Remove Returning Tokens to HF

[shubla]

Transition is easy.
All tokens that are currently outside of HF can be put back in.
But all tokens retrieved from HF since the change is made cannot be put back into HF.

No one buys tokens just to hold em.

[MagicManICT]

Simple ways to burn up the current amount of tokens in the system:
1) Allow players to upgrade to silver and gold subscriptions with them (probably not the best value, but hey, if you want to eat tokens for that, it's on you.)
2) Allow them to be exchanged for "store credit" so that they can be used to buy hats and such.
3) Make a new series of hats and other cosmetics that are "rented" for 30 or 90 days. This last idea probably won't fly right now as I imagine jorb has a pretty busy life schedule.

FWIW, 1) and 2) have come up elsewhere. Credit to the appropriate authors.

Just a word of caution: remember the principle of supply and demand before messing with emergent economies. We've become pretty dependent upon the token being a basis of economy.

[shubla]

3) Make a new series of hats and other cosmetics that are "rented" for 30 or 90 days. This last idea probably won't fly right now as I imagine jorb has a pretty busy life schedule..

Renting hats is interesting idea. But 30/90 days is too much! Could be more of like 1-2 weeks for 1 token or so. (so it would ACTUALLY be a sink for them)

[MagicManICT]

1-2 weeks for 1 token or so.

For a $10 token? I don't think so, Tim.

[Apocoreo]

Just a word of caution: remember the principle of supply and demand before messing with emergent economies. We've become pretty dependent upon the token being a basis of economy.

There's always Rose Gold Coins

Seriously though I like all three ideas, especially store credit. Anything that adds more value for tokens while consuming them.

and I hope no one expects anything in this thread to happen anytime soon lol, I don't. I see it as a critique first and long-term ideas second.

1-2 weeks

That might make it only useable by big factions, mind you. Not going to come outright against it. What if the rented hats are discontinued ones? Maybe only some because there's some prestige to wearing a discontinued hat. A bunch of rentals who can't sell the hat kind of diminishes the effect. What will the "Hat 0r Die" people do?

Okay, bad idea. But exclusive rentals, hmm.

If my guess is right, what about a smaller change, to make unspent tokens return to the original buyer* at the end of the world? It won't change much for those who buy tokens for actual use, until they do it at the last moment of the world and doesn't manage to use the token before the server goes down.

I think this would have less impact on the game than the destruction of unspent tokens.

* For tokens that already exist at the moment of implementation, I think, it would be better to substitute "original buyer" with "person who owned it at the moment of implementation", so not to undermine previous deals.

I adore this idea. I wish I had it, I think I prefer it to my idea tbh. Eliminates hoarders but now they are even more valuable to the people that actually buy them.

[SnuggleSnail]

I feel like a lot of these posts basically read as: Hey Jorb, here's how you could make less money


The buying power of a token for in game items is VERY high RN because there are so few people selling tokens, but I think the main reason there are so few people selling tokens is because of their high buying power. The whales spend whatever the minimum amount is needed for them to get everything they want, then don't spend any more. It was really noticeable whenever the token price jumped from 400gold to ~ 1200gold in like one month, but gold price for most ingame goods remained stagnant. I would be paying the most for a week straight, but get approx 1/3rd to 1/4th the regular number of tokens from when tokens were 300-400 gold.

Token value relative to USD, however, is inflated as frick. You could theoretically buy a 9USD hat, sell it for 3-5 tokens, sell the tokens for the regular RMT price(4-6USD), then buy another hat with a profit. You won't find enough people buying tokens to actually do this, but those are fairly standard prices. (Note to the plebs: sell people hats, don't buy tokens)

I suspect if tokens had a higher value to the people who control the markets by virtue of them being tradeable for store credit or some such, autists would go further out of their way to create competition in the markets, and hopefully encourage whales to spend more. Quality increasing at a higher rate would likely have a similar effect, as is the whales can buy everything they rly want for a very small token price, and won't need to upgrade it again for a long time, unlike previous worlds.

lmao I've NFI about economics this is probably all wrong
PS: RMT BAD

[Zentetsuken]

people are not buying tokens to support the game, they are buying tokens because they are generally a P2W shortcut for trading in most cases
There are people in the game in most large factions that have 100s of them banked, which is probably part of the reason why the same groups end up being massive realm villages world after world, they don't have any problem making deals to gather resources or manpower.

