Forums » Pantheon Classes

Which class do you think will make the most money and why?

    • 14 posts
    February 1, 2019 8:36 PM PST
    I'm really curious to hear everyone's opinions on which classes will be able to make the most money in game?

    As a former casual eq player I remember wanting to buy cool gear but not being able to afford it haha. So maybe this will help me decide on which class I'd like to focus on in Pantheon.

    So which class do you think will be rolling in the dough and why?

    My speculations so far are either druid because of speed buffs and ports or rogue because of pickpocketing.

    What do you think?
    • 35 posts
    February 2, 2019 12:25 PM PST

    There's no way at all to know the answer to this as we don't know what travel options we have or how the economy or trade skills work.

    • 36 posts
    February 3, 2019 12:53 AM PST

    Hard to say with so many details yet to be hashed out. Look at it from the perspective of what to people demand. People don't want to lose xp so I think it's safe to say that healers, depending on their rez percentage, will be able to make some money since there will be some type of xp pentalty. Buffs are always popular.  I'm sure ports, if they are in, will be in high demand as well.

    Then there is tradeskills, sculpters for example will make things that blacksmiths need. Maybe other tradeskilles will be interdepent as well.  Scribes will make enchantments and such, those will probably be in demand.  I think comsumables like food and drink or potions and poisons can be lucrative.

    • 1039 posts
    February 3, 2019 11:18 AM PST

    The economy in Pantheon will likely go to complete garbage right after release because modern play style is to make everything in the game to be about the player economy (ie the primary means to advance), not the adventure portion of the game. I can already see people essentially catagorizing the game by its monetary means. In short time, everything will be sold by players who camped items they had no use for with a large percentage of players buying their advancement through player trading (rather than camped by themselves) , it will be similar to EQ Kunark era where Yantis became king and everyone was using trade as a means to circumvent content (I knew many who gave up on getting an item by camping for it because everyone was camping the item to sell on the trade market).

    People would be like...

    Player A: Dang, that is a nice fungi tunic, I heard the camp (Fungi King) is very hard to break and hold, is that true? 

    Player B: No idea, I just bought this. 

     

    Keep in mind this is exactly what plat sellers/farmers want. 


    This post was edited by Tanix at February 3, 2019 11:19 AM PST
    • 16 posts
    February 3, 2019 4:09 PM PST

    A big part of the answer to this question is going to be based on how buffs work.  Power leveling in EQ was a good money maker especially with druids.  If you can provide duration buffs at higher lvls to lower lvl chars then buffing classes will be able to make a bunch of money.  Ports and rezs will also make cash.  Rogue is an interesting idea but i'm not sure if it was ever really worth the time spent.  I think druid would be a good choice but in the end i wouldnt make a char just based on their ability to make money.  Any class can be a good money maker if you can find your niche.

    • 13 posts
    February 3, 2019 8:02 PM PST

    If crafted items are desireable, crafting will be the best money maker in the long run.

    • 14 posts
    February 3, 2019 8:54 PM PST
    Yeah these are great considerations. I hadn't even thought how crafting would come into play... I wonder if the ranger's foraging will also allow them to find basic crafting mats...

    Power leveling is also a good point! Seems like druids or shamans would probably come out on top in that regard but I could be wrong.
    • 149 posts
    February 4, 2019 1:59 AM PST

    to be honest, the best class to make money is the class that requires the least, he won't need to buy anything. Or has the most items dropped for them, being able to pick it up easily or buy for cheap.

    If looking back on the EQ days, it seemed VERY hard to get tank gear, you needed high hp and high ac, which was always in high demand making it nearly impossible to get. As a druid i just needed wisdom and the marginal gains were so slim it didn't really matter, so eventually he was richer (obviously also due to the fact he could port for plat)

    • 1253 posts
    February 4, 2019 9:44 AM PST

    It's without a doubt enchanter. 

    Lyrith’s Embellishment  Passive Ability. Your skill with physical enchantment and illusions has made you adept in the art of persuasion. Your buy prices will be decreased and your sell prices will be increased with most vendors.

