Credit Transfer limits to SV

[TrixxieTriss]

4 hours ago, Dylanof said:

Free market economics in a closed system

Taking away people’s choice is not a free market system 

[DeannaVoyager]

14 hours ago, DWho said:

The economy is broken on all the other servers, that's why they are talking about restrictions.

Besides, we are talking about an exceedingly small part of the population impacted by repair costs (99% of the people playing the game won't ever have repair costs anywhere near what progression raiders do). Allowing everyone to bring over huge numbers of credits so a handful of players don't have to do any content they don't like makes no sense. If you want to deal with repair costs for progression raiders, a better solution is to have a group ability that reduces repair costs while in an Operation.

The reason BS didn't give us transfers at the beginning was because they wanted to see how the economy was functioning with the credit sinks they have on all other servers. That test is now about to end, and we've seen it's not functioning: the credit sinks are too much compared to what we get as loot and rewards and that needs to be fixed. 

Whether 99% of people will never have the same repair costs or not is irrelevant. As long as that 1% has to pay more than anyone else and they can't afford to play, the economy is broken. The rewards & credit sinks shouls be balanced so that everyone can play, not just the casuals who never even get their gear scratched because the raiders are doing the heavy lifting in DF/DP frag farming too. (I dare you to get a group of 8 casuals basic attack spammers and try to clear DF SM with them)

Some people will be quite happy to farm heroics to get credits, but if that becomes the main (and required) activity in the game, the only people left playing will be the credit farmers. You want to have people playing the game instead of farming credits because guess what causes inflation? Population that has been conditioned to farm credits by any means they can think of.

[Dylanof]

45 minutes ago, DeannaVoyager said:

The reason BS didn't give us transfers at the beginning was because they wanted to see how the economy was functioning with the credit sinks they have on all other servers. That test is now about to end, and we've seen it's not functioning: the credit sinks are too much compared to what we get as loot and rewards and that needs to be fixed. 

Whether 99% of people will never have the same repair costs or not is irrelevant. As long as that 1% has to pay more than anyone else and they can't afford to play, the economy is broken. The rewards & credit sinks shouls be balanced so that everyone can play, not just the casuals who never even get their gear scratched because the raiders are doing the heavy lifting in DF/DP frag farming too. (I dare you to get a group of 8 casuals basic attack spammers and try to clear DF SM with them)

Some people will be quite happy to farm heroics to get credits, but if that becomes the main (and required) activity in the game, the only people left playing will be the credit farmers. You want to have people playing the game instead of farming credits because guess what causes inflation? Population that has been conditioned to farm credits by any means they can think of.

oh you mean farming df/dp over and over again for tech frags to upgrade your implants, CM, tacticals.

Or killing NiM Nefra over and over again or cheesing/cheating dash.

All content is a time sink at the end the reward is slightly different for each activity. Difference right now all content is viable and of value.

[FrontLineFodder]

16 minutes ago, Dylanof said:

oh you mean farming df/dp over and over again for tech frags to upgrade your implants, CM, tacticals.

Or killing NiM Nefra over and over again or cheesing/cheating dash.

All content is a time sink at the end the reward is slightly different for each activity. Difference right now all content is viable and of value.

None of those activities involve the GTN which is the only place affected by trillions of credits in the economy.

so the content you just promoted is of the same value to a PLAYER regardless of the server. It is no more difficult for a player on SF or SV and the reward is identical.

now if they then want to take that on Sell it on the GTN, then you have some form of an argument about an inflated economy. Higher prices mean fewer buyers. Though fewer credits in the economy mean fewer buyers also. There is nothing stopping a seller from selling at a lower price in an economy with more credits, getting even more buyers.

if you do not want to do that content and wanted to buy the rewards off the GTN (instant gratification) then I can see how having fewer credits in the economy is good for you, but what about the seller? Are they satisfied with their reward for the effort they put in ?

[Dylanof]

18 minutes ago, FrontLineFodder said:

None of those activities involve the GTN which is the only place affected by trillions of credits in the economy.

so the content you just promoted is of the same value to a PLAYER regardless of the server. It is no more difficult for a player on SF or SV and the reward is identical.

now if they then want to take that on Sell it on the GTN, then you have some form of an argument about an inflated economy. Higher prices mean fewer buyers. Though fewer credits in the economy mean fewer buyers also. There is nothing stopping a seller from selling at a lower price in an economy with more credits, getting even more buyers.

if you do not want to do that content and wanted to buy the rewards off the GTN (instant gratification) then I can see how having fewer credits in the economy is good for you, but what about the seller? Are they satisfied with their reward for the effort they put in ?

oh how are you buying your augments ? or your stronghold bonus, legacy unlocks, gear progression and upgrades ? 

the value of the reward is changed due to the supply of credits in the system. Heroic content is many times more valuable of SV than it is on SS. 

