Gold Capped: Warcraft needs a new gold sink, and it needs it yesterday

Last month in this column, we discussed in-game inflation. Inflation is an inevitability in any economy -- a natural (albeit controllable) erosion of the value of money.
Usually, Blizzard falls over itself to do everything it can to promote balance. Are too many people dying to a certain mechanic? Slash the damage that mechanic inflicts by 10%, or change the frequency at which it occurs. Is a certain class struggling in PVP? Boost one of the bursty attacks by 8%. It's a subtle back and forth that goes on all the time.
With all the emphasis on balance, you'd think that Blizzard would micromanage the in-game economy to the nth degree. This quote (or this paraphrasing) from Lead Designer Tom Chilton from Gamescom stuck out rather prominently in my mind when I read it:
Blizzard Interview at Gamescom
No gold sinks are coming soon because of the large variance in the amount of gold players have.
What in the heck are they thinking?
Raising the white flag
Let's call this what it is: Blizzard is surrendering the war against inflation.
Like DPS numbers and raid mechanics in World of Warcraft, real-life financial markets and the economy are heavily watched and regulated. While I'm sure all you armchair libertarians might take issue with the extent at which a government should regulate the economy, there's little question that bad things happen when the ball gets dropped (or, in some cases, when the ball is never even picked up in the first place).
What's a gold sink?
For those new to the concept, a gold sink is simply some (usually) non-essential item or service that takes money out of the World of Warcraft economy. Vial of the Sands is perhaps the most aggressive example in Cataclysm thus far -- each one that's crafted sucks tens of thousands of gold out of circulation -- but it's far from the only one. The 10% off the top that the Auction House takes, reforging, repair bills, and soon transmogrification -- all of these are gold sinks.
Typically, as WoW ages, game designers put more large gold sinks into the game. At first, advanced riding skills were gold sinks (900g to get the ability to use a 100% speed ground mount -- a lot of money at the time). Now, gold sinks typically take the form of mounts and items. In Wrath, there was the 20,000g Reins of the Traveler's Tundra Mammoth. The materials to craft Vial of the Sands cost around 30,000g. Even in patch 4.2, we have a few smaller (but definite) gold sinks: the 1,300g+ Crimson Lasher pet, the 1,300g+ Hyjal Bear Cub pet, the 437g Mushroom Chair, and the 3,000g+ Mylune's Call.
Gold sinks are often seen as luxury items, a way to flaunt wealth. But that's not why they exist. They're small battles in the losing but necessary war against inflation in World of Warcraft.
Gold inequality is the problem
Blizzard cites the variance of size in WoW bank accounts as the reason for not instituting a gold sink. That's bizarre thinking -- the inequality is the problem. Big players in the Auction House game are racking up bankrolls in the millions and even tens of millions. Even for more casual gold cappers, five-digit account balances are the norm and having hundreds of thousands is far from rare.
Now consider the more casual player. While they arguably have more in-game money now than they've ever had, at the same time, the gap between the WoW casual class, the WoW middle class, and the WoW upper class has never been larger. It's okay if the upper class -- those who play WoW for the Auction House -- are way ahead of the rest of the players, since they'll always have more money than they'll ever need. The problem happens when the middle class -- those who simply play the Auction House -- start blowing the casual class out of the water financially.
Why? Because it's the middle class that helps set the prices on the Auction House. They're not the ones buying Spectral Tigers. They're the people in trade asking to buy a pair of Valor bracers. They're the ones who spent a huge percentage of their bank account to buy that one i378 BOE in the earlier days of patch 4.2. They play the Auction House for some of those smaller rewards you can get -- a small but measurable advantage in the PVE game.
But these middle-class buyers are also buying just about everything that those more casual players are buying. They're grabbing food off the Auction House. They're buying glyphs for themselves and for alts. They're buying materials to help level professions or to just make a few Mythical Mana Potions for that heroic they're running later.
Because the middle class has so much money, they're willing to pay more for the basics. If they need a Flask of a Draconic Mind for a raid, they'll buy it regardless of the price -- 100g is a drop in the bucket. "Glyph of Spirit Tap costs 150g? Man, that's a lot, but I need it for my alt."
For more casual players, these necessities make up a significant portion of their bankroll. And worse yet, for absolute beginners, some of the most important elements they need -- say, that glyph -- are absolutely out of reach without strong knowledge of how to play the Auction House. That's the problem; inequality leads to more inflation, and more inflation requires people to do more to keep up. Sure, you may have cleared 80g for finishing that heroic yesterday, but what about that level 25 player who just got access to a glyph slot? They get a few silver for doing what you get 80 gold for. And without a doubt, these players are the ones who need those meager funds the most.
