PDA

View Full Version : Gold Sinks - What Are Your Ideas?



Stok3d
08-07-2013, 11:30 AM
I've seen a lot of ideas regarding what people envision to be the ideal solution for Hex's AH and what the primary currency is best for it. Although I always believed the PVP and PVE AHs were to be separate with separate currencies, I'm not creating this thread to pursue this avenue. I'm simply going to make a hypothetical situation and pretend that is the case and that this economist is running various scenarios to effectively make a proper gold sink :)

As a result, I'd like to solicit the community for feedback on ways in which you believe would prove as a good means to combat inflation and provide a proper gold sink?

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 11:30 AM
I have three Ideas that I would like to discuss:




1) Buffs

Common to include in most MMOs
Can be purchased directly with gold or crafted
Possible (non-exclusive) ideas are: +1 starting hand size, +Max Health, 0/5 mob in play, etc
I believe having the RL perk purchasable via a buff would silence any person currently clammering that it's unfair/cheating/*insert comment here* and attempting to discredit world firsts with this method. Those currently with the RL perk would effectively own a perm RL buff for life. As a person with the RL perk currently, I fully support this decision.
Those serious in raiding will want any advantage they can get. This would be quite useful in spending the gold as it could help you beat a boss and receive loot valued much higher than the perk buff costs...


2) Crafting

Make gold park of the cost for crafting
One recipe could be tied to buffs if they weren't to be directly created from gold as stated in first example
Recipes could potentially add additional properties to buffs. for instance: Add +gold to make buff last through death, add +gold to add an hour to duration of buff, add + gold/materials to make potion a cauldron usable by all party members, etc


3) Hospital Bills for Mercs

Many MMOs have repair bills as gold sinks--this wouldn't work in Hex. Instead, consider if a Merc (notice I didn't say your default Champion as people have to start somewhere with no gold) dies then he potentially has to regain health at X Ticks per X duration of time. Lets pretend it would take 1 tick every 3 minutes and full health would be an hour. People have the option of simply paying X amount of gold to fully recover his health instead of waiting.
Many would opt to simply try another Merc that is fully healed--and this is fine. I believe this side effect would help promote people from enjoying a bigger variety of their Merc Collection with greater frequency if you're attempting to conserve gold.

nicosharp
08-07-2013, 11:32 AM
I think they are not worth the cost.

Much prefer porcelain or acrylic
with a good garbage disposal.

Much easier to combat inflation by buying gold bars.

On serious note. I think that Gold sinks can be added as the game matures. It is too early to say how the economy will work until there is an economy to play with.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 11:39 AM
On serious note. I think that Gold sinks can be added as the game matures. It is too early to say how the economy will work until there is an economy to play with.

If gold is brought into the system, there needs to be an effective way to remove it and help combat inflation. I believe this is best devised from inception. I'm simply looking for ideas people may have to spend it outside the AH that will take the gold permanently out of circulation.

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 11:42 AM
Buying stuff from NPCs (cards, EQ, crafting mats)
Used to craft
Silly, but the idea of healing your mercs is funny and I like it.

jaxsonbatemanhex
08-07-2013, 11:44 AM
In regards to the RL buff as a consumable idea, to be a fair option you would have to invest a lot of gold or time to get them - if they're as easy to get as, say, flasks in WoW, then the RL tier effectively becomes meaningless. Sure, you get to save on buying the buff for life, but if it's not very hard to get in the first place then collector/DC are both far superior.

But for the idea as a whole, I think it's fine. ^^

nicosharp
08-07-2013, 11:54 AM
If gold is brought into the system, there needs to be an effective way to remove it and help combat inflation. I believe this is best devised from inception. I'm simply looking for ideas people may have to spend it outside the AH that will take the gold permanently out of circulation.

Well, for starters:
% cut from AH sales
Crafting cards
Conversion to plat - if there is one
Hero skills (potentially pay for level ups)
Hero equipment swaps (may be a fee as well)
Enhancement to your Keep for Keep Defense mode
Cosmetic enhancements for in-game / sleeves, certain Mercenaries (which gives meaning to the word Mercenary)

I feel that these are fairly generic, but more complex ones will be added with time as the economy morphs.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 11:59 AM
As a result, I'd like to solicit the community for feedback on ways in which you believe would prove as a good means to combat inflation and provide a proper gold sink?

I'd like to respond to the bolded portion. My proposed solution for inflation does not require gold sinks, though gold sinks would still be useful. The proposed solution would not just "combat" inflation, it would eliminate inflation.


If CZE does not define a fixed quantity of gold, then it is, by definition, inflationary because players, individually and in aggregate, start with zero and then earn gold through playing, withough limit. Thus, gold is a time-backed currency; its value is tied to play-hours spent to mine it, which is not so different than real life gold. (Since it represents real value, it is not, as someone else said, fiat currency as far as I understand what "fiat" means.) As long as the gold supply truly comes only from player hours invested (and not from bots), and as long as CZE has enough gold sinking, things should work out, but maybe we can think of something better.

There are only two ways to avoid inflation: deflation and fixed supply. Deflation obviously fails because the supply eventually goes to zero and you have no currency.

So the only way out of inflation is to fix the gold supply. Is this possible? Well, let's say that CZE defines a fixed amount of gold to exist in the game forever more, maybe 1 trillion coins. 1 trillion should be more than enough to cover a few million players with adequate currency resolution. Now, we still have the problem that all the gold is in the hands of the NPCs, not the players. So, game goes live, and we start handing out the gold through the normal PVE processes (and also take it away through the normal sinks). The key would be to track every coin given out and every coin taken back so that the total supply remains fixed. The goal would be to get all the coins into the hands of the players. When the NPC supply hits zero, gold would stop dropping until gold comes back to the NPC supply through the various gold sinks. After all the gold is given out, new players earn gold by farming items to sell on the AH for the gold held by others. There would also be a small amount of gold recirculating through the NPC sink/supply mechanisms. (This is not a strange concept. When gold was used as currency in the real world, very few people actually mined for gold; most people just performed their chosen profession and traded their value for gold.)

Would such a system work? I'm not aware of any game that has tried it, but it might work quite well actually. The currency portion of the economy should be quite stable.

Even with this model, gold sinks would still be a good thing as a means of gold transfer. (Gold into NPC sink, comes back as loot to a different player.)

Barkam
08-07-2013, 12:01 PM
Entry fee for PvE tournaments.
Keep vanities.
Character models.

I really hope that gold drops are rare and that most drops are either cards or equipment.

keldrin
08-07-2013, 12:17 PM
In regards to the RL buff as a consumable idea, to be a fair option you would have to invest a lot of gold or time to get them - if they're as easy to get as, say, flasks in WoW, then the RL tier effectively becomes meaningless. Sure, you get to save on buying the buff for life, but if it's not very hard to get in the first place then collector/DC are both far superior.

But for the idea as a whole, I think it's fine. ^^
I've toyed with this line of thought myself.
1) the purchasable buff would need to be relatively expensive, like you said. This means, that CZE will need to be willing to increase cost if gold value decreases. So many games, after they have been around a few years, the amount of gold floating around is huge compared to where it started. And it's value is much smaller. So, there would need to be a commitment, to keep the cost high, compared to current relative value of gold. So, they would need to reassess it every few months.
2) the buffs give you the equivalent buffs as if you had a raid leader in the group. Meaning, each person in the raid would need their own buff.
3) Another possibility, is separating out the raid leader bonus, and making it so you can only use 1 buff. So, you would have to choose, the extra card in your hand, or the blessing card in play.
4) If there are other buffs available, would the raid leader be able to use them?
5) if you make it possible for people to get buffs to equate the raid leader bonus, will that mean future raids will automatically be balanced with the idea most people will be using those buffs? As it stands, they said that raids will be balanced to be without the raid leader bonus. It could potentially mean you are almost required to have those bonuses for high end raiding.

All said, it could be done. And be done right. But, my gut feeling is, it would start out expensive, to make people with raid leader feel OK about it. Then, the pricing wouldn't change, as the value of gold, or the craft material drops. Because raising the cost, to account for the devaluation of the currency would both be unpopular with the (potentially vast number) people that feel they need those buffs to play. As well as, would be essentially a official acknowledgement that the value of gold was decreasing. Which may not be something they would want to do.
THEN, the lifetime raid leader bonus, would become near worthless.
No offense to grand kings, but, raid leader is 1 of 5 account flags. If the raid leaders value dropped for them, they still have 4 other account flags to play with. I spent the same amount they did, and have 2 account flags. My raid leader becoming worthless would be a major blow to what I have. And there are some, who only backed raid leader. It would leave them with no decent account flag to use.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 12:20 PM
Hmm... what about the Guild Bank? I'm sure there are features that could prove upgradable? What about: expanded capacity storage for decks, Extra Guild Ranks, etc. I'm sure we could come up with some examples. However, these fees should spike very sharply in price depending on how close you get to the cap upgrade for that tier.

@jaxsonbatemanhex/keldrin: I agree, the +1 starting hand should be quite steep in price. One idea that came off the top of my head was to utilize an Exchange via an Exotic NPC Trader (Not a recipe) that included: XGold+YSpectral Lotus+ZShards from disenchanted legendary?? as an example. The Spectral Lotus is finite in daily supply--we know that. This Merchant's rates varies at the beginning of each month depending on what he needs via a posted sign. Hence, CZE could have the ability to increase pricing as they saw fit.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 12:21 PM
Yoss, you indicated that there were only two ways to stop inflation, either a fixed amount of gold, or deflationary currency.