    That one ability will far out weigh any amount of money made from ports or rez's etc over the long run...not to mention mana regen spells for tips usually do pretty well too.


    This post was edited by philo at February 4, 2019 9:45 AM PST
    • 14 posts
    February 4, 2019 10:05 AM PST

    philo said:

    It's without a doubt enchanter. 

    Lyrith’s Embellishment  Passive Ability. Your skill with physical enchantment and illusions has made you adept in the art of persuasion. Your buy prices will be decreased and your sell prices will be increased with most vendors.

    That one ability will far out weigh any amount of money made from ports or rez's etc over the long run...not to mention mana regen spells for tips usually do pretty well too.

     

    ya, I noticed that too. That is pretty epic! I'm curious how big of an impact NPC shops will have vs the player economy. 

    • 149 posts
    February 4, 2019 11:53 PM PST

    philo said:

    It's without a doubt enchanter. 

    Lyrith’s Embellishment  Passive Ability. Your skill with physical enchantment and illusions has made you adept in the art of persuasion. Your buy prices will be decreased and your sell prices will be increased with most vendors.

    That one ability will far out weigh any amount of money made from ports or rez's etc over the long run...not to mention mana regen spells for tips usually do pretty well too.

    For some reason i doubt that. In EQ1 Enchanters had the same abilities, but i cannot remember it actually being of very much use aside of making cash trips and faction grinds shorter. Most cash items didn't increase in price that much with more faction and charisma. But we will see i geuss?

    • 620 posts
    February 7, 2019 7:35 AM PST

    Tanix said:

    (I knew many who gave up on getting an item by camping for it because everyone was camping the item to sell on the trade market).

    People would be like...

    Player A: Dang, that is a nice fungi tunic, I heard the camp (Fungi King) is very hard to break and hold, is that true? 

    Player B: No idea, I just bought this. 

    Keep in mind this is exactly what plat sellers/farmers want. 

    I believe the devs have made a comment addressing how they are looking into ways to help mitigate this to deter farmers/plat sellers.  But I would defer to @Bazgrim and his staff or maybe @OneAddSeven to site that forum post.

    To respond to the O.P. I would say that this is a very interesting topic.  I would have to agree with some of the other posts that have said that there are too many variables to make a solid assumption at this time but if I were to speculate and use EQ as a reference point I would have to say that a very consistent form of non-itemized (farming gear and selling it) income would be teleports.  To add onto that, I would have to say that I would assume that the "cost of living" for wizards and druids would be lower as they shouldn't be taking much damage (repair costs).  So between the druid and wiz, there will be the portal reagent costs to consider and maybe food/drink expenses.   Whichever of those two are capable of soloing better may be able to get into the item resale market too if that is a consideration...  I would have to assume the Summoner and Enchanter will be solid solo classes once max level (maybe the necro too if anything like EQ).  

    I wouldn't think that Rez or Buffs would be "consistent" income earners (i.e. just logging on and auctioning services for a set price).  Nor do I see buying low from NPC vendors and selling high to players being very lucrative... if that does turn out to be lucrative it will likely be addressed fairly quickly.

    Something else to consider is that there may be a market for "power leveling" or selling loot rights, but these would be unlikely to be consistent also (unless there is some kind of mentor - / XP sharing / level dispersity within group - system).

    Crafting will obviously earn income, but there will also be a lot of costs involved with crafting that may not be as lucrative as teleporting when considering the expenses vs income.

    • 749 posts
    February 7, 2019 2:54 PM PST

    Probably a necro, and any other class that can kite fairly well. Also, any class that works on crafting...crafting at the start of any MMO is usually a really strong money maker in the beginning.

    • 1039 posts
    February 11, 2019 9:45 AM PST

    Darch said:

    Tanix said:

    (I knew many who gave up on getting an item by camping for it because everyone was camping the item to sell on the trade market).

    People would be like...

    Player A: Dang, that is a nice fungi tunic, I heard the camp (Fungi King) is very hard to break and hold, is that true? 

