Archived Modify The Value Of Regals On The New Server

This suggestion has been archived / closed and can no longer be voted on.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Valto

Staring at the sky
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Messages
21
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Location
Somewhere out in space, there is a place
My suggestion for the new server is simple: the server determined value (through voting and other server activities) of regals should be increased by a factor of 5-10 compared to the current value system (10 regals -> 50-100 regals). This change might sound nonsensical when you first consider it, but there's many benefits and few negatives.

Pros:
Trading large amounts of low value items like building blocks and food can actually be profitable without a huge profit margin (often Buy 2 : Sell 1 currently)
Player determined item value will become less rigid and more dependent on the current market
New/veteran players will consider regals from voting as more valuable without any actual increase in the amount gained
Unique items can be priced according to interest/quality and not categorically
Players might be more eager to spend/sell due to item prices being less static
Cons:
Initial confusion about the increase in value (mostly negated by the new server environment and the change being a demand side increase)
Players possibly valuing currency less and investing more into minerals/rare items
Monetary system becomes less parallel to real life currencies
 
Last edited:
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
I don't know how things used to work, but I've been under the opinion that player supply and demand will determine what things sell for what price.
 
I don't know how things used to work, but I've been under the opinion that player supply and demand will determine what things sell for what price.
Player supply and demand determines specific prices based on how money is attained/circulated. I'm suggesting that the initial sources of all regals given by the server as a result of voting/doing quests/killing monsters (idk if quests/monster killing will reward money on the new server) increase by a factor of 5-10 specifically.

Basically if you received 40 regals from voting before, the new amount would be increased parallel to an increase in all other amounts (if increase by factor of 5: 200 regals from voting, 20-30 regals from green mobs, 75 regals for completing a level 1 pack isle quest, etc).

As I stated in my initial post, the server environment would cause no problems with monetary rebalancing since it is an almost completely new environment with no extant monetary value/trends.
 
Last edited:
Don't really see a reason to, Ive never had issues with regals being worth too much to warrant a decrease in their value.
 
My two cents are that this change of server and loss of all regals resets the market. Until a shop is set up the god gear that players take with them is all that exists until they build up the resources to craft their own which will take a bit of time. Dark rooms should become a consistent source of income for many as raids will not be able to supply enough regal tribute for some time. Not for the cost it would take to get the supplies for such an endeavor. I feel like the market will be in a perfect setting right now. No one holds more wealth than another and players will need to figure out how to generate an income on their own for a few weeks. That means for a bit of time survival will be the only way to generate regals as even art shops and such on the forums won't be able to sell their work at their usual rate as players will need to build up their supplies once again.
 
I agree with what's been said. There isn't really a reason IMO to artificially inflate the economy like this. Artificial inflation, while it may allow for more specific prices, has no overarching benefit as our economy develops.
 
I had a similar idea to this back before the reset when a diamond cost less than a regal. While it doesn't really help the economy itself, it makes the 1r diamond now worth, say, 100r (should it be multiplied 100 times). To me it simply makes more sense for something as essential as that to cost more than one singular unit of money. But most people like it better the way it is, so eh
 
Status
Not open for further replies.