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 9 of 10)
HunterFromTheStart Sep 20th 2011 11:57AM
Player Housing. Monthly taxation, with the option to have the AH in your house..... For a price!!
Angus Sep 20th 2011 12:44PM
The parallels to current US issues are too good to pass up.
Apparently not even a gold based economy helps.
johnny.ramos1 Sep 20th 2011 12:47PM
I dont have much gold, but I make decent money in real life. let me sell Blizzard store mounts and pets for gold without the fear of losing my account. or, limit the gold cap to 100,000 for your whole account. regardless of how many Alts you have. even if you have 10 accounts it doesnt matter becuase the majority of the player base doesnt have gold coming out of their butts. so you're forced to sell that new purple for a decent amount, not 35,000g
Gnug315 Sep 20th 2011 12:52PM
I fail to see how the gold-capped players are the problem. They amass gold for the fun of it, not because they need to afit their entire guild with every BoE on every patch release. So they gold sits in their account and never reenters the economy. Next expansion, gold cap will be raised 1000%, and they'll go for the next plateau. Let them have their fun (I'm one of them btw).
Are the AH players setting the prices high? Only if they can, ie. only if there's no competition. Aggresively cornering markets by controlling mats is very rarely done effectively, so really what they're mostly doing is providing the casuals a service when they relist all their wares dozens of times every day.
Lets assume for a sec that noone cared about making a lot of gold. AH prices would rise, as nobody cba to list cut gems, flasks, pvp gear, enchants etc, and the casual player would get even less stuff for his casually-earned pitiful gold.
Btw, I'm all for some kind of exuberant gold sink. I recognize the danger re casuals being upset about not being able to afford it, so obv. it needs to be a huge vanity item. How about an obnoxiously large crown of gold to wear, costing 1 million? =)
Eirik Sep 20th 2011 8:07PM
LOL... you echo my "reply to an early comment" rant. Money not spent is *effectively* removed from the economy.
The downside is that that money can be returned to the economy at will. So the case where the money really is removed from the economy is the compulsive gold-capper, who will not spend the money because holding the money is their goal.
But not everyone with a 5, 6, or even 7 digit bank account will "hold the gold regardless of temptation."
Perry Sep 20th 2011 1:00PM
I've read ALL the way thru the comments, and saw some good suggestions. I saw some Auctioneers expressing empathy or a bear's defense. The issue at hand is more stratification than anything else.
My proposal: rather than a lower gold cap, a higher AH cut, a tax, or gold sinks would be to limit the bid and buyout prices of an item in the auction house to a function of it's item level or level range. Peacebloom should be capped at maybe 2g a stack. 359 BoEs to 3590 gold. From that pricing point, bids should be allowed and accepted. If no bids are made, the price is forced down by a percent every day. Your auction persists until sold, reaching 1c.
In this manner, Low-demand items become cheaper until a demand is found. High-demand items become more profitable, encouraging the market to supply a needed demand.
Prices would stay affordable to the market the items are INTENDED for. A 25 glyph may not exceed a price unreasonable to a character of level 25.
"But won't the system become flooded?" 100 auctions active per account at any given time. Canceling your auction in order to post something else deletes the item in question. Selling your item awards an surplus auction slot, remaining able to be filled for 24 hours, after which it vanishes, unless the item is sold, re-opening that slot for an additional 24 hours. A Serious Auctioneer would be running 1000+ auction slots, no problem. For a gold cost, they could extend the availability of their slots by an additional day if they need to go on vacation.
Casual accounts get what they need. Auctioneers, thru effective Auctioning, gain an increased ability to sell.
This solution CATERS TO CASUALS AND NEW PLAYERS, while still allowing middling and high-tier auctioneers to play the game. This solution is dedicated to those who have vendored their gear to afford 280 flying.
mgodish Sep 20th 2011 2:14PM
Can someone explain where, exactly, the problem is with having AH entrapeneurs gold capped? This isn't RL where income disparities lead to disparities in access to necessities. In WOW, the worst thing that happens if you are poor is that you can't buy BOE epics or vanity mounts, pets, etc. So what? If you can play the game, you have the capacity to make enough gold to suit your needs. Anybody who wants to raid with a full set of current tier BOE's without ever investing any time or effort is just being lazy...why tax the people who put time/effort/intelligence into gold making for this?
