Arguments against credit sinks are short sighted.

[Diamaht]

They are reintroducing credit sinks.  If you don't fix the underlying issues that created the mess in the first place then you will never solve the problem long term.  Small sinks here and there don't hurt all that much, and are easily made up for by actual gameplay, but they do deflate the economy long term.  Like some of you have said:  "I don't have anything to spend credits on!"  Well guess where those credits are going to go slowly over the next year.

A huge temporary credit dump, like some market stuff for credits or seasons for credits is fine and yes will remove more credits in the short term.  However, if there are still no valid ways to consistently remove credits on an every day basis you end up right back where you started.

If you are out of shape and you go to the gym for 4 months then stop, guess what?  Eight months later you are out of shape again.

Large, short term, credits dumps may be needed but if the conditions stay the same then the issue will simply repeat.

[DWho]

2 minutes ago, Diamaht said:

If you don't fix the underlying issues that created the mess in the first place then you will never solve the problem long term. 

You have misidentified the underlying problem. The high costs of Cartel Market items are 100% due to the credits already in the game not any current influx. People are capable of buying up every single one listed and then relisting them for whatever outrageous price they want.

Credit sinks do have a place as a fine tuning mechanism but we are a long way away from anything needing to be fine tuned. A 1% increase in the GTN tax would not even be noticed and would actually pull credits out of the game. All these QT sinks do is slightly slow down the increase.

To use your gym analogy, the current QT credit sinks effect on the economy are like going to the gym around the corner, looking at the workout machines, and then leaving (you burned some calories by walking to the gym, but didn't make a significant impact - it would take years of walking to the gym to have the same effect as a couple of serious workouts).

[Diamaht]

2 minutes ago, DWho said:

You have misidentified the underlying problem. The high costs of Cartel Market items are 100% due to the credits already in the game not any current influx. People are capable of buying up every single one listed and then relisting them for whatever outrageous price they want.

Credit sinks do have a place as a fine tuning mechanism but we are a long way away from anything needing to be fine tuned. A 1% increase in the GTN tax would not even be noticed and would actually pull credits out of the game. All these QT sinks do is slightly slow down the increase.

To use your gym analogy, the current QT credit sinks effect on the economy are like going to the gym around the corner, looking at the workout machines, and then leaving (you burned some calories by walking to the gym, but didn't make a significant impact - it would take years of walking to the gym to have the same effect as a couple of serious workouts).

1) Yes the issue is the credits in the game.  They are there because the methods to slowly remove them were taken out.

2) Yes increase the GTN tax.  That would be another step that might help.

3) Walking to the gym everyday for a year or two will do far more for your health than your "couple of serious workouts".  But hell, if you walk to the gym and ALSO do some serious work outs while you are there, you'll be in even better shape.

[DWho]

13 minutes ago, Diamaht said:

1) Yes the issue is the credits in the game.  They are there because the methods to slowly remove them were taken out.

2) Yes increase the GTN tax.  That would be another step that might help.

3) Walking to the gym everyday for a year or two will do far more for your health than your "couple of serious workouts".  But hell, if you walk to the gym and ALSO do some serious work outs while you are there, you'll be in even better shape.

But putting in pin-prick methods to take them out without actually doing something significant first to remove them (and these credit sinks are going to be anything but a significant impact) accomplishes nothing other than making you feel "good" you are doing "something". You put in the methods to take out large sums first, then you fine tune the day to day operations with small credit sinks. To use another example (or silly analogy), It's like patching a crack in Hoover Dam with a piece of Scotch Tape. When the Dam collapses, no one is going to care that it was delayed a few micro-seconds by the tape.

Bioware needed to do something big first, then focus on the fine tuning with the small credit sinks (large credit sinks would fall under the "big" category - things like taxing all player to player trades whether on the GTN or not at some appropriate level)

[CarpeSangrea]

That is an egregiously apologist and honestly somewhat condescending standpoint.  Nickle-and-diming people for a QOL feature that WE ALREADY PAYED EXTRA TO USE is not the answer.  This was an incredibly stupid move on their part which won't even make a dent in the issue.

[Diamaht]

8 minutes ago, DWho said:

But putting in pin-prick methods to take them out without actually doing something significant first to remove them (and these credit sinks are going to be anything but a significant impact) accomplishes nothing other than making you feel "good" you are doing "something". You put in the methods to take out large sums first, then you fine tune the day to day operations with small credit sinks. To use another example (or silly analogy), It's like patching a crack in Hoover Dam with a piece of Scotch Tape. When the Dam collapses, no one is going to care that it was delayed a few micro-seconds by the tape.

Bioware needed to do something big first, then focus on the fine tuning with the small credit sinks (large credit sinks would fall under the "big" category - things like taxing all player to player trades whether on the GTN or not at some appropriate level)

In other words you are fine with the credit sinks, you just want something big to bleed out the excess cash also.  If that is the case then we agree.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Diamaht

[Diamaht]

5 minutes ago, CarpeSangrea said:

That is an egregiously apologist and honestly somewhat condescending standpoint.  Nickle-and-diming people for a QOL feature that WE ALREADY PAYED EXTRA TO USE is not the answer.  This was an incredibly stupid move on their part which won't even make a dent in the issue.

Then why the emotion?  Nickle and diming is exactly how people wind up with little money in real life.  Its a slow buildup or a slow decline.

They can by all means have something large and temporary to let people dump credits into.  This doesn't solve the issue in the end though.  All it does is allow rich players to purchase things with credits the rest of the player base can't.  The money bleeds out, then builds back up again.  Now they do another temp credit sale and rich players can buy things the rest of the player base can't, again.

There is no one thing that fixes it.  Its a collection of things.  The arguments that I think are false are the ones that say don't do this one thing, do this other one thing.  Do them both, get it under control.

[CarpeSangrea]

Just now, Diamaht said:

Then why the emotion?  Nickle and diming is exactly how people wind up with little money in real life.  Its a slow buildup or a slow decline.

They can by all means have something large and temporary to let people dump credits into.  This doesn't solve the issue in the end though.  All it does is allow rich players to purchase things with credits the rest of the player base can't.  The money bleeds out, then builds back up again.  Now they do another temp credit sale and rich players can buy things the rest of the player base can't, again.

There is no one thing that fixes it.  Its a collection of things.  The arguments that I think are false are the ones that say don't do this one thing, do this other one thing.  Do them both, get it under control.

They aren't going to pay you.  The constant white knighting by you and that other guy in every critical thread is seriously embarrassing.

[Diamaht]

Just now, CarpeSangrea said:

They aren't going to pay you.  The constant white knighting by you and that other guy in every critical thread is seriously embarrassing.

You do all the name calling you like, if that's all you got then I guess the point stands.

[DWho]

16 minutes ago, Diamaht said:

In other words you are fine with the credit sinks, you just want something big to bleed out the excess cash also.  If that is the case then we agree.

I'm fine with them when applied properly, which I don't think the QT ones are. They are way out of line with other travel costs, which was the most common thing mentioned during the PTS testing. It is insane to have QT on Coruscant cost 5K point to point when players using them are getting maybe a couple hundred per completed mission (costs on a lot of the higher level planets are lower because they are smaller so it is impacting low level players more than the high level players who have the creds to spare).

Their pure distance formula is what I disagree with most. The jump back from the Forge to the Jedi Temple in the JK story is over 1000 credits when at that point you maybe have a bank of 5K or so, that's way too much. A formula based on the combined cost of using the taxis plus a small "convenience" fee would be the right way to go (A to C should cost about the same whether it is QT or two taxis).

[Ardrossan]

30 minutes ago, Diamaht said:

You do all the name calling you like, if that's all you got then I guess the point stands.

You won't win any debate points here for using tactics like "why are you so emotional" and following it up with "hey why are you namecalling". We see you. 

You've created a straw man argument: no one is against credit sinks, including the poster you replied to. People are against ineffective, nickle and dime sinks, which remain ineffective even combined with other sinks. Most people here want sinks that act as carrots, vendors that sell something we want to spend the credits on, armor, decos, high-end unlocks etc. Failing that, we want sinks that remove credits without people noticing much, like a higher GTN tax. What we don't want is to be taxed for something that was a paid unlock and it existed for free for a decade until BW decided they needed to appear like they were doing something about inflation.

Forcing players to choose between Yes to credit sinks even dumb ones versus No to credit sinks, do nothing to fix inflation is reductionist. There are more choices than this, and we can differentiate between good credit sinks and sleazy nickel and dime-ing that we'll be stuck with for months while bioware "collects feedback". 

 

[Diamaht]

1 hour ago, DWho said:

I'm fine with them when applied properly, which I don't think the QT ones are. They are way out of line with other travel costs, which was the most common thing mentioned during the PTS testing. It is insane to have QT on Coruscant cost 5K point to point when players using them are getting maybe a couple hundred per completed mission (costs on a lot of the higher level planets are lower because they are smaller so it is impacting low level players more than the high level players who have the creds to spare).

Their pure distance formula is what I disagree with most. The jump back from the Forge to the Jedi Temple in the JK story is over 1000 credits when at that point you maybe have a bank of 5K or so, that's way too much. A formula based on the combined cost of using the taxis plus a small "convenience" fee would be the right way to go (A to C should cost about the same whether it is QT or two taxis).

But the QT tax isn't really a tax on new players.  Which by the way I just leveled a knight from 1 to 80, I haven't done the expansions yet and the game has already given me over 7 million credits.  It's more than enough credits to pay for travel and any other credit sink while leveling, but I shouldn't have that much money just for leveling only half the game. 

Newer players don't have the legacy perks that we do.  I can fast travel at will, by the time their cool-downs expire, the game has given them enough to pay for it and then some.  Or they just use speeders and the space ports like normal.  Its a luxury tax that is coming out of my pocket and yours.

 

[CarpeSangrea]

1 hour ago, Ardrossan said:

Forcing players to choose between Yes to credit sinks even dumb ones versus No to credit sinks, do nothing to fix inflation is reductionist. There are more choices than this, and we can differentiate between good credit sinks and sleazy nickel and dime-ing that we'll be stuck with for months while bioware "collects feedback". 

Precisely this.  Of all the possible options to combat inflation(most of which would be more effective), this being the one they decided to go with is laughable.  I personally would have gone with raising the GTN cap so you could tax those multi-billion credit transactions.  More people would be able to sell their stuff without spamming chat for hours on end, you'd be removing large chunks of credits from the economy, and you wouldn't be screwing over low-level and casual players in the process.  Everyone wins.

[Diamaht]

6 hours ago, Ardrossan said:

You won't win any debate points here for using tactics like "why are you so emotional" and following it up with "hey why are you namecalling". We see you. 

You've created a straw man argument: no one is against credit sinks, including the poster you replied to. People are against ineffective, nickle and dime sinks, which remain ineffective even combined with other sinks. Most people here want sinks that act as carrots, vendors that sell something we want to spend the credits on, armor, decos, high-end unlocks etc. Failing that, we want sinks that remove credits without people noticing much, like a higher GTN tax. What we don't want is to be taxed for something that was a paid unlock and it existed for free for a decade until BW decided they needed to appear like they were doing something about inflation.

Forcing players to choose between Yes to credit sinks even dumb ones versus No to credit sinks, do nothing to fix inflation is reductionist. There are more choices than this, and we can differentiate between good credit sinks and sleazy nickel and dime-ing that we'll be stuck with for months while bioware "collects feedback". 

 

Nickel and dime is how people get rich and how others get poor.  They want you to get poorer and they want to prevent you (and me) from getting this rich again.  What precisely is straw about that?  You are not qualifying that statement with anything, I'm being pretty specific about what and why here. 

To the second point, you only want "carrots" so you are able to get around the Cartel Market.  That's not a bad argument on it's own, and its not a bad bandaid for the problem, but it's disingenuous in this context.  If they let you buy market items with credits while leaving alone the basic money issues that caused the problem in the first place, you will just repeat the cycle with more credits and ask for another helping of carrots.

Edit: Said GTN above, changed it Cartel Market.  My bad.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Diamaht

[Char_Ell]

2 hours ago, Ardrossan said:

You won't win any debate points here for using tactics like "why are you so emotional" and following it up with "hey why are you namecalling". We see you. 

I guess I'll say you're not winning any debate points here for misquoting what the OP stated in response to someone who offered zero substance, only emotion, in their posts.

 

2 hours ago, Ardrossan said:

You've created a straw man argument: no one is against credit sinks, including the poster you replied to. People are against ineffective, nickle and dime sinks, which remain ineffective even combined with other sinks. Most people here want sinks that act as carrots, vendors that sell something we want to spend the credits on, armor, decos, high-end unlocks etc. Failing that, we want sinks that remove credits without people noticing much, like a higher GTN tax. What we don't want is to be taxed for something that was a paid unlock and it existed for free for a decade until BW decided they needed to appear like they were doing something about inflation.

Forcing players to choose between Yes to credit sinks even dumb ones versus No to credit sinks, do nothing to fix inflation is reductionist. There are more choices than this, and we can differentiate between good credit sinks and sleazy nickel and dime-ing that we'll be stuck with for months while bioware "collects feedback". 

No one is against credit sinks?  I'm not so sure about the poster you referred to. Retracted.  The poster I referred to stated GTN was a better credit sink to use.

I would like to know how you determined the quick travel cost credit sink is ineffective when BioWare's stated intent is "The goal of these changes is to introduce passive, small credit removal to the game. This way we have credit removal a bit more in line with our credit generation." 

I understand your arguments about not wanting to be taxed to use a feature that, as far as I can remember, always had no credit cost prior to 7.2.1.  I can clearly see the large volume of discontent quick travel costs have generated on the swtor.com forums and on /r/swtor.  If BioWare has metrics to track new and/or casual player retention I certainly hope they are paying attention to those as I support the position that the quick travel credit sink  has a greater impact on new and casual players with relatively few credits than it does to veteran players with 100's of millions or billions in credits in their banks.  I also understand the lack of trust in BioWare's management of the in-game economy since the credit economy has had such rampant inflation for several years.  All that being said, the situation now is the same as it has always been.  We have no option other than BioWare to address these problems and I for one am glad BioWare are finally taking some action, even if I think quick travel costs missed the mark.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Char_Ell
retraction

[CarpeSangrea]

36 minutes ago, Char_Ell said:

I guess I'll say you're not winning any debate points here for misquoting what the OP stated in response to someone who offered zero substance, only emotion, in their posts.

 

No one is against credit sinks?  I'm not so sure about the poster you referred to. 

I would like to know how you determined the quick travel cost credit sink is ineffective when BioWare's stated intent is "The goal of these changes is to introduce passive, small credit removal to the game. This way we have credit removal a bit more in line with our credit generation." 

I understand your arguments about not wanting to be taxed to use a feature that, as far as I can remember, always had no credit cost prior to 7.2.1.  I can clearly see the large volume of discontent quick travel costs have generated on the swtor.com forums and on /r/swtor.  If BioWare has metrics to track new and/or casual player retention I certainly hope they are paying attention to those as I support the position that the quick travel credit sink  has a greater impact on new and casual players with relatively few credits than it does to veteran players with 100's of millions or billions in credits in their banks.  I also understand the lack of trust in BioWare's management of the in-game economy since the credit economy has had such rampant inflation for several years.  All that being said, the situation now is the same as it has always been.  We have no option other than BioWare to address these problems and I for one am glad BioWare are finally taking some action, even if I think quick travel costs missed the mark.

That's cute, someone who thinks that changing the color of their text makes them more credible.

[Diamaht]

1 minute ago, CarpeSangrea said:

That's cute, someone who thinks that changing the color of their text makes them more credible.

Still waiting for you to add something.  At least he tries to back up his stance. 

[CarpeSangrea]

Just now, Diamaht said:

Still waiting for you to add something.  At least he tries to back up his stance. 

Coming from the person who has been trying to argue in bad faith since I got here, that's hilarious.

[Thepyrethatburns]

It seems that I'm adding this argument a lot to these topics.  Instead of making QT changes that primarily impact new players:

Give people things they want for credits. 
Example:  For the Seeds/Shroud mission, give them a CSR for 100K credits and disable the switch puzzles.
For Uprisings, 1 million for a CSR.
For non-story FPs: 3 million for non-sideplot FPs with a CSR.  5 million for sideplot (Rakghoul/Czerka) FPs.
For Ops, allow them to do a non-sideplot OP for 10 million with two CSR and a Sideplot story Op with two CSRs (Pretty much the Dread Masters Ops) for 20 Mil.  These might need a little watering down (or character buffing) but that's a minimal effort fix. 

You could even throw in the abilty to earn the special quest Aratechs to appeal to completionists (or people like me who just like the Aratechs) as a way of subtly encouraging people to grind out the Ops/FPs that they normally wouldn't.

---------------------------------

As an example:  I only recently, after a decade and change of playing, broke a billion.  I'm not sure exactly how much that I have but let's just say 1.2 billion with 7 toons.  Under this system, here's what I'd have right now:

Seeds/Shroud: 1 toon thus far hasn't completed.  200 k
Uprisings: Only applies to 3 toons and all three have passed it.  Still, for the other 4, it'd be nice to be able to pass the Rakghoul one in the future if not all of them.
Non-Story FPs: Colicoid FP hasn't been effectively available for 4 toons.  12 million
Ops: EV and KP: 20 Mil.  DM OPs (EC, TFB, S+V, DF, DC) 100 mil.  Presuming that I wait for my toons to beat Section X before hitting the DM Ops.  3 toons 360 mil 4 Toons 80 Mil.

So my 1.2 Billion would be currently - 452,200,000  for a total of 747,800,000.

And, Y'know what?  I'd pay that happily......and many others would as well.  These are credit sinks that people want.  These are the "carrots" that Bioware should be offering.  Not only does it act as a credit sink but it keeps people playing longer.  At my current rate of 4 sessions a week, that just added 9 weeks not counting the extra mat gathers that I offset my "story" playing with.  Given that I'm paying $15 a month to subscribe, that's an extra (rounding up) $45 in EA's pocket from me alone.

This is literally a win-win type of credit sink for everyone.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Thepyrethatburns

[bncsmom]

1 hour ago, Diamaht said:

But the QT tax isn't really a tax on new players.  Which by the way I just leveled a knight from 1 to 80, I haven't done the expansions yet and the game has already given me over 7 million credits.  It's more than enough credits to pay for travel and any other credit sink while leveling, but I shouldn't have that much money just for leveling only half the game. 

Newer players don't have the legacy perks that we do.  I can fast travel at will, by the time their cool-downs expire, the game has given them enough to pay for it and then some.  Or they just use speeders and the space ports like normal.  Its a luxury tax that is coming out of my pocket and yours.

 

New players CAN have the same legacy perks that we do. It just takes a few hours and they can have the vast majority, IF they're willing to drop a bit of REAL MONEY on Cartel Coins. 

 

The point here is REAL MONEY. We spent REAL MONEY on Cartel Coins, which we used to unlock Quick Travel, which was touted as a way to bypass the COST of the Taxis. Both the time cost AND the credit cost applied here. 

The fact of the matter is that this was something we purchased with the understanding that we would have this as a PERMANENT PERK. Now we're having half of that perk stripped away, after YEARS of using it. 

 

It's not a luxury to be taxed on something that was already paid for to be included as part of the experience. Stop defending this move. 

[CarpeSangrea]

2 minutes ago, bncsmom said:

New players CAN have the same legacy perks that we do. It just takes a few hours and they can have the vast majority, IF they're willing to drop a bit of REAL MONEY on Cartel Coins. 

 

The point here is REAL MONEY. We spent REAL MONEY on Cartel Coins, which we used to unlock Quick Travel, which was touted as a way to bypass the COST of the Taxis. Both the time cost AND the credit cost applied here. 

