If SE is taking away my hard work...

[viion]

The honest (fairly logical break down):

It will affect you for the first while, people will put a lot of items above 1/10 their original cost. People will buy those items, but those will be people wasting their money. Once players start producing items (gathering, killing, making) people will start to undercut each other, people will undercut each other till equilibrium. The real point will rubber band above and below equilibrium, however the price WILL , WILL , reach to that rubber band point. Just like it has in 1.0 currently (you can watch a price bounce between a very consistent range).

However whenever SE adds or changes content price changes will always occur, like when new expansions are added they usually sell for 100X more or less then what they should - this equals out over time.

Even if SE didnt do this 1/10 thing we would still have economic unstability for the first month or so as content has changed in difficulty and reward (some items better or worse, easier/harder, new/better).

Will there be something different ? Yes.

In the long run however it wont matter, the economy will be the economy and only the size of the number and not the power of the number has been effected (specially since gil is the only currency in this game).


Its not worth talking about really. But I can understand some people feel cheated - but those people either a) dont understand it doesnt matter, or b) will always be the people that feel cheated at anything SE does, like adding new content that makes their gear no longer the best. (Which they will do, and have to do in order to keep the MMO going)

Very valid, but that price the item will reach to, that "rubber band point", may not be 1/10th ever, even after 10 years it may never reach that reduction. If all prices drop to 2/10ths and get to this over a period of 1 year and stay for 10 years like this, you are losing out because they are twice as expensive now. This is how we understand it. We are also not wrong to have this opinion or expectation.

[Shougun]

Very valid, but that price the item will reach to, that "rubber band point", may not be 1/10th ever, even after 10 years it may never reach that reduction. If all prices drop to 2/10ths and get to this over a period of 1 year and stay for 10 years like this, you are losing out because they are twice as expensive now. This is how we understand it. We are also not wrong to have this opinion or expectation.

True, but then when you sell the item for that price, and someone buys it, and then they sell it, and everything is situated around these new prices. It still doesnt matter.

SE may change what makes money - like when they make materia suck ass. But the economy will be fine, specially since we will have a server that will mostly be just us oldies. We will all come in with proportionately the same amount of money. How we continue to make money will change - so therefore the items will not all be 1/10th (nor do they have to be) but the market itself will be regular.

To expect 2.0's market to be exactly like 1.0's is a major flaw. Indeed the value of some your items will be lesser. So people buying out large portions of items may be sorely shocked in 2.0. Or happily surprised. But the "weight" of our gil hasnt changed.

Edit: As Almalexia below me states. This isnt exactly the redenomination. The value of an item will be changing in 2.0, that is not the value of your gil however. We will have the same inflow of gil (gil being created by npcs, monsters and other money printers). If the value of EVERY item is unchanged, then all items will be exactly 1/10 the price in the long run. But items wont be the same value, different subjects coming into the same pot.

[Almalexia]

Very valid, but that price the item will reach to, that "rubber band point", may not be 1/10th ever, even after 10 years it may never reach that reduction. If all prices drop to 2/10ths and get to this over a period of 1 year and stay for 10 years like this, you are losing out because they are twice as expensive now. This is how we understand it. We are also not wrong to have this opinion or expectation.

You are mistaken if you blame this on redenomination, though.

[viion]

True, but then when you sell the item for that price, and someone buys it, and then they sell it, and everything is situated around these new prices. It still doesnt matter.

SE may change what makes money - like when they make materia suck ass. But the economy will be fine, specially since we will have a server that will mostly be just us oldies. We will all come in with proportionately the same amount of money. How we continue to make money will change - so therefore the items will not all be 1/10th (nor do they have to be) but the market itself will be regular.

To expect 2.0's market to be exactly like 1.0's is a major flaw. Indeed the value of some your items will be lesser. So people buying out large portions of items may be sorely shocked in 2.0. Or happily surprised. But the "weight" of our gil hasnt changed.

