Of course this wouldn’t happen… I’ve said this in so many different threads, numerous times. Windsward and Everfall will ALWAYS be central trade/craft hubs- strictly due to the fact that all basic crafting materials (ie. green wood, iron, rawhide, and hemp) are right outside of the towns. If AGS wants to diversify and spread the player base amongst the towns then they would have to get rid of the pyramid crafting design.
1 Like
I disagree with this. A high level settlement can lose up to 5 upgrades after one invasion whereas a low level settlement will lose two.
There is a big penalty with no benefit for the border towns.
Ebonscale and mourningdale are geographically ideal for level 60 players and are a natural destination for high level characters who can get more herbs, silks and higher level ores at these locations
The issue isn’t about windsward everfall and brightwood being popular destinations . It’s about the other cities being artificially held back in development.
They should raise the level of everfall since it is no longer a starting City and give all cities the same penalty for lost invasions or make it cheaper in the high level settlement to upgrade.
These are issues not related to the linked trading post and things that can happen because there is a linked trading post
1 Like
the post I responded to, you say that they linked trading posts to spread crafting out.
I’m saying most crafting is centralized because thats where the tables are the most stable/high level.
the trading post is generally not a major factor in my crafting. Who has the tables I need is the first factor.
also territory standing effects things.
people weren’t really engaging in the multiple market economy, so it was overall not really adding anything to the game.
1 Like
No.
It’s due to the tremendous amount of bots.
Dont believe me?
Go to monarchs/everfall beaches… Theres bots in every direction you look… On ALL servers.
1 Like
Yep the fucking bots have utterly destroyed the mote market. AGS simply don’t give a shit about their bot problem…period.
1 Like
Linked trading posts were always going to reduce prices overall as linking them provided a more efficient market… which is different than deflation.
What is causing the reduction in prices “deflation” has zero to do with linked markets.
We are experiencing lower prices because the number of players playing keep dropping. Those that are left, have been forced to focus on either solo or “zerg” content as many 5 man group areas became unplayable. Solo players are gathering and crafting… Zerg is doing chest runs. These two activities are flooding the markets with resources, refining agents, and chest contents. Players (casual, pvp’rs etc…) who would normally purchase these goods have stopped playing for a variety of reasons.
Until player retention is fixed, server mergers occur… we are likely to continue to see prices drop.
If your crafting and city A and B have tier 5 crafting stations.
City has 50 to a 100 people constantly buying stuff.
City B has 10 to 20 people things constant.
Your most likely to craft and sell in city A because of a bigger market. Your only gonna goto city B if you believe someone would pay for same stuff at inflated cost.
Same goes for dropped gear… you gonna sell that tier 4 gear in eastburn? A lower tax settlement in Mourning dale or the large pop place at windsword/everfall
In the old system you aren’t going in to mourningdale.
Yes alot of people made. Good plat selling stuff in low traffic areas to people who bought for convenience.
But that market was restrictive and didn’t encourage. Trade traffic like the linked system does
It the bots that lower the price on alot of items
2 Likes
Firstly, you are spouting out info without having any statistical data for luck figures.
To get it out of the way obviously the prices were going to fall, but they did it to boost revenues in non-central non-starter zones that make all the money in the world by allowing people to buy and trade from anywhere. My server the blokes that run Weavers lowered their taxes to the absolute lowest threshold so people would make higher gold sales and buys from their turf to escape higher taxes that might even be reasonable to make more gold for themselves.
Secondly trophies don’t give more than 1.5% to gathering luck for a single fully upgraded trophy. The loot table is 100,000 mate, that is a six figure number mate.
1500/100,000=1.5%=you are bad at math or buy into what some bullshit some boar killing moron was selling on Reddit.
Are more rare drops coming out, maybe, 10% for none gathering resources isn’t breaking the game. The price comes down on all things the longer the game is played because more supply and less demand, you are obviously not from a company that has owned a major province, the ones that bankrolled people’s crafting sets, trophies and skills and did so with your tax gold, you are some insignificant player that wants to whine because you finally got a drop and it wasn’t for what you paid for it or what you saw it sell for.
More people feel an incentive to go farm too with this circumventing the need for entire gathering sets.
I do not flag for gathering luck, all of my gathering sets without food ranger 43-45% and that is sufficient for me to gather days worth of legendary mats in as little as six hours of straight farming. Food only give an extra 2% to clear that one up for you. Could I farm it faster with an extra 30% gathering luck maybe, it then I get the pleasure of dealing with every fuck that comes along and I wouldn’t trust a fight in my logging or harvesting set and my build, but at the other time watching flagged people get maybe 75% gathering luck on zero nodes because I go there first is equally as appealing, more so when they are busy fighting others. Everything in this game deflates in value as it goes, more people skill up, more people gather, more people get lucky, some people are willing to risk death for a carrot, but here you are crying over it all.
Adderstone’s are a bad example due to a lot of recent changes involving luck.
Here’s a better one:
Anyone with a brain and like…any meaningful amount of time playing an MMO knew this was going to happen. Legit people just standing around waiting on OPR to pop while they play the market from a centralized point.
These developers are morons, flat out, whoever is in charge of final decisions at the New World studio killed this game, nobody else.
Advertising a unique economy as one of the key facets of your game and removing it 2 months into release, along with all the horrible things going on elsewhere in the game. They don’t deserve to be employed.
2 Likes
wtf? how do you drop this, 5g seems overkill lmao
They were 150 - 400 before the markets merged. That screen shot was taken on November 21st.
My server has them for 75g each at the moment.
Why would people want to go to other areas is the question.
Most players converge to a central location in a lot of games that have cities.
Realistically it’s easier to craft/gather and trade in lower lvl areas because resources are plentiful and don’t offer much resistance as far as mobs go.
An example of a higher lvl hub was dalaran in World of warcraft. There were vendors you had to access and you could do dungeons from ect.
I’m this game in particular I don’t see a reason to be in ebonscale. Linked markets aren’t causing prices to go down but it’s easier to obtain because of pvp luck and bots.
On my server which we don’t have many bots and is very low pop silvers are 500G a piece and was 6-700G a piece before the patch.
Edit: markets stabilize all the time around Central markets and I really believe the people that are blaming it solely on linked markets never played a game with a stable player base and economy.
1 Like
Linked markets are good for dead servers. It’s a good stopgap measure to slow the decay on those servers (as people get frustrated by lack of items on market). However they need to be unlinked prior to server merges. The moment population rebounds, the linked markets just make central cities with convenient layouts (EF and WW) even more popular.
MD has a great layout, but is untenable without a house due to Azoth costs. Cities with agonizing layouts, like MB, FL and Restless, are always going to suffer without some other incentive. Reek is also terrible, but a lot of people set recall here if it isn’t in GC or SM.
For the merge, they need to unlink markets and then allow a one-time housing refund - as in, be able to “sell” your houses at cost in order to move to another city. This will allow people to move to other territories more easily. Otherwise, all the tax changes, market changes, or etc in the world aren’t going to do anything if people have already established their houses and trophies in EF and WW, which many have.
They also need to remove or greatly increase cap on Azoth, reduce Azoth travel costs by half, and make it so that doing corruption portals actually can prevent invasions or reduce invasion waves. All those changes would make territory ownership in outlying territories a lot more palatable.
Only thing i can think of would be to limit the amount of crafting stations each town could upgrade so that no single settlement could have t5 of everything. if WW was only able to max the outfitting station and EF was the Forge then Brightwood could do Alchemy and MB the cooking place, etc. Towns could then coordinate what buff they run to the station they upgraded. This would force players to spread across the map for crafting which would lead to them also buying houses in that town.
2 Likes
Regardless of why they implemented the effect is not what they thought.
Sure people throw the odd bit of loot on a random AH now rather than take it back to a main trade centre and yes if a remote settlement maintains a particular trade at level V people may move their crafting there - BUT the main effect is people can now do almost all their crafting at one place and not move it around to list it at different spots- and that “one place” usually is Windsward or Everfall.
The effect of this change is the opposite of what they expected.
1 Like
Like most things, it’s not just one reason. I think you’re right about lack of population. I also think people have a point about luck playing a factor. BUT, at the same time, linking the Trading Posts, imo, was the biggest factor by far and most of us could predict it. But, even if it’s not the biggest reason, it’s still one of the many reasons, and it was a bad decision. It just made something that was already bad even worse.
The worst part, is there are so many people that actually think this is a good idea, AGS will never revert it back to the way it should be. People would be really mad about it on the forums. The anti-link people like myself are just sitting back saying “I told you so,” but not really raising a ruckus like people would if they changed it back. Unfortunately, it’s just a really bad decision that is going to have a negative impact on the economy forever.
It was a good idea… and linked storage sheds need to happen as well… more efficient markets are never a negative for the average person…lack of demand causes “deflation”, not more efficient markets… there is a difference.
Yes, because there’s a bigger market which increases the lack of demand. Therefore, deflation.