[MUD-Dev] DESIGN: Active and Inactive currency

[Matt Chatterley]

From: Freeman, Jeff
> From: John Buehler
>> Jeff Freeman wrote:

>>> It seems to me that the problem there isn't the faucet at
>>> all. But how do you address it?  All crafters will take any cost
>>> or drain that you throw at them and use that to establish a base
>>> price, charging everyone else that plus a little more, and
>>> therefore accumulate cash.

>> 1. Competition and anti-trust laws.

> This won't address the problem of cash 'pooling' on cookie-makers.
> Even with reasonable/fair prices, all the money in this example
> flows to them and stops.  The only way to make money flow the
> other direction would be to force the cookie-makers to sell
> cookies for less than it costs to make them.  I think players
> would refuse to do that.

[ Big Snip ]

> My conclusion: The Crafter in a game performs the role of economic
> drain, by removing money from circulation.

I definitely agree, given the above example - I like the 'cookie
case study' and am going to attempt to express a further opinion by
extending it (as other posters have).

So far we have chip-miners (CH), dough-gatherers (DG) and cookie
makers (CO). CH + DG sell their materials to CO, and CO sells a
product (cookies) to CH + DG. The cookies are sold at a profit, so
CO will always gain money (at some, indeterminate rate - be that
quickly or slowly).

In some ways this is a 'healthy' economic model - all participants
acquire (or create) goods, and everybody is actively buying and
selling goods as well. However, it is 'unbalanced' from one point of
view - in favour of the player highest up the food chain - the
cookie maker.

CH/DG players can mine/gather more raw materials, but the CO players
will most likely only buy what they need - otherwise they will end
up with more cookies than they can sell (assuming that both raw
materials and the finished article decay at some rate).

If we extend the model, and include (as another poster suggested)
the Baker (BA), we have:

  CH + DG sell to CO.
  DG sells to BA.

  BA sells to everyone.
  CO sells to everyone.

Does this added complexity add anything to the model, or not? Now
the DG players can sell to two buyers, and if they were to work
harder and produce more dough, they could sell more, increasing
their profits (probably accumulating money themselves); the CH
players do not have this luxury, and have only one outlet for their
goods.

BA and CO compete with each other to fill the stomachs of the
community (again, as per another poster), each product might have
its own advantages and disadvantages - and different players will
favour different products.  The producers can lower their prices as
they compete with one another. The BA players have a simpler recipe
to follow (they need only one ingredient), and may be able to
benefit in times of surplus - whereas a dough surplus does little
for the CO players if there aren't enough choccie chips available!

It certainly becomes more interesting when availability of resource
is put into this slightly more complicated model.

If we add another level to the 'hierarchy' above the BA/CO players -
for instance, the 'grocer' archetype, who buys bread and cookies
from the producers and then sells them on to everyone (either at the
same location, or a different location), then the players benefiting
most are likely to be the grocers, who will obtain their goods at a
lower price than the standard retail - if a loaf is normally 10
coins, but a grocer is prepared to buy 100 loaves for 800 coins, the
baker will more than likely lose a little profit-per-loaf in order
to get the big sale!

I think in this case, everyone would still be making money - but the
higher up you go (the further away from the 'resource gatherers'),
the more money there is to be made - and the more money players will
pool.

Assuming that the sinks/faucets are appropriately serviced, and no
potential gain is "excessive" compared to others, I don't see
anything wrong with this.

What it suggests to me is: There must be other outlets for
money. Better ovens. Bigger shops, a larger wheelbarrow to carry
choccie chips in - whatever it is, things such as upgrades will, if
made available, encourage the richer players to re-invest their
'inactive cash', putting it back into circulation.

Blurring the distinctive hierarchy above might change the situation
too, but I haven't really thought that through enough - however,
what about adding the 'wholesaler' in, someone who buys cookies and
dough in bulk from the gatherers, and then sells it on to
bakers/cookie makers - covering the costs of storing and
transporting the goods?

Cheers,

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