Ah cap is a burden to all players

General Discussion
Prev 1 3 4 5 26 Next
04/29/2013 01:24 AMPosted by simplemath
The only thing Blizzard does by keeping the gah cap at 2 billion is force an ever increasing portion of the high end market into areas outside their control. This isn't an opinion.


Everyone should read that line right there.
04/29/2013 02:07 AMPosted by Chillaxin
The only thing Blizzard does by keeping the gah cap at 2 billion is force an ever increasing portion of the high end market into areas outside their control. This isn't an opinion.


Everyone should read that line right there.


Thisx100

The GaH cap should be removed...blizzard is losing out...a certain high end streamer bought a 25B gold EF...think of the 15% cut blizzard lost out on if the transaction could occur on the GaH...talk about removing gold from the game.
Everyone should read that line right there.
I'm sure people are already well aware of that. Accept that, to most of us, we don't care about that market as most people won't participate in it except the credit card warriors and uber flippers.
blizzard is losing out...a certain high end streamer bought a 25B gold EF...think of the 15% cut blizzard lost out on if the transaction could occur on the GaH...talk about removing gold from the game.
When items were approaching the billions range, people were moving their trades from GAH to JSP because of the 15% fee. The fact of the matter is, people already trade 3rd party anyways regardless of cap or not. It was bound to happen, and has been happening.

Besides, like DiVerse said, 2 billion is the limit anyways. How are the programmers going to uproot that system and rewrite it to support transactions over 2b?
Since this discussion has devolved into a discussion about the games economy, I will put my 2 cents in (pun intended).

I think it is interesting how opinions vary so widely about if the economy is broken and how to fix it. Let me separate out a few.

"Limiting the amount of gold a player can collect in their account". I guess this is meant to be a threat to flippers and botters and the successful (gold/magic finders). Interesting argument. Yea, some people do multiple accounts, how are you going to limit them? Most of us have one account and would not want our success limited (greed or not). How about this. Limit gold production. What if Blizzard was to limit the gold at the source, the game. If monsters drop less gold, neph valor was 5% per stack, paragon were 2% per level, and monster power had half the gold benefit, what would happen then? It seems to me like the value of gold would rise, the amount of legondaries found would fall, the values of essence, gems, etc would rise. Gold may again be worth more than $0.25 per million at the Real Money AH. Since there would be less legondaries, they would have more value. Of course, the top legondaries would also have more value, calling out a need to raise the Gold AH cap.

"People who can't afford better gear would be stuck". Somehow you think that legondaries are unaffordable. I have watched many items over the months. 6 months ago, I saw Immortal King Eternal reign bottom "buy out" prices near 3 million gold, now 200-300K, The witching hour could not be touched for less than 10 mill, now you can get one on a "buy out" for less than 200K. It is like that for every legendary you can name. The bottom has gone down by a factor of 10 or more for everything ( "buy out" prices). With less gold and item drops the bottom might raise a little, but every player with 500K when they reach lvl60 can afford an AH make over that will allow them to go to MP3-5. This tells me the spread in price of all items has gotten a lot larger and are affordable for all players.

"Controlling third party sites, botting, spamming and other non-sanctioned activities". In the forums I have seen the word "greed" applied to all the parties, players, Blizzard, EA, and so on. I think that one thing we can all agree on is that this word mostly applies to the third party sites, botters and spammers. It seems like, when there is money to be made, these groups will try to exploit it. Removing the RMAH is a solution people have pointed out in the forums. That could be one way to remove some of this activity, but not all. What else can be done? Could there be a warning from Blizzard stating "Please, purchase items an gold from the Blizzard AH and RMAH to ensure game compatibility"? Could the "Report Spam" carry a stronger weight with Bliz, like if the account gets 3 spam reports, the account is removed immediately for review? Can Blizzard and it's legal team pursue criminal and civil actions against parties encroaching on their intellectual property? All it would take is to create a legal precedence to scare away most offenders. This may sound like a bunch of work for Bliz but I think in the long run, they will develop good methods of controlling the spammers/botters and may even allow the company to flourish in the long run.

Most of us are just trying to play a game, repair our gear, upgrade our artizans, upgrade our character and have fun doing it. Some of us want to do it all day every day, and some may only want an hour or two on Friday night. With this diversity of player, the game needs diversity in scope.
04/28/2013 10:55 PMPosted by TheTias
Raising the cap actually would make it harder for the average player to find items because relatively speaking, when the top tier's values are now that much higher, the bottom of the barrel tends to also get inflated by a proportionate amount. And since the actual gold intake isn't also being inflated for the players, items start becoming out of reach much sooner.


04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
You're using an illegal (with relation to Diabo 3) third party site to rationalize value caused by greed. Really? Come on Chillaxin, you can do better than that.


You are clueless.

Value of items are determined by demand (look, I can write in italics too). Items that are mediocre and low-end will never see a price increase. You know why? Because there's barely any demand for them. If no one wants them now, cheap, no one will want them then, more expensive. This is because these items are easy to find. Mediocre legendaries/rares drop all the time.

High-end gear on the other hand, does not drop all the time. Hence the reason why they're more sought after. In fact, such items barely ever drop. Pair that with the inflation of gold (thanks to our friendly neighborhood bots) and you have yourself a lot of gold in the market but not enough items to compensate it.

So then, what happens? Well, everyone starts offering more and more for these items. Say someone puts up a very rare legendary on the AH for a 100k bid only. To you apparently, this would actually not fall under the so called "greedy" category. You'd see that in a matter of minutes, people would be willing, out of their pockets, to completely take that bid to the billions of gold level. That's how value is created for these items. It's driven by how much people demand it.

Even if you were to limit the amount of gold people could have per account. There will always be ways around this. What's stopping people giving you 500 Radiant Star Emeralds for that perfect Echoing Fury? The AH has no real relevance to the value of items. Removing the cap will only bring benefits. Ensuring that gold is sunk (via 15% tax) and that the transactions are safe.
04/29/2013 02:32 AMPosted by Eddizel
TLDR - Make gold worthless and cap accounts so that anything of any value is immediately bought out for the account/AH cap and listed on 3rd party sites for strictly real money now, not even gold, sweet idea bro.


Raising the gold cap does the following to the in-game economy:

1) Causes inflation proportionate to the increase to the gold cap.

2) Brings the lower tier items up in price since said gear is still the same strength/value relative to the top tier item.

3) As prices go ever higher on both ends of the spectrum, more and more players are forced to third party websites anyway because gold becomes so devalued due to inflation that no matter what Blizzard sets the floor at (even $0.01/Million), the outside sources will offer lower prices to compete. That's the same as it is now, only the player feels even morecompelled to go there instead of remaining in the game's sanctioned systems.

It doesn't matter what the cap is in terms of the 15% cut since 15% is 15%. It's a percentage that doesn't change. It may scale up as the total prices increase, but the prices have also scaled up by the same proportion, so you haven't solved anything on that front.

Again, using the third party websites as rationalization for raising the cap when it would do more harm than good (and by a large margin) doesn't work.

Let's say a cap of 2 billion was implemented on the per-account level. Now, it'd be rather hard to price any single item at more than 2B because that's the most any account can pay for it. Ever. A player can't suddenly decide to value that item at 6B because then he'd need three separate accounts to pay him 2B each for one item, except his account can only take in 2B max anyway. That kind of setup pretty much nullifies third party websites in terms of gold.

But what about the real money issue players keep referring to? Well, there's this little clause in the EULA:

Ownership.

All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Game and all copies thereof (including without limitation any titles, computer code, themes, objects, characters, character names, stories, dialog, catch phrases, locations, concepts, artwork, structural or landscape designs, animations, sounds, musical compositions and recordings, audio-visual effects, storylines, character likenesses, methods of operation, moral rights, and any related documentation) are owned or licensed by Blizzard. The Game is protected by the copyright laws of the United States, international treaties and conventions, and other laws. The Game may contain materials licensed by third parties, and the licensors of those materials may enforce their rights in the event of any violation of this License Agreement. You have no interest, monetary or otherwise, in any feature or content contained in the Game or associated with the Account.