[FrontLineFodder]

13 minutes ago, Dylanof said:

oh how are you buying your augments ? or your stronghold bonus, legacy unlocks, gear progression and upgrades ? 

the value of the reward is changed due to the supply of credits in the system. Heroic content is many times more valuable of SV than it is on SS. 

On SF ?

Craft everything myself

pay for things using wealth generated from years of dailies, crafting, frag runs and trading.

on SV

I’ve been doing dailies since launch, honestly to me a credit earned through gameplay on SV is no more valuable to me than on SF.

i can’t buy 344 gear off the GTN, and I’m not paying for someone else’s time to craft an augment, I’ll wait for my crafters.

sure, buying cosmetic will be cheaper right now*, but I have everything I am interested in in that regard, so it’s of no increased value.

The difference is I don’t have the credits or characters to send crew out on endless missions, or increase the influence on endless characters.

i have purchased items off the GTN commanders companions, crafting materials, hypercrates, and have sold items on the GTN (same as above, flipping for profit), currently I’m neutral in credits(from trading), but have invested in materials for when I transfer my crafters in. Which is where I will continue to get my augments and other crafted items from. Though I will transfer my crafting materials as well.

 

To quote @TrixxieTriss

Shae Vizla should be allowed to become a server just like any other.

it is after all the APAC regional server first.

[FrontLineFodder]

All this pearl clutching and shouting protect the economy just makes me want to invest every credit from heroics and dailies into increasing the demand on GTN sales

[Dylanof]

13 minutes ago, FrontLineFodder said:

All this pearl clutching and shouting protect the economy just makes me want to invest every credit from heroics and dailies into increasing the demand on GTN sales

Thats great brings more vibrancy and turn over into the economy. Welcome it

[Toraak]

18 hours ago, DWho said:

There is no need to drop hundreds of billions of credits onto the server just so a handful of players can raid without having to put any effort into acquiring credits. Reducing the equipment damage in Operations would have almost no effect on the server economy (there just are not enough progression raiders around for their repair bills to have any significant impact on credit sinks) and is a far better solution. The GTN/trade taxes had more effect on the economy of the other servers than the travel costs and repairs did (so Broadsword could even go back to the original damage model with minimal effect on the economy).

Except dropping the repair costs would lessen a credit sink all of the other servers desperately need. Unless Broadsword is going to make repair costs different on each server you shouldn't lessen the repairs at all.

[DWho]

3 minutes ago, Toraak said:

Except dropping the repair costs would lessen a credit sink all of the other servers desperately need. Unless Broadsword is going to make repair costs different on each server you shouldn't lessen the repairs at all.

Based on the way the economy reacted when they implemented the repair costs then waited to implement the GTN/trade fees reverting the repair costs would have little if any impact (in fact they will need to be changed anyway once the excess credits are drained). The repair costs and travel costs had almost no impact on the economy while the fees caused a significant change. The majority of the excess credits are with people not playing the game (and thus accruing damage to their gear) but rather just trading things on the GTN. If the economy was in better shape the repair costs might have an impact on keeping it in balance but not as the servers currently are with massive amounts of excess credits.

[DeannaVoyager]

9 hours ago, Dylanof said:

oh you mean farming df/dp over and over again for tech frags to upgrade your implants, CM, tacticals.

Or killing NiM Nefra over and over again or cheesing/cheating dash.

All content is a time sink at the end the reward is slightly different for each activity. Difference right now all content is viable and of value.

Grats, you managed to completely to miss the point! 

What has df/dp and nefra/dash farming have to do with what I just said? I'll give you a clue: nothing. 

[Toraak]

2 hours ago, DWho said:

Based on the way the economy reacted when they implemented the repair costs then waited to implement the GTN/trade fees reverting the repair costs would have little if any impact (in fact they will need to be changed anyway once the excess credits are drained). The repair costs and travel costs had almost no impact on the economy while the fees caused a significant change. The majority of the excess credits are with people not playing the game (and thus accruing damage to their gear) but rather just trading things on the GTN. If the economy was in better shape the repair costs might have an impact on keeping it in balance but not as the servers currently are with massive amounts of excess credits.