    Player B: No idea, I just bought this. 

    Keep in mind this is exactly what plat sellers/farmers want. 

    I believe the devs have made a comment addressing how they are looking into ways to help mitigate this to deter farmers/plat sellers.  But I would defer to @Bazgrim and his staff or maybe @OneAddSeven to site that forum post.

     

    I will have to look for it, but I remmeber following various discucssions on the issue a while back. Also keep in mind that in my opinion, the problem isn't simply plat farmers/sellers, rather the core of the problem is at the player economy level as it encourages progression development through means outside of obtaining the gear through game play from its origin. Since that concept is a major instigator, the solutions I think need to attend to it first. 

    Ultimately the main problem with player trade is that it circumvents the game play balance aspect in aquiring the gear. That is (technically) a person could farm extremely easy content for low drop coin for large amounts of time to eventually gain enough money to purchase a high end drop from extremely difficult content. This is why plat sellers become very valuable. 

    As for a solution, I have no real idea that I could be certain would work. You could remove player trade (ie only facilitate trade with an NPC vendor) entirely, but this is HUGE change to the system to which many would have issues, not to mention it has an "artificial" mechanic flavor to it that while can be reasoned, is still a bit off (What? You mean I can't hand another player anything I have? Nothing?). Selective No-Drop is a solution, but again, this causes issues and requires some delicate attention to implementing the crafting system, not to mention it is an yet another artificial mechanic.  

    Though, lets be honest, most people like player trade and the advantages it gives (which is why many would object to player trade being disallowed at the level I describe). 

    Fact is, this issue is EXTREMELY complex and sensitive. Go too far in one direction, you get massive problems, go the other... again... problems... I don't envy the decisions they have to make. 


    This post was edited by Tanix at February 11, 2019 9:48 AM PST
    • 3086 posts
    February 11, 2019 12:11 PM PST

    A player driven economy has always been emphasized in Pantheon.  The "Game Features" section highlights:

    --  Take part in an economy that is largely player driven.

    Here is an excerpt from the FAQ:

    6.5 What will the in-game economy model be like?

    Having a player-driven economy is an important part of Pantheon and we want a heavy focus on player-to-player trading. Items need to come in and out of the economy regularly. Keeping items scarce and adding item sinks to give reason to donate or sacrifice your items will be important to the game. With some exceptions (quest items, epic-quest items, crafter customized items) almost everything in the game will be tradable. We want exotic items found in one end of the world to be very valuable elsewhere.

    Here are some quotes from Brad where this topic has come up in the past:

    "Well, first of all what I can say for certain is there will be no global auction house or bazarre.  We want travel and remote regions to matter and for trade to take place in different areas and to see items fluctuate in value depending on how hard it was or wasn't to obtain and then bring to the area where you want to sell it.  A player driven economy, as I've said many times, is paramount to Pantheon."  https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2594/death-to-the-auction-house/view/page/3

    -C- Economy
    Q5C-1. Will a player run economy be a priority in future development?
    Yes, a player driven economy is a huge part of what makes Pantheon tick. Buy/sell locations will largely be determined and driven by the community.  https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/3865/faq-tenets-and-features-revamp/view/post_id/62442

    "So when we think about ideal Realm populations it comes down to 'is the world the right size, not too small and not too big, such that the kind of community we want to create develops?  Looking at when Realm population peaks and then at times when fewer players are on.... have we created a virtual world that feels more like a village and less like a metropolis?  Do we have approximately the right number of people on for a player driven economy to exist and thrive?  Do you feel like you're truly part of something, that people recognize you, that you have an opportunity to become known (or reviled, or whatever floats your boat)?"  https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/184/community-content-and-alternate-rulesets

    "Minimizing having to make items no-trade or bind-on-equip is also a key part of our desire for a vibrant player driven economy.  Combined with local banks and such then fits into our desire to see regional price differences and player merchants moving merchandise across the world for profit (the old Silk Road example)."  https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/7526/no-random-loot-boxes-please/view/page/3

    There are a bunch more floating around but the general idea is that a player driven economy is considered paramount to Pantheon.  They want to avoid using BoE and BoP as much as possible ... meaning that if either are used, it would be the exception rather than the rule.  The value of items will be based on supply vs demand and there is a wide range of factors that could contribute to that.  Regional auction houses have been cited as a consideration, as well as organic player hubs.  The rarity of items will matter, of course.  Rarity won't necessarily be limited to low drop rates, either.  Certain content will be tied into the event system (the rarity is in the triggered event rather than the drop rate of something you camp for 2 days straight.)  Certain items might be gated behind extremely challenging content, such as the "really challenging raid tier single group content" that was recently mentioned by Joppa.

    VR hasn't mentioned any specific plans on how they plan to combat RMT but it's definitely something they have thought about and plan on tackling once the game is closer to release.

    To answer the OP ... I think monks will be the major bread-winners.  It's just a hunch.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at February 11, 2019 12:27 PM PST
    • 1039 posts
    February 11, 2019 2:22 PM PST

    I never said it wasn't oneADseven. I am not sure what point you are making. 

     

    The point is, they are going to run into issues because the player economy is the number one fault point of any game to which most problems stem from. That is why I said, it will be a nightmare to balance and no matter what they do, there WILL be major problems due to it.


    This post was edited by Tanix at February 11, 2019 2:25 PM PST
    • 3086 posts
    February 11, 2019 2:47 PM PST

    There were a few points in there.  If players acquire items through trade, rather than the direct origin, it is not considered a problem, it is intended game design.  Anything that restricts trade will generally be frowned upon since a player driven economy has always been described as a core pillar of game design.  They are considering the selective use of no-trade but it will be the exception rather than the rule.  If they are ever going to lean more heavily toward a certain direction, it will likely favor open trade.  I shared plenty of on-topic quotes and information.  Do with them as you please.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at February 11, 2019 2:54 PM PST
    • 2380 posts
    February 11, 2019 2:58 PM PST

    I wouldn't imagine any particular class will be rolling with much deeper pockets in general, but consumable crafters I imagine will have the greatest fortunes. 

     

    As for the rest of the above? No problem with most things being freely tradable. I don't give a care if someone bought or earned the majority of items so long as the top tier/most challenging content produces no-drop items, never had an issue with how the economy worked in EQ and twinking alts was very enjoyable.

    Someone wants to spend countless hours farming currency to purchase something tradable then who cares? I'd say they earned it, just not the same way others may have. 

    • 3086 posts
    February 11, 2019 3:22 PM PST

    I agree with you Iksar.  In general I really don't like seeing BoE or BoP but I think they have value if used selectively.  As far as players circumventing the challenge of earning gear, there are always two sides to every coin ... buying gear from other players isn't even on my radar.  If people are involved in RMT then that's a different story.  When a game has a strong player driven economy I have no issue with someone paying a fortune to acquire something nice.  As long as they worked for their resources legitimately (earning currency in-game rather than buying it online) then I think everything is fair game.  A player driven economy is one of my favorite aspects of an MMO and I really look forward to seeing that again.  On the other side of the coin is players acquiring items with bad tactics like zerging.  I think that's awful for the economy because it skews the supply line.  Instead of the "flaming sword of sovereignty" being available to only the best groups, any zerg-blob of 20+ players can get their hands on it.  It disrupts risk vs reward and supply vs demand at the same time.  Thankfully zerging is unlikely to rear it's ugly head in Pantheon.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at February 11, 2019 3:25 PM PST
    • 1039 posts
    February 11, 2019 3:30 PM PST

    oneADseven said:

    There were a few points in there.  If players acquire items through trade, rather than the direct origin, it is not considered a problem, it is intended game design. 

    Regardless, the problem is not the statement of it being approved or not, it is what results due to such a system. Everything is connected, sometimes directly, sometimes through subtle means. 