Blizzard has the right to shut down any third party site dealing in real money with regard to any property, intellectual or physical, that is owneb by them. If they do not, that is on them, not us.

If anybody thinks Blizzard can't adjust how caps work or where the caps are placed and/or remove gold from the economy if it deems it necessary, you might want to read this:

TERMS OF SALE.

All Auction House sales are final, and no refunds are permitted except with respect to any statutory warranties or guaranties that cannot be excluded or limited by law. Please visit Blizzard’s Terms of Sale for additional terms and conditions applicable to the purchase of any Loot listed on the Auction Houses.


If anybody thinks they are entitled to more and more profit regardless of game conditions, or that any of their items are ever guaranteed to maintain any set value, I direct you to this:

RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS OF USE.
You agree:

(i) to use the Auction Houses only for your own individual purposes;

(ii) to access the Auction Houses only with an authorized, unmodified version of Diablo; and

(iii) to accept the risk that you may lose some or all of the value that you exchange as part of your use of the Auction Houses.


Should anybody continue trying to use the third party website as reason or rationalization for any aspect of the economy that they wish to see changed, here's this for you as well:

OWNERSHIP OF LOOT.

YOU AGREE THAT:

Blizzard owns or has the right to use all of the Loot, as well as all of the characters and content that appears in Diablo.

You do not own any of the Loot, characters, or other content that appears in Diablo, and that you have no right or title in or to any of the Loot (other than any license to use any Loot granted to you by Blizzard, which may be revoked by Blizzard at any time), Diablo, or your Account.

You are not allowed to sell, trade or somehow transfer Loot, characters, or any other Diablo content outside of Diablo or the Auction House.


What is the point of all of these quotes? It's to direct you to the relevant information pointing out that a) Blizzard owns all loot and any associated items, b) no item is guaranteed to hold, maintain, or increase in value at any time thus the player has no entitlement to any such effect, and c) going outside of the authorized channels provided by Blizzard is not only not allowed, but that because it is not part of the game environment, Blizzard is neither liable for any losses or damages incurred from such actions, nor responsible for making changes to any element of the game and/or its economy relative to those websites or third parties

Now, I've pointed out why raising the AH cap would be harmful. I've yet to see any evidence as to why it would not be harmful, or at least why it would be less harmful than not raising the cap given the would-be results of doing so.

If you want your argument to have any meaning whatsoever, you're going to have to do it within the context of the Diablo environment itself, and not include any third party in your data, as they are irrelevant.
Ensuring that gold is sunk (via 15% tax) and that the transactions are safe.
I've pointed out time and again though that it's well known that people will not use the AH at all so they avoid the 15% fee. How come people don't address this?
04/29/2013 03:12 AMPosted by Bluthium
Raising the cap actually would make it harder for the average player to find items because relatively speaking, when the top tier's values are now that much higher, the bottom of the barrel tends to also get inflated by a proportionate amount. And since the actual gold intake isn't also being inflated for the players, items start becoming out of reach much sooner.


You're using an illegal (with relation to Diabo 3) third party site to rationalize value caused by greed. Really? Come on Chillaxin, you can do better than that.


You are clueless.

Value of items are determined by demand (look, I can write in italics too). Items that are mediocre and low-end will never see a price increase. You know why? Because there's barely any demand for them. If no one wants them now, cheap, no one will want them then, more expensive. This is because these items are easy to find. Mediocre legendaries/rares drop all the time.

High-end gear on the other hand, does not drop all the time. Hence the reason why they're more sought after. In fact, such items barely ever drop. Pair that with the inflation of gold (thanks to our friendly neighborhood bots) and you have yourself a lot of gold in the market but not enough items to compensate it.

So then, what happens? Well, everyone starts offering more and more for these items. Say someone puts up a very rare legendary on the AH for a 100k bid only. To you apparently, this would actually not fall under the so called "greedy" category. You'd see that in a matter of minutes, people would be willing, out of their pockets, to completely take that bid to the billions of gold level. That's how value is created for these items. It's driven by how much people demand it.

Even if you were to limit the amount of gold people could have per account. There will always be ways around this. What's stopping people giving you 500 Radiant Star Emeralds for that perfect Echoing Fury? The AH has no real relevance to the value of items. Removing the cap will only bring benefits. Ensuring that gold is sunk (via 15% tax) and that the transactions are safe.


Unfortunately, you're wasting logic on this guy.

THe modus operandi for "MVPs" is to make an idiotic assertion that is countered by observable phenomena, and then stubbornly, idiotically cling to that assertion in the continuing face of logic and reason.

I've had more thoughtful arguments with my 5 year old about what she wants to wear for school. Literally.
Unfortunately, you're wasting logic on this guy.
While he has flaws in his argument, he's not entirely wrong.
04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
Or did you somehow miss that being the result of taking away the cap?


Now I understand the core of your problem. You believe in something called "price ceiling fallacy." You feel that capping the price on the best items to 2billion gold makes their value capped to 2 billion. This is untrue. Creating a price ceiling has no effect on the items real value. Just because a 10billion gold item can only be priced up to 2billion on the GAH does not mean the item is only worth 2billion.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
You're using an illegal (with relation to Diabo 3) third party site to rationalize value


JSP, diablofans, and other 3rd party sites sell items for over 2billion gold daily and fanbased sites like these are not illegal.If you have not done any 3rd party trading, then I suggest leaving this thread because you have no clue what you are even talking about. The top gear is not on the GAH and never will be as long as there is a cap. If you do all your trades via the GAH, then you have no experience in trading the top tier loot in the game.

We need to remove the 2billion gold cap so we can bring the top tier trades back into the game where they belong. Once this happens, billions of gold will once again be able to sink out of the economy and that benefits everyone.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
Come on Chillaxin, you can do better than that.


I appreciate your understanding of my potential. I question your understanding of economics.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
And the player that gets that greedy and ends up being scammed is worthy of my sympathy...why?


A player who plays the game and works really hard and finally gets his lucky break to find an item worth more than 2billion wants to be able to get the gold his item is worth. This is completely normal and doesn't make him a bad person. It is rational to think that if an item with X stats is worth 2billion, then an item with X+2 stats is probably worth even more. They should not be capped at the same price when the 2nd one is obviously rarer and better.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
They know the risks if they choose to go that route.


I sincerely hope that while playing the game you happen to find an echoing fury with strictly higher stats than the one that sold for more than 7,000 Euro. Then you will be faced with the decision to sell it for 2billion gold (since you don't like the RMAH or 3rd party) Do you believe in the cap so much that you would give away an item worth thousands of dollars for only 2billion gold? Only an insane person or someone who is already rich would do this willingly. I hope the luck gods bless you with this situation so you can fully understand.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
You're not going to win over a justification argument using this as your rationale


Maybe not, but I should be able to win you over through facts about economy. And it is a well known fact the price ceilings destroy supply. And you can see the proof if that as the best items are not in supply on the GAH. The price ceiling is to blame for this. Price ceilings also have many other damaging effects such as the AH gold sink not being used to its full potential. This hurts everyone who uses gold.

Causing hyperinflation for all tiers of gear is not the way to go about doing it.


The gold cap does not cause hyperinflation. You think that capping the price on something stops its value from rising when all it does is stop the item from being sold on the GAH. Removing the gold cap helps fight hyperinflation by allowing the item to be sold on the GAH for its true value and the gold sink gets used more.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
And the value of gold is due to the relationship between the GAH and RMAH


You think that gold gets its value from the RMAH which is untrue. Gold would have real value even if the RMAH never existed. Time is money and players are willing to save time by spending money. The true value for gold currently is about 3 cents per million. The RMAH didn't cause this. Botters and the lack of well implemented gold sinks caused that. Removing the GAH price cap would be a very well implemented gold sink sinking billions everyday. The more gold that sinks, the lower the price of items would eventually become over time.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
Limit the amount of gold any single account can gather and you pretty much kill this entire debate.