Properly managed gold sinks are a third option, if you remove the correct amount of gold from the system then you have neither inflation or deflation. There are potential other ways to manage it. The US government removes dollars from circulation to "combat inflation" But they produce money at a much greater rate, so we still have it. But they have all sorts of tricks to pretend that we don't. Any of which could work in this system too potentially.

ursa23
08-07-2013, 12:21 PM
What about PvE alt art? I'd probably sink some gold in the name of a differently pretty deck.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 12:22 PM
@keldrin:
There's a balancing act there. You can't make it too cheap (as you said), but you also can't make it too expensive. If it costs too much, then no one will buy it and its function as gold sink is defeated.

Also, if inflation doesn't exist (my proposal), you wouldn't need to constantly rebalance prices because the currency is stable.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 12:23 PM
Inflation also wouldn't exist, if you have proper gold sinks.

Shadowelf
08-07-2013, 12:31 PM
Please guys don't derail this thread to another RL buff argument;)

As for gold sinks, how about repair costs to your keep ? or maintainance costs ? Depending on your losses, there will be repair costs to be paid; a damaged keep won't be able to load as many decks to defend it as an undamaged keep; or maintainance costs depending on the number of decks loaded at the same time

Badmoonz
08-07-2013, 12:41 PM
About one hour into the PVE you encounter a shop. Here you can buy the following, but they restock at a rate of once a week.

Consumable buff to temp increase dungeon loot by 100%.
Consumable buff that next raid starts with +1 card.
Consumable ticket for an entry into a PVP draft.
Consumable buff to temp increase experienced gained by 10%.
Spectral Lotus

They are expensive. Yes they stack.

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 12:43 PM
You should not be able to buy in game what the KS folks got. Otherwise why even offer exclusives?

keldrin
08-07-2013, 12:44 PM
@keldrin:
There's a balancing act there. You can't make it too cheap (as you said), but you also can't make it too expensive. If it costs too much, then no one will buy it and its function as gold sink is defeated.

Also, if inflation doesn't exist (my proposal), you wouldn't need to constantly rebalance prices because the currency is stable.
Your concept is fascinating actually.
I know you mentioned no bots.
but a couple other issues
1) with free accounts existing, will there be a issue with potentially large sums of gold getting tied up in inactive accounts.
2) 3rd world gold farmers. In DAOC we had issues with a company in China, that hired people to sit on DAOC all day farming gold. They aren't technically bots. And if you limit the total amount of gold available, you might run into making the price of gold be high enough to attract people to actively mine the gold to sell, since it could generate more money in their country than working a normal low wage job.

RobHaven
08-07-2013, 12:49 PM
I think they are not worth the cost.

Much prefer porcelain or acrylic
with a good garbage disposal.

Much easier to combat inflation by buying gold bars.

On serious note. I think that Gold sinks can be added as the game matures. It is too early to say how the economy will work until there is an economy to play with.

I'm embarrassed that I didn't get it until three lines in. Once I got it: So good. Loved it.

As I mentioned in another thread earlier this week, I stopped calling for gold sink ideas (something I was big on a while back) because it's one of the more futile things for us to discuss right now. We have NO idea what they're working on, what they have in mind, etc etc etc. Until we experience the system they've built, we can not possibly generate any ideas of value. Maybe gold will be extremely scarce because they sink the hell out of it. Maybe we'll be sitting on mounds of worthless bling within 3 hours of launch. Maybe it's somewhere in between. You wouldn't tell a chef he needs more nutmeg in his recipe when you've never tasted the cookie, right? Now get the hell out of the kitchen.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 12:49 PM
Yoss, you indicated that there were only two ways to stop inflation, either a fixed amount of gold, or deflationary currency.

Properly managed gold sinks are a third option, if you remove the correct amount of gold from the system then you have neither inflation or deflation. There are potential other ways to manage it. The US government removes dollars from circulation to "combat inflation" But they produce money at a much greater rate, so we still have it. But they have all sorts of tricks to pretend that we don't. Any of which could work in this system too potentially.
Good points. Let's go through them in more detail.

OK, so let's go with the unlimited gold model that most of us expect from games (like WOW and others). If the gold sinks are optional or too soft, you have inflation (we all agree on this I think). If the gold sinks are mandatory and too hard, then it will be impossible to gain any meaningful amount of gold and gold will not exist as a meaningful currency (this is the "deflation" I referred to) and indeed the game might be unplayable (otherwise the sinks weren't actually mandatory after all).

Now, as you point out, there may be space between those extremes. I suppose they could have sinks that vary with time such that they only kick in when the gold supply exceeds a threshhold, but isn't that basically just another way to try to create a fixed supply? In fact, it sounds almost like just a tweak or an implementation detail of my proposal.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 12:57 PM
My "Hypothetical Example" in the OP is how I believe the AH is going to happen and I personally believe the economist is there to properly run gold sink models. Gwaer is correct in stating that a proper gold sink eliminates inflation or deflation. A proper gold sink is the key to everything. Call me crazy, but I believe that is exactly what the economist is doing now. I simply put this thread together for ideas on various ways to make it possible to remove gold from the game.

As I wasn't wanting to derail this topic and impose my "reading between the lines" with CZE's current intentions, I'm trying my best to keep my PERSONAL thoughts to myself. Regardless, I'm happy to see we have some ppl in here thinking in terms of economic principles.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 01:02 PM
I can't think of a way to feasibly fix the supply. Encounters need to drop enough gold to feel worthwhile. when there's too much gold out, no amount of work will make you any gold because earlier people are sitting on it? That doesn't seem to be a valid solution at all.

You want gold sinks that incentivise their use, but also are not mandatory so that some people can save up gold if they desire. Repairing mercs/keep are pretty good "mandatory" sinks in that if you're interested in doing things with mercs or keeps you will have to pay some amount of gold, but people who aren't can still save up, or would rather have gold for some other activity. Those sorts of decisions can be good.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 01:04 PM
Your concept is fascinating actually.
Thank you.

I know you mentioned no bots...
3rd world gold farmers. In DAOC we had issues with a company in China, that hired people to sit on DAOC all day farming gold. They aren't technically bots. And if you limit the total amount of gold available, you might run into making the price of gold be high enough to attract people to actively mine the gold to sell, since it could generate more money in their country than working a normal low wage job.
Well, the "no bots" comment was tied to the inflationary gold model, not the fixed one. I think the fixed model would be pretty good at defeating the ill effects of bots and farmers. I mean, inflation is the primary problem, right? In the fixed model, inflation (of currency) is impossible. Now, the bots/farmers could still ruin the value of commodities. But bots/farmers are somewhat besides the point anyway because every proposed system would suffer from them (and probably equally so). I think we have to accept bots/farmers as a given, to be combatted as best as possible, regardless of which system we choose. Only if a given system makes it easier to combat the bots/farmers should they even enter into the discussion. I guess what I'm saying is, my only claim for the fixed model is that it is no worse off for bots/farming as any other system I've seen.


but a couple other issues
1) with free accounts existing, will there be a issue with potentially large sums of gold getting tied up in inactive accounts.
Yeah, this is a good point. They could implement a take-back policy for gold. Maybe after X days of no activity all gold on your account is automatically converted to plat at market rate. Then they're not stealing anything from you (in case you come back), but they're also not deflating their fixed supply (if you don't come back).

keldrin
08-07-2013, 01:05 PM
I'm embarrassed that I didn't get it until three lines in. Once I got it: So good. Loved it.

As I mentioned in another thread earlier this week, I stopped calling for gold sink ideas (something I was big on a while back) because it's one of the more futile things for us to discuss right now. We have NO idea what they're working on, what they have in mind, etc etc etc. Until we experience the system they've built, we can not possibly generate any ideas of value. Maybe gold will be extremely scarce because they sink the hell out of it. Maybe we'll be sitting on mounds of worthless bling within 3 hours of launch. Maybe it's somewhere in between. You wouldn't tell a chef he needs more nutmeg in his recipe when you've never tasted the cookie, right? Now get the hell out of the kitchen.

Almost every major forum thread here, could be said the same thing of. To a extent, each problem is a puzzle. And as a collective mind, we throw out various pieces and try and put together as a group what might be the best way to deal with a problem.
CZE probably has their own ideas. But, they can see what is being discussed, and may take here and there to improve on their existing ideas. Potentially, we may actually discuss what they have planned, and problems they might not have thought of, may get brought up.
Anyways, it would be easier for them to implement a solid system from the start, then tweek it. Then to have to start over using a different concept.
It's interesting that we just won't know, what ideas they where going to do from the start. And what ideas where influenced by thread discussions.

RobHaven
08-07-2013, 01:08 PM
Yoss, there are a few games that use a finite economic system. One of them - I believe - is Project Entropia. The economy is entirely real money, and what comes out is limited by what comes in. The game will never allow more in payouts than what is currently available through vendor-bought items and item depreciation. It's not exactly what you described, but it's the same end effect. It would effectively stop inflation in a non real world currency based economy.

Most of us are used to infinite wealth generating systems. There's no ceiling on payouts. If you're going to cap payouts, you'd also have to (A) regulate non-gold drops in the same manner, or (B) disable selling to vendors once cap is reached. (If that was included in what you said, I apologize - I was skim reading.)