    Player trade facilitates and encourages obtaining items without earning them by their original design (ie going to the dungeon, and getting it from that mob). It encourages loot mongering based play (ie everything then becomes a "need" as they can sell it to trade up on the player market) and it is one of the main features to which plat sellers/farmers rely on. In fact, they specifically manipulate the player trade markets to make buying plat the most attractive way to gain items (in EQ, in a single week, the inflation of currency went from the top earners having 10's to 100's of plat, to 100's of millions of plat due to duping bugs which were actively sought by item/plat farmers). 

    I am old fashion I guess, being a Test server player (we used to run off the East Commons sellers when they would pop on to the server as the community didn't approve of it), but I don't see any real contribution those trade markets make to game play, in most cases they circumvent it (unless it is trade for crafting or the like). 

     

    oneADseven said:

    Anything that restricts trade will generally be frowned upon since a player driven economy has always been described as a core pillar of game design.  They are considering the selective use of no-trade but it will be the exception rather than the rule.  If they are ever going to lean more heavily toward a certain direction, it will likely favor open trade.  I shared plenty of on-topic quotes and information.  Do with them as you please.

    Certainly it will be frowned upon, but you are incorrect on your claim about it being a "core pillar of game design". In fact, EQ didn't even have player trade in mind to any extent when it was released. EC player trade was ENTIRELY player driven emergent behavior in EQ and it was not openly acceped by all (initially many thought it to be a bunch of oppurtunists trying to gimmick the system by buying their progression rather than earning it through play).

    In fact, when it really took off during Kunark, there were many people who were scoffed at, looked down on, or given a hard time if they bought their items. I know many of us monks were pretty miffed at all the Iksar twinks who started showing up to groups with their Hundred fist staffs, Fungi Tunics, etc... who had no clue how to play a monk and most of their skills were still extremely low (you could power level a character, but it was obvious who was power leveled because their skills would be lacking as skills went up based on use that could not be power leveled ). 

    Player trade markets were more of a mainstream anti-gaming idea to be honest that naturally progressed due to its benefits, so I agree anything that stops or limits people from being able to buy their progression is going to be frowned on. Even my idea of having items degrade in their power based each trade (making the item its highest value upon first obtaining it from the mob that drops it) would be frowned upon as there are many who think it would be unfair for them to not be able to buy that item at that power level. 

    I am not a big fan of no-drop or various other artificial mechanics, so I don't think that is a solution and as you said, there is no way people would accept it if player to player trade was only allowed through vendor NPCs (where the developers would have complete control as to what is allowed, item worth, etc...).

    Point is, I realize they are already on a basic path of design and I am not asking for any other solution (the time to suggest that would have been years ago). I am just commenting on the problems that WILL occur due to this system, and they WILL happen, count on it. 

    That said, just so you know oneADseven, I am not new to the game, I have been reading the forums since the KS and have followed them over forum changes over the years. I remember when they were going over all these concepts and discussing them with the players (which is why I said that a lot of these things were already decided on years ago when the original player base was supporting them). 

     I do appreciate your links though, but don't think I am unaware of a lot of their plans (I might be out of date on some things mind you, but the basic tenants were set a long time ago). 

     

    • 1039 posts
    February 11, 2019 3:37 PM PST

    Iksar said:

    I wouldn't imagine any particular class will be rolling with much deeper pockets in general, but consumable crafters I imagine will have the greatest fortunes. 

     

    As for the rest of the above? No problem with most things being freely tradable. I don't give a care if someone bought or earned the majority of items so long as the top tier/most challenging content produces no-drop items, never had an issue with how the economy worked in EQ and twinking alts was very enjoyable.

    Someone wants to spend countless hours farming currency to purchase something tradable then who cares? I'd say they earned it, just not the same way others may have. 

     

    I don't care what others do, that isn't the issue (ie other than personal opinion of them circumventing play), it is more how this will have an effect on the over all game (plat selling/farming, perm camping for item sale, loot mongering and fighting over drops because they can be sold, etc...). 