Gold sinks generally draw interest from all players. Everyone wanted that Tundra Mammoth, since it offered the ability to repair on the fly. New mounts have a cool factor. None of this stuff is necessary for players to have. It's just a little something extra to keep the economy from falling apart.
The consequences
Surrendering the war on inflation will have terrible consequences, mostly for the most casual of players. Without a steady Auction House income, these players won't be able to afford much beyond simple repairs. The middle class of players are going to feel the pinch too -- a BOE piece of gear will probably cost 250,000 gold or more in the opening days of patch 5.0.1; basic flasks might run thousands of gold each. A single Pandaren herb might run 100g.
Obviously, inflation is going to happen no matter what Blizzard does. But by surrendering the war, inflation is going to get much worse that much sooner.
Are gold sinks the only solution?
If Blizzard doesn't want to put in a new gold sink, one would hope it's got a plan to deal with the consequences. Certainly, dealing with inflation doesn't require a gold sink, but it's the most elegant solution.
What are the other options? Well, if inflation is rampant and newer players need to buy the bare essentials, the game will have to pay out progressively higher rewards for simple quest completion and monster drops. (One wonders why these drops and rewards are so tiny as-is -- 10 silver doesn't buy anything.) Blizzard will need to give players the tools to deal with out-of-control prices.
But does that really solve anything? Pumping more gold into the World of Warcraft economy will only worsen the existing problem. And worse yet, it will rapidly erode any kind of savings that players have. Your local economy works because of the actions of 10 or so major (~1,000,000g) players, backed up by another hundred or so minor players (~100,000). With inflation making the act of working for more money than you immediately need futile, these players are less likely to keep the economic motor humming. The consequence of that: Not being able to find what you need on the Auction House when you need it. (If you've ever been on a low-population server or even the less-played faction of your own server, you know how frustrating it can be to see only 12 Wool Cloth listed at any given time.)
Certainly, Blizzard doesn't have to put a shiny new 50,000g mount in the game, or a bunch of 10,000g pets, or something even more expensive like player housing. But it's the most effective, elegant solution to a problem that will only get worse without attention.
Filed under: Economy, Cataclysm, Gold Capped
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 7 of 10)
thawedtheorc Sep 20th 2011 6:12AM
Have you ever been on the PTR? Everyone is given a huge amount of money so they can get to max level and tweak their gear for end raiding/pvp or what not for testing purposes.
Then have you seen how much items then cost in the AH? A gem in a regular server that can go from 50-500G now will cost over 20K or higher.
And good Lord! You want to encourage these newer crop of players who STILL beg for everything instead of questing and dungeons. In game charity is not needed. Blizz CAN control issues like that via lower vendor prices. Not taking from this player you deem has 'too much stuff' and gives to another who is too lazy to work for it in game. This is WoW. No one has a poor toon because it is mentally ill or fighting a catastrophic disease.
Poor people do not exist because someone else has a larger portion of the pie. That would mean there would always be a finite amount of pie to go around. A healthy economy has an infinite amount of wealth as time goes on and more people play and create products and services- ie value/wealth.
Trying to control the actions of others to stave off inflation via these ideas you guys are coming up with is what always makes things worse in the long run.
Take my money away that earned? Fine. I will keep raising my prices and pass the taxing on to my buyers.
BlackTiger Sep 20th 2011 4:32AM
Simply remove all BoE epics. Easy and simple.
wow Sep 20th 2011 4:44AM
4.3 epic gems should be a decent gold sink if they're only lootable as Raid rewards.
wow Sep 20th 2011 4:45AM
Except ofc they're not, you're only going to fuel the issue further.
./goes to get more coffee
thawedtheorc Sep 20th 2011 5:53AM
Micromanaging any economy has an enormous amount of unforeseen consequences. Never been able to understand where the idea of one central control has the wisdom to control a market past the short term.
Taxing those you deem to have too much money to control inflation only makes things worse as well. People will pass on their lost gold in higher prices in the AH and make the inflation worse in the long run.
justacronk Sep 20th 2011 7:39AM
@thawedtheorc
You'd be right, except your prices are set by what others are willing and able to pay for them. Sure, you might be able to pass on the costs in the short term, but eventually the system would grind down gold levels and you'd need to lower prices to make a sale.
Think of it like the Great Depression - things were cheaper because the majority of people had no money to buy it.