As someone else pointed out, a Scrooge McDuck going inactive could really put a HUGE strain on a system like this. It only works if there's a consistent, healthy flow to the economy. If new players are never able to acquire gold, they'll become ex-players very quickly.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 01:08 PM
isn't that basically just another way to try to create a fixed supply? In fact, it sounds almost like just a tweak or an implementation detail of my proposal.

An economy trying to find a proper balance with gold sinks is no where near the same as a fixed supply. Lets say you have 1Trillion Gold as you originally suggested in circulation. Now lets pretend we got 1million ppl. That's 1million g/person. What happens when the game hits 3million ppl? What will happen to the purchasing power of this? It's obvious: Gold will be able to buy more.

Now lets consider accounts that have gold on them that go dormant, etc that essentially pull gold out of the system? Basically, you would be promoting ppl to bank/hoard their currency and new players wouldn't have a chance for the PVE currency to drop.

While the idea is unique, I think there is a reason we have never seen this implemented in any game I'm aware of...



Until we experience the system they've built, we can not possibly generate any ideas of value.

I disagree. I personally believe that if there is gold being generated, then there needs to be gold removed from circulation. I'm not trying to derive % numbers to achieve equilibrium here--that's impossible with what we know (nothing really). However, coming up with constructive avenues for gold to effectively be "consumed" are as you state "Ideas of Value".

keldrin
08-07-2013, 01:14 PM
Yeah, this is a good point. They could implement a take-back policy for gold. Maybe after X days of no activity all gold on your account is automatically converted to plat at market rate. Then they're not stealing anything from you (in case you come back), but they're also not deflating their fixed supply (if you don't come back).

I also suppose, if needed, there's the option of minor increases in the total gold supply if needed.
And the idea of converting it to plat if there is a exchange rate between the 2, makes sense.
Or some other conversion... like if they don't want to give direct plat, maybe, give the equivalent value in booster drafts maybe. Hmm. Maybe they need a 3rd currency. I know it's confusing. But if there was a currency, that could be only used to buy directly from CZE. Like to buy packs, or tournament fees, maybe VIP program. Then the gold could be converted to that, and it would avoid the adding of artificial real world currency into the game. This might be more important, if a method becomes available for people to cash out plat.
The other currency, might also be something they could give out, for tournament awards.

RobHaven
08-07-2013, 01:17 PM
Sorry about some of my last post's redundancies and whatnot. I took a long time writing it, so I missed a bunch of things that came out.


Almost every major forum thread here, could be said the same thing of. To a extent, each problem is a puzzle. And as a collective mind, we throw out various pieces and try and put together as a group what might be the best way to deal with a problem.
What I've said here I've also said in almost every major thread. I've said it so much that I have thought about setting it to F13 so I don't have to type it out anymore - I hit the key and it auto-posts. When I jump into these discussions, (other than complaining about a lack of merit to the thread) I usually try to address points that make sense to debate. For instance: Would a closed economy work? There's no discussion about what Crypto should or shouldn't change about their current system, it's just a discussion about whether or not system X will function as desired.

The line in bold is exactly why I get all riled up about these things. What is the problem, exactly? That gold will lose value? What facts are you basing this on? What information do you have that I don't? How could you possibly label this as a problem? Maybe you didn't care for my chef analogy, but I think it fits pretty well in this context. You're assuming that Crypto has not accounted for an issue, and then you're telling them how they should fix it. I'm waiting to see what happens, get a real understanding for it, then provide feedback on that system if and when they want it.

EDIT: This applies to Stok3d's post as well.

I disagree. I personally believe that if there is gold being generated, then there needs to be gold removed from circulation. I'm not trying to derive % numbers to achieve equilibrium here--that's impossible with what we know (nothing really). However, coming up with constructive avenues for gold to effectively be "consumed" are as you state "Ideas of Value".
You're assuming they haven't already sufficiently accounted for it.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 01:18 PM
You want gold sinks that incentivise their use, but also are not mandatory so that some people can save up gold if they desire. Repairing mercs/keep are pretty good "mandatory" sinks in that if you're interested in doing things with mercs or keeps you will have to pay some amount of gold, but people who aren't can still save up, or would rather have gold for some other activity. Those sorts of decisions can be good.
I agree that what you propose is the best that can be done in an unlimited supply model. Still, if the sinks "are not mandatory so that some people can save up gold", then gold is now inflationary (the supply is increasing). Granted, when players choose to activate an optional sink, then there is instantaneous deflation (which is also bad, by the way; we want STABILITY) and then inflation resumes. Basically, you end up with a roller-coaster of gold value with a trend of inflation.

"Encounters need to drop enough gold to feel worthwhile."
What's wrong with dropping items? Why should I care if I get gold or not (especially so if gold is inflationary)? In order to be "worthwhile", shouldn't the metric be value (not a specific commodity)?

"when there's too much gold out, no amount of work will make you any gold because earlier people are sitting on it? That doesn't seem to be a valid solution at all."
Well, no amount of work will make you find gold as loot, true. However, you can still "make gold" by selling loot on the AH, right?

keldrin
08-07-2013, 01:19 PM
An economy trying to find a proper balance with gold sinks is no where near the same as a fixed supply. Lets say you have 1Trillion Gold as you originally suggested in circulation. Now lets pretend we got 1million ppl. That's 1000g/person. What happens when the game hits 3million ppl? What will happen to the purchasing power of this? It's obvious: Gold will be able to buy more.

Now lets consider accounts that have gold on them that go dormant, etc that essentially pull gold out of the system? Basically, you would be promoting ppl to bank/hoard their currency and new players wouldn't have a chance for the PVE currency to drop.

While the idea is unique, I think there is a reason we have never seen this implemented in any game I'm aware of...




I disagree. I personally believe that if there is gold being generated, then there needs to be gold removed from circulation. I'm not trying to derive % numbers to achieve equilibrium here--that's impossible with what we know (nothing really). However, coming up with constructive avenues for gold to effectively be "consumed" are as you state "Ideas of Value".
actually it would be 1,000,000 gold per person if there was a million players. You calculated if there was a billion gold, not a trillion.

And I agree with you, that dealing with gold inflation and value needs to be done pretty much from the word go.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 01:19 PM
like if they don't want to give direct plat, maybe, give the equivalent value in booster drafts maybe. Hmm. Maybe they need a 3rd currency. I know it's confusing. But if there was a currency, that could be only used to buy directly from CZE. Like to buy packs, or tournament fees, maybe VIP program. Then the gold could be converted to that, and it would avoid the adding of artificial real world currency into the game. This might be more important, if a method becomes available for people to cash out plat.

Keldrin, that currency is called Platinum--the pvp currency. I'd prefer not to expel energy in this thread explaining how Absolutely Nothing should directly allow a player to have gold/pvp cards drop in PVE or offer a Direct exchange rate from the company itself (not supply/demand AH). Lets keep that Healthy discussion to non-consolidated threads about the AH.

Edit: Updated conversion post as I did do the numbers for a Billion.

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 01:26 PM
Since there are tons and tons of economists out there with their own theories, what would help this discussion along would be to know is what school of thought does CSE's come from?


ETA: Im no economist, so I wont pretend to be able to argue the merits of each,.....other than my opinion and observations of what has happened in various countries running various types.....carry on.

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 01:30 PM
You can not implement a finite economy system (EDIT: only my opinion). Besides the fact that it will require heavy regulation on all existing accounts, and even the consideration of removing money from accounts that can be heavily argued, this will also alter the drop rate of gold constantly. A large increase of money in game will decrease the money drops in game as well, and this will cripple those less active players cumulatively. This will also make gold a valuable commodity rather than a means of trade, making the value of cards dependent on gold collectors rather than its rarity. Like others have stated, 5 individuals could spend immense amount of time farming gold and collecting gold, trying to hoard all the games gold, reducing prices of card heavily with the decrease of money availability, making their fortune worth more as time progresses. Since this game as a trading card game, gold can't be this important since we are talking about real money being invested in cards. The only possible option would be to put a max of gold per account rather than a max of gold in the entire game. This, again, could be circumvented by having multiple accounts, so still an iffy option.

Personally, I believe there is no real possible Gold Sink method in Hex's situation, because its a Trading Card Game where real cash is heavily involved in PvP. I think the goal shouldn't be limiting the access to gold, but more what gold can access.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 01:33 PM
What is the problem, exactly? That gold will lose value? What facts are you basing this on? What information do you have that I don't? How could you possibly label this as a problem? Maybe you didn't care for my chef analogy, but I think it fits pretty well in this context. You're assuming that Crypto has not accounted for an issue, and then you're telling them how they should fix it.

If gold drops in game (which it will), then currency is being generated. [Fact]
If gold drops in game, then the generated gold supply will continue to increase over time. [Fact]

To combat the cost of an item from continually rising (as people have more currency to throw around--inflation), then finding a way to balance this is something to pursue. Hence, something to "permanently consume" this currency in small continuous amounts would be an ideal fix. I'm 99.9999% sure CZE is already on par with the idea.

So, knowing the above facts and inferred steps subsequent analyzing the situation, the thread was made to simply brainstorm some creative things that could be gold sinks. I'm not here trying to do cost analysis or anything, I'm simply doing a big picture here. A healthy economy will need gold sinks--I really don't see any other way around it.

Long story short, what this thread is doing is something productive. We're thinking big picture and CZE would fill in the (economic) specific details.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 01:38 PM
Yoss, there are a few games that use a finite economic system. One of them - I believe - is Project Entropia. The economy is entirely real money, and what comes out is limited by what comes in. The game will never allow more in payouts than what is currently available through vendor-bought items and item depreciation. It's not exactly what you described, but it's the same end effect. It would effectively stop inflation in a non real world currency based economy.
Thanks for the info. I'll Google "Project Entropia".
EDIT: It seems you can get PED as drops in game, so it's actually inflationary?


Most of us are used to infinite wealth generating systems. There's no ceiling on payouts. If you're going to cap payouts, you'd also have to (A) regulate non-gold drops in the same manner, or (B) disable selling to vendors once cap is reached. (If that was included in what you said, I apologize - I was skim reading.)
This is a good point. I hadn't thought about vendor selling specifically, but the proposal did cover it (in a general way). When the NPC gold supply is empty, you can't get any more gold from them, period. In your specific example, I suppose vendors would just stop buying until more money comes in through the various gold sinks. I think I'd actually just not allow vendor selling though; disposal of excess items can be done through crafting. Not a big deal either way.


As someone else pointed out, a Scrooge McDuck going inactive could really put a HUGE strain on a system like this.
This is a good point and there are others that also brought this up, both before and after you (keldrin, Stok3d, maybe others). Solution is in Post 24.


If new players are never able to acquire gold, they'll become ex-players very quickly.
I agree. See solution in Post 30, 2nd part.


[stuff leading up to...] Gold will be able to buy more.
Is this a problem? Isn't this precicesly the point of trying to "combat inflation"? As long as there's sufficient currency resolution, this seems like exactly what we want.


Now lets consider accounts that have gold on them that go dormant, etc that essentially pull gold out of the system? Basically, you would be promoting ppl to bank/hoard their currency and new players wouldn't have a chance for the PVE currency to drop.
Addressed in Post 24 (reclaiming inactive gold) and Post 30 (what happens when PVE stops dropping gold).

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 01:44 PM
Is this a problem? Isn't this precicesly the point of trying to "combat inflation"? As long as there's sufficient currency resolution, this seems like exactly what we want.

That is a huge problem Yoss. The only ppl who would be rewarded in your finite system you propose are those that simply rocked out major PVE hours/Godly trading from the START of the game. Then those coming late to the party are essentially screwed. Everyone and their grandmother wouldn't be trading the currency either as they know holding on to it would be the best bet.

No where do I see this is healthy for the longevity of the game.



Yeah, this is a good point. They could implement a take-back policy for gold. Maybe after X days of no activity all gold on your account is automatically converted to plat at market rate. Then they're not stealing anything from you (in case you come back), but they're also not deflating their fixed supply (if you don't come back).

Gold Auto-Converted to Platinum?!? I'm going to simply stop here Yoss.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 01:45 PM
Loot and gold are synonymous if there's any way to trade out loot for gold not in system. That also means that some items are worse than worthless. If no one wants it and it won't sell since there's finite gold. And people don't want to waste it. This is a monumentally bad situation.

RobHaven
08-07-2013, 01:47 PM
Thanks for the info. I'll Google "Project Entropia".
EDIT: It seems you can get PED as drops in game, so it's actually inflationary?

The amount of PED (like gold in your scenario) that can drop is limited by how much is in the game. While I can mine for ore that I sell for PED, I'm also losing PED by way of depreciation on my items (which must be repaired or replaced). A lot of times you're running at a net loss. Sometimes you can pull a decent haul to offset those losses. There will never be a scenario, though, where everyone is at a net gain because the total payouts across all activity has a ceiling that is directly dictated by the total amount of money invested in the game by the collective player pool. Cash-outs are an in-game thing, so even a giant influx of cash (converted to PED) will not cause inflation.

I guess that cash out thing should have been mentioned earlier...my bad. But the system itself would still work as you describe if you closed off both input and output.

keldrin
08-07-2013, 01:51 PM
Loot and gold are synonymous if there's any way to trade out loot for gold not in system. That also means that some items are worse than worthless. If no one wants it and it won't sell since there's finite gold. And people don't want to waste it. This is a monumentally bad situation.

Expand crafting a bit to allow those items to be used there. That way no item is completely worthless.

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 01:51 PM
That is a huge problem Yoss. The only ppl who would be rewarded in your finite system you propose are those that simply rocked out major PVE hours/Godly trading from the START of the game. Then those coming late to the party are essentially screwed. Everyone and their grandmother wouldn't be trading the currency either as they know holding on to it would be the best bet.

No where do I see this is healthy for the longevity of the game.



Gold Auto-Converted to Platinum?!? Are you serious? I'm going to simply stop here Yoss.

Thats when CZE gets into Quantitative Easing and just "prints" another trillion or two. Problem solved.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 01:54 PM
Thats when CZE gets into Quantitative Easing and just "prints" another trillion or two. Problem solved.

Uh Oh, I see some political jokes incoming soon...

Yoss
08-07-2013, 01:59 PM
[bunch of stuff]
"requires heavy regulation"
You present this as a bad thing. Could you elaborate, please? To me, a software algorithm tracking things is not "heavy", but maybe you mean something else.

"removing money can be argued"
Not "removing money", converting gold to plat. Also, if it "can be argued", I'd be interested to hear your views.

"will continuously alter the drop rate of gold, which will hurt new players"
I think Post 30 dealt with this.

"This will also make gold a valuable commodity rather than a means of trade, making the value of cards dependent on gold collectors rather than its rarity."
Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't the whole point of a currency to have value?

"5 individuals could spend immense amount of time farming gold and collecting gold, trying to hoard all the games gold, reducing prices of card heavily with the decrease of money availability, making their fortune worth more as time progresses."
I don't see the problem. The 5 individuals are spending time playing the game and are being rewarded for it. Their profit does not hinder other players from also profiting. If those 5 individuals manage to get every gold drop (unlikely), still other players can farm loot and then sell the loot for gold. This is how a market works. There's nothing wrong here.

"Since this game as a trading card game, gold can't be this important since we are talking about real money being invested in cards."
I must be missing something. Why does the value of gold change the plat-value of cards?

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 02:01 PM
Uh Oh, I see some political jokes incoming soon...

It is simply economic theory that has been practiced when a finite supply of money (gold) runs out.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 02:02 PM
It seems to me that moving gold to play just makes play inflationary. Which is much worse. A small amount of inflation on the gold side can be overcome by CZE selling a set amount of gold for a set amount of plat. But not allowing gold to turn into plat at all. This way gold has a plat value of X at all times. If inflation gets too bad there people will stop buying it with plat, since it becomes a bad deal, letting gold sinks and such to their job until it stabilizes.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 02:04 PM
If gold drops in game (which it will), then currency is being generated. [Fact]
If gold drops in game, then the generated gold supply will continue to increase over time. [Fact]
Fact 1 is only true in the inflationary (World of Warcraft) model. It would not be true in the fixed model; the currency would be transferred, not generated.
Fact 2 needs a caveat of "drops in game without limit" in order to be true. The fixed model would have gold drops limited by supply.


Long story short, what this thread is doing is something productive. We're thinking big picture and CZE would fill in the (economic) specific details.
I agree, it's a good thread. Gold sinks are either essential (in an inflationary model) or beneficial (in a fixed model).

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 02:06 PM
I can't think of a way to feasibly fix the supply. Encounters need to drop enough gold to feel worthwhile. when there's too much gold out, no amount of work will make you any gold because earlier people are sitting on it? That doesn't seem to be a valid solution at all.

You want gold sinks that incentivise their use, but also are not mandatory so that some people can save up gold if they desire. Repairing mercs/keep are pretty good "mandatory" sinks in that if you're interested in doing things with mercs or keeps you will have to pay some amount of gold, but people who aren't can still save up, or would rather have gold for some other activity. Those sorts of decisions can be good.

I don't think the supply can be fixed tbh. As a result, there needs to be something strong to stunt it's accumulation or at least be something ppl want to save up for and spend every dime they have on. Then come a new block, more big ticket Gold Sinks could appear?

I'm trying to think of something that is "near" mandatory. The merc quick replenish is the closest I think I've come up with. God forbid you probably don't want to lose durability on your cards when you die. That would fix the issue quickly, but would kind of be unpleasurable at the same time (at least for me). I dunno really. I'm hoping some others will consider some angles that hasn't been realized yet.

keldrin
08-07-2013, 02:23 PM
Well, if we go to the account limit on gold. That would help some. I realize if there is a way for someone to create multiple accounts, they would just transfer the gold across to the extra accounts.
It looks like that would be trackable though. The need to have a solid deck to play with, and leveled character/ mercs to mine gold effectively, would likely mean they would have one primary account they mine from. And several gold storage accounts. Accounts not being played, receiving multiple transfers of gold from probably the same account, could potentially be investigated and shut down if necessary.
I'm kind of thinking of it like at work, where I have max vacation days. When I hit my max, anything earned beyond that, is lost. So I have a incentive to use the days rather than just horde them.

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 02:27 PM
@Yoss:
"requires heavy regulation"
I might not have correctly stated what I meant. What I meant is that many things will constantly change depending to the accessibility of money. Each individuals merchant prices for example. If you for example make prices dependent on that individuals gold stash, it can be manipulated. But if you don't make it dependent on that individuals gold stash, they will be very dependent on how others "regulate" the economy. This also brings certain manipulations. So my fear isn't exactly the regulation of accounts itself, but how the whole game is linked to these individual accounts based on this finite economy.