It does matter, because say I have 10m, I bought item at 10m, in ARR guy has 10m but ends up with 1m. Then I sell and successfully sell at 3m, and several others do. I have been been able to enter ARR with 3m. The 1m guy cant even buy the item and will have to work for another 2m in order to do so. The guy who bought for 3m, is silly in first place, I am lucky to retainer some of my money back and the guy trying to get the item is out of luck until he earns more.

That means that 1m guy's 1m gil is not as much value was it was before, the weight of gil has changed.

You are mistaken if you blame this on redenomination, though.

I am blaming it on this whole situation. if you want to state the mistake is because of no price history, then thats your argument, I don't believe this will be the case. Many Ward resets have proven this isn't the case really and that items end up back at their original price even with no history.

You're right if all prices drop to 1/5th instead of 1/10th. However, since we're pulling numbers out of the air here, what if they drop to 1/20th or 1/50th? In your hypothetical scenario a net loss is just as likely as a net gain isn't it?

Yes it is as likely, and it can happen, I never once said it could not. I don't think it will, I think there will be a net loss, but there is also the possible of a massive net gain, with many many items being significantly cheaper now, and there are plenty of suggestions to back this up. I personally, in my opinion, do not think that will happen.

I want to make it very clear, that I am arguing the fact that a global loss can occur and that I think it will. It might not, we might gain or we might equal or we might transform into milkybars. Either situation is plausible. I don't deny they could happen, I don't think they will happen.

It might, and I will be wrong if there is a net gain or net equalise, but I will be very much correct if there is a net loss in the rest of the entries game lifespan.

[Shougun]

It does matter, because say I have 10m, I bought item at 10m, in ARR guy has 10m but ends up with 1m. Then I sell and successfully sell at 3m, and several others do. I have been been able to enter ARR with 3m. The 1m guy cant even buy the item and will have to work for another 2m in order to do so. The guy who bought for 3m, is silly in first place, I am lucky to retainer some of my money back and the guy trying to get the item is out of luck until he earns more.

That means that 1m guy's 1m gil is not as much value was it was before, the weight of gil has changed.



I am blaming it on this whole situation. if you want to state the mistake is because of no price history, then thats your argument, I don't believe this will be the case. Many Ward resets have proven this isn't the case really and that items end up back at their original price even with no history.

SE already said that the value of items will be changing in 2.0. If you are attempting to change your gil currency into an item currency and maintain its gil worth into 2.0, that will be false.

SE "gil will have the same power" [ redenomination ]
SE "items will be changing in 2.0, please dont buy out items in fear" [ rebalancing of gameplay and items ]

The redenomination has no part in the second SE statement. That is a different issue.

[viion]

SE already said that the value of items will be changing in 2.0. If you are attempting to change your gil currency into an item currency and maintain its gil worth into 2.0, that will be false.

SE "gil will have the same power" [ redenomination ]
SE "items will be changing in 2.0, please dont buy out items in fear" [ rebalancing of gameplay and items ]

The redenomination has no part in the second SE statement. That is a different issue.

How do SE judge what value an item is when it is me, the seller and the player, the buyer that decides the value?

If I decide an item is valued at 3m (originally valued at 10m) and a buyer decides that is a fair value, therefore I have maintained 30% of my Gil, where as you maintained 10%. This is not false.

[Shougun]

How do SE judge what value an item is when it is me, the seller and the player, the buyer that decides the value?

If I decide an item is valued at 3m (originally valued at 10m) and a buyer decides that is a fair value, therefore I have maintained 30% of my Gil, where as you maintained 10%. This is not false.

They dont care what you think about the item :P (in a general sense). Of course an item that is meant to be hard to get like a relic will probably maintain that feeling (though not exactly the same, perhaps harder, perhaps easier).

Also some items may have a feeling that they dont want it to have. So they will be changing it.



Value (value put on it by the player) of items != redenomination. If an item is 100X as powerful in 2.0 as in 1.0 the item may cost even more then what it did in 1.0. Item values are not 100% related to gil power.

In a case where you bought an item that became OP in 2.0 then you would make a large profit. This is because of the value of the item and not the value of your gil.

[viion]

I totally get that. What exactly do you think makes a net loss more likely? Sorry if you already stated this, but if you agree that a net gain is as likely, I want to make sure I'm clear on your reasons to the contrary (even if it's just lack of faith in humanity ^^).

It is a little lack of faith in humanity, my reason for this is due to things like Exploits that have occurred and the XIV community go "Wont get banned? EXPLOIT!" This tells me people will do evil things to get what they want! (evil bit over the top but you get it). It is also the fact that many people are greedy, many items I believe are super expensive, some being more expensive than their vender counterparts, such as low level equipment. There is also people who dominate market areas. I have successfully done this from only a few weeks ago to around 1 month in the game I dominated a market. Thus I vastly increased the price of items. (So I am evil too!).

A loss, to me, is that in 1.0 I can buy item X, in 2.0 from start until the end of the game, item X never goes to 1/10th like I did. I will always have to gain up to what X sells at in order to get back where I was, If i relied on quests, guildleves, vendor selling at 1/10th I am always losing out, I may regain if i sell something at inflated price or higher, but i have to do that each time i buy inflated price. I will have to do this for each occurring item. To me, I find this a loss. If all items go to 2/10ths, then you are always going to need twice as much as you did in 1.0. (Because in 1.0 figures if you had 10m and went to 1m, then the relation would be an item being at 20m going to 2m, but item was at 10m and went to 20m, did not reduce 90% it reduces 80%, thats 10% gone).

This might not be seen as a loss to you, if items go to 1/10th, or gil is twice as easy to obtain, or maybe its twice as hard and so prices rapidly fall to 10% or less, then I will of failed in my prediction. I be happy to be prove wrong by it, I just dont think that it will. It could! But i am not convinced.

They dont care what you think about the item :P (in a general sense). Of course an item that is meant to be hard to get like a relic will probably maintain that feeling (though not exactly the same, perhaps harder, perhaps easier).

Also some items may have a feeling that they dont want it to have. So they will be changing it.

Some items, I assume will go low, I am still very unsure they will hit 1/10th so I am sticking by the expectation they're not. Also it would be great if relics don't go down to 1/10th, they should be that little bit more luxury and expensive, imo! (maybe, i don't own one so i dont know lol)

The only way higher prices on the wards can be construed as a loss in wealth would be if you only purchased items, and never sold them yourself. If you sell any items to another player in 2.0 the higher prices just balanced out the loss you experience in purchasing other items.

In the player driven economy the price of items is not a one way street. Higher prices do not equal a loss in wealth, unless you willfully choose to only consume items and never produce them.

Very good point there, I agree with it, but I do not believe it will be enough balance due to the high variability in what reduces. And one person is always going to loose out. If you go on what you believe that things will reduce, then you may purchase an item at X+30%, but by the time you sell, it could be X+20%, and you wont be able to get that 10% back because you did not sell in time, this is a little off though and is not a victim of the cause.

[Felis]

How do SE judge what value an item is when it is me, the seller and the player, the buyer that decides the value?

If I decide an item is valued at 3m (originally valued at 10m) and a buyer decides that is a fair value, therefore I have maintained 30% of my Gil, where as you maintained 10%. This is not false.

SE have a indirect influence on supply and demand due to droprate and stats mechanic.

example: People complained that for the relict weapons some materias are easier to get than others. Now SE could change the rate to make it more balanced. The value of this rare materias decrease.

[AzuraSin]

Yes it is as likely, and it can happen, I never once said it could not. I don't think it will, I think there will be a net loss, but there is also the possible of a massive net gain, with many many items being significantly cheaper now, and there are plenty of suggestions to back this up. I personally, in my opinion, do not think that will happen.

I totally get that. What exactly do you think makes a net loss more likely? Sorry if you already stated this, but if you agree that a net gain is as likely, I want to make sure I'm clear on your reasons to the contrary (even if it's just lack of faith in humanity ^^).