fixed Prices,

[Mamous]

Economy fix suggestion - ADOPTION NPC

Hey guys ,
I would like to suggest something to fix the economy

What is problem in my opinion ?
Well ... people just dont get enought money from battles , and the only decent way to make money is to sell a good poke , usually a HR poke whit good iv's but those are hard to find , its not every day that you catch a wild dratini whit 31 speed IV so that you can sell it for 10m and make a bank for yourself .

So what i would like to suggest is : ADD a NPC that buy HR pokes from players . ( buy is kinda harsh to say in pokemon world , maybe you can say that the npc offers you cash to ADOPT the poke and take care of it for the rest of its life )

The npc would buy any HR poke for 2m or 1m , that way it is still kinda hard to find a HR poke , but even if you find a bad one , at least you get 2m out of it .
you guys can also use the membership to give a 3% boost on the HR finding chances that way PWO would have more people trying to get HR pokes , more people willing to buy membership , and more people whit MONEY on their banks to play the game .

Anyway its just a suggestion , dont hate me guys .

Lemme know what you guys think .

Thank you,
Mamous

 

[Boora]

hey,i have been thinking about this for a while and while this is not perfect, bare in mind this is just an idea,
at this moment we have a huge problem with cash in the community, and eve bigger one in the market, as few years ago you could sell the bad ivs hr's or unwanted common shinies, now you simply cannot
they either sit in a box or get realased , or on the off chance you get lucky you'll sell one once a month to a new player who just wants it for the sake of having it,
i'l go a bit more into detail, for example lets say i spent 15hours hunting a dratini, i finally found one, it has 1.4.5.7.9 ivs, you got the idea, Bad, it is still a #5 or lets say a i got a shiny common (bidrill,ratata,what ever) it is still a shiny
it feels like nowdays people getting punished when they get those kind of pokemons instead of rewarded becasue they are well, worthless,
my idea is basically an Npc that will buy ONLY tier4/5 and shinies for a fixed Price, you decide the price, it really doesn't matter,
this way people could empty thier boxes and gain some much much needed cash, and when they find thier next shiny or #4/5 they know even if its bad, they still made a little profit,

i'm saying #4/5 and shinys only to avoid abuse, and the abuse was part of the reason i did not post this earlier,but i got the idea from a friend who suggested only tier 4/5 and shinies,
it will bring cash, get rid of unwanted pokemon, and most of all, this will be a good way for people to finally earn pokedollars.

i would love to hear your opinion on this suggestion,

 

[Boora]

Re: Economy fix suggestion - ADOPTION NPC

Hey guys ,
I would like to suggest something to fix the economy

Spoiler

What is problem in my opinion ?
Well ... people just dont get enought money from battles , and the only decent way to make money is to sell a good poke , usually a HR poke whit good iv's but those are hard to find , its not every day that you catch a wild dratini whit 31 speed IV so that you can sell it for 10m and make a bank for yourself .

So what i would like to suggest is : ADD a NPC that buy HR pokes from players . ( buy is kinda harsh to say in pokemon world , maybe you can say that the npc offers you cash to ADOPT the poke and take care of it for the rest of its life )

The npc would buy any HR poke for 2m or 1m , that way it is still kinda hard to find a HR poke , but even if you find a bad one , at least you get 2m out of it .
you guys can also use the membership to give a 3% boost on the HR finding chances that way PWO would have more people trying to get HR pokes , more people willing to buy membership , and more people whit MONEY on their banks to play the game .

Anyway its just a suggestion , dont hate me guys .

Lemme know what you guys think .

i agree , but i'd let stuff make the prices and also add shiny commons and tier 4s to the list as my thread says, dam we should've really made only one thread xd

 

[Mamous]

hey dude i've had a similar ideia , its good to know that more people feel the same way , maybe this is the beggining of something

 

[strikerito94]

I think your idea is quite interesting , and id go with it. PWO faces a major problem nowadays unlike the past which is ( Dead market) , almost 90 % of the users dont have enough pokedollars to buy expensive pokemons (above 140m) due to the fact that there isnt that big source of income , and as my friend boora said theyr tire 5 pokemons are mostly worthless.These pokemons end up being released or sold for very very low price.In the past a bad Hr was worth at least 2m or more , nowadays its worth maybe 100 k or 200 k , i think thats a big problem that should be fixed.I recommend boora's idea. TIME FOR A CHANGE.

 

[Electrofreak]

Doing that fixes nothing honestly. The fatal assumption here is that pokemon are actually "worth" what people are charging for them in terms of monetary value. The fact is they are not. Money is leaving the system faster than it is coming in, and people are just too stubborn to adjust prices.

All this does is give people more money, which will just make stubborn people raise prices even more. The only way for this to change is for time to take its toll and people adjust to the new amount of money in the system. Stubbornness EVENTUALLY loses. This is not considering ultra-rare pokemon by the way. Those pokemon were always outside the realm of money for the most part.

 

[mad30]

I have to agree with Electrofreak on this.

The suggestion you are making indicates you do not believe there is ENOUGH money in game. However for quite some time now there's been a common belief by many, but not all, that there is too much money in game.

There needs to be a balance, and that balance is when a player gets a fair amount of money.. say that of the average player, there are required choices of how he spends his money. Currently in pwo, and it has been worse in the past, when you get to certain amount of money the only thing you are really concerned about affording is pokemon. That is not a good system.

Players with the most money will continue to distribute wealth to other by buying other peoples pokemon. They will then value that pokemon at a very high amount due to only have a few other pokemon being more valuable so its only logical they are able to sell it at a high enough rate to afford those select better pokemon. They have no other purpose for money so a single pokedollar is worth less to them than to a relatively new player.

In the past there has been a suggestion to do a money reset. This happened once before and solved very little due to the reason there was so much pokemoney in game was still present. The suggestion for a money reset was always based on the desire to remove pokemoney from the game. Unfortunately this is seen as not being desirable by a lot of players due to how imbalance in fairness this is and is seen as a punishment to players with more money. Instead pwo has been creating re-usable items and other money dumps to suck money out of their accounts and it is working, albeit slower than what most people would like.

I believe the economy is better today than it was 2 years ago. I believe at this rate the economy will be better a year from now. Yes it is hard to be a new player in pwo due to how much more money other players have, but this is true in all MMOs. When Natures/abilities more of the battle system is completed elite players will have to start buying pokemon at a more rapid pace to keep having the best pokemon possible. This will continue to spread the wealth among players.

If anything needs to be done, I suggest a taxation method to target wealthy players. Not via a direct method, but indirectly targeting them. For example, the more wealthy you are greater the odds you have more pokemon than a player with average amount of money. A tax on having so many pokemon over x amount would then in theory be a indirect tax on the wealthy. if you have 25 or more pokemon, you are taxed .5% of your pokemoney each month. Have more than 50 pokemon? 1% of your pokemoney each month.

In conclusion what you really want is there to be a lower difference in amount of money a wealthy person has compared to an average player, so instead of suggesting average player to obtain more money, It is better for the game to find ways to remove money from the wealthy player.

 

[Electrofreak]

What we really need is a commodity that bridges the two gaps, unrelated to RNG. We need something the wealthy player will buy from the not-as-wealthy player, but will be worth the investment to actually acquire that item for one but not the other.

An example, what I will refer to as the "hedgefund principle" from now on, is as follows.

A player who does not have much/is newer will need to work to get things no matter what the player does. They are still going through the game to acquire things and hunt and all that. When this player gets somewhere wealth wise, they then have to make meaningful decisions because of their limited funds and pokemon inventory. An example of this would be someone who has only 3 shinies, 2 of which are their OT. They would be REALLY reluctant to trade all 3 of their shinies for ONE higher rarity shiny of equal value. In their mind they value the multiplicity that gives them options in their trading.

If a richer player comes along, they have more expendable funds to throw at the same shiny. If someone has 20 shinies, expending 3 to get a better rarity shiny is something they would see in their best interest. They see those 3 smaller shinies as harder to get good and different offers on due to being more easily obtained.

A move like that is less advantageous for the player in the first instance, but advantageous in the second. This perpetuates growth in the latter, but lacking in the former. What we need is a system that reverses the two, and as such would drain money from the higher-ups into the lower end of the population.


The hedgefund principle here is that assets carry different values to people in different economic states. They have more comfort room around their main assets.

What type of commodity would be something that new players would work for to sell, but only old players could really use? We would need something newer players would be able to put in gameplay hours to get, so that the older players can purchase it from them. GENERALLY SPEAKING, older players tend to do more economic or passive play within game. This would give a dimension of a way for the newer players to have an income source that is entirely fair, but is taken more advantage of by the newer players than the old. Battle tower is a great example of this principle at work. I personally have spent over 25m buying battle tower items/tms from people because I did not feel like grinding them out myself.

The question then necessarily becomes "What could be done like that on a larger/more valuable scale?" This is the point of interest I think needs to be talked about and targeted rather than the actual amount of money within the game.


Another important concept is the liquidity of assets within the game being an issue at the moment, but that will be for another time/post.

 

[HitmonFonty]

I have merged these two suggestions because they are almost identical. The first post in this thread has been switched however since Mamous posted first, sorry for the confusion.

 

[Electrofreak]

I have merged these two suggestions because they are almost identical. The first post in this thread has been switched however since Mamous posted first, sorry for the confusion.

I didn't even know that was possible. That's kinda awesome. Thanks.

 

[Mamous]

I have merged these two suggestions because they are almost identical. The first post in this thread has been switched however since Mamous posted first, sorry for the confusion.

awesome

 

[Tasigur]

Way to derail the topic hitmon.


Electro, that's great in theory, but how do you do that in practice? Ideally that is what pokemon and daycaring are suppose to do, rich people get others to do the work for them when they can afford to do so.

As it turns out, anything new players can do, so can older players because there's nothing better for older players to do.

 

[Electrofreak]

Way to derail the topic hitmon.


Electro, that's great in theory, but how do you do that in practice? Ideally that is what pokemon and daycaring are suppose to do, rich people get others to do the work for them when they can afford to do so.

As it turns out, anything new players can do, so can older players because there's nothing better for older players to do.

Most older players are lazy. This is a generally known thing. If you read my post then yes I agree the issue is having the system to where anything new players can do old can as well. I was not saying that wasn't the case. The main point was that over time the average workload would be done by new players and not the old players. You cannot fix a system quickly, generally speaking, as the only way to do that would be to create a huge imbalance that would just create a worse problem than the one in the first place.

If you have a system where the average is that newer players take advantage of that opportunity but older players do not, then it evens things out monetarily over time by nature of it being an average. You will always have those players who choose to keep their money and keep working on things themselves. You cannot stop this entirely, but just because you cannot, does not nullify the point here.

As far as how it works out in practice, it would need to be something tied to an inexhaustible system. Battle tower would be this very thing if it wasn't for the fact that you only end up needing one of each item or very few of a select handful of TMs.


This is the part where I do not claim to have the direct answer. This is also the place where direct feedback/theorycrafting and other inputs will be needed. It will need to be a comprehensive system that ties together all of the market systems. Currently the monetary flow is a (mostly) one sided funnel that goes towards a select few. Battle tower was an opposing current in the stream to funnel some resources back into the lower player pools. What we would need to do is figure a way to reverse the funnel. We need something regular players can grind that the rich players would flock to purchase in droves.

We need a modulated decision chain to do such a thing in all honesty. An example would be as follows:
1. I can do X or Y.
1a. If I do X, A happens.
1b. If I do Y, B happens.
2. I do X because of reason Q.

We need meaningful choices to where players can respond to their current economic situation. As stated before there are choices like these in the game already, but they tend to go one direction. (reference the shiny situation above)

I am in no way saying I have all the answers here, but I am saying this would be the only way to fix the problem without completely destroying the game or creating a bigger long-term problem later. The difficulty in implementing something in reality effectively as opposed to pure theory is a difficulty I am aware of. This is exactly why this needs to be more than just me or a select few people giving input on this. Battle tower was AMAZING in what it has done for the community and doing this very thing.

Just a thought would be something like berry farming in hoenn as well. (Stuff like lum/chesto/unreleased berries.) Battlers would need to buy stacks of these for their gameplay and the other players could supply that. By spending more time battling, they have less time to grow berries than other players. This is just a small example. We will need much more than berries to reverse such a tide.

The smallest streams can often run together into a mighty river, and this would be one of those situations where that mentality would be good. It is just a matter of what is reasonably possible with the staff/client capabilities at the time, as well as the creative output we would collectively have together. If anyone has any ideas, please put them forward.

 

[Electrofreak]

tl;dr
linear decision-making = bad
non-linear decision-making = good
In economic balancing situations.