"removing money can be argued"
If you actually want to convert gold to Platinum, doesn't this still mean that there is an infinite gold? Because even though there is only 1 million gold coins in the game, if at a certain point these accounts have their gold transformed to platinum to reduce the gold the moment it reaches max 1 million, wouldn't it still mean they can just re-farm the gold to make it transform to platinum again, making platinum infinite rather than gold (even though Platinum should be scarcer than gold). I don't agree with transforming gold to platinum in that way (i would only allow max transform per account)

"will continuously alter the drop rate of gold, which will hurt new players"
Yes sorry, its hard to keep up with the posts :P

"This will also make gold a valuable commodity rather than a means of trade, making the value of cards dependent on gold collectors rather than its rarity."
Yes its important that gold has value, but Hex is a trading card game, so the most important deciding factor of currency should be cards. But if there is a limit of gold, than its actually "collecting" gold that will alter the value of cards rather than cards depicting its gold value. (this of course is only in the situation where gold drop decreases as gold stash increases)

"5 individuals could spend immense amount of time farming gold and collecting gold, trying to hoard all the games gold, reducing prices of card heavily with the decrease of money availability, making their fortune worth more as time progresses."
What I'm saying is that if there is a big group of individuals that decide not to spend their gold, as they keep accumulating gold in a finite system, the "loot" that people farm to sell for gold, will constantly decrease in value because there is not enough "supply" of that gold. Just a normal suppler and demand concept, if there is less supply of gold, gold value will increase, making other commodities worth less gold.

"Since this game as a trading card game, gold can't be this important since we are talking about real money being invested in cards."
What i'm trying to imply isn't that Plat values change, because plat is a currency by itself, and that will never change based on gold. What I'm trying to say is that, If there is no separation between PvE and PvP on the AH and gold can buy it all, PvP cards will be bought more by gold than by platinum, because they can control gold and that costs no money, and this will affect those that spend real money and have not a lot of involvement in the PvE gold aspect of the game.


I'm sorry, I'm not very good at properly explaining my point of view. I biggest worry is just that people will "manipulate" the market with gold. I rather have the PvP only aspect that can only be obtained through booster packs only be obtained through platinum or card trading and completely separate from gold, unless there is a max of gold->platinum conversion per day/week.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 02:28 PM
a combination of many different sinks would be best I think, and lets the individual ones be smaller. Could have;
merc repair
card repair
dungeon encounters that can be manipulated with gold
gold AH fees for either the gold AH
gold fee with the plat ah
they've said no to buffs many times but its an option
crafting fees
pve tournament entry fees

thats all i came up with off the top of my head. I'd just like to say many of those are terrible ideas. I'm in no way promoting them, just listing options for discussion

@abandonallhope, great post, I think it quite clearly makes a very good point.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 02:29 PM
That is a huge problem Yoss. The only ppl who would be rewarded in your finite system you propose are those that simply rocked out major PVE hours/Godly trading from the START of the game. Then those coming late to the party are essentially screwed. Everyone and their grandmother wouldn't be trading the currency either as they know holding on to it would be the best bet.
People coming in later are still rewarded for playing. They get loot just like everyone else, and if it's new content with new loot then that loot will be worth something. It seems like your key point here is that people would hoard gold. Yet, what would that accomplish? Gold sitting in the bank isn't worth anything until you spend it. You spend it because you want what it buys. Are you saying that there will never be anything new on the market to entice people to buy? I mean, gold hoarders would at least be willing to sell for plat, right?


Gold Auto-Converted to Platinum?!? I'm going to simply stop here Yoss.
I'm operating under the assumption that a gold/plat conversion (between players, not CZE selling) will exist in the game. Do you assume otherwise? If you use my assumption, I don't see the problem. If you assume gold/plat cannot interact, then I'd be interested to know what your economy looks like. (This blends into other threads.)


Loot and gold are synonymous if there's any way to trade out loot for gold not in system. That also means that some items are worse than worthless. If no one wants it and it won't sell since there's finite gold. And people don't want to waste it. This is a monumentally bad situation.
If no one wants the loot, why does it matter what currency system we're using? If you're saying "some loot will be worthless", then I agree, and it will be true regardless of the currency system. (And as keldrin points out, that's what crafting is for.) However, we can also say "some loot will not be worthless", and that is the loot that will get players into the economy as described in post 30.


Thats when CZE gets into Quantitative Easing and just "prints" another trillion or two. Problem solved.
Uhm, no, that breaks the entire premise of the "fixed" system. However, if we think that 1T is too low then use 100T; the exact number is only important to the extent that it's "big enough" to provide currency resolution to the entire player base and that it never changes once decided upon.


It seems to me that moving gold to play just makes play inflationary. Which is much worse.
By what mechanism? Inflation means increasing supply. Are you saying plat is being created by CZE for this purpose? I agree that would be terrible and have never suggested such a thing. The movement of gold to plat requires the plat to come from some other player, not from CZE. CZE should not sell gold for plat or vice versa, because that pegs the two currencies to each other. Gold needs to float relative to Plat, which means the exchange between the two must be a market system.


A small amount of inflation on the gold side can be overcome by CZE selling a set amount of gold for a set amount of plat. But not allowing gold to turn into plat at all. This way gold has a plat value of X at all times. If inflation gets too bad there people will stop buying it with plat, since it becomes a bad deal, letting gold sinks and such to their job until it stabilizes.
If CZE sells gold for plat, then you've introduced the exact thing you're trying to avoid! Plat now becomes inflationary right along with gold (if gold is inflationary)!

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 02:34 PM
I don't think you have a good grasp of economics yoss =(

Abandonallhope has a great explanation of why people would hoard gold in your setup. Also, the gold sinks thread doesn't seem like a great place to be having this conversation at all =/

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 02:39 PM
I'm sorry Gwaer, I've tried to think of many "gold sink" possibilities, but I just cant think there will be "must" factors in a game such as Hex that is completely based on a Trading Card Game based on fighting with a Deck vs Deck that will make sure there is a large enough Gold sink to help manage it. Its a good topic, but I honestly can't think of any, why I accidentally brought this type of discussion here.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 02:40 PM
I'm operating under the assumption that a gold/plat conversion (between players, not CZE selling) will exist in the game. Do you assume otherwise? If you use my assumption, I don't see the problem. If you assume gold/plat cannot interact, then I'd be interested to know what your economy looks like. (This blends into other threads.)

I'm not going to touch on the gold/plat conversion economy in this thread.

I will, however, discuss something auto happening to my account when I go away for extended periods of time. Imagine the following scenario: You're enlisted and shipped out for a tour of duty. Lets say you come back able to play in a year's time. How would you feel if the "buying power" you had went up 5x fold in your Finite Currency model and the game auto "Sold" all the currency you owned for you? I know I'd feel "cheated" The threads would be filled with irate people upset at what happened. Honestly, I don't believe anything should "auto" happen to your account while you're away minus the following exceptions: 1) Those owed Set 2 & 3 packs from KS perks still receive them and 2) the Collector Perk still gets their Alt Art cards.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 02:42 PM
Sadly, this thread has turned into combatting Yoss's idea and he's now directing all conversation. I'd like to divert it to either the OP or someone else's ideas.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 02:43 PM
Must is less important than compelling reason to do it. If you want to play with mercs and you have to spend some gold to play with them after losing, you have a compelling reason to spend that gold. Or you could just walk away from that merc. If you enjoy keep defense, and you need to pay some gold while doing it, that's a compelling reason to do it. You could just walk away from keep defense, but if you're willing to invest some gold, good.

I personally don't think that gold inflation is a big deal. As long as gold is pegged to a value in plat that will psychologically impact how much gold is worth to people. If necessary they can have big events a few times a year where you spend gold to participate and that could serve to keep inflation down as well. There's all manner of options really.

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 02:46 PM
Maybe a good Gold Sink would be investing gold to upgrade your guild (only limiting factor is that your guild will be dependent on investment). Not sure if the number of members should be limited by guild investment, but maybe there can be lots of interesting "features" that can be provided by upgrading your guild with gold. (not sure if that was already offered as an idea elsewhere). Just make it tempting enough to make it a permanent gold sink.

Might even want to give it an upkeep past a certain guild level, that if the guild bank doesn't pay that upkeep, its features will cease to exist until you pay a certain amount that is like 10x the upkeep, or something of the sorts. Upkeep value increases the higher your guild level is.

An example:
Guild level 20 will give you a 2% experience bonus, but will require a daily upkeep of 10,000 gold, and if you cant pay it, if you want to activate it again, it will require 100,000 to activate it again and henceforth a 10k upkeep. This will allow people to time when they want this bonus, and also allows a gold sink.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 02:51 PM
I haven't seen that idea mentioned on this forum, good one.

Guild levels are very well done in a number of games, tying that to a gold sink could have tremendous impact.

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 02:54 PM
Yeah, there are many good example in games where Guild levels provide many features. Many also use it to decide how many members can join a guild, to portray how "large" that guild is. Not sure how many of those games use upkeeps, so not sure how well that work to a certain extent, but it does provide a consistent gold sink.

Yoss
08-07-2013, 02:54 PM
@ gold-capping accounts:
Let's not encourage multi-accounting please.


@Yoss:
"requires heavy regulation"
I might not have correctly stated what I meant. What I meant is that many things will constantly change depending to the accessibility of money. Each individuals merchant prices for example. If you for example make prices dependent on that individuals gold stash, it can be manipulated. But if you don't make it dependent on that individuals gold stash, they will be very dependent on how others "regulate" the economy. This also brings certain manipulations. So my fear isn't exactly the regulation of accounts itself, but how the whole game is linked to these individual accounts based on this finite economy.
Vendors would not have variable prices per player, as you point out. I do not undertand your next point though. Are you just worried that the market cannot figure itself out? Market systems are amazingly capable of proper regulation of all sorts of details that central planners cannot begin to keep up with. (Central planning is the alternative to a market system, in case you were wondering.)


"removing money can be argued"
If you actually want to convert gold to Platinum, doesn't this still mean that there is an infinite gold? Because even though there is only 1 million gold coins in the game, if at a certain point these accounts have their gold transformed to platinum to reduce the gold the moment it reaches max 1 million, wouldn't it still mean they can just re-farm the gold to make it transform to platinum again, making platinum infinite rather than gold (even though Platinum should be scarcer than gold). I don't agree with transforming gold to platinum in that way (i would only allow max transform per account)
If all the gold is in the hands of players, then the NPC supply is empty. If the NPC supply is empty, then gold is never given out by the game. Therefore, you could not "re-farm" the gold, except to get it from other players on the AH, which does not change the supply. Also, (and I thought this was a given) CZE cannot sell plat for gold (or vice versa) without destroying the purpose of Plat. Therefore, when I say "convert to plat" it means "go to the AH and buy plat from other players using your gold". Sorry for the confusion.


"This will also make gold a valuable commodity rather than a means of trade, making the value of cards dependent on gold collectors rather than its rarity."
Yes its important that gold has value, but Hex is a trading card game, so the most important deciding factor of currency should be cards. But if there is a limit of gold, than its actually "collecting" gold that will alter the value of cards rather than cards depicting its gold value. (this of course is only in the situation where gold drop decreases as gold stash increases)
I'm not sure I follow. A card's value is what it is regardless of currency. Currency is simply a medium of exchange. If Card A and Card B have the same value (not to be confused with price; that's currency related), then they will continue to have the same value regardless of what the currency does. Of course their price using that currency will change with the currency, but their true value does not change.


"5 individuals could spend immense amount of time farming gold and collecting gold, trying to hoard all the games gold, reducing prices of card heavily with the decrease of money availability, making their fortune worth more as time progresses."
What I'm saying is that if there is a big group of individuals that decide not to spend their gold, as they keep accumulating gold in a finite system, the "loot" that people farm to sell for gold, will constantly decrease in value because there is not enough "supply" of that gold. Just a normal suppler and demand concept, if there is less supply of gold, gold value will increase, making other commodities worth less gold.
You're mostly right, but let's be clear. It is the PRICE-IN-GOLD that will be decreasing, not the VALUE. The rest of what I said before is in line with this.


"Since this game as a trading card game, gold can't be this important since we are talking about real money being invested in cards."
What i'm trying to imply isn't that Plat values change, because plat is a currency by itself, and that will never change based on gold. What I'm trying to say is that, If there is no separation between PvE and PvP on the AH and gold can buy it all, PvP cards will be bought more by gold than by platinum, because they can control gold and that costs no money, and this will affect those that spend real money and have not a lot of involvement in the PvE gold aspect of the game.
Hopefully, both gold and plat will have value. The value of Plat is obvious; it represents $US. The value of Gold is time spent playing PVE. If you claim "PvP cards will be bought more by gold than by platinum" then you are basically saying that people would rather spend PVE time than $US in order to buy the AH goods. For some people that will be true, but there will be others who would rather spend $US than PVE time.


I'm sorry, I'm not very good at properly explaining my point of view. I biggest worry is just that people will "manipulate" the market with gold. I rather have the PvP only aspect that can only be obtained through booster packs only be obtained through platinum or card trading and completely separate from gold, unless there is a max of gold->platinum conversion per day/week.
It's getting a bit off topic for this thread, but gold/plat interaction is basically all or nothing. Either they interact or they do not. If they do not, the game will be VERY strange. (Check the AH/currency thread for more discussion.)

keldrin
08-07-2013, 02:55 PM
well, you could limit times you can attempt a certain raid or dungeon within a set time. And if you want to do that raid or dungeon before reaching that time, you pay a gold fee.
There's going to be a number of raids and dungeons, so you have others you could do instead of attacking the same raid or dungeon over and over. This has the side benefit of helping keep the whole community from just hitting the latest dungeon or raid.
Hmm. Not sure why, but, I suppose something similar to a character house could be rented, allowing you to decorate it with items purchased, plus maybe trophies you got for completing certain content, or winning certain tournaments.

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 02:58 PM
I really wish a mod would move these huge off topic posts to another thread =( I'm digging where the on topic conversation was going. =(

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 03:04 PM
I honestly dont think card repair would be good as it would potentially add up FAST if you are talking 60 cards getting hurt every fight....yikes. Most/some people would just rage quit after losing a battle, or just drop from a battle if they are about to lose. But a merc hospital bills, a keep repair/upkeep would be good. Upgrades to your keep, crafting costs, costs for mats to craft I think would all be good sinks.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 03:04 PM
I like the ideas you threw out on the keep AbandonAllHope. This sparked me to build on it a bit and review the keep defense. Seems we could possibly pay a daily salary for extra defense by the way of archers, ppl to man catapults, etc. Effectively, this could mean the first person coming in to the keep could focus target these extra defenses that provide either dmg per turn or troops in play from the start. Having these defenses (or lack there of after defense defeat) could make some keep breaches most effective in waves.

Essentially, Attacker 1 (A1) targets the Archers defeats them and eventually dies. A2 targets the Ballistas and eventually dies. This could leave us with A3 coming in with just here to combat the keep deck without added annoyance from the secondary gold paid defenses. I'm actually quite fond of needing to coordinate an approach toward attacking Keeps...

All the while, someone in the guild watching the keep or monitoring the in game channel /keep could pay to re-enlist more defenses and attempt to spoil the attackers plans. Gold could be spent fast this way and I have to admit I'm getting a little excited just thinking about this playing out as I'm typing...

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 03:05 PM
Dont worry, I'm taking a step back from the whole AH topic. I'm not even sure what CZE is going to do, and I'm no game developer, I find it easier leaving it to them.

As for limited number of raids in a set time period, and afterwards a gold fee, not sure about that. Not sure if you should limit the amount of playtime of individuals even if you want to manage game gold. It's still a game people should be able to play as much as they went. It's not a bad idea, but I probably wouldn't like it personally if I had to pay gold to have to do a dungeon a 6th time if I felt like it. Because I want to be able to collect that one specific Item I need for my card as much as possible rather than having to collect gold from other dungeons to be able to buy it :D

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 03:08 PM
Hahaha thats excellent SToked, you honor your name !! Sounds very interesting, it was also stuff I was thinking about when I mentioned it. Figured I would first offer the simple idea, because you can make it as complex as you would like, and is open for many possibilities.

There are many expenditures that you can involve in Keep Defense, that could provide your deck with bonuses. I'm sure CZE has already added many factors that benefit the Keep Deck, because an AI has to survive so long. If they add tactics to it in a form of benefits through different means (such as spending gold on what you gave as an example) it would make things interesting. Of course you need to remember that its a card game, so need to keep that in mind when devising such intricate ways of keep defense :D

Yoss
08-07-2013, 03:09 PM
I don't think you have a good grasp of economics yoss =(
It's possible that I lack proper insight, but this particular quote doesn't prove it.


Abandonallhope has a great explanation of why people would hoard gold in your setup.
See Post 60.


Also, the gold sinks thread doesn't seem like a great place to be having this conversation at all =/

Sadly, this thread has turned into combatting Yoss's idea and he's now directing all conversation. I'd like to divert it to either the OP or someone else's ideas.

I really wish a mod would move these huge off topic posts to another thread
I'm directly answering the OP, actually. Here's the relevant quote:

As a result, I'd like to solicit the community for feedback on ways in which you believe would prove as a good means to combat inflation and provide a proper gold sink?
However, I can take the conversation elsewhere if you'd prefer. (In which case, stop trying to refute my proposal here and instead follow the link to where it was originally posted.) Please be more clear in your OP that your goal is not "combat inflation" it is "brainstorm gold sinks". By the way, I like the brainstorming and other people are still dropping gold sink ideas for you. It would be cool if you consolidated them into the OP for us.


I will, however, discuss something auto happening to my account when I go away for extended periods of time. Imagine the following scenario: You're enlisted and shipped out for a tour of duty. Lets say you come back able to play in a year's time. How would you feel if the "buying power" you had went up 5x fold in your Finite Currency model and the game auto "Sold" all the currency you owned for you? I know I'd feel "cheated" The threads would be filled with irate people upset at what happened. Honestly, I don't believe anything should "auto" happen to your account while you're away minus the following exceptions: 1) Those owed Set 2 & 3 packs from KS perks still receive them and 2) the Collector Perk still gets their Alt Art cards.
So we can add a notification warning system. As long as you respond to the warning, you prevent (postpone) the conversion. In your military example, you should still be able to check email now and then in order to respond.

Vibraxus
08-07-2013, 03:12 PM
I like the ideas you threw out on the keep AbandonAllHope. This sparked me to build on it a bit and review the keep defense. Seems we could possibly pay a daily salary for extra defense by the way of archers, ppl to man catapults, etc. Effectively, this could mean the first person coming in to the keep could focus target these extra defenses that provide either dmg per turn or troops in play from the start. Having these defenses (or lack there of after defense defeat) could make some keep breaches most effective in waves.

Essentially, Attacker 1 (A1) targets the Archers defeats them and eventually dies. A2 targets the Ballistas and eventually dies. This could leave us with A3 coming in with just here to combat the keep deck without added annoyance from the secondary gold paid defenses. I'm actually quite fond of needing to coordinate an approach toward attacking Keeps...

All the while, someone in the guild watching the keep or monitoring the in game channel /keep could pay to re-enlist more defenses and attempt to spoil the attackers plans. Gold could be spent fast this way and I have to admit I'm getting a little excited just thinking about this playing out as I'm typing...

I listed before how the MUDD I used to play did guild raids....long story short, each guild can create a piece of equipment. It would be rare level of power. To create the eq it costs the guild a lot of gold. Bad guy guild attacks and gets in, they buy the eq cheap ( a limit to the quantity they can buy) and throw it on the auction house. As it is a guild pride on the line, and the eq is quite hard to get, the guildies buy it back for a high price.

Now to be fair IMHO for this to work, members of the guild being raided should be able t replace a "guard deck" or whatever with themselves playing rather than the AI trying to take down a human played deck....but it can work, and does work very well in the MUDD I play(ed)

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 03:28 PM
Your answer to being off-topic in this thread is to just let your off-topic stand and not refute it? That seems pretty ridiculous. The op clearly states "As a result, I'd like to solicit the community for feedback on ways in which you believe would prove as a good means to combat inflation and provide a proper gold sink?" I could see that you missed the last bit of the sentence, combat inflation and provide proper gold sink, it's a single idea. You're talking about stuff you're proposing in a different thread here. That's kind of ridiculous that you'd then tell those of us trying to be on topic that you'll stop discussing it as soon as we stop telling you we think it's a bad idea, and that's why we're here having a gold sink discussion instead of your idea discussion from your other thread.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 03:29 PM
@Vibraxus: I almost forgot about MUDDs. I played one in the mid 90s and was great. I'm a fan of stealing something for bregging rights and being able to put it on display.

While reviewing an older thread I made on Keeps, I came across a post that could prove worthwhile for some defense boostes that could be paid in gold. It also may be interesting to be able to only have say 3x active at any one time making choices more strategy based:


Here are some of my ideas as I posted in this thread with some added in, http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=24686&page=3

1. Archers that reduce your opponent's life by 1 each turn
2. Banners to permabuff all troops
3. Reduced casting cost
4. Storage facility with free resources/thresholds
5. Start with some constants or defending troops in play
6. Healer heals defending champion every turn
7. Resident wizard that gives a random buff or casts an offensive spell every turn
8. Portcullis which an attacker has to destroy before they can damage defending troops/champion
9. Moat which limits number of attackers per turn
10. Faction support/reinforcements if you have high enough reputation
11. Mines that randomly damage an attacking troop after some conditions are met ( > X attackers )
12. Nets that are randomly thrown on an enemy troop to prevent them from attacking or blocking
13. Ground traps that exhaust a random attacking troop for 2 turns.
14. Ballistae or catapults that do massive damage to a random troop after some conditions are met

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 03:43 PM
Ah yeah, thats pretty cool. I would agree with limiting the number of total buffs you can use, and I would probably say the stronger the buff becomes, the later it comes into effect (for example some buffs only trigger on the 3rd turn, showing that the longer it drags on the, more of a disadvantage the attacker ends up in). But I guess thats more of a topic of discussion for the Keep thread, since I would say archers doing 1 damage each turn might be a bit overkill, maybe reducing the players starting life would be fairer. Also have some comments on the other buffs, but this is a different thread I guess.

But I definitely like how it could cost you money to trigger these buffs. You already get gold from winning a defense, so might as well take some money out of the game by adding prices to buffs.

As for the stealing of unique equipment, it does shift the focus of gold to equipment, so that would be nice. But I assume thats only the case when there is such a thing to steal, or is it visible which guild has what to steal? Like spending money to spy on a guild.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 03:50 PM
As for the stealing of unique equipment, it does shift the focus of gold to equipment, so that would be nice. But I assume thats only the case when there is such a thing to steal, or is it visible which guild has what to steal? Like spending money to spy on a guild.

OMG That's Brilliant. Basically that one artifact allows viewability to the holder of that Keeps defense and deck. A Keep Crystal Ball in essence. Obviously, people would fight hard to get that back. I'm going to move this to a "Keep Topic".

Yoss
08-07-2013, 04:10 PM
Your answer to being off-topic in this thread is to just let your off-topic stand and not refute it? That seems pretty ridiculous.
No, it is to refute me in the "proper" thread. If you feel the need to post something here about it, then just say "I posted a rebuttal to your idea in the other thread. Please discuss it there."

EDIT:
So, I'll say it for you. "Yoss' proposal is being debated in the thread from whence it came. Please do not discuss it here any more."

keldrin
08-07-2013, 04:33 PM
OMG That's Brilliant. Basically that one artifact allows viewability to the holder of that Keeps defense and deck. A Keep Crystal Ball in essence. Obviously, people would fight hard to get that back. I'm going to move this to a "Keep Topic".

I agree, that would be pretty awesome item. And one that you would fight to get back. That said, I don't like them being able to sell it on the auction house. Also, if a expensive item, I would think they would have it on display in their keep, but not able to use it. That would motivate a siege retake of the item.
I wonder if some smaller guilds could work together to take a keep and get their cumulative stuff back from a larger more powerful guild.....

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 04:35 PM
Should also have the option to just reforge the item, so if you can't get it back you're not permanently at a disadvantage, which could be a gold sink! look at me bringing it back around to on topic.

AbandonAllHope
08-07-2013, 04:44 PM
Exactly stoked, very well worded :D

@Keldrin: Yes that is possible, especially since with decks it is still heavily luck based, so if many guilds attack, one is bound to get through :D

@ Gwaer: Yeah, it should never be a once in a life time option, otherwise you would one insanely superior Guild steal all those items, and it could be near impossible to steal them back.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 05:29 PM
Should also have the option to just reforge the item, so if you can't get it back you're not permanently at a disadvantage, which could be a gold sink! look at me bringing it back around to on topic.

Great idea. Maybe the ability to reforge would be possible only after a set duration after initial disappearance (say 2 days). It should be quite expensive to do and giving a finite timeline could help eliminate the ability for one guild lacking the ability to defeat another guild to get it back.



@ Gwaer: Yeah, it should never be a once in a life time option, otherwise you would one insanely superior Guild steal all those items, and it could be near impossible to steal them back.
Exactly.

Yubar
08-07-2013, 05:49 PM
It seems that someone came up with an idea similar to mines already in this thread, but whatever, I posted this solution to gold hording on Yoss' awesome AH proposal thread. The preface of this post was to let CZE handle Plat to Gold exchange:

The weak point is the CZE ran exchange rate between Plat and Gold, it would definitely have to fluctuate with the value of gold (inflation) UNLESS we can use Yoss' awesome idea and fix the amount of gold in the system. This amount of gold can be based on the average user base (to make up for new & inactive players) and would have to be large enough that a few people can't horde it all (which is unfortunately where Yoss' argument weakens) A funny method to ease this is that there would be a bank that can only hold so much gold, and that gold would be secure. However any amount above that would either have to go to some black market bank (which levies fees on the regular basis, giving gold back to NPCs) or some weird insecure bank ( which has regular "robberies", putting money back into the Npc hands)

keroko
08-07-2013, 05:52 PM
war efforts in wow were fun.

City of Heroes / Villians had nice base designer. while we not running around in 3d its be neat to see supplementary game where players boost war funds of faction in various areas of map, mini game of civ made up of player keeps and lands. < selfish, just want to dig a burrow keep.

lotus and other flower npc vendor, market price determined - expensive. quality consumables for use in pve.

monster flute - 1.2xp - xp buff scales with each encounter where player chooses to maintain ending life total if below starting total. expensive. !?there is a reusable* one?!

multiplayer rez item, autorez item... lots and lots they could make to soak up player gold.

keldrin
08-07-2013, 05:55 PM
Should also have the option to just reforge the item, so if you can't get it back you're not permanently at a disadvantage, which could be a gold sink! look at me bringing it back around to on topic.

OK, so you're in a guild. The guilds keep gets attacked, and your prize artifact stolen to a more powerful guild. Your attempt to retake fails. A couple of days later, a few other guild officers and guild mates reforge your artifact! Great!
Well, in the meantime you had talked with some other guilds, and arranged a group attack, and that night, you take out the other guilds keep reclaiming the stolen artifact.
So.... what happens? Does your guild get the artifact and now has 2? Does it just disappear as a trophy from the opposing guilds inventory? Do a group of dwarves get really drunk and sing of battles victory at a tavern?
Well.. I mean the dwarves getting drunk is a given.... but what of the other stuff?

Gwaer
08-07-2013, 05:57 PM
Once you reforge your artifact I think the old one should disappear immediately. Basically part of the reforging is calling the power back from your artifact, since there can only be one for each guild. If you raid their keep and have reforged your artifact you should end up with theirs, if they have one in keep, or someone elses if they're holding onto one, which you could give back to the rightful owners or sell it or keep it to attack them. If they have no artifacts you end up with whatever other reward you would get and no artifacts.

keldrin
08-07-2013, 06:15 PM
Once you reforge your artifact I think the old one should disappear immediately. Basically part of the reforging is calling the power back from your artifact, since there can only be one for each guild. If you raid their keep and have reforged your artifact you should end up with theirs, if they have one in keep, or someone else's if they're holding onto one, which you could give back to the rightful owners or sell it or keep it to attack them. If they have no artifacts you end up with whatever other reward you would get and no artifacts.
Maybe it's just me, But in my mind, each successful raid on the keep, should enable you to only pick 1 artifact as your prize. Whether that is your own. The keeps artifact, or one that was captured from someone else should be up to you.
Also, after a successful raid, should there be a cool down time before you can raid the keep again? You know, to prevent a keep with 5 captured artifacts from losing them all to one guild in rapid succession.

Allowing a cool down time, would allow the guild to buy back the destroyed purchased defenses and would thus keep with the idea of a gold sink.
Also, Should there be a fee for a guild or keep owner, to change his deck structure?

Yoss
08-07-2013, 06:20 PM
It seems that someone came up with an idea similar to mines already in this thread, but whatever, I posted this solution to gold hording on Yoss' awesome AH proposal thread. The preface of this post was to let CZE handle Plat to Gold exchange:

The weak point is the CZE ran exchange rate between Plat and Gold, it would definitely have to fluctuate with the value of gold (inflation) UNLESS we can use Yoss' awesome idea and fix the amount of gold in the system. This amount of gold can be based on the average user base (to make up for new & inactive players) and would have to be large enough that a few people can't horde it all (which is unfortunately where Yoss' argument weakens) A funny method to ease this is that there would be a bank that can only hold so much gold, and that gold would be secure. However any amount above that would either have to go to some black market bank (which levies fees on the regular basis, giving gold back to NPCs) or some weird insecure bank ( which has regular "robberies", putting money back into the Npc hands)
I have, uh, refinements for you in the other thread. I do not think this proposal will work as stated. Maybe we can work on it.

ShadowTycho
08-07-2013, 06:32 PM
Gold sinks:
Raid bosses are single attempt, additional attempts can be bought for gold an unlimited number of times, however if you die you must pay twice what you paid last time. fee resets on boss death or re clearing the dungeon to that boss.

Purchasable store fronts on the auction house that have a daily fee.

equipment is damaged when you take damage and must be repaired. repair scales with level.

a pve slot machine with properly adjusted odds. hell, a casino really. it doesn't matter which games you put in, if you use real world odds the house will always win.

Stok3d
08-07-2013, 06:38 PM
Giving the discussion about Keeps it's own thread. Please post all further ideas / responses about Keeps Here (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=26824).

primer
08-08-2013, 12:00 AM
Gold > Plat > Packs > Free limited. Will it not work that way?

RobHaven
08-08-2013, 05:53 AM
Must is less important than compelling reason to do it.

I read through this thread. Still not sold on the value of it. Some cool ideas came out of it, but they were less gold-sink and more side-game kind of things. Although discussing the viability of a closed/capped economy is interesting, I'm willing to bet it's WAY too late for Crypto to alter whatever they've had planned. If it's not capped now, I don't think they'd change that at this point.

The assumption that gold sink ideas are necessary is frustrating. You're starting off with the base assumption that Crypto has not properly balanced their economy. You're also doing so with little-to-no knowledge of that economy. Furthermore, most of the proposals are either (A) I don't really want to use this word, but "obvious" or (B) potentially game altering. Take buffs, for example, since it fits in both categories. If they haven't already decided to use buffs, you're now suggesting they add in an element that could significantly disrupt the balance of the play experience - and that's a balance they've worked hard to achieve. If they have decided to use them, it's extremely likely they're doing so at a cost.

Oh, and the reason I highlighted Gwaer's post is because of how true it is. Regardless of how much of a choice it is, giving people a choice keeps the game fun and prevents any sort of resentment or loss of enjoyment.

Stok3d
08-08-2013, 06:25 AM
The assumption that gold sink ideas are necessary is frustrating. You're starting off with the base assumption that Crypto has not properly balanced their economy. You're also doing so with little-to-no knowledge of that economy.

I honestly can't see any way around gold sinks and you're right--I do simply take it as a given. It has nothing to do with CZE and their capabilities of properly balancing an economy. Basically, if gold comes into circulation then I believe there is a fundamental need to have it permanently removed in some way. CZE would do all the math for proper balance, I just thought it would be a fun idea to consider ways in which it could happen.



Furthermore, most of the proposals are either (A) I don't really want to use this word, but "obvious" or (B) potentially game altering. Take buffs, for example, since it fits in both categories. If they haven't already decided to use buffs, you're now suggesting they add in an element that could significantly disrupt the balance of the play experience - and that's a balance they've worked hard to achieve. If they have decided to use them, it's extremely likely they're doing so at a cost.

I agree. Some of the ideas are game altering and may not be something CZE envisions. Using buffs as an example, I see this as a compromise on many levels and thought it's ability to also have a gold sink side effect was worth noting here. This thread's original intent wasn't necessarily to state what must or must not be done. I thought it best to simply list out all the ideas that could be done.

The economy is key to us all. A lot of the ideas flying around in some of the current AH threads make me want to pull my hair out, but I saw this thread as an opportunity to think of some ways a basic need (gold sinks) could be fulfilled. (Please Yoss do not comment on your Finite Gold Supply idea again in this thread regarding gold sink needs as a rebuttal)

RobHaven
08-08-2013, 06:56 AM
I honestly can't see any way around gold sinks and you're right--I do simply take it as a given. It has nothing to do with CZE and their capabilities of properly balancing an economy. Basically, if gold comes into circulation then I believe there is a fundamental need to have it permanently removed in some way. CZE would do all the math for proper balance, I just thought it would be a fun idea to consider ways in which it could happen.
I agree that there's a fundamental need for sinks, I'm just saying we're spinning our wheels by listing out ideas for the sake of change.

That being said, I don't want my "we're here for business, not fun" mentality to take away from the forum experience of everyone else. I guess my hardline/unrelenting attitude comes from two straight weeks of seeing dead horses being drug through the streets so everyone can get a few punches in. You think it's a fun discussion to have, and I'm in no place to tell you it is or isn't; I'll get out of the way (for now), but I reserve the right to decry the thread's continued existence any time I want. It makes me feel better.

The solution to bringing some significance back to the forums (as I see it) is to let us into alpha today. Just do it, Crypto. We - the forum frequenters - need it. I need it. I'm hanging on by a thread here...

ossuary
08-08-2013, 09:09 AM
You think it's a fun discussion to have, and I'm in no place to tell you it is or isn't; I'll get out of the way (for now), but I reserve the right to decry the thread's continued existence any time I want. It makes me feel better.

The solution to bringing some significance back to the forums (as I see it) is to let us into alpha today. Just do it, Crypto. We - the forum frequenters - need it. I need it. I'm hanging on by a thread here...

hahahah, this is a fantastic post. And I've been feeling this way for a couple of weeks now... just give us alpha access already so we can have something to talk about! We can handle it... we won't get mad if there are bugs. Pretty please? :)

Yoss
08-08-2013, 09:35 AM
Gold > Plat > Packs > Free limited. Will it not work that way?
Gold/Loot > Plat > Packs > "Free" PVP

It's not confirmed, but likely to work that way. The main question in my mind is not if, it is: how efficient it will be (how much time will it take in PVE in order to "pay" for a draft)?

EDIT:

Although discussing the viability of a closed/capped economy is interesting, I'm willing to bet it's WAY too late for Crypto to alter whatever they've had planned. If it's not capped now, I don't think they'd change that at this point.
I'll respond to this in the currency thread.

keldrin
08-08-2013, 01:13 PM
On the housing for gold line of thought.
It would really be keep decorations for gold.
What I'm thinking is, if your keep goes so long without being taken, you have the option of buying another decoration. guild banners, wall texture upgrades. Upgrade to the keep main doors. etc.
If keep defense is in stages. Like they have to have a battle in a outside terrain, forrest, plains, moutain, ocean, etc. (terrain might be tied to race or faction). then the seige encounter. Outside the keep walls. Then maybe a encounter inside the keep walls, or even in the throne room.
anyways, each stage of the keep attack, could have purchasable upgrades in both functional and decorative options. The options could increase, the longer it is since the last time the keep was taken.
The timer, might be setup with the concept of having to buy a upgrade before the timer sets-up again to count down til next purchase. Now, in this line of thought, you would get a functional upgrade to help with keep defense , then the next available upgrade, would be decorative. You would have to get the decorative upgrade, in order to get the timer moving towards the next functional upgrade. I can see the idea that as you move forward, the cost of upgrades increases.
Then, when you get raided, you lose the top item, from your keep, and it is kept by the enemy as a trophy, til it is retrieved, or you rebuy it. (rebuying would have to wait for the timer to count down again)
The top most item would be some kind of cool decoration. It would be the most expensive item you bought, but, it would protect your most expensive functional upgrade. each upgrade could have more than one option for purchase.

Edit: I'm reposting this on the "keep raids: how do you envision it" since the post crosses both territories.