Old Players, New Worlds - A problem arises?

[Rukkirii]

We will be setting up fresh new Worlds for the new players so that they build the economy from the ground up and if an existing player wanted to play on a new World, they would have to create a new character on that World.

New players wanting to play with existing players will be able to create a new character on their World as long as the population limit has not been reached. We currently have no plans of setting up a new World where existing players can transfer to right at launch.

[Azurymber]

We will be setting up fresh new Worlds for the new players so that they build the economy from the ground up and if an existing player wanted to play on a new World, they would have to create a new character on that World.

New players wanting to play with existing players will be able to create a new character on their World as long as the population limit has not been reached. We currently have no plans of setting up a new World where existing players can transfer to right at launch.

So when determining how to price gil sinks in the market (such as dynamis-like raids) how will you determine the cost? If one server has a brand new economy and another server has millions of gil, you will either have:

1. a high-price, easily affordable on old servers but not affordable on new servers

2. a low-price, easily affordable everywhere ruining the gil sink concept

3. Two/Multiple different prices which will never be fair as it is nearly impossible to create an index of players who have lots of gil but aren't currently playing, and nearly impossible to predict when players hoarding gil will return.

Or you completely limit the game from any price controls what-so-ever, which seems like a recipe for disaster.

So basically, how does SE intend to deal with the obvious economic problem of having multiple DIFFERENT economies, without creating unfair policies that benefit one server over another, and alienate players or cause mass-migrations when server transfers are open?

And if this doesn't sound like a serious issue. Consider applying US monetary policy to Nigeria, or Canada, or France. Ask any economist and they will tell you what a disaster it would be.

[Reika]

So when determining how to price gil sinks in the market (such as dynamis-like raids) how will you determine the cost? If one server has a brand new economy and another server has millions of gil, you will either have:

1. a high-price, easily affordable on old servers but not affordable on new servers

2. a low-price, easily affordable everywhere ruining the gil sink concept

3. Two/Multiple different prices which will never be fair as it is nearly impossible to create an index of players who have lots of gil but aren't currently playing, and nearly impossible to predict when players hoarding gil will return.

Or you completely limit the game from any price controls what-so-ever, which seems like a recipe for disaster.

So basically, how does SE intend to deal with the obvious economic problem of having multiple DIFFERENT economies, without creating unfair policies that benefit one server over another, and alienate players or cause mass-migrations when server transfers are open?

And if this doesn't sound like a serious issue. Consider applying US monetary policy to Nigeria, or Canada, or France. Ask any economist and they will tell you what a disaster it would be.

At one point, the server you are currently on had 0 gil in it's economy too. They will be fine.

[Azurymber]

At one point, the server you are currently on had 0 gil in it's economy too. They will be fine.

so basically you're saying that if nearly every player on one server gets super cool houses, and nearly every player on the other server has no chance to get them for 3-4 years, that's totally cool and won't create any problems?

[Reika]

so basically you're saying that if nearly every player on one server gets super cool houses, and nearly every player on the other server has no chance to get them for 3-4 years, that's totally cool and won't create any problems?

Yes, no problem. We have the luxury of starting out a new game with lvl50 characters already. Had FFXIV's 1st release had all these cool things, you and I would have had to wait until being able to obtain them as well, instead of coming into it with millions of gil.

[Azurymber]

Yes, no problem. We have the luxury of starting out a new game with lvl50 characters already. Had FFXIV's 1st release had all these cool things, you and I would have had to wait until being able to obtain them as well, instead of coming into it with millions of gil.

Yeah but the point is, if you had a choice between spending 500 hours on your server now to get a relic weapon
or 20 hours on another server

you wouldn't choose the 20 hour server?

I mean it happened in FFXI with camping HNMs and giant linkshells migrated servers so they would have a better chance or claiming nidhogg and such. I know this for sure because a really annoyingly rude shell moved to kujata and pissed off the entire server.

[Zantetsuken]

So when determining how to price gil sinks in the market (such as dynamis-like raids) how will you determine the cost? If one server has a brand new economy and another server has millions of gil, you will either have:

1. a high-price, easily affordable on old servers but not affordable on new servers

2. a low-price, easily affordable everywhere ruining the gil sink concept

3. Two/Multiple different prices which will never be fair as it is nearly impossible to create an index of players who have lots of gil but aren't currently playing, and nearly impossible to predict when players hoarding gil will return.

Or you completely limit the game from any price controls what-so-ever, which seems like a recipe for disaster.

So basically, how does SE intend to deal with the obvious economic problem of having multiple DIFFERENT economies, without creating unfair policies that benefit one server over another, and alienate players or cause mass-migrations when server transfers are open?

And if this doesn't sound like a serious issue. Consider applying US monetary policy to Nigeria, or Canada, or France. Ask any economist and they will tell you what a disaster it would be.

Currently there aren't large (Dynamis-like) gil-sinks in the world - and other than housing estates, I don't know of any planned ones.

Almost all Gil sinks in FFXIV are smaller convenience fees that are easily avoided by new players:

• Market Tax
• NPC Repair
• Airship Travel
• NPC mats for endgame crafting
• etc.

These work just fine in removing gil from the economy end-game, which means it will hit the servers full of capped players much harder than ones with all new players.

Sure, it may be a long time before anyone on a new-player server gets to buy a big housing estate compared to any of us, but that's hardly game-breaking.

[Punainen]

So when determining how to price gil sinks in the market (such as dynamis-like raids) how will you determine the cost? If one server has a brand new economy and another server has millions of gil, you will either have:

1. a high-price, easily affordable on old servers but not affordable on new servers

2. a low-price, easily affordable everywhere ruining the gil sink concept

3. Two/Multiple different prices which will never be fair as it is nearly impossible to create an index of players who have lots of gil but aren't currently playing, and nearly impossible to predict when players hoarding gil will return.

Or you completely limit the game from any price controls what-so-ever, which seems like a recipe for disaster.

So basically, how does SE intend to deal with the obvious economic problem of having multiple DIFFERENT economies, without creating unfair policies that benefit one server over another, and alienate players or cause mass-migrations when server transfers are open?

And if this doesn't sound like a serious issue. Consider applying US monetary policy to Nigeria, or Canada, or France. Ask any economist and they will tell you what a disaster it would be.

Everyone will eventually have millions, so they should just price everything the same.

[Zumi]

We will be setting up fresh new Worlds for the new players so that they build the economy from the ground up and if an existing player wanted to play on a new World, they would have to create a new character on that World.

New players wanting to play with existing players will be able to create a new character on their World as long as the population limit has not been reached. We currently have no plans of setting up a new World where existing players can transfer to right at launch.

What about old players who want to transfer to an old server that is in their correct region. Like say if my server Durandal is a JP server, will I be able to transfer to an old server that is in the NA region?

[Molly_Millions]

What about old players who want to transfer to an old server that is in their correct region. Like say if my server Durandal is a JP server, will I be able to transfer to an old server that is in the NA region?

yes

/10char