Re: AFK Rare Gathering Not Era-Accurate
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:45 pm
I wasn't aware that afk macroing was legal here. It was illegal over there.Except then you are also jailing poeple AFK macroing skills or counts also.......
A forum for discussion of Second Age UO Shard
http://forums.uosecondage.com/
I wasn't aware that afk macroing was legal here. It was illegal over there.Except then you are also jailing poeple AFK macroing skills or counts also.......
Code: Select all
With Razor being legal, the solution would have to come from a mechanic involving picking up/stealing the item on the server side. Maybe something like randomizing the spawn within the sub-region, thus keeping the item spawn in the same general vicinity & requiring more "hands-on" searching than what a script/macro would allow.
Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that they DO have a value. Just because that value is not determined by a line of code, does not make them worthless.Kaivan wrote:While I agree that this is an issue we should be working on mainly for mechanical accuracy reasons, I would like to note that collecting rares is not defined as AFK resource gathering. They cannot be sold to a vendor, nor can they be crafted once gathered and sold in the same way. The only thing that these items enable is the transfer of wealth between players, which is strictly controlled by the desire and willingness of players to pay for such items.
Light Shade wrote:Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that they DO have a value. Just because that value is not determined by a line of code, does not make them worthless.Kaivan wrote:While I agree that this is an issue we should be working on mainly for mechanical accuracy reasons, I would like to note that collecting rares is not defined as AFK resource gathering. They cannot be sold to a vendor, nor can they be crafted once gathered and sold in the same way. The only thing that these items enable is the transfer of wealth between players, which is strictly controlled by the desire and willingness of players to pay for such items.
In real life, gold has been used for currency for thousands of years. Its just a lump of metal similar to copper or aluminum. It's rarity is a matter of debate. One thing is certain. It IS worth money for the same exact reason that other things are worth money. They have a demand for the item.
You base your premise around what can and cannot be sold to a vendor, but this is flawed logic at best. To say that one item has "value" based off of Vendor code while another does not completely ignores the fact that there is SOME value to those items. There is SOME gain for not playing the game, regardless of who determines that gain.
In order to accept your premise, you have to assume that players think these items are worthless. We all know that this is not true, so it throws your argument out the window. Sure, it doesn't "create" wealth in the sense of adding "gold" to the economy, but it ignores that there IS a value to said item.
In the end, they are profiting by NOT playing the game.
Players are punished that actually play the game attended.
This is simply an illogical gameplay policy for this shard.
-L/S
P.S. I saw this discusion in IRC overnight and felt the need to re-iterate how incredibly devoid of common sense this all is.
This is actually doable with the spawning system.Hoots wrote:I would think an easy fix could be to not have rares spawn with players on screen. Once a timer is ready to spawn it wont spawn until no players are on screen? If something like 30mins passes without being able to spawn the rare goes into "random spawn" where it will try to spawn every x minutes or x hours until no players are on screen?
This. I care not for rares, but somehow what Stranger said makes much more sense to me than this nice little 'oh, we're all for the good of the people!' web Light Shade and Co are trying to spin here. Just my two cents. Peace out.Stranger wrote:No offense but, never saw you complain about it until your guide on how to do it was made public, and you no longer had all the spoils to yourself. It would have been in the best interest of the shard for you not to have farmed those massive amounts of rares using said methods. I find it a bit ironic that you have exploited this method for quite sometime, but now that its out for everyone to use you no longer want it to be allowed.
It seems like you're saying that because other players can control how much gold/resources the AFK rare gatherers are profiting via their AFK macro, this is acceptable? Because in some kind of insane thought-experiment scenario, that number could theoretically be zero?Kaivan wrote:While I agree that this is an issue we should be working on mainly for mechanical accuracy reasons, I would like to note that collecting rares is not defined as AFK resource gathering. They cannot be sold to a vendor, nor can they be crafted once gathered and sold in the same way. The only thing that these items enable is the transfer of wealth between players, which is strictly controlled by the desire and willingness of players to pay for such items.
Aside from the fact that your comment is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand...221396056 wrote:This. I care not for rares, but somehow what Stranger said makes much more sense to me than this nice little 'oh, we're all for the good of the people!' web Light Shade and Co are trying to spin here. Just my two cents. Peace out.
You do know that I gave everything I had in this game away to completely random players, correct?221396056 wrote:'oh, we're all for the good of the people!'
The fact that something has value, and the fact that something creates new value are separate issues. One facilitates the shift of value, the other creates it out of thin air.Light Shade wrote:Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that they DO have a value. Just because that value is not determined by a line of code, does not make them worthless.
Finite commodities have value based on their store of wealth, inability to be cheaply reproduced (look at aluminum as a great example), and their use in producing things that could not be produced without it. They do not create wealth, merely store it relative to other forms of value storage.Light Shade wrote:In real life, gold has been used for currency for thousands of years. Its just a lump of metal similar to copper or aluminum. It's rarity is a matter of debate. One thing is certain. It IS worth money for the same exact reason that other things are worth money. They have a demand for the item.
The premise is based off of what can be sold to a vendor, because that sale creates value out of thin air. The fact that rares don't lose their value is simply an inherent relationship between demand, low to non-existent increase in availability of the rare, and the relatively fast increase in the availability of other items of value.Light Shade wrote:You base your premise around what can and cannot be sold to a vendor, but this is flawed logic at best. To say that one item has "value" based off of Vendor code while another does not completely ignores the fact that there is SOME value to those items. There is SOME gain for not playing the game, regardless of who determines that gain.
The intent is to prevent the creation of wealth out of thin air, which a rare does not do. You cannot sell it to a vendor to increase the total amount of gold available, and thus add value to the game. Rares only facilitate the transfer of wealth.Mikel123 wrote:It seems like you're saying that because other players can control how much gold/resources the AFK rare gatherers are profiting via their AFK macro, this is acceptable? Because in some kind of insane thought-experiment scenario, that number could theoretically be zero?
Again, this is apples to oranges. The value of labor is applicable when the labor produces something that couldn't be produced without the labor (i.e. refined metals). The value for rares is in their store of value, which is entirely driven by player demand, since they have no use elsewhere.Mikel123 wrote:There is no market or economic system, in-game or otherwise, in which labor is valued at zero. When I buy shackles from someone, I'm not buying shackles. They're freely available. I'm paying for the labor and technical knowledge which was used in obtaining them. And this is always going to be some amount greater than zero.
The rare spawns were on the server starting at or near day 1, well before a defined scope or objective had been formalized for UOSA. Since then, they have remained virtually untouched, and at this point, when we do address the rare spawns, it will be with the intent of making it as accurate as possible.Mikel123 wrote:As for the desire to obtain the shackles in the first place... by spending time and effort to put them into this shard, you are operating under the assumption that someone on this shard will spend time and effort to obtain them. (Otherwise, you/Derrick would spend that time implementing something else that actually would get utilized). Player time and effort has an opportunity cost, which can be measured (among other ways) in terms of the amount of gold pieces that one could have obtained during that time with that effort if they hadn't decided to get the rares instead.
I have to assume that if Derrick or you thought it was remotely possible that no one would ever want a single spawning rare... that no one would ever spend opportunity cost gold pieces to get a rare instead... that there are other things you could have worked on for this shard instead of a rare system that had zero value. Simply by implementing it, you are acknowledging that players would at some point spend some time (and thus opportunity cost gold pieces) to obtain them. And thus, AFK rare gathering is indeed equivalent to AFK gold gathering.
To start off, i agree that AFK rare gathering makes no sense. I actually sent Derrick some PM in regards to afk gathers around ~2009 when i last played, and i think he even popped into game once so i could show him first hand... This long before super detailed razor scripts were the norm (or at least made public....)Mikel123 wrote:I guess I fail to see why value created by player demand is different than value created by NPCs.
If you know, with certainty, that I can sell a katana I found on an orc for 33gp to an NPC... and you know, with certainty, that I can sell shackles I found for 33gp to a player... I just don't see how one of these things is creating wealth and the other is not.
The idea that shackles don't "do" anything is silly. As long as there is one player on the shard who values decoration, they do plenty. Likewise, I could argue that for a player like Chumbucket, a katana doesn't "do" anything. There is no threshold of lines of code under which an object does nothing, and above which it "does something". The utility of every object in this game is entirely dependent on player interest and interaction.
Finally, let me propose a thought experiment, now that vendors have a fixed purse with which to buy things. If NPCs on the shard can only buy, say, 50k gp worth of metal items and ingots per hour, than any ingots I mine after that hour are only able to be sold to other players. Thus they don't create NPC-sourced wealth, but rather they just facilitate existing wealth transfer between players. Right?
Actually, let's even take it one more step back. Ingots themselves are, essentially, never sold to NPCs. The items they create are essentially never sold to NPCs either. One gets more gold pieces by selling ingots and Blacksmith-made items to other players. So if I mine ingots myself, and throughout their existence they and their derivatives are only ever used by players, there is no wealth creation from me AFK mining them, right?
This is completely and totally arbitrary. In my opinion, inertia is not a valid argument.The rule is about if a NPC can buy the item, not if they are currently available to.
One transaction facilitates the transfer of wealth from one person to another, while the other produces new wealth in the form of gold (or, the unwilling transfer of wealth, however you want to view it). This is the only issue that our rule covers.Mikel123 wrote:I guess I fail to see why value created by player demand is different than value created by NPCs.
If you know, with certainty, that I can sell a katana I found on an orc for 33gp to an NPC... and you know, with certainty, that I can sell shackles I found for 33gp to a player... I just don't see how one of these things is creating wealth and the other is not.
One has no mechanics that it can interact with, short of the ones that are allowed for any item that you can pick up, while others have a vast array of mechanics that it interacts with. This is a huge difference in utility, where one item's value is derived from its rarity and not from it's utility. It's aesthetic value that you point to is entirely tied to it's rarity, and has nothing to do with it's utility.Mikel123 wrote:The idea that shackles don't "do" anything is silly. As long as there is one player on the shard who values decoration, they do plenty. Likewise, I could argue that for a player like Chumbucket, a katana doesn't "do" anything. There is no threshold of lines of code under which an object does nothing, and above which it "does something". The utility of every object in this game is entirely dependent on player interest and interaction.
It is irrelevant that a player may choose not to sell those resources directly to an NPC. The fact that a player can do so, which is never possible with a rare, is the issue that's being addressed.Mikel123 wrote:Finally, let me propose a thought experiment, now that vendors have a fixed purse with which to buy things. If NPCs on the shard can only buy, say, 50k gp worth of metal items and ingots per hour, than any ingots I mine after that hour are only able to be sold to other players. Thus they don't create NPC-sourced wealth, but rather they just facilitate existing wealth transfer between players. Right?
Actually, let's even take it one more step back. Ingots themselves are, essentially, never sold to NPCs. The items they create are essentially never sold to NPCs either. One gets more gold pieces by selling ingots and Blacksmith-made items to other players. So if I mine ingots myself, and throughout their existence they and their derivatives are only ever used by players, there is no wealth creation from me AFK mining them, right?
The rule is not arbitrary at all because there is a distinct difference between an item that can be turned into new gold and one that can't. This difference, and the underlying implications, is what our rule addresses.Mikel123 wrote:The notion of "increasing gold on the shard" also seems arbitrary, given that we know for certainty that items unable to be turned into gold will still have value.
While I agree that this is an issue we should be working on mainly for mechanical accuracy reasons...