And micromanaging a relatively small and simple economy is doable. It's the big ugly ones you see in RL that can't be managed like that.
nymrohd Sep 20th 2011 6:09AM
Battlegroup or Continent-Wide Auction Houses. One auction house for every faction of every server in each region. The supply will boom beyond the demand, auction house players will find it increasingly harder to create monopolies and undercutters will drive the prices of auctions to zilch.
cendrake2 Oct 17th 2011 1:10AM
Do you remember when AH scans crapped out because there were more than 40,000 auctions listed on a single server? Can you imagine trying to get a scan for an AH serving an entire battlegroup? Much less getting a scan of every auction in North America?
Yeah, people on low volume servers would love it, but it won't happen.
Hoofio Sep 20th 2011 6:16AM
We need socialism!
Blizzard should have a method for providing levelling characters with the basics of what they need without ever having to visit the auction house (apart from selling ofc)
Enchants, glyphs, profession mats (silver rod, I'm looking at you) should be obtainable through questing/faction grind on a limited basis. Having some time-heavy method of obtaining what a newb needs would still allow alts of rich capped players to just buy what they need saving time. It would also add more flavour to faction rep.
I haven't quested in new Desolace yet but I did on my main way back in vanilla. One lot of Centaur used to require you getting them a target dummy .. I looked in AH but could no way afford one from there and didn't know any engineers in game so I was stuffed.. twas very frustrating.
If factions all had profession masters who could supply quest goods for a vendor fee (or even a small quest) I think that would rock.
pokerspiv Sep 20th 2011 6:19AM
What the author is missing here is that not every server has 150g glyphs and other such overpriced items. When Blizzard says "the average bank account varies dramatically", they mean from server to server, not just player to player.
On high pop raiding servers, prices for many consumables are lower than they were in wrath.
rayden54 Sep 20th 2011 7:01AM
I have a few ideas.
What if instead of vendors selling the BoE vendor items for VP, they sold them for 2,500g plus a certain amount of VP. Even if people buy and resell them, the initial 2,500 gold is gone. Obviously, the gold price would have to drop once the items become outdated.
You could do something similar with BoE crafted Epics. Have the recipient purchase a soul-bound "work order" from a vendor that's consumed when crafting the item. The resulting item should still be BoE. You could drop the work order requirement from outdated items as new tiers are released.
Perhaps more controversial, I wouldn't mind the ability to buy a full set of entry-level gear upon reaching max level. By entry-level, I do mean either iLvl 305 (min. requirement for the 85 normals) or 325 (min. for non-troll heroics) not entry-level raiding. Right now, it's quite possible to reach max level and be barred from the dungeon finder altogether because your iLevel is too low (especially if you use heirlooms). Ultimately it would save a bit of time, and provide someone with a way to start out an off-spec.
If they wanted, they could even "sponser*" GDKP runs where a percentage of the pot is charged as a "fee." *Sponser as in add in-game support for not actually hosting them.
I wouldn't increase the costs of necessities like repairing or reforging since that would simply hurt people who don't have a lot of gold, and while vanity items are nice a lot of "rich" people wouldn't want them. There's no reason to remove them though.
To me, the best gold sink would be something consumable, that saves time, but isn't strictly necessary, and also isn't prohibitively expensive. If it costs too much, only the rich buy it, and everyone else just goes without. If you're just looking to remove gold (which is all a goldsink does-it doesn't redistribute) then it's the same if one person spends 10,000g for something or 10 people spend 1,000 for it. The only difference is the number of people who might buy it.
I also agree with droknar on limiting the number of auctions you can post per day (per account not per toon). Set it high enough that most "normal" people will never see it, sure, but limit the people who post thousands upon thousands of auctions per day.
red-ketchup Sep 20th 2011 7:31AM
Presently i have 850,000 gold on my main.
i would gladly pay gold to get a 30 days game time :P
instead to pay 14.98$ for a month ... i would pay .... 20,000 gold ? 50,000 gold ? 100,000 gold ? for it.
it could help me sometime :P
since they are starting to jump the fence with Diablo 3 and the AH with some kind of ''real money'' stored in your account ..... i would transfert some ... to use later for game time.
Lachdanan Sep 20th 2011 8:04AM
That's not how that works: what you suggest is that Blizzard gives you money (and that's not going to happen ^^), whereas the Diablo 3 RMAH is about players trading amongst themselves the way they've always done.
Lachdanan Sep 20th 2011 8:02AM
"A single Pandaren herb" xD
Daryl Sep 20th 2011 8:08AM
Does Blizzard employ an economist?
A game this big with so many people would need an economist to micromanage the details.
