Spiral Knights - Crown sinks needed, solutions wanted:

Crown sinks needed, solutions wanted:

15 replies [Last post]

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 10:56

Daystar

Legacy Username

OK so the topic on everyone's mind now is CE's rocketskying price. I don't have an easy solution for the problem of market manipulation: that's something OOO is going to have to really look at and figure out how they want to handle it for themselves. It brings to mind a lot of economic parallels to "the real world" and thus people are always going to be influenced by their opinion for how much value we should place in a "free market," and whether or not protective regulation needs to exist.

*nips soapboxing in the bud* Onto the idea I DO want to talk about: Crown sinks. This game needs them, and there's a perfect want to go with that need:

-UV recrafting.

Even as a new player who just found out about UVs, the obvious questions were asked in my mind. The idea that you could reach 5* without getting a UV, and were stuck with it unless you started from scratch, seemed just silly. It gives players at end-game nothing to look forward to: either they have the UV from a low level item they want and upgraded it, or they didn't.

So the simplest of solutions that comes to mind is that you can recraft a 5* item, maybe only once it reaches level 5 or 10, to give it a chance of getting a UV, OR if it already has a UV, give it a chance at increasing the value of its UV (Medium to High, say).

Here's the clincher though: THIS NEEDS TO COST CROWNS. It CANNOT cost energy, or it will have no impact on the market and crowns will be even further devalued.

Something like 50k crowns for the chance at a UV, and maybe 100k for a chance to upgrade your UV, + the materials needed to craft it in the first place (adding another much needed sink for mats) would make this a process mainly for end-game players to have something to save up for and look forward to. Recrafting until you get the right UV, or upgrading to try and maximize your UV will be the major crowns sink for people who have crafted all their 5* gear.

And yes, this will still increase the amount of energy bought, for the simple reason that not everyone likes to spend the tons of time it will take to get the money needed for this. They will instead pay for more energy and sell that to players to make the crowns they need to recraft.

-Aesthetic Shift

Another thing many people want is the ability to change their "color theme." Most people chose their color before they really understood that it would be the one that stuck to all their gear for the rest of the game, and would now like to change it. Additionally there could be costumes in a wide price range (from about 10,000 to 1,000,000 crowns per item). As in Puzzle Pirates, these purely decorative outfits could crumble after some number of days, so costume wearers would need to rebuy occasionally to remain costumed. The dusting mechanic would also differentiate crown costumes from the promotional regalia that lasts forever.

No matter how much this service costs (and to be meaningful it needs to be at least in the tens of thousands) it has to be done in crowns, or once again the market becomes more lopsided than it already is.

Comments, questions, concerns, criticisms?

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 13:47

Algol-Sixty

I do think this is a good

I do think this is a good idea. It is basically a lottery and could be a huge crown sink.

I would suggest that instead of only 5* items being allowed to be recrafted with a new UV, that any *bound* item can be recrafted. There shouldn't be any discount for recrafting a 2* item over a 5* one, but some items don't go to 5* and some players may want to try for UVs before they tap out the top end.

As far as the price, I don' think it should be too high, you want it to be an impulse item. Right now, it appears that you have about a 10% chance of getting a UV. If it cost 50k crowns to recraft, on average it would cost 500k crowns (10k CE) per UV which is far higher than UV items are selling for. It would be better to have a 10k crown fee and a reduced (5%?) chance of getting a UV, which would average about 4k CE per UV. That is still higher than UVs currently sell for, but I think people will try it quite often. After a couple of runs, people have 30k crowns and will think: "I don't have anything else to do, let's try getting a UV!" Of course, when they decide they really want that new gun they saw someone use, they won't have as many crowns, but they can get more by selling some CE.

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 14:31

Icee

No energy-free weapon buffs, but decorate!

I prefer crown sinks that aren't tied to weaponry. Things that influence how you play the game should be tied to the cash currency, but there is plenty of room for things that don't influence how you play.