It was a retard level idea to implement them as permanent items in the game and I can think of easily 20 ideas off the top of my head that could immediately replace any money lost on token purchases as a result of them becoming temporary items

[Agrik]

Just a word of caution: remember the principle of supply and demand before messing with emergent economies. We've become pretty dependent upon the token being a basis of economy.

The game should have in-game resources for that. "Basis of economy" being created with real money basically shouts about RMT and a broken separation between real and in-game economies.

[MagicManICT]

The game should have in-game resources for that.

I completely agree. Is not a token an in-game resource that can be lost or stolen once it has been purchased? (Sorry for the teasing there. Just seemed a bit too easy to not take it.)

"Basis of economy" being created with real money basically shouts about RMT and a broken separation between real and in-game economies.

But is there? I'm not really sure if there is an "appropriate" place for the discussion, so this will do, I think. What is the broken part of it? What part of it would be different if it were strictly "in game item based" as it was in previous worlds? Is the basis for this argument simply around that people are accumulating tokens and driving up prices or some other slight? Is there ethical violations? There's a lot of discussion on RMT, but very little actual discussion of the issue, problems, ethics, and realities of life and games.

I don't do the Haven Discord channel, and I don't closely follow the trade threads, just pay attention to who may be causing issues. I don't recall seeing anyone saying that they "only buy or sell for tokens." They usually base a token at X value and list various items, with quantities that equal that token. (I believe that in a few cases, yes, it is "only taking tokens for this.") I understand that there is a bit of a black market (or at least call it grey) for the transfer of tokens from one player to another, just like there is for accounts. Changing the role of tokens doesn't change those things. A token has the one advantage of providing 30 days of subscription time, whereas a pearl (the standard in previous worlds) was worth 10k LP/hour.

My whole point is changing the supply or demand for tokens is going to potentially be a huge shift in their value. Going back to pearls, with the current rules of the game, will be a huge change in the econoomies of Haven. Ask for such changes with caution and with an expectation of major change.

FWIW, Haven isn't a subscription based game. It's a freemium, and with little to control what goes on outside of the game, some things are just going to be. Everyone has added in some for of exchange of goods for game time/items with but a handful of exceptions these days. It's what consumers want. The purist gamer is a rare bird these days.

[Apocoreo]

There's a lot of discussion on RMT, but very little actual discussion of the issue, problems, ethics, and realities of life and games.

Sort of replying to the whole of your post. Thought I'd like to speak more generally about tokens, forgive me some retreading of stuff earlier in the thread.

I'd say the totality of Token's influence on haven is basically the ability to bring yourself up to market strength with an adequate payment of IRL currency, and should you have in-game items worth tokens, gain them without investment of IRL currency, and either way retain them through worlds. In essence this mainly effects mid-level players, who can gain power by essentially materializing currency from outside the game world. I see this as less an ethics issue, more balancing.

Realistically not everyone is buying tokens, so balance is not maintained. The concern of this thread is not in broader balancing, but in the possibility that those buying the tokens are not actually getting ahead of those that aren't, and by saving up tokens purchased with in-game items you can essentially stay ahead of those that are buying them, without contributing to the game with real money yourself. In theory, at least.

Essentially the world I'm envisioning is very similar with what we have now, but day 1 advantages are restricted to those that purchased tokens with IRL currency rather than in-game currency, hopefully increasing their demand out of game by increasing the number of players they are useful to. Either through mine or Agrik's suggestions.

Edit: I've been struggling to describe increased profitability through lesser value. Think McDonalds, the food is shit but more people buy it because it's cheap, therefore more useful, and McDonalds makes more money. Likewise I want to increase Tokens "target audience".