Online store prices are outrageously high!

[linayar]

Remember this when they reduce the limit on something you care about without compensation. I personally don't care about gil, but I would not want someone to remove some of my storage and suddenly all my mats (trash or not) were just gone. If such a cap were to be lowered warning would have to be given, just like tomestones being phased out.

They already do. They've removed the old tomestones I collected and, while some of them are moved to poetics, others are moved to hunts and I no longer do hunts. Even the conversion they give you means you still lose out on some as it's not a 1-to-1 conversion.

Obviously they should warn people ahead of time to let people decide if they want to do something with their "excess" gil before the cap is lowered. Or just make it so you can't gain more gil until you're below the new cap.

"Gil is meaningless" past a point where you have enough to buy everything in the game without making a significant dent in your own funds. Removing ALL gil sinks instead of creating more will exacerbate the problem by creating more and more people with excessive gil amounts. Again.. the system requires a sink for those who have too much not an increase in the cost of playing in general. The problem right now is it has to be heavily expensive.. but not contribute something inequality creating or advantage granting. Also it cannot be something that only the super rich have access too as then it will INCENTIVIZE money hoarding and brew complaints about gating. ... I'm still at a loss as to what that could be.

Again, I'm not seeing the problem with having excessive gil. In fact, the people I usually see having problems with "undercutters" are usually people who would have enough money anyway. So much so, that one common solution is to buy out the competition and resell at higher prices, which would seem to exacerbate the problem of having "excessive gil" if it really was a problem.

[Krotoan]

They already do. They've removed the old tomestones I collected and, while some of them are moved to poetics, others are moved to hunts and I no longer do hunts. Even the conversion they give you means you still lose out on some as it's not a 1-to-1 conversion.

Obviously they should warn people ahead of time to let people decide if they want to do something with their "excess" gil before the cap is lowered. Or just make it so you can't gain more gil until you're below the new cap.

That.. was why I used the example. Because it's what they do already. However considering this has never been done before with anything except tiered tomestone stuff, it'd probably have to be quite a long warning and .. gonna say likely not well received since simply amassing money is some peoples endgame. Just going "ok now you can't have that much" to control Gil is not a great solution. Better to give everyone something to do with that gil.

Again, I'm not seeing the problem with having excessive gil. In fact, the people I usually see having problems with "undercutters" are usually people who would have enough money anyway. So much so, that one common solution is to buy out the competition and resell at higher prices, which would seem to exacerbate the problem of having "excessive gil" if it really was a problem.

People who complain about "undercutters" are part of the problem.. not the victims. These are the people who have no output but making more money to make that number bigger because past a certain point that money is just a score. Once you can buy all the stuff, you don't have to worry about being able to afford things and are also not interested in any of the piddling sinks out there because you likely make that just on a invest-craft-sell cycle a day. We need a way to interest those people in spending that crazy surplus so there aren't "superpowers" out there anymore.

[linayar]

That.. was why I used the example.

Yes, I'm clarifying that tomestone is what I care about, so no reminder is necessary. Change is part of the game. That title you gain after so much hard work with your static could be earned solo in later expansions (ultimate being a happy exception, for now). And of course people will complain about change, just like people will complain about no change.

People who complain about "undercutters" are part of the problem.. not the victims. These are the people who have no output but making more money to make that number bigger because past a certain point that money is just a score. Once you can buy all the stuff, you don't have to worry about being able to afford things and are also not interested in any of the piddling sinks out there because you likely make that just on a invest-craft-sell cycle a day. We need a way to interest those people in spending that crazy surplus so there aren't "superpowers" out there anymore.

And that's why we should lower the gil cap, so it'll be less of a score or a "superpower."

[Krotoan]

Yes, I'm clarifying that tomestone is what I care about, so no reminder is necessary. Change is part of the game. That title you gain after so much hard work with your static could be earned solo in later expansions (ultimate being a happy exception, for now). And of course people will complain about change, just like people will complain about no change.

And that's why we should lower the gil cap, so it'll be less of a score or a "superpower."

I'm a personal fan of not taking things away from people to fix problems created by poor forethought. While lowering the gil cap might solve some of the problem, I'm willing to be people will still just spread out their fortunes over alts.

[linayar]

I'm a personal fan of not taking things away from people to fix problems created by poor forethought. While lowering the gil cap might solve some of the problem, I'm willing to be people will still just spread out their fortunes over alts.

The other alternative I mentioned is to prevent you from getting more gil until you're below the cap. So every gil you've already earned is still there.

As for alts, while it's possible, they haven't made it easy to transfer between alts. And I don't see a problem with that either as every character will have the new cap limit. In fact, to go even further, I'd say make it so your retainers cannot hold gil, so you have to take gil from your retainer before that sale slot is cleared and be usable for another item to sell.

[ZattanaWen]

Again, I'm not seeing the problem with having excessive gil. In fact, the people I usually see having problems with "undercutters" are usually people who would have enough money anyway. So much so, that one common solution is to buy out the competition and resell at higher prices, which would seem to exacerbate the problem of having "excessive gil" if it really was a problem.

As long as I've been playing the game, people have claimed that the way to combat undercutters is to buy what they're selling and relist it at a higher price.

I have never EVER EVER EVER seen that be effective.

It may have been effective years ago, but nowadays the people who are undercutting are crafters who are doing little else, and bots. Both are just going to replace what you bought at the same price. Because the MB now is a place where certain accounts spend literally all of their time.

And of course the people complaining about undercutters have gil; the people complaining about undercutters are other people trying to sell on the MB in enough quantity that undercutting is an issue. Someone trying to sell a single high priced item is barely going to notice they're being undercut. Someone trying to sell a bunch of different items, and being undercut on all of them by the same people/bot every time, are going to notice.


Instituting a gil cap will do one thing: it'll cause a dramatic influx of bot/alt accounts, which SE has already proven they are largely unwilling to do anything about. They aren't going to stop selling so much, they're just going to find new places to put their money.