     

    When I was on Test, it wasn't an issue, but after the wipe I transferred my toon to a live server and all of a sudden I had casters demanding they roll on a monk staff that dropped. I was kind of shocked, but they argued that they have every bit the need because they could sell it and buy something else they wanted. So it did have a direct effect on my play, which is why I have a negative view on it. 

     

    From the argument of "earning" though, lets be honest, grinding out mundane easy content or playing the trade game on the market to earn lots of money to get your item is circumventing the adventure portion of the game which is required in order to obtain that item. So while they may have "Earned" it in the very basic sense of the word, they did not however put the required effort that was designed by that encounter or content to achieve it, rather they circumvented that requirement. 

    • 1039 posts
    February 11, 2019 3:48 PM PST

    oneADseven said:

    I agree with you Iksar.  In general I really don't like seeing BoE or BoP but I think they have value if used selectively.  As far as players circumventing the challenge of earning gear, there are always two sides to every coin ... buying gear from other players isn't even on my radar.  If people are involved in RMT then that's a different story.  When a game has a strong player driven economy I have no issue with someone paying a fortune to acquire something nice.  As long as they worked for their resources legitimately (earning currency in-game rather than buying it online) then I think everything is fair game.  A player driven economy is one of my favorite aspects of an MMO and I really look forward to seeing that again.  On the other side of the coin is players acquiring items with bad tactics like zerging.  I think that's awful for the economy because it skews the supply line.  Instead of the "flaming sword of sovereignty" being available to only the best groups, any zerg-blob of 20+ players can get their hands on it.  It disrupts risk vs reward and supply vs demand at the same time.  Thankfully zerging is unlikely to rear it's ugly head in Pantheon.

    There is no proper risk vs reward when you can buy your advancement, even if it is through in game money. In fact, there are guys that simply played the EC tunnel trade game (they started with one item, traded for another, and built up a stock, trading again and again until they had a large stock of items) and there was no real "risk" in terms of the adventure game. That person could be absoultely horrible at playing the game and yet they could have the best items in the game without ever stepping foot into a raid or dungeon. Where is the risk? Where is that precious balance of weighting your efforts when you enter a dungeon, work your way to a boss and then try to defeat it? 

    Why is it acceptable for a person to grind easy mobs without any risk for long periods of time to buy a difficult to obtain item, but not for the guy who pays real money to a friend to give him an item? Keep in mind I am not advocating RMT, I just don't understand how buying that content circumvention is all of a sudden acceptable because it uses in game money? Both didn't earn the actual item, they just bought it. Also, if a friend wants to give another friend a bunch of plat so they can buy the item, why is that acceptable now? The only difference is there is no RMT going on, rather it is someone just giving them the money. 

    I just find the whole practice a bit... odd... because essentially it is the same regardles, buying an item without having to actually go and complete the content that is required to obtain it. 

    I mean, that kind of sounds like... cheating? Maybe? Not cheating in the fact that it cheats the game, but it certainly cheats the required progression to obtain that item. That is, someone has to obtain that item. So, someone did the requirement, the other just paid to not have to do it?

     

    Like I said, it just seems odd...

     

    • 620 posts
    February 11, 2019 4:02 PM PST

    Tanix said:

    There is no proper risk vs reward when you can buy your advancement, even if it is through in game money. In fact, there are guys that simply played the EC tunnel trade game (they started with one item, traded for another, and built up a stock, trading again and again until they had a large stock of items) and there was no real "risk" in terms of the adventure game. That person could be absoultely horrible at playing the game and yet they could have the best items in the game without ever stepping foot into a raid or dungeon. Where is the risk? Where is that precious balance of weighting your efforts when you enter a dungeon, work your way to a boss and then try to defeat it? 

    I'm not trying to gang up on you Tanix because I totally see where your concerns are stemming from, but I think I speak on behalf of a lot of people when I say that we aren't concerned if someone wants to spend their time basically roleplaying as a vendor.  As long as their wealth was gained from within the game (not bought online), then they earned it in my opinion.  If the item was given to them by a friend, or guildmates, then that's on the gift giver and although I would be insanely jealous, its still part of the game world.  If someone were cheating other people out of items or money then that would be addressed, but otherwise --Shrug--

    • 3086 posts
    February 11, 2019 5:13 PM PST

    In many ways ... I view a player driven economy as a foundation for "intentional emergence."  If the game is being designed, eyes wide open, with the intention of having most items tradable ... there are endless possibilities of how players can accumulate wealth or items.  Where you sell, when you sell, and how you sell all have an impact.  The same can be said for buying.  Players can start off with scraps and if they play their cards right they can start flipping gold without ever venturing out into the wilds.  This concept doesn't really follow risk vs reward in a traditional way, but it does still exist.  Time/Effort/Resources are considered risk, in this sense.  There are any number of ways that you can exhaust those resources and if someone makes the conscious decision to play the role of opportunistic tradesmen instead of adventurer or crafter, there is an opportunity cost for that decision.  It's a very non-linear approach to gaming and it's also highly social and interactive.

    At the end of the day, this type of gameplay can be incredibly satisfying for certain kinds of players.  They like to learn the ins and outs of the economy and discover patterns or trends that can become profitable.  There are plenty of folks out there who prefer to unload their merchandise to vendors or undercut the lowest price on the auction house.  The relationship between these two player types is actually quite harmonious.  On one end you have someone who would prefer to spend their time adventuring or doing something else ... they just want a reasonable offer for whatever they are selling and they are happy to go on with their day.  This pairs up nicely with the tradesmen who actively seeks these kind of players out.  They purchase their items for a mutually agreed price and then they look for ways to create a profit margin.  It's basically the "circle of life" in a player driven economy.  The emphasis on regional markets and resources adds a lot of depth to this style of play.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at February 11, 2019 5:21 PM PST
    • 1039 posts
    February 11, 2019 6:26 PM PST

    Darch said:

    Tanix said:

    There is no proper risk vs reward when you can buy your advancement, even if it is through in game money. In fact, there are guys that simply played the EC tunnel trade game (they started with one item, traded for another, and built up a stock, trading again and again until they had a large stock of items) and there was no real "risk" in terms of the adventure game. That person could be absoultely horrible at playing the game and yet they could have the best items in the game without ever stepping foot into a raid or dungeon. Where is the risk? Where is that precious balance of weighting your efforts when you enter a dungeon, work your way to a boss and then try to defeat it? 

    I'm not trying to gang up on you Tanix because I totally see where your concerns are stemming from, but I think I speak on behalf of a lot of people when I say that we aren't concerned if someone wants to spend their time basically roleplaying as a vendor.  As long as their wealth was gained from within the game (not bought online), then they earned it in my opinion.  If the item was given to them by a friend, or guildmates, then that's on the gift giver and although I would be insanely jealous, its still part of the game world.  If someone were cheating other people out of items or money then that would be addressed, but otherwise --Shrug--

     

    It isn't so much that I am worried about others and what they do, it is more so the over all effect the system has on the game. The economy puts pressure on people to camp items for sale and often the best selling items are what are camped. In EQ PoP, the Staff of Flowing Water was an extremely hot selling item on the server due to monks/beasts being the most popular twinking classes. Because it was such a big seller, everyone camped it and everyone wanted to roll on it so they could sell it on the market (which made monk/beast mains have a lot of problems trying to obtain it through legitimate means). Many aspects of EQ became all about farming for items to sell on the trade market to purchase ones advancement. I personally disliked the effect it had and how it changed many peoples attitudes in the game. People got very greedy and there were constant arguments over wanting to roll on loot for sale, etc.. As a monk most of my items were massively difficult to obtain because the trade market saturated the camps with people farming for the trade market to amass money for their next purchase. 

    So it isn't that I care that people buy their way through the game, it is more the over all negative effect this has on other elements of game play as I described. My comments about the oddity of it was just testing the logic of the thinking behind why one thing is accepted and the other isn't as it doesn't make any sense to me. That is, a sanctioned circumvention is still a circumvention of content, regardless if the designers approve of it.