As for low level players being taxed by inflation, this works both ways. Yes, the glyph may be 200g, but rich players levelling alt professions allowed you to sell that stack of ore for a tidy profit. I recently rerolled on a new server and never once, from day 1, felt like I didn't have enough gold to do what had to be done to advance in the game (repairs, replacing outdated gear, etc). I didn't have full heirlooms or twink BOE blues, but it didn't matter. Questing is tuned to be fairly idiot proof as long as you A) attack the enemy B) don't try to be stupid and aggro the whole zone.
In summary, gold sinks are for players who either have more money than they know what to do with and want to spend it, or as a reward for a grind for players who aspire to have stuff instead of gold. Those who acquire gold for the sake of gold making don't do much to promote inflation, because they don't spend the gold they make. If anything, competition keeps prices lower than they would be
otherwise.
Eirik Sep 20th 2011 8:38PM
If you toss crafting out the window, then yes, inflation doesn't hit you, because while leveling there is nothing on the AH that you NEED, and passive money gains (dropped loot, quest rewards) makes up for your passive money losses (travel, repair, possibly food/water).
Just for one example, tailoring. Between auction house prices and accelerated leveling, you have to work very hard to create gear you would want to use as you level up. Tailoring eats cloth and spits out no desired (sellable) products until you get near the maximum ability. The value while leveling is largely in "using what you make". Which is highly difficult to choreograph in today's WoW environment.
A tailor can sell their cloth for large amounts to people leveling up alts, sure. But they do so only by cannibalizing their own progress.
Oh, and Tailor/Enchanter is recognized as one of the viable crafting skill combos, with the tailor providing the enchanting materials. They may be able to recoup some of their money selling unused enchanting material, but they don't have the other money making methods you're suggesting.
Pwnographer Sep 20th 2011 2:12PM
There is already a great gold sink in game... its the major players in the games economy. On an average week I will take about 100kg out of my servers economy. It goes into my pockets, and doesn't come out. That's after what I spend on mats to restock. I'd love to take the gold that I have and use it buy something from a vendor, to show off what I have done, but for me, and many many others the economy is a game in and of itself.
The problem is, and always has been, the middle class. The raiders, the herb farmers, the people that manage to do 20+ daily quests every day. These are the people that are responsible for inflation. If it wasn't for them, we would still be making profit, just not as crazily.
You also have to remember that if you put in a vendor gold sink, you will only encourage those that don't have in game wealth to just buy gold from gold sellers.
Darraxus Sep 20th 2011 2:20PM
I have never downrated more comments.
How is penalizing the rich going to benefit the rest of the population. It is the same thing as telling a raider that they can only receive one item per week for their raids. Eventually, those players are going to stop playing.
You want to complain about prices now? Prices will sky rocket without the competition that goes on in most auction houses from the Barons.
Most of the people over 1 million gold (myself included) tend to hold onto the gold. THAT IS A GOLD SINK. It takes the money out of the economy.
I make gold because it is fun for me. I also enjoy other aspects of the game. Just because I don't really care to PvP doesnt meant that I want Blizzard to make it no fun for PvPers. We don't tax roleplayers.
Many of the suggestions in this thread have been ridiculous and posted by people who don't even care about the AH mini game.
If you want the AH Barons to get rid of some of their money, I think that an Ethereum faction based on trading would be a great gold sink. As someone said before, you pay gold to gain reputation.
Friendly would get you a specially made banking outfit. Honored would get you some other perk. Revered could get you a title like "Tycoon" or "Baron" etc. Exalted would get you a second bank to store your crap. I know a lot of AH players who would pay a ton for more bank space.
Anyways, those are just my two cents.
Lorne Sep 20th 2011 2:40PM
I would pay a tonne for more bank space and I'm not an AH tycoon!
mibu.work1 Sep 20th 2011 4:02PM
Perhaps an elite membership that grants you certain privilages, but has a high entrance rate combined with a regular high fee.
For instance, say the alliance has 'The Socialites of Stormwind' and the Horde has 'The Bloodpact of the Laughing Skull', for diversity's sake. Entrance to each club is 100,000g, and a monthly cost of 5000g. In return, each week the participating members can bid on a mystery box containing double the content of, say, a satchel of Exotic Mysteries, or perhaps a bag of mixed ore, herbs, leather, cloth, gems, all from every profession level, or perhaps a bag with a rare piece of gear from any item level, a blue or a purple, perhaps even some stuff not available any more. The winners get the contents, which are random, and can put them on the auctions, but with the increased availability of low-level mats, lower-level gear, and various other contributing factors, the supply rises, and thus demand will decrease, and prices drop, while the upper-class get to gamble away their money with regular small cuts into their funds, creating a massive gold-sink for them.
With that in mind, 100,000 with a minimum monthly income of 5000 will become the standard for high living in WoW, but none of the benefits are truly exclusive, as these mounts, pets, gear, and mats are all available for redistribution.
Japith Sep 20th 2011 4:28PM
I've said it before. I'll say it again:
Full-fledged Goblin NPC-run Casino. The cartels are good at this sort of thing!
Pay gold for tokens only usable in said Casino (no refunds!). Win wonderful prizes (mounts, vanity items, perhaps filler gear slightly lower iLevel than current Raid quality). That little companion pet could end up costing a lot of gold by the time you finally won enough tokens to buy it.
Slots, Poker (maybe playable against other players?), in-casino Arena Matches viewable by onlookers from the stands - all with the ability to spend tokens on for gambling's sake.
That would be a gold sink. Yes, it would be 'borrowing' from Dragon Quest, but I think it would be so much fun - and it could possibly create an entirely new subculture to the game.
If the opportunity comes up, I'll mention this yet again until Blizzard makes it happen.
Eirik Sep 20th 2011 8:42PM
That's a mighty nice Tundra Mammoth you've got there. Would be a shame if it lost a kneecap due to a freak tire-iron mishap. By the by, I'm sure you'll get Mr Grabitall's money back to him by the end of the week. I know you're good for it. Right?
sarah Sep 20th 2011 5:42PM
I'm not saying that the AH is the cause. But large amounts of gold aren't actually the problem - if they were, they would lower the gold cap. The problem is inflation and the growing gap between the people who can afford to buy things, and the people who can't.
As you said yourself, you are an active AH player. I have time to AH or raid, but not both. My ability to raid is compromised by my inability to play the AH, because the raid drops are being passed around between the people with lots of gold. You don't farm, you raid casually - your money comes from playing the AH.
You're quite right that Blizzard has reduced costs for a lot of people, reduced opportunities to shed the gold. Things like the Chopper and Sandstone drake are a way to pull gold out of the market, but 'gold sink' - if you read the Blizzard post - refers in this case to the stuff that takes it away forceably. Repairs, enchants, gems. Those of us who don't play the AH can't afford to buy even one BoE, I've been saving for my bracers since the start of the raid tier! More vanity items would be fine. They've quite deliberately nerfed vendor costs, flying costs, and so forth, because those of us who don't have time to play the AH are struggling.
In real life, when there's rampant inflation it's always the people on minimum wage who struggle just to stay afloat. The difference here is that Blizzard have control over the game world, they can create artificial controls to even the playing field a bit.
Jon Sep 20th 2011 7:10PM
I said it before and I'll say it again. Penalize AH entrepreneurs and here is what will happen:
1.) You will no longer be able to find that item you need RIGHT THIS MINUTE on the AH. Guess you'll be crafting them yourself, something you could have done in the first place, since the market has dried up! Insert soviet russia joke here.
2.) Items will go UP in price as competition decreases. Can't craft the item yourself? Guess you're gonna pay through the nose. Raising the AH cut, or limiting AH activity hurts the smaller entrepreneurs worse than the larger ones (sound familiar?) The truly rich won't be hurt, they'll simply operate off smaller margins. But the guy who was just supplying glyphs on the AH for fun, helping to bring the price down a bit? He's gone now, and guess who's probably going to pay for that extra AH "tax" - you the consumer.
The RL parallels couldn't be clearer.
silverbees Sep 20th 2011 7:21PM
One word: Housing.
Blizzard said they'd eventually get to it then said they changed their minds. Add housing and all the stuff you "need" in a house and you've got the best gold sink ever.
Faroth Sep 20th 2011 11:32PM
I think Transmogrification is one of the best gold sinks they've put in. It has longevity rather than a one-time purchase.
red-ketchup Sep 20th 2011 8:00PM
in game services and you pay with gold :)
150,000 gold for a race change.
175,000 golf for a faction change.
200,000 gold for a server transfert.
Eirik Sep 20th 2011 8:48PM
Couple problems with this, I guess.
You compete with the real money Blizzard takes in for those services. Even if you assume that Blizzard does those "at cost", the loss of revenue has to be balanced by ... the perceived improvement of the economy. Blizzard would have to see that in terms of "improvements of other revenue streams" (subscriptions, for instance). Either "we lose fewer people if we do this" or "we get people (back) if we do this".
That's a real hard sell. How many people do you know that have (or would) stop playing because of the in-game economy?