It’s relevant if Billy doesn’t have permission to withdraw. It won’t work.
Also relevant if blizz were to add an hour delay to withdrawals to prevent this mail work around.
3 Likes
First, you cannot fly to Stormwind from Ratchet.
Second, it takes time. Let’s be generous and say that it only takes 10 minutes to travel to Stormwind from Gadgetzan. That is still at least 20 minutes round trip.
Are you going to tell us all that instant is not more convenient than a minimum 20 minute round trip?
1 Like
If Billy doesn’t have permission to withdraw from the guild bank, he would not likely have asked that Johnny deposit that thorium into the guild bank, would he?
Which invalidates the claim of instant in this situation. Now if both do have permission than yes indeed it would be as you say but this is not universally true in all situations.
Blizz very well could put a timer on withdrawals to prevent this as well.
4 Likes
Are we back to trying to negotiate, or bargain for, an overhaul of the guild bank system for classic to address all the “cons” against guild banks in classic? Those would be the “cons”, or counters to pro guild bank arguments, that you claim do not exist, BTW.
Thanks Captain Obvious! You can catch a boat from Ratchet to BB and fly from there, hence short flight.
That’s not at all what I’m saying. Once again Fesz, I am not asking for linked guild banks. Regardless, anyone who is in a hurry is going to make a 20 minute round trip over waiting an hour for the mail service aren’t they, which was the original point.
1 Like
Are you back to pretending you know the time it would take for Blizzard to complete the proposed changes and how much effort/resources they may or may not be willing to contribute?
1 Like
But, they are not going to make that 20 minute flight if they can get that thorium instantly if Johnny deposits in the guild bank in Stormwind and Billy can withdraw it from the guild bank in Gadgetzan.
Or are you also going to try to negotiate, or bargain, for an overhaul of the guild bank system in the hopes of making the addition of the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks more acceptable to those opposed to that non vanilla QOL convenience change.?
I never claimed to know “the time it would take for Blizzard to complete the proposed changes and how much effort/resources they may or may not be willing to contribute”.
I only claimed that it would likely take additional time as well as development resources to overhaul the guild bank system.
Call it whatever you want. Reasonable logical people call it a solution to your imagined problem that is dependent situation and circumstances.
2 Likes
An “imagined problem” needs no solution, right?
Pro guild bank advocates, though, may feel that valid, logical, rational and reasonable arguments against guild banks that are supported by Blizzard’s own actions (reinstating that one hour delay to the mail system) and statements may very well require trying to negotiate an overhaul to the guild bank system for classic in order to make it more palatable to Blizzard to add the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks to classic.
Aside from your tired old “QoL” tripe, yeah, that’s exactly what I’ve been trying to do. If said overhaul were to take place to bring guild banks in line with the functionality offered by bank alts, they wouldn’t be a QoL convenience would they? They would be a static system that negates the need for hundreds of bank alt characters. There is no hidden motive here.
This is why I asked the question earlier in this thread about whether it would be acceptable to people to have a guild bank that offered identical functionality. You stated that you would still prefer bank alts. That’s your position and you’re entitled to take that position.
Don’t try and make out that there’s some scheme going on to get QoL garbage added through the back door because there isn’t, as has been stated multiple times.
4 Likes
I appreciate your honesty.
1 Like
A bit more math to add to the point. Let’s start with a few basic premises:
Realm pop 3k, 100% full, 50%A/50%H
For the first two years, things could be fairly close to how they were back in 2004-2006: gold is scarce and the riding expense prohibitive. But this is when the difference comes. Back then, TBC launched and players had both new incomes and new expenses. The biggest expense of TBC was learning to fly. Normal flying was a fairly inexpensive 225G. However, epic flying was 5000G.
The math: 3000players x .5per faction=1500players/faction
1500players/faction x 5000G= 7,500,000G/faction that flying removed.
So four years or so down the road, there will be a potential 7.5M gold in the economy that wasn’t there before. Even if that number comes in at just under half, 3.5M gold/faction will not be healthy for the economy. Using guild banks heavily would still mean getting the money out of the economy could be a very tall order. The original 6 tab guild bank cost 9350G.