Drakkenfyre Sep 20th 2011 8:14AM
I mean this only jokingly.
But have the system in Diablo 2. When you die, you lose half of your gold. Not even sticking it in your stash saves it. You die, it takes half the gold on you, or a percentage of what's in your stash if you aren't carrying any gold.
Or even worse, the Diablo 1 system where when you die, you drop all equipped items, and almost all of your gold, lootable by anyone else.
Monnezza Sep 20th 2011 8:45AM
Regular and daily quests in Wow grant a nice sum of money in exchange for a certain expense of time. This gold will never make you rich, but an hour of questing easily pays for an evening of raiding, both in terms of repairs and consumables.
Average players can equip themselves well enough to confront raid content just by running random dungeon (meaning heroics and zandalari here), and those runs usually provide more reward then they cost in repairs and consumables.
The constant inflation is a major concern only for the most casual players, that probably don't have enough time to regularly invest some of it into quest farming, even if they still have time to spend while in queue for their occasional random heroics or zandalari (I'm assuming a casual player will probably play the dps role, although direct experience sometimes proved the countrary). But these players are indeed the minority of the market.
The big chunk that makes economy go on and represent the demand is made of average players, whose income is made of quest rewards and loot from killing monsters or gathering materials. If we take apart the short periods after a new expansion is launched and some items'prices skyrocket because people are actually willing to spend more of their spare money, even the most seasoned auction grinders cant multiply their customers'funds. The average players do not have a big concern about inflation, because it is their demand that makes the market, and prices tend to settle not too far from the price they are willing to pay.
If an hour of questing can bring you about 400g, and an hour of farming herbs can supply you 100 herbs, you will not want to sell those herbs for less than 4g each, that makes 80g a stack, and counting everything in, the final price for a flask will be around that amount. People that can quest for an hour a day will probably find it a fair price. But if an hour of questing provided only 100g, the cost of herbs would quickly decrease in a similar way, since on the side of demand questing people would find it too expensive to pay more than 20g for a flask, and on the side of offer more herbalists would find it convenient to invest some time into herb farming until prices settled down.
My point is that the "rich" slice of players will always find ways to get gold capped, even if you slow them down, but that is not the big concern anyway. The big concern is the gap between the "average" and the "poor" players, since the first are the majority and tend to be decisive for settling the prices of the items, and the latter are the weak side that suffer this gap. Since the main source of income for the average player is essentially the time they spend farming, dungeoning or questing, the key point is to make it less lucrative, but in a way that has a reduced impact on the more occasional players.
So to make a long story short, my strategy would be to make quest and dungeon money rewards decrease one after another every week for each account on a certin server. Let's say the first quest reward of the week will grant you 50g, the second 40, the third 30, then 25, 15, 10, 5 and then settle to 1 or 2 gold per quest. The occasional player could gather almost the same gold as an average player by only questing for an hour every week instead of an hour every day, thus drastically reducing the gap. If this proportion was applied to both quests and dungeon rewards, the amount of money circulating would substantially decrease, and the AH prices with it.
There would still be the necessity to bind all characters of an account on a server to the same quest reward counter, but it would not be necessary to bind different servers, and maybe different factions on the same server. Of course you should tune the monsters'loot so that questing would still be valuable, or at least not worse than just farming mobs after reaching the lower cap in rewards.
I am aware that such a novelty would probably cause people to tear their robes and commit mass-suicides or send killers into Blizzard Offices of course. This is just my idea for an alternative to gold sinks.
Thystle Sep 20th 2011 9:00AM
Why not provide the absolute basics for a set price? The base-level glyphs that add minor boosts; basic food-stuff (minimum buff-level); less-than-optimal potions/flasks; etc. Make these things available from a vendor and watch prices on "luxury" items drop as demand for them decreases.
Example
Instead of paying 100g in mats for a Mythical Mana Potion, I could go over to NPC-A and buy a lesser version for 10g. Have the price and amount gained scale (as so many other things do) with level so that low-level characters (though they usually don't need such items as frequently) have easy access to them as well.
Trilynne Sep 20th 2011 9:02AM
Aren't transmog and void storage going to be gold sinks?
George Sep 20th 2011 9:07AM
How about this. If you spend 4 months focused on getting a million gold, don't complain about gold sinks. You're causing the problem in the first place.
Normal players do not do that, so normal players have far less gold than you.
I would say that on average a normal player (who doesn't put effort into farming up as much gold as they possibly can, and write a blog about it in the process) has probably got 10,000 to 50,000 gold, and they can use that up quickly by buying a couple of BoEs, 310% flying on alts, etc.