guys I just love talking about economics let me tell you why

[krawco]

lets not be harsh, i don't think he understands english that well

Yes, I don't. And I gently ask for simple answer to my previous simple questions and for some reason, instead of giving it to me you are constantly trying to make an idiot of me.

[Sever]

lets not be harsh, i don't think he understands english that well

Yes, I don't. And I gently ask for simple answer to my previous simple questions and for some reason, instead of giving it to me you are constantly trying to make an idiot of me.

Allow me to have a shot at it:

and 1 silver = 1 €

I stopped reading here. I'll quit instantly if they start selling game items for real money. That's just a recipe for way too much bullshit.

This should have been somewhat self-descriptive, but it's not perfectly clear.

Basically, Haven & Hearth's in-game economy -- and there is an economy, even if it is largely subsistence there is also significant trade -- is entirely disconnected from the real world in any way except time investment. Effectively, it is peoples' interest in their development and the potential to reduce others' progress that is currency, and when you introduce the ability to buy wealth, a bunch of rich douche-bags become very popular and influential for some reason.

If it is not obvious to you why that is undesirable to this community, then allow me to belatedly introduce you to a number of denizens who will consistently despise your ideals.

[saltmummy626]

@jorb and potjeh. your discussion was very interesting. not to bring it back up, but as I was taught, a "monopoly" was a company that would buy up all the other related companies, material suppliers, and such rendering yourself completely independent from any outside company and leaving very little left over for other competing companies. example: a computer company buying up other smaller ones along with the companies that make the chips, boards, wires, plastics, ect ect ect.

@krawco
wurm is definitely not better in any sense than H&H.
you've got to pay to play it. I'm not paying a single cent for an incomplete java game. (just like I never payed for minecraft. my brother DL it on some torrent site and I took it off of his machine, though I have considered paying for it.) and if thats not bad enough then the complexity will get to you. it literally took me an hour to figure out how to cut down one tree.. I may be going a little far with this one, but I had an easier time learning to play dwarf fortress. and dwarf fortress didn't make my head hurt. H&H is by far much easier to play.
the graphics. wurm is a visual abomination. It may be 3D, but its just ugly. It looks like the badly skinned objects for a bad Morrowind mod.
too many rules. I took one look at that rules board and said, "fuck it." Jorb and Loftar dont throw that kind of shit and regulation on us. if we wanna dig near someones house, the devs don't give a flying fuck. If someone walks over and starts smashing your shit, you dont get a temp ban from the mods for griefing in H&H. you start talking massive shit in H&H or being racist, the players may fuck you up. In other words, in H&H the rules are up to each individual not some dick muncher sitting behind his keyboard throwing his weight around in a game.

Its a shit-tastic game. It would be nice if maneuvering the many menus was easy and if the devs would leave their players alone to do what they wish like they do here in H&H but they don't.

[loftar]

[...]as I was taught, a "monopoly" was a company that would buy up all the other related companies, material suppliers, and such rendering yourself completely independent from any outside company and leaving very little left over for other competing companies.

For the record, per von Mises' definition, a monopoly is where a seller can restrict the amount of sales (that is, restricting the supply) of some goods and, by doing so, have the prices of those goods increase to a greater degree than that to which he restricts sales, therefore earning greater sums than he would have if he would not have restricted sales.

Normally, on a free market, the prices of goods would not increase by a seller restricting his sales, because doing so would either allow another seller to sell more of the same goods, or allow a new supplier to enter the market, preventing the supply as a whole from being restricted or, at least, diminish its restriction. The common way by which such a monopoly arises is, of course, by restricting the market by forbidding, per government decree, anyone but a single or a closed set of sellers from supplying those kinds of goods (cf. e.g. alcohol in Sweden :P). There are other ways it can arise, too, however (though they are exceedingly rare in practice).

[saltmummy626]

[...]as I was taught, a "monopoly" was a company that would buy up all the other related companies, material suppliers, and such rendering yourself completely independent from any outside company and leaving very little left over for other competing companies.

For the record, per von Mises' definition, a monopoly is where a seller can restrict the amount of sales (that is, restricting the supply) of some goods and, by doing so, have the prices of those goods increase to a greater degree than that to which he restricts sales, therefore earning greater sums than he would have if he would not have restricted sales.

