New Alloy: Electrum

[Jed1314 420]

- Trading the currency instead of the actual commodity seems redundant.

- Trading the currency instead of the actual gold seems redundant.

- Moderator store credit devalues the different commodities, as there becomes an instant and bottomless source of any resource. Being one of the only people to have discovered a specific commodity on your server, like gold, silver, iron, etc, means nothing, and if you can trade raw commodities to the moderator for coinage or other commodities, you basically have a lowbrow TFC equivalent exchange.

Not true. The advantages of currency are abundantly clear:

1) Ok, so you need charcoal, but bob has chickens. Bob needs your iron. Oh well, nevermind. We only trade in commodities.

2)Ok, so bob has some gold, but he only has a bar. He feels your iron is worth a half bar. Oh well, nevermind, no small denominations.

3)Ok, so bob is getting real tired by this point. He goes to the mod store to buy the iron. "What ?!" , he exclaims, 1.5 gold ingots for iron ? Oh well, better go buy the iron off of other players

In summary, stop talking out your ass. We use currency for a reason.

Or, without the sarcasm:

1) Bartering doesn't work when people have different needs to what is available.

2) Gold is not divisible. If we trade in whole ingots, it will be too large increments to be useful, hence breaking a bar down into coins.

3) Make the Mod shops a last resort, priced well above the going rate.

Furthermore, the currency would be backed by its own intrinsic value. You could (if you wanted) set a baseline for its value (aka 1 gold = 10 coal or whatever) but it's not necessary.

As a final amendment, fixing your currency like that is generally not a good idea. Free floating currencies will always work better because they can change in value compared to their fixing agent. If coal became extremely abundant and you tied your currency to it ... Oh well, there goes the economy

[Scooterdanny 285]

Agreed, currency that's intrinsically valued, is a great idea, especially for large servers, i would love to have piles of coins in my house, just cause... As well as the fact that i don't have to make an extremely complicated barter

[kotoroshinoto 97]

Yeah, we already ended up having this discussion in another thread. It didn't end well.

rawr!

[Just_Another_Guy_:) 1,066]

Ignore this post, accidental.

*Doesn't ignores it and spams in the thread. Feels like a rebel *

Now seriously... I like the currency idea, but wasn't that discussed in another thread? ._.

[M_So 3]

Minecraft already works on the barter system, if you want currency you might as well just use dirt as coins because anything you can get someone else can too. (for servers I guess you could use something useless that can not be acquired, why not Sequoia and Kapok saplings?)

The only way currency works is if it enforced by the people, if people do not use it then why have it. Anyone ever hear about silver quarters? People would melt them down into bars because the metal was would more then the coin.

[Jed1314 420]

*Doesn't ignores it and spams in the thread. Feels like a rebel * Now seriously... I like the currency idea, but wasn't that discussed in another thread? ._.

You son of a .....

Could you link the thread ? I'm a keen economist and I want to jump into the middle of any currency related debate

[Jed1314 420]

Minecraft already works on the barter system, if you want currency you might as well just use dirt as coins because anything you can get someone else can too. (for servers I guess you could use something useless that can not be acquired, why not Sequoia and Kapok saplings?) The only way currency works is if it enforced by the people, if people do not use it then why have it. Anyone ever hear about silver quarters? People would melt them down into bars because the metal was would more then the coin.

That isn't true. If you used dirt as coins, anybody could increase the money supply and you would end up suffering from hyperinflation, which would cripple a servers economy. The idea of coins based on precious metals works very well in a minecraftian economy. Using kapok saplings and such is unfair, as well as forcing the servers ops to learn some basic economic theory. For example, if the ops restrict the saplings too much, they will become too valuable and unfeasible as a currency. If they are too free with them, hyperinflation. To resolve this the ops would have to buy up saplings out of circulation and stuff. It would be a clusterfuck Precious metals, on the other hand, regulate themselves in MC. The difficulty in getting them, combined with the increased demand for coin minting, would help restrict coin production.