I still want costumes, in a wide price range (from about 1,000 to 1,000,000 crowns per item). As in Puzzle Pirates, these purely decorative outfits could crumble after some number of days, so costume wearers would need to rebuy occasionally to remain costumed. The dusting mechanic would also differentiate crown costumes from the promotional regalia that lasts forever.

Along with costumes, I want portraits. I bought a slime slasher just because it looks cool, but I don't use it so no one sees it. Let me take a portrait with it and show that off on a tab when people inspect me.

Guild hall furniture could be a crown sink, too. Those empty spaces just beg for decoration, and unlike a weapon UV, guild hall decorations don't make you better at killing monsters.

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 17:03

Daystar

Legacy Username

Response

@wrs1864:

The problem with letting any bound item be recrafted is that you will see the same thing that happens now: people will just acquire the cheapest item in the evolutionary line, and recraft that over and over until they get the UV they want, then upgrade it normally. If you were to keep the price the same regardless, it still wouldn't require the same mats, and making a low * item recrafting require the 5* mats is unworkable (different evolutionary lines having different mats).

Perhaps they could make it so that 4* gear can also have it done ONLY if there is no 5* advancement, but the simpler solution in my mind is to just make sure every piece of gear has a 5* evolution. They should be doing this eventually anyway.

@Icee:

If all the meaningful buffs are tied to Energy and not Crowns, then the game becomes "F2P, P2W" (Free to play, Pay to win) which is a model that many gamers despise. Given a reasonable time investment, a free player can still reach the crowns needed to upgrade their gear if it uses crowns. If it uses energy, then the cost of energy rises even more, and it becomes all but impossible for free players to ever catch up to the privileged payers. In this model, those who buy energy will still have a significant advantage.

That said, I did add your appeal for more aesthetic services to the OP :)

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 17:54

Icee

There is no way to "win" SK.

"If all the meaningful buffs are tied to Energy and not Crowns, then the game becomes "F2P, P2W" (Free to play, Pay to win)"

I understand why you think that, but there is evidence that this is not true as long as the CE exchange exists with reasonable exchange prices.

In Puzzle Pirates (sorry to keep referencing that game, but it's the only one with a similar exchange that I have played), most weapons require doubloons (the pay currency) to purchase, all ships require doubloons to purchase (some over $20 worth for a single ship), and even cosmetic things like houses, furniture, and portraits may cost $5-$130 worth of doubloons each. Still there are plenty of free-to-play players in that game who have several ships, top-notch weapons, and furnished houses.

The problem with allowing people to look for UVs with crowns only is that it will lower the amount of CE sunk. For business reasons, OOO isn't going to make that change. Every CE spent is about 3 cents revenue. Eliminating the farming of 2* gear for UVs will lower the amount of CE sunk, and will thus lower revenues. Adding new, crown-only items will not negatively impact the amount of CE spent on other things, so it will not hurt revenue.

Crown sinks for cosmetic items will lower the CE exchange rate because the players who want to trade their money for the free-to-play players' time will sell CE for crowns to get the fancy costumes, portraits, and furniture that will let them show off their wealth. This will allow free-to-play players to get their 5* gear more easily, pay for more elevators, and even take a few extra shots at UVs at the 2* level before leveling up their gear. It's a win for free players, who will be able to buy CE for crowns more easily, a win for paying players, who have fun new stuff to buy, and a win for OOO, who make all of their players happy without hurting their own revenues.

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 20:26

Algol-Sixty

The problem with letting any

It wouldn't matter when you recraft for the UV as long as the cost is the same. Having recrafting be a pure crown sink, at a price of around one or two tier runs, you make it an impulse buy. This is a critical aspect of lotteries, you don't want people to have to think about whether something is really worth it or not, or just how many times they have tried to get the UV they want.

Also please note that the cost of getting a UV via recrafting is, with both of our suggested prices, significantly higher than the current method of crafting many 1*/2* ones to get a UV. Recrafting is taking advantage of the common trend of people buying non-UV stuff first, then they get enough crowns to want something better they go for UV versions. Instead of throwing out their current 3*/4*/5* item, they just try recrafting a few times. Then a few more times. And, before you know it, they have sunk a lot of crowns.

As far as recrafting needing materials, I think it would be best to significantly increase the amount of low materials on all the recipes (and to a less extent medium/high materials too).

The problem with allowing people to look for UVs with crowns only is that it will lower the amount of CE sunk.

I'm not certain how much CE is used to farm UVs, I suspect a great deal of it is done using mist energy with alt armies.

If you get enough crown sinks, you will change the mindset from "I'm buying CE because I need CE" to "I'm buying CE because I need crowns". Until this point is reached, CE will always seem to be an annoyance.

And, yes, the puzzle pirates economy is much better thought out. There are huge PoE (crown) sinks in the form of items that dust after a period of use and all the material cost a significant amount of PoE (crowns) that is completely sunk. Sadly, I don't think OOO can change spiral knights to match the puzzle pirates model, it would be too big of a shock. Still, things can be improved by adding a lot of large crown sinks.

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 21:46

Icee

$2.50 is still revenue

Maybe the 2* crafting here is done with alt armies, but that's a slow process. Considering you can make back most of the energy in the auction house on non-UV items, and a single UV item can yield huge profits, I'm pretty sure there are people out there using CE to farm UVs. Also, those alts cost $2.50 each now that the 75 cent payment option is gone. It doesn't sound like a lot, but $2.50 is better than $0 for a player who wants extra shots at UVs.

Also, if the auction house offerings are any indication, people are also trying to find UVs on things that start at 3* or higher. I see plenty of shell shields, chroma masks, angelic raiments, and graviton bombs for sale, so people are spending 200+ energy (100+ CE) per craft looking for UVs.

Mon, 06/06/2011 - 01:21

Daystar

Legacy Username

@Icee

"I understand why you think that, but there is evidence that this is not true as long as the CE exchange exists with reasonable exchange prices. "

That's the whole point of this. You're still not grasping that increasing crown sinks also lowers the cost of CE. Making it cost CE will not lower the price of crowns. At all. People will buy CE and use it directly: no more will enter the market, and crowns will have LESS value than they do now, making actually playing this game have less meaning. Crowns cost time: energy costs money. F2P players have one, P2P have the other. Both need to be valued in this game, or the model does not work.

"The problem with allowing people to look for UVs with crowns only is that it will lower the amount of CE sunk. For business reasons, OOO isn't going to make that change."

CE does not need more sinks. That is part of why there is such a massive imbalance between the two currencies. OOO doesn't need CE sinks for people to buy CE: players will buy it anyway to sell to others for crowns. Do you think the price of CE went down after the AH because people *stopped* buying CE? Not at all: they needed crowns to use the AH, so more and more people started buying and selling the CE for quick crowns to use. That's what crown sinks do in the game that so badly need them.

"Also, if the auction house offerings are any indication, people are also trying to find UVs on things that start at 3* or higher. I see plenty of shell shields, chroma masks, angelic raiments, and graviton bombs for sale, so people are spending 200+ energy (100+ CE) per craft looking for UVs."

Actually, no. Almost all of those 3* items with UVs are either a) gear that only starts at 3*, or b) gear that someone upgrades from 2* that gets a UV, and they decide to sell it instead of wearing it themself. Remember that only 4* and 5* bind to the crafter. There is absolutely no economic advantage to crafting up to 3* to look for a UV. There should be: it would be neat if the UV chance increased the higher the * craft. But mass-producing 2* is the best way to go. Compare any similar UV on a 2* and 3* piece, and you'll see that the price difference is usually the same as the cost of getting it there: rarely even the price of the recipe. The UV is what people pay for, not the 3* rather than the 2*.

