ARR Gil Cap Reduction

[NefarioCall]

Irony is i've been saving my gil for ARR. ...
but i'll go with that spread it out on multiple characters thing.
Also, gils still gonna inflate again.
This is like telling us there's a new currency being made to fix rapid inflation and our dollar is now worth only ten cents. ... but i think Gath's is probably still worth more.

[Dawiichan]

The main reason for this is so that starting players can get a reasonable amount of gold without using the market at the start. That's why starter gear is currently placed at unreasonable prices. All that gear that you see that is level 15 that sells for 30k in the market wards will drop down to 3k. That gear that you see from NPCs that sell for 52k will drop to 5.2k.

Splitting your money between characters won't do anything. Even if you split it 99,999,999 x3, it will just drop down to 9,999,999 in each character. Some people may not like it because it doesn't affect them directly, but if new players find the economy to be as inflated as it is now the outcome will fare far worse. However as people have already mentioned, unless they add more effective gil sinks nothing is going to change in the long run.

[Luluna]

Originally Posted by Bayohne


Q: Will you wipe gil from our characters or change the currency with the launch of ARR?

A: No, there won't be a gil wipe. However, we do currently have plans to decrease the max digit by 1 (999,999,999 > 99,999,999)


Where does it say we will lose 90 percent of our gil?

[Ferth]

Originally Posted by Bayohne


Q: Will you wipe gil from our characters or change the currency with the launch of ARR?

A: No, there won't be a gil wipe. However, we do currently have plans to decrease the max digit by 1 (999,999,999 > 99,999,999)


Where does it say we will lose 90 percent of our gil?

See that's the problem. Bayohne's translation doesn't say it, but other people who speak japanese and english seem to think Yoshi-p said redenomination rather than just a lowering of the gil cap.

Bayohne's translation was pretty rushed and he was probably worried more about getting it up quickly than getting it up right, he could very well be the one who got it wrong.

That's why we're asking for clarification. Because one way makes sense and is fair for everyone. The other way is massively stupid and won't actually address the problem of inflated currency.

[Xerius]

Items in-game work like stocks or precious metals irl. If you want to keep your money, then just buy a lot of an item that is likely to sell a lot eg. crystals, ingots, anything that's a mat for ammunition. It can be a pain in the ass to sell back but you can also make more money than you had originally off of it.

[Rizon]

A revaluation of currency might be ok at the start but if SE is still planning on a free market economy then they will have problems in the future. People will still charge what the market will bear. As new high level items and gear appear accounts will be wiped in 1 or 2 transactions. There will always be idiots with more money then brains to buy things. The only way SE can control this is to place price limits on items and, IMO, that would destroy the economic system completely. SE needs to rethink this. The best way to do this is to adjust the methods for earning Gil to bring it more in line with what they want.

[CrystalW]

They only said that the cap would be lowered. What would be the point of lowering everybody's gil anyway? beside pissing people off.. Someone said it would be fair to new players but they're making brand new servers so that's not a valid point. I see it being useful for when they re-release the game. RMTs won't be able to hold as much gil, so they can't "save up for 2.0" (like some players said they're doing -_- ) so there won't be a big amount of gil exchanged back into the game in a short amount of time. But other than that, they can just lower gil rewards and npc costs to fix the amount of gil in the game, no need to take anybody's gil

[Endemerrin]

They only said that the cap would be lowered. What would be the point of lowering everybody's gil anyway? beside pissing people off.. Someone said it would be fair to new players but they're making brand new servers so that's not a valid point. I see it being useful for when they re-release the game. RMTs won't be able to hold as much gil, so they can't "save up for 2.0" (like some players said they're doing -_- ) so there won't be a big amount of gil exchanged back into the game in a short amount of time. But other than that, they can just lower gil rewards and npc costs to fix the amount of gil in the game, no need to take anybody's gil

But there is a need to take it. I don't think people understand the underlying issue. Gil comes from somewhere. People don't just have it. Whether it be from vendoring items, obtaining it from quests, or getting it from leves and mob drops. It comes from somewhere.

That being said, leves gave an incredible amount of gil at the release of the game. Upwards of 20k+ for a normal leve in some cases. A few months in they reduced this, but the damage had already been done and the market had been saturated with a huge amount of gil. Given there are so few gil sinks, that gil has been floating around and has kept the economy inflated.

What they plan on doing here is reducing that inflation. By removing the hundreds of millions of excess gil, it will generally drive prices down to a reasonable level within what is obtainable in the new version of the game via normal means accessible to your average player.

But in the end, there are more than a few ways of spreading your wealth around as to not lose it all. People are completely over reacting.

[Xenor]

If SE plan content right people with high gil will spread their wealth around. The relic quest is a good example. If I were able to get past hamlet I'd be spending 25mil on a double melded weapon or 25mil worth of materia and materials to produce it myself. It's just too time consuming to SB the materia myself. So if I want a relic I have to spread my wealth. I may also have to do the same with hamlets, spending around 50mil on the mats to obtain top provisioner. The game needs more content to make me spend gil, not less gil in my pocket. If there's less gil in my pocket I'm more likely to do things myself the hard/long way,

[Jaeger]

Thesis statement is simply this: Dividing everyone's total Gil by 10 will hurt the savers WAY more than the spenders (or nonsavers).

Consider two players moving to ARR. One currently has 500 million and will arrive in ARR with 50 million. The other currently has 200k and will move to ARR with 20k. The first will lose a total of 450 million and the second will lose a total of 180k. Ask yourselves this, how much time was invested in the 450 million, and how much time was invested in the 180k??? It should be obvious the 450 million loss represents a vast amount more in time, industriousness, and ingenuity.

It might be fine if ARR could guarantee a "perfect" communist system with "perfect" top down control. Such a system has never been made in the history of the real world nor the virtual world. Cost of production nor produce could be guaranteed to remain at 10% of current cost at the inception of ARR. Nor could inflation to the cost of production and produce be guaranteed to match the inflation of the total economy.

Why I think inflation to the cost of production and produce will outpace inflation of the total economy? Simply supply and demand. Many will be coming back to ARR and will have demand for "stuff". There should also be many new players with a demand for "stuff" as well. They supply of "stuff" will most definitely not meet the demand. Also, the best "stuff" will always cost a ton because someone will generally always be willing to pay the price to own the best stuff.

As inflation to the cost of production rises, the player with 50 million now will fast be unable to trade their compensation of time, industriousness, and ingenuity for the same products as they can in the current system. The player whose compensation amounts to 20k is much closer to trading their savings for the same thing they currently can.

Wealth must be measured by what goods and services one can trade for. Wealth cannot simply be defined by a # of Gil attached to your name. The saver's total wealth will decrease more and faster than the spender's would if everyone's # was divided by 10...

Now consider that leveling the playing field is the intended effect. Those who invested more time, industriousness, and ingenuity, and saved, are suddenly penalized much more in respect to the nonsavers, as they enter ARR. Whether you agree this should happen or not is one thing, but we must begin by being honest with ourselves... I do take liberty with the assumption that costs will not be impacted by the same 10% that current wealth and savings would. There could be disagreement there as well...