Treasure Hunting Lockboxes are causing massive inflation and a proposed solution.

[Rolodome]

a proposed solution is to have the items from treasure hunting lockboxes have a vendor value of 1 credit. the same should be applied to any item that comes from crewskills which isn't a material. if the items have value then they should be sold on the gtn to fellow players.

This doesn't actually fix anything though. It just cuts off one revenue stream.

 

To fix a problem like inflation in a game like this is a lot more complicated than it sounds. You can increase credit sinks, but it will hurt the poorest most and leave the rich still rich. If you "tax" the rich, they will just get mad, or find ways to avoid your "taxes," as rich people do in RL, because the rich are often the most savvy (on average) when it comes to money.

 

The real problem here is twofold: 1) Only subscribers are equipped to deal with an ever increasing sell price for rare items. 2) The rarer items are, the higher people will try to sell them for.

 

2 is fixed if you make items less rare often enough (refill supply).

 

1 will never be fixed, unless one of two things happens: The overall credit pool in the game is massively reduced and sources of inflation are all capped off (a herculean, if not impossible task, at this stage, and one that would probably disenfranchise a lot of people). Or, non-subscribers (especially preferred status) can carry credit cap without dealing with escrow.

[Akostt]

In theory, you could also accept the 6% loss and use the GTN to transfer money in chunks smaller than the escrow limit; I sometimes wonder if that's what is causing some of the obvious mispricing on non-pack items.

 

they aren't banning people so it doesn't matter what you do. this isn't an exploit. maybe running a macro on treasure boxes is against the rules but they seem fine with it and it adds credits to the game and maybe they feel the game needs more credits.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

Answering this one, but it is in regards to your quote of mine. On tablet so cant quote large amount of text.

 

But ok here is how I make creds, and I am the first to admit it is not best way:

 

Everytime I play, I spend 15minutes in a group doing the tatooine heroics.that averages around 700-750k. 4-5 times a week that averages around 3.5 mill a week. I get 1 maybe 2 regular crates, sell them for around 1.2-1.5 million a week (this is with my grated monthly cc). I do a couple ops a week, may get 1 or 2 DMCs for aroun 900k each. Then I will check out certain, cheap pieces of gear on the CM (usually around 100-400cc max) and some of them actually you can get 5 million each. Not going to tell you, you find out which ones.

 

so on average I make around 8.5-10 million a week on a single toon. If I am in the mood to burn through tatooine for an hour on alts, I czn pull around 4 million.

 

And how do you find the inflated prices now in comparison to how much quicker you earn credits? Let's be generous and say 20 million for a new hypercrate ( 25 is probably close lately ) ... do you find this equally as affordable to say prior to 4.0 when they were say 5 million in terms of what you need to do to make those credits ( need to ignore any CC expenditure since that in turn is gaining from the inflation - purely looking at in game activities that generate credits into the economy ).

[MeNaCe-NZ]

they aren't banning people so it doesn't matter what you do. this isn't an exploit. maybe running a macro on treasure boxes is against the rules but they seem fine with it and it adds credits to the game and maybe they feel the game needs more credits.

 

Is it a coincidence you are using the same name as an RMT from a player based credit auction site?

I noted this when doing some research on said site recently in that you can see how much people are selling to get a feel for the popularity of RMT in the game.

 

I see no auctions listed for the username that is the same as your forum name today though ... as improbable as it sounds maybe Bioware finally did something about this or has the price possibly just tanked so far it's not worth the trouble anymore?

 

Now if you were the same person it would be pretty stupid using the same forum name ( or worse game name ) as a RMT account name ( but no one ever accused RMT sellers of being geniuses ). I would of course warn anyone of ever thinking of buying from such an individual against it of course since, if that is the case, you've pretty much given Bioware the means to trace your transactions now and thus track buyers so they would really be risking their accounts as anonymity is removed.

Edited June 15, 2016 by MeNaCe-NZ

[lightSaberAddiCt]

And how do you find the inflated prices now in comparison to how much quicker you earn credits? Let's be generous and say 20 million for a new hypercrate ( 25 is probably close lately ) ... do you find this equally as affordable to say prior to 4.0 when they were say 5 million in terms of what you need to do to make those credits ( need to ignore any CC expenditure since that in turn is gaining from the inflation - purely looking at in game activities that generate credits into the economy ).

 

I dont sell the hypercrates. You get more money breaking them up and selling individually. I think, isnt their 24 in a hyper crate? or is it 25? Either way, selling the single crates at 1.2 million, that would be what around 30 million on a hypercrate if that was 25 in the crate, and 28.8 million on 24?

 

Like I said I generally sell the singles, or the 5 packs. I seem to make more creds that way.

 

I dont waste time on them with my RNG luck, but I have no problem getting top dollar from gamblers that suffer from obsessive clicking.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

I dont sell the hypercrates. You get more money breaking them up and selling individually. I think, isnt their 24 in a hyper crate? or is it 25? Either way, selling the single crates at 1.2 million, that would be what around 30 million on a hypercrate if that was 25 in the crate, and 28.8 million on 24?

 

Like I said I generally sell the singles, or the 5 packs. I seem to make more creds that way.

 

I dont waste time on them with my RNG luck, but I have no problem getting top dollar from gamblers that suffer from obsessive clicking.

 

OK I meant buying them with credits ... was the best example of inflation I could think of.

 

Rest would be raid gear and embargoed gold drops ... might be others I'm not aware of.

 

In time all embargoed CM items will start super inflating with these packs changes - how much by depends on how many bronze items come in the new packs.

[Max_Killjoy]

I wonder what effect an escalating GTN fee would have -- a set up with the percentage taken by the GTN rising with the amount of the transaction. Along the lines of this -- sell something for one million credits, and GTN takes 6%... sell something for 10 million, and GTN takes 8%... sell something for 20 million, and GTN takes 10%... and so on. Edited June 15, 2016 by Max_Killjoy

[Darevsool]

I think I posted in this thread awhile ago (I can't believe it's still going).

 

Is the general attitude now that it is acceptable to take something away because some people might be abusing it?

 

Is it acceptable to punish the people who follow the rules, who don't cheat, because a few do?

 

Why not just punish those that actually DO break the existing rules instead of taking things away from EVERYONE?

 

Now, when 4.0 hit and the slicing nodes started giving blue credit boxes instead of green, I was one of the players that said that needed fixed. It was a bug. As far as I can tell, nothing has changed with Treasure Hunting. There is no bug to fix. Sometimes it crits and you get two boxes and you make a little extra, other times it fails and you get nothing. It balances out.

[lightSaberAddiCt]

OK I meant buying them with credits ... was the best example of inflation I could think of.

 

Rest would be raid gear and embargoed gold drops ... might be others I'm not aware of.

 

In time all embargoed CM items will start super inflating with these packs changes - how much by depends on how many bronze items come in the new packs.

 

I think the only way to bring down the hypercrate inflation is to bring back the packs every month or so, for a slightly reduced price.

[lightSaberAddiCt]

I wonder what effect an escalating GTN fee would have -- a set up with the percentage taken by the GTN rising with the amount of the transaction. Along the longs of this -- sell something for one million credits, and GTN takes 6%... sell something for 10 million, and GTN takes 8%... sell something for 20 million, and GTN takes 10%... and so on.

 

Increasing fee would do nothing but increase the price in credits, to compensate for the fee. The expense is always passed down to the consumer.

[Theeko]

Not only the hypercrate inflation but also the items themselves as well. Even on harbinger people listing Imperator + Akk dog for 250m+ each, I mean really ?

[Darevsool]

I think the only way to bring down the hypercrate inflation is to bring back the packs every month or so, for a slightly reduced price.

 

I felt that the hypercrates went up only because the way that loot was granted was changed.

 

The old way, you buy a pack you get a chance at say 5 items. armor/deco/jawa scrap/affection tokens/random item specific to pack.

 

The new way you have a smaller chance at armor, a higher chance at ANOTHER box item (which can give you ANYTHING previously or currently available), and most recently affection items and jawa scrap was brought back.

 

So the new system you have a far smaller chance at getting anything you specifically want so you need to buy MORE of them. More demand = higher price.

 

The new system rewards the sellers and sucks for the buyers.

 

I stopped playing that game because of the change.

[IanArgent]

I wonder what effect an escalating GTN fee would have -- a set up with the percentage taken by the GTN rising with the amount of the transaction. Along the longs of this -- sell something for one million credits, and GTN takes 6%... sell something for 10 million, and GTN takes 8%... sell something for 20 million, and GTN takes 10%... and so on.

 

More /trade and general chat spam.

 

Also, how to determine thresholds?

[ivanhedgehog]

Increasing fee would do nothing but increase the price in credits, to compensate for the fee. The expense is always passed down to the consumer.

 

people are charging what the market will bear currently. if you raise the price to make up for the increase and people dont buy your stuff, you will have to lower your price.

[lightSaberAddiCt]

people are charging what the market will bear currently. if you raise the price to make up for the increase and people dont buy your stuff, you will have to lower your price.

 

No I just wont sell it, and wait until the market price average goes back up.

[lobstah_rofls]

Not only the hypercrate inflation but also the items themselves as well. Even on harbinger people listing Imperator + Akk dog for 250m+ each, I mean really ?

 

Listing it doesn't mean anyone bought it. Also, people list things for crazy prices when they are one of the very first to put them on the market. On the Ebon Hawk, stuff like Akk Dog and the other cartel pack companions doesn't go for more than 2 to 5 million after the initial "be one of the first to have" excitement thing wears off after the first week or so.

 

If Star Wars GTN had a built in market history feature like FFXIV has, it would mostly solve the problem of people listing things for crazy prices. Before FFXIV did it I was leaning against the feature as knowing what to charge is a big part of how to do well on in-game markets, but having experienced it for a while, it's definitely a good thing. It speeds up selling AND buying things for people to know where the market is roughly at.

[lobstah_rofls]

I think the only way to bring down the hypercrate inflation is to bring back the packs every month or so, for a slightly reduced price.

 

Why would Bioware want people to pay LESS for hypercrates on the GTN?!?!?

 

Why on Earth would Bioware want people who buy hypercrates for ~$50 and only get 5 million creds for them? Have you noticed that the credit sellers charge something like $0.60 for a million?

 

The baseline price for cartel coins is basically 100cc ~= $1 ~= 1 million but it's crazy hard to get people to spend money on the GTN. Thexan's robes = ~$14 so get ~14 million creds to sell the set on the GTN, right? It took me like 2 months to get a sale at that price. I would have had to cut the price to 5 million to get a sale in a few days on one of the nicest armor sets in the game. Meanwhile I bought Zakuul Knight for 6 million creds. That makes the exchange rate for cc's more like an extremely weak $1 = 100cc = a measly 250k to 350k in game.

 

What it comes down to is that Bioware surely knows by now that the Cartel Coin is too weak.

 

It has gotten to the point that some credit sellers are even exploiting this by buying hypercrates with in game creds and selling them for real money at far cheaper prices than Bioware charges.

 

Another issue here is that the cash shop has created a massive haves vs have nots economy, lol. Hypercrate etc buyers have huge piles of in-game creds but the rest of players do not. Thus, it's getting harder to spend CC's on things that you can sell for in-game creds at a good return. The other crate etc buyers can afford to pay a lot but have what they want already, whereas everybody else is spending money too quick to pile up enough to pay big prices.

 

So really, Bioware would obviously like you to do more grouping for heroics and treasure hunting missions, so you can buy more stuff from cash shop spenders at higher in-game creds prices.

[IanArgent]

Why would Bioware want people to pay LESS for hypercrates on the GTN?!?!?

 

Why on Earth would Bioware want people who buy hypercrates for ~$50 and only get 5 million creds for them? Have you noticed that the credit sellers charge something like $0.60 for a million?

 

The baseline price for cartel coins is basically 100cc ~= $1 ~= 1 million but it's crazy hard to get people to spend money on the GTN. Thexan's robes = ~$14 so get ~14 million creds to sell the set on the GTN, right? It took me like 2 months to get a sale at that price. I would have had to cut the price to 5 million to get a sale in a few days on one of the nicest armor sets in the game. Meanwhile I bought Zakuul Knight for 6 million creds. That makes the exchange rate for cc's more like an extremely weak $1 = 100cc = a measly 250k to 350k in game.

 

What it comes down to is that Bioware surely knows by now that the Cartel Coin is too weak.

 

It has gotten to the point that some credit sellers are even exploiting this by buying hypercrates with in game creds and selling them for real money at far cheaper prices than Bioware charges.

 

Another issue here is that the cash shop has created a massive haves vs have nots economy, lol. Hypercrate etc buyers have huge piles of in-game creds but the rest of players do not. Thus, it's getting harder to spend CC's on things that you can sell for in-game creds at a good return. The other crate etc buyers can afford to pay a lot but have what they want already, whereas everybody else is spending money too quick to pile up enough to pay big prices.

 

So really, Bioware would obviously like you to do more grouping for heroics and treasure hunting missions, so you can buy more stuff from cash shop spenders at higher in-game creds prices.

 

From that POV, it makes a certain sense for BW to inflate the Credit supply so that each CC trades for more Credits. Though I'd like to know why you think the "par" value for a CC ought to be Cr 10k. I can't think of a method to determine that OTHER than GTN sales; which have set a much lower par value.

[lightSaberAddiCt]

Why would Bioware want people to pay LESS for hypercrates on the GTN?!?!?

 

Why on Earth would Bioware want people who buy hypercrates for ~$50 and only get 5 million creds for them? Have you noticed that the credit sellers charge something like $0.60 for a million?

 

The baseline price for cartel coins is basically 100cc ~= $1 ~= 1 million but it's crazy hard to get people to spend money on the GTN. Thexan's robes = ~$14 so get ~14 million creds to sell the set on the GTN, right? It took me like 2 months to get a sale at that price. I would have had to cut the price to 5 million to get a sale in a few days on one of the nicest armor sets in the game. Meanwhile I bought Zakuul Knight for 6 million creds. That makes the exchange rate for cc's more like an extremely weak $1 = 100cc = a measly 250k to 350k in game.

 

What it comes down to is that Bioware surely knows by now that the Cartel Coin is too weak.

 

It has gotten to the point that some credit sellers are even exploiting this by buying hypercrates with in game creds and selling them for real money at far cheaper prices than Bioware charges.

 

Another issue here is that the cash shop has created a massive haves vs have nots economy, lol. Hypercrate etc buyers have huge piles of in-game creds but the rest of players do not. Thus, it's getting harder to spend CC's on things that you can sell for in-game creds at a good return. The other crate etc buyers can afford to pay a lot but have what they want already, whereas everybody else is spending money too quick to pile up enough to pay big prices.

 

So really, Bioware would obviously like you to do more grouping for heroics and treasure hunting missions, so you can buy more stuff from cash shop spenders at higher in-game creds prices.

 

might want to scroll up at my previous comments man, I am actually against the prices going lower. I was just following up on a previous conversation with another poster.

[Andryah]

From that POV, it makes a certain sense for BW to inflate the Credit supply so that each CC trades for more Credits.

 

I have come to the conclusion that they inflated the credit supply for two main reasons:

 

1) to cut the RMTs off at the ankles... which I think they probably have done, considering the collapse in RMT pricing over recent months. When credits are easy to obtain in sufficient quantities... it undercuts RMTs pretty well.

 

2) to provide plenty of credit pools for newer players while leveling up and playing the game. This means they are not frozen out of the top end of the game and veteran wealth has less impact on newer players in terms of the player economy.

 

Both excellent moves IMO, as inflation inside MMOs is relative anyway.

 

I'd like to know why you think the "par" value for a CC ought to be Cr 10k. I can't think of a method to determine that OTHER than GTN sales; which have set a much lower par value.

 

In my experience, there is not persistent "par value" between microtransaction tokens and in game currencies. They shift and move all the time... depending on player activities and interests, and continued evolution of game content.

 

There is a "flash" par value at any given moment in time.. with probably a stability level in terms of weeks at most.

Edited June 15, 2016 by Andryah

[Akostt]

I have come to the conclusion that they inflated the credit supply for two main reasons:

 

1) to cut the RMTs off at the ankles... which I think they probably have done, considering the collapse in RMT pricing over recent months. When credits are easy to obtain in sufficient quantities... it undercuts RMTs pretty well.

 

 

 

rofl that's a good laugh right there. if that were true you wouldn't see any credit spam.

[Akostt]

Is it a coincidence you are using the same name as an RMT from a player based credit auction site?

I noted this when doing some research on said site recently in that you can see how much people are selling to get a feel for the popularity of RMT in the game.

 

 

do not besmirch my good name sir. please leave me out of your obsessive credit buying research. your time might be better spent on things which would benefit you more directly.

Edited June 15, 2016 by CommunityDroidEU
provocative part removed

[IanArgent]

I have come to the conclusion that they inflated the credit supply for two main reasons:

 

1) to cut the RMTs off at the ankles... which I think they probably have done, considering the collapse in RMT pricing over recent months. When credits are easy to obtain in sufficient quantities... it undercuts RMTs pretty well.

 

2) to provide plenty of credit pools for newer players while leveling up and playing the game. This means they are not frozen out of the top end of the game and veteran wealth has less impact on newer players in terms of the player economy.

 

Both excellent moves IMO, as inflation inside MMOs is relative anyway.

 

 

 

In my experience, there is not persistent "par value" between microtransaction tokens and in game currencies. They shift and move all the time... depending on player activities and interests, and continued evolution of game content.

 

There is a "flash" par value at any given moment in time.. with probably a stability level in terms of weeks at most.

 

I used to play a sandbox microtransactional MMO called Puzzle Pirates (tangential to the discussion, but their transition from sub to microtransaction and the results thereof are fascinating). They were "pure" microtransactional on the server I was on; but the interesting thing was that there was an in-game auction house for their CC-equivalent currency; it could be bought and sold directly for their Credit-equivalent (subject to sales taxes and IIRC listing taxes). Various functions in the game required buying time-limited "unlocks" (a la the unlocks we have for F2P players in the CM), and most non-starter gear required the CC-equivalent for the "first sale" (a delivery fee from the manufacturer - there was a robust and multi-layered crafting system). Most of the unlocks ran on "login days," but there was one that ran on calendar days - it enabled "passive" income and access to parts of the crafting subsystems. Because of this, it set a (soft) par conversion of "Credits" to "CC" - a "labor badge" had a certain value in "credits" based on the amount of money one could earn per-character in 30 days, which was in turn based on the prevailing "wages," which were relatively "sticky." So prices for "CC" tended to fall in a certain range, predictable from the "wages", though it was affected by the popularity of certain activities, whether certain large-value items were being produced in large quantities (it was a pirate-themed game, so if a lot of ships had been sunk that week for whatever reason, the "credit" cost of "CCs" would go up as the demand for new ships cost "CCs.")

[Uncle_Robo]

Just curious, how many of you have a level 50 influence companion?

 

I don't think that many people do have maxed companions. Unless you are a heavy crafter, there really isn't a reason to max your companion. And after taking into account how much in gifts you spent to max your companion, most people are not maxing a companion to run Treasure Hunting missions. Because mostly it's the wealthy players maxing their companions, and wealthy players have better ways of making credits than running Treasure Hunting crew missions.

 

This is not an exploit. It's a perk of maxing out influence on companions.

Edited June 15, 2016 by Uncle_Robo

[Max_Killjoy]

Just curious, how many of you have a level 50 influence companion?

 

I don't think that many people do have maxed companions. Unless you are a heavy crafter, there really isn't a reason to max your companion. And after taking in account how much in gifts you spent to max your companion, most people are not maxing a companion to run Treasure Hunting missions. Because mostly it's the wealthy players maxing their companions, and wealthy players have better ways of making credits than running Treasure Hunting crew missions.

 

This is not an exploit. It's a perk of maxing out influence on companions.

 

Another instance in which the scaling of companion influence effects is wonky as heck.