Mon, 06/06/2011 - 04:40

Algol-Sixty

As someone who is looking for

As someone who is looking for UVs on a line that starts on 3*, I assure you that I have an account that 100% of the mist goes to crafting and those 3* items don't sell that quickly. Paid accounts aren't the only way to get an alt army either.

The thing about recrafting for UVs is that UVs are already a lottery of sorts, so having recrafting be a lottery fits. Recrafting alone won't bring the demand for crowns up enough that most people buy CE to get crowns, there needs to be a lot of other crown sinks. It is a good start though.

Mon, 06/06/2011 - 20:00

Icee

No recrafting, no revenue shrinking

I don't like the idea of recrafting at all. I'm not saying to charge CE for it. I'm saying don't reroll for UVs on existing items at all and instead find other completely cosmetic ways to introduce crown sinks that won't interfere with revenue streams.

Assuming you don't have your own workstation cluster in your home, paid accounts are the only way to get separate mist tanks on all of your alts. You reference "alt armies" as if this is Puzzle Pirates where all you have to do is tip over 5 doubloons for a labor badge. But these accounts aren't treated the same way - they all share mist unless you own a heck of a lot of computers or you pay OOO to get separate mist tanks.

3* items cost 200 energy to make, so even using alts you're using 100 CE each time you try for a UV. So you admit that you want to take that CE sink away from OOO, at a cost to OOO of about 25 cents per "lottery" try for you. If you make a 3* item every day, that's $7.50 per month you would take out of OOO's pocket with this proposal.

I'm all for new crown sinks, but OOO would have to be daft to choose one that also reduces CE sinking. Let's make proposals that are more mutually beneficial for players and Ringers.

Mon, 06/06/2011 - 20:35

#10

Daystar

Legacy Username

@Icee

"I don't like the idea of recrafting at all."

Well, this is a completely different argument then, one I couldn't disagree with you less on. I'm not sure I follow your logic on this, really. You're arguing for a system that is unintuitive, unfair to the average player, and rewards mindless, mass alt crafting that floods the market with cheap and useless items... all because it's the status quo?

"Let's make proposals that are more mutually beneficial for players and Ringers."

I've said thrice now that this would boost CE sales, because people at end game would still have something to spend it on: energy to sell for the crowns needed for the recrafting sinks and aesthetic sinks.

Please stop Fox-News-ing my points. Either respond with a logical reason this wouldn't be true, or move on to another topic. Ignoring me and repeating your contention like I didn't say anything just makes you look bad, and you don't prove a point by repeating it over and over.

Mon, 06/06/2011 - 20:56

#11

Icee

Crazy like a Fox News

I am giving you reasons that you are wrong about the energy sinks; you are just ignoring them or perhaps failing to understand.

Selling CE for crowns is not a sink, it is a transfer from one player to another. Also, end-game players don't need to sell CE for crowns. They make lots of crowns in the dungeons and have nothing to spend them on, so rather than buy CE to find UVs for their 5* gear, they will simply use the now useless crowns that they earn in the dungeons.

Right now, those same end-game players who want UVs need to craft items using materials and energy. Sure, they'll tend toward 2 or 3* items to search for UVs, but once they find the UV they want, they have to craft it up all the way to 5*, sinking over 1000 CE on the way. That's $3. Your proposal would lower that to $0, because it would eliminate all of that crafting.

Now, I don't necessarily love that people have to craft a bunch of low-level items to get a UV, but although it's inelegant, it's not really problematic, either. I don't see it hurting the game that players can get into tier 2 with cheap items from the auction house. If a feature were developed to add a UV to existing items, I'd much rather it be a temporary trinket-like item, made by crafting or purchased with spark tokens, rather than a permanent UV addition to the item.

Mon, 06/06/2011 - 21:44

#12

Daystar

Legacy Username

They do that NOW because they

They do that NOW because they have NOTHING TO SPEND CROWNS ON. With a crown sink that benefits them, they would be using the crowns they have, and when those run out, buying and selling CE, which is beneficial to both OOO and new players. It's the same thing that happened when the AH came online.