The math:
3,500,000/9350 = 374 6 tabbed guild banks/faction. And that’s if only half the money stays in game.
Why is this scary? Each faction only has 1500 players total. In other words, to offset even half of the money that epic flying removed from the economy, 1 player in every 4 would have to have a 6 tab guild bank. I know that’s a long way down the road and all, but that’s a sizable mountain to climb when it gets here.
TLDR: Down the road, the lack of the major expenses that TBC brought could create an economy so swollen that even guild banks used on a massive scale wouldn’t be able to take enough gold out of the system.
Also, I know this is late in coming, but real life called.
Your going by the 6 tab guild bank model.
The 7th tab costs 10k gold, and 8th is 20k for a grand total of 39350g removed from the economy for every 8 tab guild bank.
Now not all guild banks will grow to that size, but the larger guilds will.
So let’s say of that 374 6 guild tabs 100 of them are actually at the 8th tab
That roughly doubles the gold spent on guild banks because of how much those last 2 tabs cost.
So of those 374 guilds 100 of them have spent an extra 3,000,000 in gold on the 7,8th tabs.
Guild banks are a very strong gold sink because as gold becomes more available the extra tabs become more reasonably priced in the eyes of the community and they will start putting gold into it as gold inflates. Thus lowering the rate of inflation and even deflating the economy a bit as it can take a massive amount of gold out of the economy at one time, especially on the last 2 tabs.
Also keep in mind that 1500 players per faction is active players. There can be well over 3000 players per faction, just not all will be on at the same time.
So it’s possible for there to be more than those number of guilds.
Edit if 375 guilds just bought guild banks to the 7th tab that puts us just under 20000g per guild, which results in that 7,500,000g spent, the 8th tab is 20,000g on it’s own meaning if every guild buys the 8th tab it would take 187.5 guilds buying the 8th tab to take that much gold out of the economy.
Guild banks have the potential to take that 7,500,000 out of the economy through the life of classic and as the server ages guilds fall appart and new guilds form, resulting in more guild banks to eat gold out of the economy.
2 Likes
We are really getting desperate now.
Trying to tie achievement rewards into classic now, I see.
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that there was a reason why Blizzard tied tabs 7 and 8 to achievement rewards and just didn’t hand out access to those tabs for free.
I used the 6 tab figure because when I checked the 2.3 patch notes, they said that guild banks were originally 6 tabs with the 7th and 8th coming with Guild Achievements (I think guild achievements were either from Wrath or Cata). I apologize if I am mistaken in this assumption.
Also, I’m not saying that guild banks aren’t a good gold sink. I’m wondering if even using guild banks as a gold sink will be enough to prevent the long term economy from being overwhelmed with gold.
Who said you would need an achievement to buy them in classic? They still cost that gold to buy. The achievements didn’t give you the tab. The gold spent did. With no achievement system it would just be gold needed. Which makes guild banks a much cost effective.
Also as a side note, only the 8th tab required an achievement. The other requirement for buying the voucher was guild reputation.
But please keep trying to discredit arguments by claiming I want something else added.
The only thing I mentioned was the gold cost. It’s easy enough to remove the achievement and reputation requirements to buy it from a vendor. They can put it in the same vendor that sells guild tabards. The requirements to buy it for achievement and reputation are ran by “if then” logically scripts, it’s a very easy change to how they are bought.
2 Likes
With using the gold prices for the 7th and 8th tabs it makes guild banks easily be able to cover the needs of that 7,500,000g in the inflation issue. Also I would like to say that number is actually higher than it needs to be because when comparing gold income from lvl 60 to 70, lvl 70 could get a lot more gold. Not just from venforimg, but from the introduction of daily quests.
And the guild bank achievement system came in cata, but I am in no way arguing for achievements to be added.
1 Like
I claimed that you wanted to tie achievement rewards into classic. That you do. Tab 8 is still an achievement reward, and tab 7 was, at least originally, an achievement reward.