Actually, enforcement by the people is only (excuse the pun) one side of the coin. A viable currency must also be well balanced and managed by a government. The reason silver quarters were melted down is because they were a poorly designed currency. The base components of any currency should never be worth more than the actual currency itself. If they are, the currency is flawed.

You hit on one very valid point, that anyone being able to make coins would affect the monetary supply, thus potentially causing inflation. I have pondered this myself very often. One solution would be to add a "mint" item, which would stamp the makers name onto every coin, thus forum ops could implement a law about currency making. To be honest though, where supply regulates currency creation, it would level itself out. I present a hypothetical scenario:

On a server, gold coins are introduced as currency. Everybody, excited by this new feature, rushes out, mines gold and makes coins. Suddenly, there is an influx of gold into the economy. The supply far outstrips the demand, and the value of an individual gold coin falls. Now that gold coins are worth a lot less, people stop making them. This situation is similar to the silver nickel one you proposed earlier. People realise that the gold is worth more than the coins, so they melt down the coins to make gold. This processs causes a contraction in the supply of gold coins, raising their value. Eventually the two become level again.

Unfortunately (I admit) there are a couple of flaws with this analogy (and coins in general).

1) There is no external market. This means there is no way for gold to leave circulation in great quantities. Even with gold being useful for late game metals, there is not enough alternative demand to absorb the excess gold supply that may be left in game after such a cycle. This would mean the respite from chaos would be short lived.

2) Most people just can't run economies. By enacting a server currency, you are basically forming a rudimentary government. If there is no central body to regulate the currency supply, it may well all go wrong. However, by regulating the supply, you place the onus of managing the economy on yourself (not an easy task).

The best solution, in my eyes, is this scenario:

The operators do not control currency creation. One ingot makes 4gp. However, the op's offer 5gp per gold ingot. Obviously, in this case, users will sell all of their excess gold to the op's. The op's, to subsidise such a system, would need to produce something to prevent themselves from spawning this extra 1 gp (this is important, as any spawned gold would increase supply above the levels dictated by the gold supply). Alternatively, the ops could levy taxes to raise this income (either would work). Either way, the value of the coins metal will never be higher than the value of the coin itself, the money will leave circulation on its own, thus giving it a supply source and cap, hopefully preventing the earlier sapling issue, and the money will be based on something with actual value so, if it all goes wrong, people have something to fall back on.

[M_So 3]

You misread what I said, the dirt was just a joke.

Your scenario is vary well put but that would make even more work for the ops then my idea would.

If you run a server and wish to have an economy you should expect at least some work implementing a infrastructure. With saplings you would not need to worry about hyperinflation, just give everyone 25 Sequoia (worth 1 each) and 5 Kapok (worth 5 each) and the people will work out how much everything else is worth. The owners could even set up a shop where they can sell and buy items. (of course everything should be at a inflated price do to supply and demand. )

Everything else you said I fully agree with.

Do we really need to add currency to a resource based game?

[Jed1314 420]

Ok, so I have decided to write a more detailed explanation of the specific nuances and general features of a minecraft based economy. For your reading pleasure (spoiler'd for length):

What we are talking about today is economics (specifically macroeconomics, the economics of government). There are two primary policy "genres" that economists refer to; Fiscal policy and monetary policy are different in that fiscal policy relies on the manipulation of tax and spending whereas monetary policy relies primarily on control of the supply of the money. There are a few problems with applying either one to minecraft:

1) Fiscal policy won't work. There is no tax mechanism, and no public sector to absorb government expenditure.

2) Monetary policy relies (partially) on interest rates, which also do not exist.

These factors mean we have to think about the problem from a new angle. A minecraftian angle. Lets look at the tools which ARE available to minecraftian economists right now:

Monetary:

1) Fixed interest loans. While floating interest is not feasible, loans with fixed interest amounts definitely are. These can be made by anyone by the simple agreement of "I lend x you pay me back x + y or I burn your house down. Simple and effective.

2) (After the implementation of money) Minting aditional coins.

These tools both allow the ops to control the supply of money. By dictating the supply, the server ops should be able to maintain the price of money at a reasonable level. As long as this money isn't spawned, no financial imbalance should occur.

Fiscal:

1) Exclusively obtainable resources. Land and spawned items are controlled by the server ops, with no other source to satiate the users demand, this is a poweful tool which may be capable of replacing tax.

2) Operator purchase of user goods (this must be controlled as too much of this will create a false economy, where the demand for goods is much lower than production, but the ops keep buying up the excess, leading to a false price level.

With additional effort, tax could easily be implemented by server ops.

The gold standard:

Many of you believe that currency must be based on something with value. This is not the case. The US currency (along with all others I belive) are now "Fiat money" (http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Fiat_money). In other words, the money is only worth something because of a general consensus it is. Instead of being fixed to the price of gold, fiat currency is fixed to the value of an economy.

Ironically, gold is itself a fiat currency, as gold has no real intrinsic value besides the value we attach to it as it is shiny

My model for minecraftian financial policy: Server ops control the supply of land, mob spawners and all manner of other goods. A server op would spawn a pre-decided amount of gold (say 500 gp) which he then lends out to his users, asking for 5% interest on the loan. The users, in return, buy land on which they can mine etc. Some people will get lucky and strike ore, others will not. This ore has actual value, and can be traded for coins to other users, as well as the OP who would obviously still be a market participant. Those who do not strike ore could easily sell their land for coins, or go into the employ of other users as a miner for example. Gardually, an economy would form. To augment the original supply of 500 coins, the ops would buy up gold at slightly above the craftable value of coins. This would help prevent deflation, which would be caused by economic growth outstripping monetary growth, leading to each coin having massive value due to the short supply. The losses incurred for doing this would be made up for by the profit of selling land and non obtainable items.

/rant

[Jed1314 420]

You misread what I said, the dirt was just a joke.

Fair do's

Your scenario is vary well put but that would make even more work for the ops then my idea would.

Unfortunately that is the fate of anyone who tries to put money in a multiplayer game

If you run a server and wish to have an economy you should expect at least some work implementing a infrastructure. With saplings you would not need to worry about hyperinflation, just give everyone 25 Sequoia (worth 1 each) and 5 Kapok (worth 5 each) and the people will work out how much everything else is worth.

What you are proposing has been proposed before. My question is, what happens when goods become more abundant and the kapok become worth more and more. Deflation is the answer, where prices of the goods fall, increasing the buying power of each unit of "money". If iron was rare initially, it would cost maybe 1 kapok for 8 ore. As iron became more plentiful, the price would fall. Eventually, given enough supply, no user would have enough saplings for it to cost even 1 sequioa for 8.

Do we really need to add currency to a resource based game?

I would argue that life is (in essence) a resource based game. Money plays an essential role in any environment where the specialisation of labour has occured. If you mean is it necessary as in "do we need to make this game more complex", remember that money would be totally optional, and very very easy to add.

[Crysyn 179]

All this talk of economy.. I like the server I play on.. about half a dozen of us and trading goes like

Player 1) Hey does anyone have any metal to spare?

Player 2) Yeah, if you just want a pick or an axe I already have a few of those made up in the chest over there.

Player 3) I have a bar of Iron if you need it

Player 4) Oh I could use a saw too if anyone has something laying around

Player 1) I have an extra saw! That is why I need another piece of metal for a pick

Hehehe.. Maybe you guys are just playing with the wrong people

If anything we use Charcoal/Food as currency as most people understand that it is annoying as hell to make charcoal (especially now) but the exchange usually goes as outlined above just with someone dropping off a few stacks of wood when picking up charcoal.

[Jed1314 420]

All this talk of economy.. I like the server I play on.. about half a dozen of us and trading goes like

Player 1) Hey does anyone have any metal to spare?

Player 2) Yeah, if you just want a pick or an axe I already have a few of those made up in the chest over there.

Player 3) I have a bar of Iron if you need it

Player 4) Oh I could use a saw too if anyone has something laying around

Player 1) I have an extra saw! That is why I need another piece of metal for a pick

Hehehe.. Maybe you guys are just playing with the wrong people

If anything we use Charcoal/Food as currency as most people understand that it is annoying as hell to make charcoal (especially now) but the exchange usually goes as outlined above just with someone dropping off a few stacks of wood when picking up charcoal.

You play a very different game of Minecraft to the one which I would enjoy the most

In my ideal server that conversation would go a bit like this

Player 1) Can I buy some metal off of anyone ?

Player 2) I want 6 gold coins for it

Unbenknownst to players 1 + 2, players 3, 4 + 5 have planned a raid on the town they are trading in. The other players burst in on the trade and a fight erupts.

Much better

To be fair, I want to make a server which emulates the more brutal aspects of medieval life. In an ideal situation, player 2's trading caravan would have been ambushed by raiders on the way to the town, so the conversation never would have happened :L

[Sasqaucth 45]

Can i see some fiefdoms and serfs?

[Scooterdanny 285]

Jed, while i thoroughly enjoyed your ideas and comments, i feel that the self regulating system of gold ore should be enough, with a starting amount of gold as you suggested, necessitating the OP's to mint and regulate money is unnecessary in my opinions, as a laissez faire approach should work, given that players band together, and in large numbers there might even be lords that can allocate land, and charge taxes, taking a good deal of work away from the OP's and letting the players rule themselves. Now, i have never done a detailed Economy system in MC, but i feel that this approach has the best balance of work, and stability. if there is a rapid influx of players, and a large amount inflation/deflation occurs, then the ops can manually fix it by taking a global tax, or introducing gold back into the system, this should only occur if a massive in/deflux of players happens.

[Scooterdanny 285]

Although, if we want to keep discussing this, i suggest creating a new forum, so we don't clutter this one.

[Sasqaucth 45]

But why?

[Scooterdanny 285]

Because this is off-topic, while interesting, it makes it harder for people that want to see both threads, economy, and new alloys, as well as hinder the Devs' abilities of finding the correct suggestions.

[Sasqaucth 45]

This is a single alloy, and it is related as we are trying to flush out what i would be used for if not useless.

[Scooterdanny 285]

Sigh, i realize that, my point is that the huge discussion on specifically coinage and mine craft macroeconomics is off topic In my opinion.

[Sasqaucth 45]

Also a thread, but we have a conversation here that is easy to access and track. Jumping threads is just busy work.

[Just_Another_Guy_:) 1,066]

You son of a .....

Could you link the thread ? I'm a keen economist and I want to jump into the middle of any currency related debate

you son of a... mother? ._. (?)

i think it was in the ingot piles thread...? i don't remember, i'm gonna take a look later.

[Jed1314 420]

Sigh, i realize that, my point is that the huge discussion on specifically coinage and mine craft macroeconomics is off topic In my opinion.

You're probably right. As it stands I actually don't think much is needed in the way of currency. I definitely don't think we need a new alloy specifically for it.

If I were to see coins implemented, it would be as simple as that, coins. A copper, silver, gold and platinum system. That way, we get the best of both worlds. It is easy to implement (4 new smithing recipies or whatever) and easy to ignore if you don't want it.

The best in game currency system for MC is, in my eyes, one which can be as simple or complex as you like, so that everyone is catered to.

[Scooterdanny 285]

Good show, jed nice and simple.

[Lumireaver 101]

Hehehe.. Maybe you guys are just playing with the wrong people

I'd like to see currency buff enough to work in a server the size of Super-Earth, honestly. Thousands of people buying and selling goods and labour. I know most TFC servers are going to be small 'just friends' deals, but I ideally I want the potential for worlds as large and developed as Tamriel, or Westeros. A simple silver -> gold -> platinum system would work, but it doesn't give as many options as a whatever-metal-you-can-mint (with restrictions) based economy would.

It's also worth noting that coins are usually mostly comprised of base metals.

Also name and code based coin minting for anti-counterfeiting. After creating your coin blueprint a gui would pop up asking for the name of the coin (giving you, for example gold rupee, brass rupee, or whatever) and a code. Coins minted with like codes would stack. Different codes don't stack. Code can be left blank.

[bsb23 303]

Sounds a little too complex considering our tech level, this is a good reason to use electrum or something similar, it isn't easy to acquire.