Removing tradeable sub tokens and hats

[Audiosmurf]

Yea I don't think thats happening.
You'll have to make it a lot more appealing to the devs and players for your idea to be seriously considered.

If they did do your idea it will just be a repeat of legacy server that has no players.
You think you want it but you don't.

Yeah I get that you wanna keep your sub tokens man. But if you at this point can't contribute anything outside of "na not happening" then it's better not to.

I mean, he's got a point and it's the same as mine. You can't totally turn an "economic system" on its head overnight without it exploding. I just think if they were doing short expedition servers like Salem, a "no tokens" server would be cute. The point about RMT is valid, but also like, flat-out ignorable in the same way the devs mostly ignore bots, because RMT is going to be a problem in every game forever no matter what anybody does.

The ultimate thing for me is just that sub token trading is simply dev-legitimized RMT and everyone knows that, which is embarrassing for the game as a whole.

[spiritualatom]

I mean, he's got a point and it's the same as mine. You can't totally turn an "economic system" on its head overnight without it exploding. I just think if they were doing short expedition servers like Salem, a "no tokens" server would be cute. The point about RMT is valid, but also like, flat-out ignorable in the same way the devs mostly ignore bots, because RMT is going to be a problem in every game forever no matter what anybody does.
The ultimate thing for me is just that sub token trading is simply dev-legitimized RMT and everyone knows that, which is embarrassing for the game as a whole.

Yeah I guess I'm coming from a similar viewpoint to what you're writing at the end there. That it's not a good look for the game.
If the solution is to make gradual changes away from the p2w instead of drastic ones, or to make a paralell server I'm behind it. But the core point has to be an acknowledgement that there is a deep problem with this monetization and a solution has to be found. A solution where devs are still compensated well but where the monetization isn't impacting the game world.

If you at this point now TP to the most popular market as a new player. The first thing that greets you there is a stall to trade in your sub token for 100 emerald, it speaks pretty clearly on their priorities.
With those 100 emerald a new player can buy;
mammoth armor pieces,
mine discoveries to go down to lvl 7 insta,
300q pickaxe

It's p2w, it's content skipping so how do we move away from that has to be like the main question.

[Dawidio123]

The ultimate thing for me is just that sub token trading is simply dev-legitimized RMT and everyone knows that, which is embarrassing for the game as a whole.

I mean, I don't think it's much different than a lot of other mmos that let you get a sub through ingame currency (wow tokens, runescape bonds, eve plex) and that's honestly arguably a good thing for the pay 2 play mmos such as haven to a large extent. Arguably it's one of the easiest mmos to grind for "gametime" in, you can upkeep yourself for a whole world with like a few hours of effort with 0 prerequisites like having a "maxxed" account equivalent.
Now, I do think the token economy is really fucking ugly and when a new player that has 0 saved up tokens sees some greedy scum demanding like 5 tokens for a tool they will go like what the fuck that's 40$ (which tbf it kinda is if we don't consider the rmt token price) for an ingame item that doesn't do that much for them.

[spiritualatom]

I think it's sad if we've gotten to a point where we're justifying real money trading in H&H by saying Activsion does it too. A big part of Havens appeal was being an antithesis to the AAA game industry. Where you have this small awesome indie duo just going its own way entirely. And now we are setting the bar here?

Like Haven is known even outside of its core audience for things like leather taking a long time to make and being an intricate process. Why was it made that way? Because real leather takes time and the system is some kind of attempt at a light simulation of leathermaking moreso than whats seen in your average MMO. That's the immersion that's being hurt by this RMT. Not because tokens break the game with the advantage gained but because it devalues the games own systems by making the fastest and most ideal way of progressing for smaller/new groups to fork out some real moneys and content skip.

[Audiosmurf]

I'd agree that "all the hottest slop merchants are doing it!" is a dreadful argument, and I've found this paradigm distasteful from the very first time I ever encountered it playing EVE. No one's talking about the cutesy "but you can sub for free teehee" stuff, the problem is the other thing you say. I've lived next to one retard by accident like 3 worlds in row, who delays starting by a month or two, and then just drops $250 or something on tokens as soon as he has a soaked palisade to buy merchant robes, high Q pickaxe, cauldron, anvil, hammer, etc.

Could I just knock him over and take it all? Sure, not my point, the same thing is true of EVE and this is ugly there too. The game already blatantly crosses the line into P2W with the bonuses from verification/sub, and all the token RMT just brings it to the point of absurdity.

[JohnBender]

I do not disagree with the sentiment. However, you have to address all the other ways that players are skipping content/taking shortcuts like botting. As long as that is allowed the token economy is more justified than Eve's Plex or whatever WoW uses.

[gravesmerch]

once a price goes up, it never goes down, so once tokens were unleashed it can't be contained anymore

best scenario is enrich the world so that players can distract themselves without worrying much about ql

[Audiosmurf]

Yeah, this is really the quandry, the genie literally cannot just be forced back into the bottle in a way that isn't disastrous.

[spiritualatom]

For sure a lot of considerations that would have to be made in changing this. And I*m not blind to remarks of sub token enjoyers and that they have invested in a commodity through real money or in-game work. So any changes to the main branch would have to be gradual and done in a smart way. But at the same time I think it would be even more harmful not to change anything or worse; go in a direction where more "trade" is incentivized through for example increased regionalisation of resources while no changes are made to sub tokens.

[loleznub]

Statistically speaking, there were more updates with good content when the game wasn't monetized, than after.