The fact of the matter is that this was something we purchased with the understanding that we would have this as a PERMANENT PERK. Now we're having half of that perk stripped away, after YEARS of using it. 

 

It's not a luxury to be taxed on something that was already paid for to be included as part of the experience. Stop defending this move. 

 

That particular individual and one other I think are just trying to piss people off because it's a hot topic.  Every gaming forum I've ever been on has had those people.

[bncsmom]

12 minutes ago, Thepyrethatburns said:

It seems that I'm adding this argument a lot to these topics.  Instead of making QT changes that primarily impact new players:

Give people things they want for credits. 
Example:  For the Seeds/Shroud mission, give them a CSR for 100K credits and disable the switch puzzles.
For Uprisings, 1 million for a CSR.
For non-story FPs: 3 million for non-sideplot FPs with a CSR.  5 million for sideplot (Rakghoul/Czerka) FPs.
For Ops, allow them to do a non-sideplot OP for 10 million with two CSR and a Sideplot story Op with two CSRs (Pretty much the Dread Masters Ops) for 20 Mil.  These might need a little watering down (or character buffing) but that's a minimal effort fix. 

You could even throw in the abilty to earn the special quest Aratechs to appeal to completionists (or people like me who just like the Aratechs) as a way of subtly encouraging people to grind out the Ops/FPs that they normally wouldn't.

---------------------------------

As an example:  I only recently, after a decade and change of playing, broke a billion.  I'm not sure exactly how much that I have but let's just say 1.2 billion with 7 toons.  Under this system, here's what I'd have right now:

Seeds/Shroud: 1 toon thus far hasn't completed.  200 k
Uprisings: Only applies to 3 toons and all three have passed it.  Still, for the other 4, it'd be nice to be able to pass the Rakghoul one in the future if not all of them.
Non-Story FPs: Colicoid FP hasn't been effectively available for 4 toons.  12 million
Ops: EV and KP: 20 Mil.  DM OPs (EC, TFB, S+V, DF, DC) 100 mil.  Presuming that I wait for my toons to beat Section X before hitting the DM Ops.  3 toons 360 mil 4 Toons 80 Mil.

So my 1.2 Billion would be currently - 452,200,000  for a total of 747,800,000.

And, Y'know what?  I'd pay that happily......and many others would as well.  These are credit sinks that people want.  These are the "carrots" that Bioware should be offering.  Not only does it act as a credit sink but it keeps people playing longer.  At my current rate of 4 sessions a week, that just added 9 weeks not counting the extra mat gathers that I offset my "story" playing with.  Given that I'm paying $15 a month to subscribe, that's an extra (rounding up) $45 in EA's pocket from me alone.

This is literally a win-win type of credit sink for everyone.

 THIS. This would be an amazing credit sink and I would pay for it for sure! I want to do some of these ops but can't get a full group. Why not give us the droids if we drop 100mil to complete it?? 

The QT "sink" is just a way to make loyal customers mad. We're already mad enough, Bioware, why do you want to make us even more mad? Give us these carrots and we'll gladly drop millions on them! SMH... 

[bncsmom]

4 minutes ago, CarpeSangrea said:

 

That particular individual and one other I think are just trying to piss people off because it's a hot topic.  Every gaming forum I've ever been on has had those people.

I agree...

[Diamaht]

3 hours ago, CarpeSangrea said:

 

That particular individual and one other I think are just trying to piss people off because it's a hot topic.  Every gaming forum I've ever been on has had those people.

Well anyway, I'm glad they are being active in correcting and upgrading the game.  Just keep asking for free Cartel stuff any time they make any change at all and eventually they will give you something.

 

Edit: said GTN, meant Cartel Market

Edited March 31, 2023 by Diamaht

[CarpeSangrea]

1 hour ago, Diamaht said:

Well anyway, I'm glad they are being active in correcting and upgrading the game.  Just keep asking for free GTN stuff any time they make any change at all and eventually they will give you something.

Again with the false equivalencies.  Nobody has once asked for free gtn stuff.  I actually advocated for raising the cap on gtn sales so it would take out more money.  But you don't care about having an actual debate with anyone, you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.