That would not solve anything and would cause more problems. Legitimate players would reach a cap and no longer be able to find gold while playing the game and botters would just buy more accounts or use more of the accounts that they stole from the illegitimate players. The botters would still be very successful and you hurt the legitimate players. Bad plan.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
Also limits bots' ability to hoard excessive amounts of gold, thus also creating a ceiling on gold influx


This is highly untrue. I've witnessed the inner workings of these activities and everyone should know that botters have many many many accounts at all times and never put all their gold on just a few of them. They split up their gold everywhere and would not be hurt by a gold cap. Even if you set every player's gold cap to 1billion, they'd just use Xaccounts to store Xbillion gold. Once again your plan would hurt legitimate players who managed to get a lucky drop that cost more than 1 billion. The botters would still be very successful and you hurt the legitimate players. Bad plan.

Also, raising or eliminating the cap also gives those who bot a huge incentive to ramp up the practice

Even if you're the only one in the world who has an item with a certain stats, it will not sell if you price too high.

All you've done by eliminating the cap is effectively created more gold influx into the economy


Absolutely wrong. Items selling for more on the GAH causes more gold to be destroyed. No gold is created.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
Account-level caps along with extra gold sinks built into the game (cosmetic, vanity, unlockable content even) eliminate much of the problems seen today


We can all agree on this! We need more gold sinks such as the ones you speak of. And we need an expensive way to customize gear via a gold sink too. We could use a lot of well implemented gold sinks. These are all great ideas and could create a new thread all together dedicated towards those ideas. Removing the gold price cap helps a lot too.

04/29/2013 12:25 AMPosted by TheTias
Eventually what's more likely to happen is that account-level caps are introduced and any gold over that is "lost". It would be the Rust Storm equivalant for the economy.


It is funny that you say that is "more likely to happen" because your suggestions would hurt legitimate players the most. I can guarantee that the blizzard staff is at least smart enough to not implement those.
Bluthium;
I am glad you copied TheTias comment (I don't know how to do that). If you read my comment above that, it shows that this MVP has not done the research.

The bottom "buy out" price has dropped by a lot for all items ( I do know how to italic). By a factor of 10 or better from 4-6 months ago. This makes the "spread" of prices quite large.

Some people blame botters for more gold in the game. But thanks to the recent patches we have monster power, paragon levels and other enhancements to gold production in the game for the "average player" and everyone else.
Chillaxin, I will say to you what I said to Bluthium:

Unfortunately, you're wasting logic on this guy.

The modus operandi for "MVPs" is to make an idiotic assertion that is countered by observable phenomena, and then stubbornly, idiotically cling to that assertion in the continuing face of logic and reason.

I've had more thoughtful arguments with my 5 year old about what she wants to wear for school. Literally.

+1000 for your extremely well laid out and content rich post. I didn't have the patience to lay it out so exhaustively.
I give up, You people are retarded. Especially Chillaxin. You guys think that you're the voice of logic and reason yet if it's not YOUR logic and reason, then it's automatically wrong. No reason to ever talk to these idiots. Better to set them on ignore and go about your business.

Blizzard won't change the cap. EVER. We win, no reason for this conversation to continue and no reason for me to post in this thread any more.
No reason to ever talk to these idiots. Better to set them on ignore and go about your business.

Blizzard won't change the cap. EVER. We win,


See, you have proven once again that those arguing in favor of keeping a cap are not bound by the strictures of logic and reason.

Just because you don't agree doesn't mean we're wrong. Sorry to burst your bubble.
04/29/2013 03:17 AMPosted by TheTias
TLDR - Make gold worthless and cap accounts so that anything of any value is immediately bought out for the account/AH cap and listed on 3rd party sites for strictly real money now, not even gold, sweet idea bro.


Raising the gold cap does the following to the in-game economy:

1) Causes inflation proportionate to the increase to the gold cap.

2) Brings the lower tier items up in price since said gear is still the same strength/value relative to the top tier item.

3) As prices go ever higher on both ends of the spectrum, more and more players are forced to third party websites anyway because gold becomes so devalued due to inflation that no matter what Blizzard sets the floor at (even $0.01/Million), the outside sources will offer lower prices to compete. That's the same as it is now, only the player feels even morecompelled to go there instead of remaining in the game's sanctioned systems.