Normally, on a free market, the prices of goods would not increase by a seller restricting his sales, because doing so would either allow another seller to sell more of the same goods, or allow a new supplier to enter the market, preventing the supply as a whole from being restricted or, at least, diminish its restriction. The common way by which such a monopoly arises is, of course, by restricting the market by forbidding, per government decree, anyone but a single or a closed set of sellers from supplying those kinds of goods (cf. e.g. alcohol in Sweden ). There are other ways it can arise, too, however (though they are exceedingly rare in practice).

That was it. I always had trouble remembering it was exactly. Thanks Loftar.

[Delamore]

As someone who has played alot of Wurm, I can tell you exactly why you're wrong about Wurms economy.

When the world starts, there is one trader and then for each village that is placed the mayor can place another trader. But why ever place your trader where anyone but your village members can access it? So almost all new traders are penned off so the village can get all the money off it. This screws anyone who lives alone or is new to the game, making it hard to enter the economy at any level.

Then the only things that really get traded are massive amounts of work or high end stuff worth quite a bit, because of the massive weight and trouble transporting any other material really. So once again newer players are cut right out of the economy.

So now you have a bunch of the high end players trading high end stuff between themselves, why actually use the ingame currency when it's already pegged to the euro? Instead most transactions use euro as it can be converted into silver at will, while silver can only be converted back if you have a buyer, and never at a 1:1 ratio.

Now you have an economy that has no problem with using real life currency and has systems set up to do so. All it took was one rich person coming in, buying up massive amounts of currency, items and characters and making a super fortress that took 50+ people to raid when it was only defended by NPC guards.

[Potjeh]

The common way by which such a monopoly arises is, of course, by restricting the market by forbidding, per government decree, anyone but a single or a closed set of sellers from supplying those kinds of goods (cf. e.g. alcohol in Sweden ). There are other ways it can arise, too, however (though they are exceedingly rare in practice).

Monopolies are rare, I'll give you that, but oligopolies are the norm in a lot of branches like telecommunications and petrochemicals. They tend to manipulate the market just like monopolies. This is why USA has the world's shittiest cellphone services, and I'm still convinced that the recent doubling of petrol prices was completely artificial rather than caused by a real shortage.

[Thurrok]

Stupid man's experience says: If I buy from a bigger company, I get shit quality and zero customer relations. However, if I buy stuff from smaller companies (who are in danger to lose grounds to "big bad companies"), I get quality and given their situation, they actually give a fuck about me as a consumer.

Maybe I should mentione an example to this: let's look at the HSDPA sim-card I bought off a discounter store vs. the German Telekom one I had gotten my hands on earlier. The discounter one came with dozens of descriptions how to use it with different modems (even though they are selling their own, branded, simlock-free one) while the Telekom one came and worked with THEIR modem only. When asking about compatibility and network coverage, the Telekom people pretty much told me to fuck off.

So jorb, you might be right that conspiracy theories on such a grand scale are idiotic, but you have to admit that the situation I mentioned above is rather common. (Or is it just me? I don't think so.)

[jorb]

This is why USA has the world's shittiest cellphone services

Incidentally the same country that sports some of the world's most draconian antitrust laws.

I'm still convinced that the recent doubling of petrol prices was completely artificial rather than caused by a real shortage.

You're talking about the most regulated and intervened in market in the world. The major cartel on the scene is made up entirely of national governments.

Stupid man's experience says: If I buy from a bigger company, I get shit quality and zero customer relations. However, if I buy stuff from smaller companies (who are in danger to lose grounds to "big bad companies"), I get quality and given their situation, they actually give a fuck about me as a consumer.

All big institutions are prone to that kind of behavior. After a while each customer becomes just an anonymous statistic that you don't have to give a crap about. The nice thing about capitalism and freedom of choice is that that other smaller provider exists at all. That being said what should be done about that problem of yours? Should the big company be forced to sell you their products on your terms? If I owned that larger company I would sooner burn it than have the government regulate in minute detail how and on what terms I sell stuff that I have produced.

[Sleep]

hello jorb im just saying hi because you have been such a gentlemen this year.
and saying hi is also a way to being a gentlemen.

But seriously,how did this turn from a silly games economic fight to a giant life economic fight.
Our village will start using coins as a gift for doing good deeds and there will be a vending machine for all of that C: