Equipment Insurance - A Way to Fight Active Leeching/Gold Farming

[Matey]

I want to use my plate armour and bec every round without ever running out of money so i can butcher more peasants.

I vote no.

[Tears of Destiny]

Basically it would force peasants to work longer to obtain their first piece of gear, but overall would be fine as they can use said piece of gear and not have the gold earned slow down, thus decreasing the amount of "fake peasants." I am referring to the fake peasants as people who wear next to nothing so that they can save up for everything they intend on wearing, and then start wearing it (because we all know that if you save up for that fancy 12K weapon, that will significantly slow down your progress to save money for your spiffy helmet and armour if you equip it right off the bat).

[Tears of Destiny]

I vote no.

He does use his plate armour every round. I have never seen the man outside.

With the gold trading he does, and that more often then not he brute forces his team to win (and his abnormal average modifier that comes with it), this changes nothing from what he already does.

[Panoply]

I vote no.

His suggestion needn't affect the sustainability of high cost load outs. It would create a line (albeit an arbitrary one), whereby all loadouts of equal and lesser cost yield the same average gain of gold, while anything above that line would decrease gold gain at the same rate as the current system.

[Tears of Destiny]

His suggestion needn't affect the sustainability of high cost load outs. It would create a line (albeit an arbitrary one), whereby all loadouts of equal and lesser cost yield the same average gain of gold, while anything above that line would decrease gold gain at the same rate as the current system.

yes, but reading and comprehension is for the weak (or the majority of the users o this forum don't understand simple mathematics).

[Matey]

honestly, the only thing i see this accomplishing... is increasing the average amount of armour that people wear... which directly nerfs all the people who play agility chars.. and seeing as agi chars already get the shaft... i would rather not see more armour thanks.

[Panoply]

honestly, the only thing i see this accomplishing... is increasing the average amount of armour that people wear... which directly nerfs all the people who play agility chars.. and seeing as agi chars already get the shaft... i would rather not see more armour thanks.

Yeah, that's certainly a possibility, though it might be argued that the only unarmored targets you're losing are gold farmers and leechers, as those using low armour loadouts for "legitimate" reasons, such as less speed and wpf penalty, wouldn't be likely to wear more armour because of this change.

I don't think I'd support this suggestion because for one, leeching isn't a huge problem any more. For another, I don't like the fact that the sustainability line is likely to be relatively arbitrary. The upkeep system necessarily means that people must pay attention to the price of their equipment, and in the case of armor, make a trade off between protection and cost. This suggestion removes that element below a certain cost. At what point does a person's equipment choice qualify as "gold farming" as opposed to simple frugality and economic trade offs. Again, while there are obvious cases of running around naked and unarmed, the rest lies on a continuum, and any delineation would again be arbitrary.

[Kafein]

Matey,

RTFP

Read the fucking post. If you don't understand that it will in no way change, and even probably reduce the maximum equipment cost that an average player can break even with, read it again.

[Thomek]

ok, read your post again Tydeus.

It's just that you are explaining it in a bad way with your examples, resulting in you paying less when your expensive armor and bec breaks. The word "Insurance" albeit perhaps correct, doesn't sound well either. It also stinks of tin-can arrogance, oh well

So what you basically suggest, is to add a guaranteed buffer when gear breaks, so that there is no point in leeching naked or with peasant gear? (If I understood you right)

If that's so then I'm positive to this. But the insurance should be very low to avoid leechers, far below 25k minimum sustainable gear. Me myself do OK in gear of about 15k, and it's not the minimum you can do well in, but close to it I guess.

On the other hand, it is a complex suggestion, and removes potency of multiplier.

If implemented, keep it low.

[Matey]

Matey,

RTFP

Read the fucking post. If you don't understand that it will in no way change, and even probably reduce the maximum equipment cost that an average player can break even with, read it again.

say what you like... but it is a fact that people could sustain heavy armour with greater ease if this were implemented. id rather see less plate than more, thanks.

[Tears of Destiny]

say what you like... but it is a fact that people could sustain heavy armour with greater ease if this were implemented. id rather see less plate than more, thanks.

Explain mathematically how this would be true?
The gold earned would be less, so your bank would be smaller.

[Tydeus]

Elerion raises a good point about actual peasants. While you're taking away the advantage of a low cost loadout for high level players, you're also making it much more difficult for peasants to accumulate the gold to buy new gear, compared to the current system. Perhaps if the gold put toward insurance started low, and increases with level?

Maybe, but then things are getting a bit more complicated. The argument is something like this:

<TearsofDestiny> this would make saving up for items take longer
<TearsofDestiny> It would solve the Strategus turning everyone into peasants though :/
<Tydeus> shouldn't make saving up for items too much longer. I mean, it could. When a peasant saved up for his first expensive weapon or armor, using it wouldn't be counted against him. He could still use it without an income loss as the upkeep for the item wouldn't be subtracting from his gold earned or at least not entirely. Before when I made alts or started out, I would save up for my first big weapon, then not even use it till I got my armor and gloves as well, so the upkeep of a 10K+ weapon and 6K armor wouldn't be counted against me.
<TearsofDestiny> True, the alt shielder I am trying to level I am having to buy everything I want before using it, which is irritating.

I vote no.

I thought you were an NA player? Since when do I not already wear plate EVERY round. I have probably more gold and heirlooms than just about any single individual that plays crpg on NA. I don't need gold nor am I concerned about upkeep. Furthermore, I'm about to buy a Champion Mamluk from Xol for just over a mil gold on which I will be wearing my plate and bringing my bec every round with a lance as well. I really couldn't care any less about upkeep. As far as I'm concerned, upkeep was rendered useless when the market came out.

The single best reason to implement this, is to ensure that when strategus comes out, crpg won't be plagued by fake peasants. Gold farming wouldn't really exist which would make managing the economy and preventing either inflation/deflation a lot easier.

[Matey]

OK, so YOU wouldnt wear armour any more often... but others would... i still vote NO. I'd rather see armour costs increase metal armour is for pansies!

[Tydeus]

OK, so YOU wouldnt wear armour any more often... but others would... i still vote NO. I'd rather see armour costs increase metal armour is for pansies!

Sure, which means that I'm not biased. Which is all the more reason for you to realize what I and everyone else in this thread has been stating.

At 30g per tic on a x1 multi and 40-50g insurance/buffer, you could only sustain the same, if not less armor cost. Which means there would be no reason at all to expect a rise in the amount of plate users.

[Matey]

Sure, which means that I'm not biased. Which is all the more reason for you to realize what I and everyone else in this thread has been stating.

At 30g per tic on a x1 multi and 40-50g insurance/buffer, you could only sustain the same, if not less armor cost. Which means there would be no reason at all to expect a rise in the amount of plate users.

how can it NOT lead to more plate? 30gold per tick + 50 in insurance... thats 80 gold per tick for the sake of maintaining your gear. OK so it's harder to stockpile gold, and thus harder to buy gear... but it is definetly going to make it easier to maintain... say nothing breaks.. you keep your 30 per tick. say everything breaks, well then you were effectively making 80 per tick instead of 30. say a bit breaks and your 'insurance money' covers it, you pocket your 30 per tick. in what way can you possibly have a harder time maintaining expensive gear with such a system?