It doesn't matter what the cap is in terms of the 15% cut since 15% is 15%. It's a percentage that doesn't change. It may scale up as the total prices increase, but the prices have also scaled up by the same proportion, so you haven't solved anything on that front.

Again, using the third party websites as rationalization for raising the cap when it would do more harm than good (and by a large margin) doesn't work.

Let's say a cap of 2 billion was implemented on the per-account level. Now, it'd be rather hard to price any single item at more than 2B because that's the most any account can pay for it. Ever. A player can't suddenly decide to value that item at 6B because then he'd need three separate accounts to pay him 2B each for one item, except his account can only take in 2B max anyway. That kind of setup pretty much nullifies third party websites in terms of gold.

But what about the real money issue players keep referring to? Well, there's this little clause in the EULA:

Ownership.

All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Game and all copies thereof (including without limitation any titles, computer code, themes, objects, characters, character names, stories, dialog, catch phrases, locations, concepts, artwork, structural or landscape designs, animations, sounds, musical compositions and recordings, audio-visual effects, storylines, character likenesses, methods of operation, moral rights, and any related documentation) are owned or licensed by Blizzard. The Game is protected by the copyright laws of the United States, international treaties and conventions, and other laws. The Game may contain materials licensed by third parties, and the licensors of those materials may enforce their rights in the event of any violation of this License Agreement. You have no interest, monetary or otherwise, in any feature or content contained in the Game or associated with the Account.


Blizzard has the right to shut down any third party site dealing in real money with regard to any property, intellectual or physical, that is owneb by them. If they do not, that is on them, not us.

If anybody thinks Blizzard can't adjust how caps work or where the caps are placed and/or remove gold from the economy if it deems it necessary, you might want to read this:

TERMS OF SALE.

All Auction House sales are final, and no refunds are permitted except with respect to any statutory warranties or guaranties that cannot be excluded or limited by law. Please visit Blizzard’s Terms of Sale for additional terms and conditions applicable to the purchase of any Loot listed on the Auction Houses.


If anybody thinks they are entitled to more and more profit regardless of game conditions, or that any of their items are ever guaranteed to maintain any set value, I direct you to this:

RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS OF USE.
You agree:

(i) to use the Auction Houses only for your own individual purposes;

(ii) to access the Auction Houses only with an authorized, unmodified version of Diablo; and

(iii) to accept the risk that you may lose some or all of the value that you exchange as part of your use of the Auction Houses.


Should anybody continue trying to use the third party website as reason or rationalization for any aspect of the economy that they wish to see changed, here's this for you as well:

OWNERSHIP OF LOOT.

YOU AGREE THAT:

Blizzard owns or has the right to use all of the Loot, as well as all of the characters and content that appears in Diablo.

You do not own any of the Loot, characters, or other content that appears in Diablo, and that you have no right or title in or to any of the Loot (other than any license to use any Loot granted to you by Blizzard, which may be revoked by Blizzard at any time), Diablo, or your Account.

You are not allowed to sell, trade or somehow transfer Loot, characters, or any other Diablo content outside of Diablo or the Auction House.


What is the point of all of these quotes? It's to direct you to the relevant information pointing out that a) Blizzard owns all loot and any associated items, b) no item is guaranteed to hold, maintain, or increase in value at any time thus the player has no entitlement to any such effect, and c) going outside of the authorized channels provided by Blizzard is not only not allowed, but that because it is not part of the game environment, Blizzard is neither liable for any losses or damages incurred from such actions, nor responsible for making changes to any element of the game and/or its economy relative to those websites or third parties

Now, I've pointed out why raising the AH cap would be harmful. I've yet to see any evidence as to why it would not be harmful, or at least why it would be less harmful than not raising the cap given the would-be results of doing so.

If you want your argument to have any meaning whatsoever, you're going to have to do it within the context of the Diablo environment itself, and not include any third party in your data, as they are irrelevant.


SMH... Some people just dont get it. Who gave this guy the forum megaphone?
I am glad the MVP brought up all that legal jargon about ownership, loot, characters and accounts. Maybe they can apply that to all those people friend requesting me, and spamming my chat box..

Or is it just for us players looking in the forums?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum