Pangaea-world.dk

"Looting rules work fine...[in context of 'no dry loot'] , but in the long run its going to kill the market."

This is just a load of bull's imo... i will give a nice example.

We have person A - who is going to be a victim, and we have person B who wants to become a robber.
Both needed some equipment in the beginning so A and B bought some crap armor and got some random things.

B feels like he needs better armor and items, so instead of BUYing a new from the market he decides to rob A.
Doing so, B instead of BUYing the armor he wanted, forces A to buy that armor instead of him.

A spent all money again for new armor and things, while B kept his money and got a new armor + items.

B after 5, 10, 50 robberies doesn't need anything at all from merchants anymore since he robs up everything he could possibly need for the next 10 years in advance. Doing so B is completely severed from the market as he makes A buy from the market instead of him, thus giving the illusion of sale boosts. But what B does actually, is stockpiling shit for the next 10 years of gameplay, which B could already do if he bought from the market directly in the first place.

Mind you that the sale boost is fictive, since merchants can stockpile products for sale for the next 10 years already now, and sell them when the market demands it. What B did is just to guarantee he won't need any merchant item again in his life, while A was working his ass off.

scenario A) Robbers damage the market:
After some time B, not only has all the equip he could possibly need, but he gets filthy rich in items, possibly starting to sell stuff back to the market and getting cash for items - doing so ruining other merchant's sales. There comes a deflation, since the previous boost was artificially produced.

scenario B) Robbers effect the market positively:
With the exception (as Maximillian commented) if robbers trashed all the items (which is not legal).

scenario C) Robbers do not effect the market:
Robbers do not effect the market in the long run whatsoever, it just gives the illusion of it as Robbers force other people to work for them - while others buy, robbers don't need to as they stockpile shitloads... or get pwned by Law and Law gets fat, ty B and A kind of ^^ (then Law doesn't need to buy either for years to come, very vicious cycle, or Law just returns to A what is found to be of that person if possible - so it returns to its rightful owner who already has some other armor [stockpile again]).

I believe the mix of scenario A and C is what really happens, and sincerely don't think that the lack of robbers/drylooting is what is making the market stagnant. Point being made.

This were my 2 euros about market.



Now to get back on topic... I'm not a priori against robbers robbing or dry looting rules, mind you. I think robbers are great RP opportunity, adrenaline rush and pvp fun in general.
I even have some own ideas about looting rules and didn't see any similar suggestion yet, but want to think a bit more about it before sharing.


________
Ovinnik

Ovinnik wrote:

"Looting rules work fine...[in context of 'no dry loot'] , but in the long run its going to kill the market."

This is just a load of bull's imo... i will give a nice example.

We have person A - who is going to be a victim, and we have person B who wants to become a robber.
Both needed some equipment in the beginning so A and B bought some crap armor and got some random things.

B feels like he needs better armor and items, so instead of BUYing a new from the market he decides to rob A.
Doing so, B instead of BUYing the armor he wanted, forces A to buy that armor instead of him.

A spent all money again for new armor and things, while B kept his money and got a new armor + items.

It's like your completely forgetting about Law drylooting that robber eventually. Notice that in this scenario one person still loses armor, giving a merchant a sale, now if NO ONE loses armor, then how is this an illusion?

Fang-Qui Droma wrote:Glad to see someone has the same thoughts that I do. Robberies aren't the only thing that causes you to lose your gear. I've mentioned it in a previous post and this here for instance:

Alteran wrote:

When i ran masters of craft we had a full box of different armours , and yes they did get used, because some still die ,and lose all the things because it deacy , and our blacksmith was allways behind with the ores.

Ding!

This is a poor example, back when Alteran ran Masters of Craft robbing was in affect, this is back when Pang was at its best.

well just randomly checked a few players today , and i see that allmost every one has a blaksmith or a tailor.
So yes i can understand why no one is buying anything.

Alteran

And ideas as far as a solution to over populations of classes?

Alteran, you should start arms loreing everyones armor and see if if there smiths or tailors that created it

dont realy have that kind of time , but you are asking hwo is doing what , and the only one to blame is the players.
It is like in the real world mates.

Alteran

Best after all would be: robbers - staff approved - could take all, EXCEPT (with examples):

- tailored armors (exceptional vampire bone helmet, exceptional lizard hide studded tunic)
- IDENTIFIED magic items (iron maul of might, indestructable kilt of magery)
- smithed stuff (exceptional lunar longsword, elite daemon's skull chain coif)

Everything else is kinda disposable, robbing a smith at vein will not cause major war between people, because smithes can get ores themselves, tomorrow is a new day.

It's a major annoyance when you need to buy new armor sets, especially if the set is something else than your basic vampire bone set you already have 5 of.

its cool and shit at the same time

COOL:
you not a Pvp char/out of war and you DONT GET LOOTED, party in cloths booya

Not cool:
no thrill or fear, kinda removes abit of fun, RObbers = pointless

SO If your a Robba
AND NEED LUUT
JOIN IMP FFS!@!!

Thats the thing though, lets say Holger joins imperial, very poor rp imo. How can I roleplay a guy with no care for life if I am supposed to be fighting for someone else?

think alexis cares about Esuna, shes there to KILL!, Simple to rp


HOlger, is bound by magic unable to exstract his vengence on the world, he see's a chance to kill his enemys by joining the order of Imperial, little did they know once i was in, and could kill again, i would not care nor pray to this esuna, for i need only my own strength.


there simple shitty idea, you get to kill and for yourself just under a new name. ZULULULUL