up for many valid points, i think...
Discuss? (again lol)
Anyway...
What if square were to sell items (not gil!) themselves in order to fight the gil sellers and constant rise in prices?
Think about it... if square were to sell a Ochiudo's Kote for 50 bucks (out-of-the-ass ammount, dont quote that <.<):
1. Gil Sellers would not overcamp the NM, only legit players.
2. The price for it would probably stop rising exponentially due to point #1.
If item#1 drops in price (or simply doesnt keep rising), the whole economy will, in time, recover and be more realistic towards a real economy, since Gil Sellers would be wasting their time selling the gil since you can just buy it for cheaper from square.
The OKote is an example, don't flame me over an example, thank you...
So let's think about it again, what if this doesnt really help the economy, since people are still greedy to sell their shits for higher prices... atleast we would confirm once and for all if the Gil Sellers are really the root of our problems and we could probably anihilate them all if square did the selling themselves.
Another thing we would benefit from is that since a Gil Seller has to sell the gil, the gil itself will just add to the economy, and will probably never be eradicated, or atleast not anytime soon... buying the item directly from a source that doesnt add that gil to the economy would be the only means to stop the gil overflow, only square has the power to create an item without any gil involved.
Bought items are bound to you... you cannot sell them, but no one other than you needs to know that, i guess.. some system for items that have your tag on it but only you and square know of it, can't trade, can't sell on AH, can't bazaar, can't send through del. box, can drop or sell to NPC.
I could see people going like this:
Bob: ahha n00b, put that item on bazaar so i can see you didnt buy it!
Joe: erm.. orz..
Bob: ahhaaah :D /kick nub
Me: hey bob, so he bought the item.. why do you care? just as long as he doesnt harm the economy for the rest of us, that's fine with me, i actually bow down to his choice over buying the actual gil /bow
Bob: boobs!
Me: ... :D
I know i know... the economy would still be fucked up from greedy people, but i think it would be more realistic... nowadays the economy shifts alot, because stuff like a weskit suddenly goes from 3mil to 20mil (for example) but this would NOT happen if the economy was realistic and not run by IGE who decided to drop their gil prices... what would happen is, another example... Silk Thread rises 2k because suddenly the supply was lacking and someone raised the price, then, and because the economy has to follow, Silk Cloth would have to rise atleast 2k in order to maintain the balance, THAT is a real economy shift.
Another idea:
Silk Thread (i use this example since it's such a popular item) has been selling for 10k per stack (EXAMPLE!) for the last week, the AH could keep track of that ammount, and whenever someone deviates from that price, they pay extra tax, simple, the longer an item stays up for the same fluctuation of prices, the more it closes in on a fixed price that square didnt label, it was purely created by players...
Something like this...
John puts a Silk thread stack on AH for 10k.
Bob buys it for 10k.
Carl puts another stack for 10k.
Bob buys it for 10k.
John decides it's a good investment time-wise, and since there's competition, he decides to undercut a bit, he sells for 9k.
Bob buys for 9k.
Carl doesnt settle for less so he keeps selling for 10k.
Bob buys for 10k.
Richard now decides he will outsmart everyone else and puts it up for 15k just because it is in low supply, because he is disrupting the economy since the last transactions were considerably cheaper, he pays 15% tax +5% for the sudden rise in price.
Richard removes the item because he thinks the +5% tax is ridiculous... and if he sold for more it would prolly still nail him enough profit, so he puts it up for 30k, and because of that he will have to pay a tax of 15% +15% for the sudden and unnecessary rise in price, richard is pissed as he has lost alot of gil on tax.
The +Tax% would be a calculation of how much you deviated from the price the item sold the most, that is something square would have to think deep and hard about.
The current fixed taxes are stupid imo, in real life tax reflects the economy, and it fluctuates as markets change, and you pay more tax the higher you sell something for, in ffxi that tax should fluctuate aswell but since it is also a very different situation, tax should fluctuate on items themselves based on the prices they usually sell for, not in a global way that makes people undercut for a lower tax.
This way, after like 100 stacks of silk thread that sold from 8k to 30k, the AH would calculate an approximate value (bolded below) at which you would pay only the city-based tax.
< less tax | 8k--------------19k-------------30k | more tax >
About undercutting... you can sell stuff for less if you want and no penalty is applied, it's mainly your loss since you still pay a city-based tax, selling for less would be dumb.
So in essence the key would be to define a tax based on how much an item has been sold taking into account the prices and for how long those prices were kept.
Unfair to new people who had no say in the economy growth? Isnt that how it is in real life? You open up a store and you are forced to sell stuff for a Recommended price or atleast a price that doesnt deviate so much that no one would buy it in your store, however it is also true that not everyone pays tax in the real world, but that's another issue we will not bring to a gaming forum.
Maybe there's inconcistencies (sp) on my views as im no expert in economy or whatever, but it just ocurred to me and in essence it does make up for many valid points, i think...
Discuss? (again lol)
Comment