The travel cost was never going to affect the economy. I never understood why people even cared about that unless they were on a new account that had nothing. If you had even 1 level 80 the cost was nothing. You got enough credits from 1 heroic, or 1 Daily or any other activity to cover the cost of quick travel 5 times over.

 

The Trade Tax, and repair cost were the 2 big things that helped the economy more then the QT tax (and I suspect they hit a bunch of the Credit sellers about the time they did the trade tax and never told us). Now with the new GTN update I don't think the economy is that bad in truth. The problem is selling on the GTN became a waste of time for most of us that aren't going to sit there undercutting 24/7. For Buyers costs are down massively compared to what they had been. I still say leaving repairs as they are is key for now until they get the economy to where Broadsword wants it before lowering them.

[VegaMist]

3 hours ago, Toraak said:

The travel cost was never going to affect the economy. I never understood why people even cared about that unless they were on a new account that had nothing.

I'm on an old account, and still hate QT tax every time. For some missions, it breaks the immersion since it makes one doubt why would their character accept such a mission in the first place. For example, Bounty week missions. If you use QT, the bounty pay-off doesn't cover your expenses, so why would any Bounty Hunter agree to such a contract unless they have 0 economic sense? It's also a feeling of being nickel-and-dimed to revisit places you already unlocked. Do I still QT even though I hate the fees? Yes. Do I use it less and limit overall game exploration as a result? Also yes.

A similar argument can be made regarding repair fees. If repairs cost you more than credits generated during a mission the repairs are associated with, then one is again questioning why accept such a mission at all.

At the end of the day, economy isn't just dependent on credits removed from the game, but also on the player's ability to generate credits via regular play-through, and by doing variety of missions - without resorting to GTN. And if that part isn't working, then economy isn't working well either. Basically, economy should still work even if GTN was removed from the equation - GTN is an add-on, not a must, and should never become a must.

Edited January 22 by VegaMist

[Toraak]

1 hour ago, VegaMist said:

I'm on an old account, and still hate QT tax every time. For some missions, it breaks the immersion since it makes one doubt why would their character accept such a mission in the first place. For example, Bounty week missions. If you use QT, the bounty pay-off doesn't cover your expenses, so why would any Bounty Hunter agree to such a contract unless they have 0 economic sense? It's also a feeling of being nickel-and-dimed to revisit places you already unlocked. Do I still QT even though I hate the fees? Yes. Do I use it less and limit overall game exploration as a result? Also yes.

A similar argument can be made regarding repair fees. If repairs cost you more than credits generated during a mission the repairs are associated with, then one is again questioning why accept such a mission at all.

At the end of the day, economy isn't just dependent on credits removed from the game, but also on the player's ability to generate credits via regular play-through, and by doing variety of missions - without resorting to GTN. And if that part isn't working, then economy isn't working well either. Basically, economy should still work even if GTN was removed from the equation - GTN is an add-on, not a must, and should never become a must.

However the people complaining about the economy are doing so based on the GTN, because of the inflation for cosmetic items or other CM items. If you take out the GTN, this game has never had an issue with it's economy. When I played from Launch until now I never had issues with making credits in game from missions or other activities. Removing the GTN aspect just makes it more time consuming.

 

When each mission gives out roughly 28k, even PvP missions, Ops missions give out plenty. QT fee's are truly not important. Only becomes that way if your not tossing 1 mil or so on a new alt or each character. Lets be honest 1 mil per alt isn't much either. You get 2-3 just from doing the storyline while leveling.

Edited January 23 by Toraak

[VegaMist]

2 hours ago, Toraak said:

However the people complaining about the economy are doing so based on the GTN, because of the inflation for cosmetic items or other CM items.

And that's my biggest issue with the whole economy fixing approach - too much focus on GTN prices at the expense of the rest of the game.

2 hours ago, Toraak said:

When each mission gives out roughly 28k, even PvP missions, Ops missions give out plenty. QT fee's are truly not important. Only becomes that way if your not tossing 1 mil or so on a new alt or each character. Lets be honest 1 mil per alt isn't much either. You get 2-3 just from doing the storyline while leveling.

I'm tossing way more on new alts when I create them, yet QT fees still bother me every time because they put into question some of the missions I'm accepting.

Edited January 23 by VegaMist
Typo