An energy sink is ONLY AN ENERGY SINK.

A crown sink is BOTH A CROWN SINK AND AN ENERGY SINK.

You clearly don't understand this, and I can't explain it any simpler. You're ignoring the precedent that's been going on in this game for months: people buy energy and sell it for crowns if they have a use for crowns OR energy.

The point is to reduce the cost of energy, because it's too high without a crown sink.

This would create a crown sink EVERYONE would use, even endgame players, repeatedly.

It would make crowns valuable at any level.

It would make buying CE for crowns useful at any level.

Mass crafting is done with Mist from alts. It is a one-time only charge that is not sustainable, and does nothing to lower the cost of energy, and thus does nothing to entice new players to stick with the game.

You have yet to refute any of these points.

Tue, 06/07/2011 - 04:24

#13

Algol-Sixty

An energy sink is ONLY AN

An energy sink is ONLY AN ENERGY SINK.

A crown sink is BOTH A CROWN SINK AND AN ENERGY SINK.

Exactly.

And: A material sink is not only a material sink, but certainly an energy sink and probably a crown sink also (via AH fees).

Now, since you can use free ME to run gates, not just CE, a 6k crown sink is not a 100CE sink, it needs to be larger than 6k cr. How much larger is hard to say. However, both my suggest price of recrafting and daystar's price are SIGNIFICANTLY larger than what it currently costs to craft even a 3* UV.

The goal here is that if crowns become desirable (right now, they are just a byproduct), free players will use more CE to run gates in order to get the desired crown. I am not trying to take real money out of OOO's pocket, I'm trying to add to it. Again, this proposal alone is not enough of a crown sink to change the mindset from "I'm buying CE with RL money because I want CE" to "I'm buying CE with RL money because I want crowns", but I think it is a good idea that would sink a huge amount of crowns from higher end players.

Selling CE for crowns is not a sink

It most certainly is a 2% crown sink.

Assuming you don't have your own workstation cluster in your home, paid accounts are the only way to get separate mist tanks on all of your alts.

No, it is not the only way. Worse, it only takes a few players to figure any of quite a few way for there to be a significant impact on the game, such as....

Here is the rub: I'm selling those items I'm crafting, they aren't being sunk. The people buying them would have been much less likely to have used as much mist energy to craft the items themselves than a dedicated seller such as myself. The current UV farming method is reducing the CE used, and it takes only a small number of sellers with lot of free ME to flood the market.

In short, you are being penny wise and pound foolish. Indirect CE sinks are far better for the game since they feel much less like you are being nickeled and dimed to death. I have absolutely zero problems with the prices of recrafting (or other mat/crown sinks) being adjusted so that the overall CE sunk is larger than the direct CE sinks are now.

Tue, 06/07/2011 - 08:19

#14

Icee

Sinks and Toilets

"An energy sink is ONLY AN ENERGY SINK.

A crown sink is BOTH A CROWN SINK AND AN ENERGY SINK.

Exactly."

No, not exactly. A thing that removes crowns from the game is a crown sink. A think that removes energy is an energy sink. A thing may do both (crafting requires crowns and energy), but something that only directly does one isn't the other just because it would suit your argument. You claim that a crown sink is an energy sink because... I'm sorry, I still can't figure out where the energy is being sunk, especially not the 1000 CE to make up for recrafting the 5* item from a UV 2* item.

Yes, the CE exchange is a crown sink. It's not an energy sink, though, which was my point. Selling energy on the exchange sinks some crowns, but sinks no energy. It may allow a free player to more easily sink energy on other things, which is why I agreed that we could use some more crown sinks, but the act of selling CE on the exchange does not directly sink any energy.

"Here is the rub: I'm selling those items I'm crafting, they aren't being sunk. The people buying them would have been much less likely to have used as much mist energy to craft the items themselves than a dedicated seller such as myself. The current UV farming method is reducing the CE used, and it takes only a small number of sellers with lot of free ME to flood the market."

This is an awfully speculative claim. Your AH customers may have used more than 100 CE to make their 3* item, or they may have waited until a day they couldn't play in the dungeons to make their gear, or they may have not used that 3* gear and tried fewer lines of gear in general because they couldn't afford to try stuff without depressed AH prices from UV farmers like you. There are many possible scenarios.

If what you say is true, though, and alts using mist energy are drastically lowering the CE that would be sunk, then the fix is to disable the use of mist energy for crafting, or perhaps disable it for crafting the second time a recipe is used, to cut down on this alt-craft-farming that you say is so problematic. I don't actually want that, but if you've identified a real problem, that is the real solution.

"No, [having multiple computers] is not the only way [to get an alt army with mist energy]. Worse, it only takes a few players to figure any of quite a few way for there to be a significant impact on the game, such as...."

If using multiple computers and paying for alt accounts aren't the only ways to get free mist energy on multiple accounts, then you have found a pretty horrible exploit. I'm sure you reported it and didn't abuse it, so OOO can close the loophole soon.

Tue, 06/07/2011 - 10:07

#15

Algol-Sixty

A thing that removes crowns

A thing that removes crowns from the game is a crown sink. A think that removes energy is an energy sink. A thing may do both (crafting requires crowns and energy), but something that only directly does one isn't the other just because it would suit your argument. You claim that a crown sink is an energy sink because... I'm sorry, I still can't figure out where the energy is being sunk,

You can not fountain crowns into the game without sinking energy in the elevators. (Compared with puzzle pirates, a PoE sink is not a dub sink because you can get PoE fountained into the game without sinking dubs.)

I have argued in the past that ME should not be usable for crafting (or buying weapon/trinket upgrades, or anything else that requires very little time). The idea of letting ME be used once per recipe is a good idea though, and a good compromise.

especially not the 1000 CE to make up for recrafting the 5* item from a UV 2* item.

First, a minor point, but recrafting doesn't get around the crafting process from 2* items up to 5*. At the proposed prices to try recrafting, you would be stupid to recraft a 2* or 3* item since it costs so much more than just making a new item. However, I could easily see people rolling the dice a few times on 4* items, saving 700CE of that 1000CE you mentioned. Again, my goal of recrafting is to have OOO capture the market of people who would sink a "small" amount of crowns per chance to get a UV who wouldn't be willing to start over from scratch with a new 2* item. People who are playing games are much more open to impulse buying, and recrafting could be a very attractive impulse buy.

As far as exactly how many crowns need to be sunk to make up for CE, I don't have an obvious answer. A T2 run through to the JK will net you about 8k crowns for 70 energy (skipping the JK itself), an average of about 114cr per energy. Clearly, a lot of that energy will be ME and not CE, what percentage is CE is not something I can really even guess at, but OOO will probably know. Say it is 50% CE, then sinking about 228cr effectively sinks 1CE, so to sink 1000CE you would need to sink around 228k crowns. Adjust the numbers according to what the real percentage is, and there you go.

Now, I strongly suspect that the higher the cr<->CE exchange rate goes, the more people will restrict themselves to using ME to run gates. If you make crowns more valuable, thereby lowering the cr<->CE exchange rate, OOO will likely see even more CE sunk than the initial percentage would indicate. If 100CE cost only 2k crowns, people would play all day on CE, but that obviously means that crowns would have to be very highly desired. if 100CE costs 8k crowns, then using ME instead of CE saves you as much as you can earn on a JK run, even if you don't have T2 access yet.

I have been vague about the methods so that people without a clue have to at least work hard enough to get a clue, but there is nothing that OOO can do to close the loopholes, and I'm sure that the loopholes are obvious to the developers. They are basically the same things that people use to get around bans, and i'm sure you have know pirates, if not knights, who have done that many times. These kind of techniques are not very useful for people playing in the clockworkds, but if all you are doing is crafting an item once per day and then putting up an auction, well, that is quite workable.

Search

Crown sinks needed, solutions wanted: