[MUD-Dev] Simpson's "In-Game Economics of UO"

[Paul Schwanz - Enterprise Services]

>On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Paul Schwanz - Enterprise Services wrote:
>> 
>> I thought so as well.  I was especially fascinated by how the
>> "improve-by-doing" system for gaining skills can throw a wrench in the
>> whole economy.  However, I have a suggestion/question.  What if the
>> model were changed slightly to "improve-by-failing?" 
>

Timothy Dang wrote:
>This could help alleviate it some, but really doesn't fix the problem. 

[snip of why it doesn't fix the problem.]

I agree.  I was thinking of this, along with giving the character a choice
between "skilling" or creating items as a total package to try to fix
the problem.  In essence, since natural resources are always consumed, it
becomes a pay-for-skills system in disguise.

>One other approach is to increase the opportunity cost of production. If
>it took a significant amount of time to make a crude dagger, and a similar
>amount for a really nice halberd, then those capable of creating the
>halberd wouldn't be competing with those creating the daggers. This might
>alleviate some of the competitive pressure on folks just starting out, and
>let them charge higher prices. Again, not enough, but something. I
>also don't know if the overall effect on gameplay of requiring more time
>would be positive or negative.
>

Actually, would it really have to take a similar amount of time?  Assuming
that you could sell the dagger for x and the halberd for 10x, then you
would only need to make the production time for the halberd < 10t, where t
is the production time for the dagger.  Providing that the demand for the
halberd never brings the price below 10x, I would think that this would be
sufficient to ensure that those who were skilled at making halberds would
not compete with those who were skilled at making daggers.  (Although
looking back over what I've written, I see that I assumed an equal cost
for resources other than time which is probably not appropriate.  For
simplicity's sake, if you assume that the materials for the halberd are
2m, where m is the cost of the materials for the dagger, then the
production time for the halberd would need to be < 5t.)  Anyway, I've
probably revealed an apalling lack of understanding in economics, but this
is what makes sense to me.  Is this close?

>If it weren't for existing opportunity costs (gotta choose
>between killing trolls and crafting swords), one would expect that every
>profession would be a money-loser, since the competitive price for an item
>would be the price charged by those already skilled at production.
>

But won't those "skilled at production" vary with the item?  If there was
some sort of graduated profit margin, where "better" items were more
profitable (I think this would be assumed since it seems to reflect what
we expect in the rw) then those who are skilled at dagger-making will make
daggers and those who are skilled at halberd-making will make halberds.
Again, I might not be fully grasping the issues, but this is what makes
sense to me.

>> Also, give the character the opportunity to choose whether they are 
>> attempting to increase skill (resources automatically consumed) or
>> attempting to make a saleable item (item created if successful).
>
>This would solve the problem (while possibly causing others). 

Did you have some possible problems in mind, or where you theorizing?

--Phinehas

----------------------------------------------------------------------
		"All things are permissable,
			but not all things are expedient."
----------------------------------------------------------------------




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev