New rent cost
posted by Björn
2004-05-27 14:40:58

Björn 2004-05-27 14:40:58
I think the new rent cost is terrible and forces many of use to spend way too much time collecting rent money. The fact that if you have collected a lot of money for once, you are struck especially hard by the proggressive taxes.

Anyone agrees and wants this changed?
Chark 2004-05-27 20:11:51
I agree, one thing I liked about the BNs when I first began to play them was the fact that you could rent "anywhere" and that the rent was free. Now the rent of one of my chars is something like 1 gold 10 silver/day and he don't even have any special eq, only a jewelled ring. If I remember correctly the rent was free without that ring, what is quite silly imo.
Aredhel 2004-05-27 23:09:38
What's rent like novadays for good metal set, a focus, and a decent weapon?
Mandor 2004-05-27 23:20:52
Say, atleast 4 gold if you are in your hometown.
Björn 2004-05-27 23:40:34
Four gold used to be enough to rent more than a decent set, containing shining and a scroll or something nice! I remember when I heard about a top at 20, which was when Rasta hoarded MANY foci when he was warlord for a long time. Today 20 gold rent doesn't mean a really nice set.
Scar 2004-05-28 10:45:41
I've decided the best solution to optimizing your rent cost is to retire all your characters. It did leave me with another problem for a while; what to do with all my newfound spare time.
Beran 2004-05-28 11:22:58
I don't have much time to play, but due to the rent changes, i can only log on when i know i have enough time to gather enough money to keep the eq until i log on again. Then again, i don't see this much of a problem since it has always been easy for me to get that money. Maybe i have been just lucky, or maybe i die often enough to lose any good eq so i don't have to pay rent for it.
Luke 2004-05-28 16:56:02
well i have found nice way how to solve this, i keep all my chars naked, and what i love when im retireding char, i just ask for few silver and retire without need to get some eq!
though when i played Litovel and Smrtihlav, i got insta to 60 gold rent per day!!!!!!! and i had only normal eq and 2 heals 2 rocks , simply basic eq
Björn2004-05-29 15:06:50
I have also noticed that this prevents me from sparing like I used to. I used to consider 500 gold a fortune and would gladly spare 100 of it to anyone needing money. Now I can never afford giving money away if I have less than 500. Especially when I rarely get over 50. Today I had a bejewelled shield spare, and I would have given it away to the guy looking for shields in Angdil. But I couldn't since I needed the money from selling it and he could never pay my rent cost. So this is in no way hitting the hoarders worst.
Zrifft2004-05-30 14:31:33
Well, rent costs solved, got followed by fast trackers as soon as I exited noc, had no chance of escaping.
Force2004-06-01 20:12:29
I think you're whining. Kill five assassins per session and you're sorted. That takes how long, five minutes?
Zain2004-06-01 20:41:27
5 assassins = 5 gold, maybe a couple more when you sell weapons. That's only enough to cover your rent if you have either no equipment or you play every single day.
Bagger 2004-06-04 11:26:41
I mean, who wants to log on just because you have to before the eq expires? it´s crazy that it should cost this much, and when even the money, which you pay your rent with, costs to rent with, its sick. SICK. I have no clue wether it´s their ass or their balls the management "think" with.
Björn 2004-06-04 13:09:18
For example just a pale blue stone adds 2 golds and 10 silver to the rent cost! That's how much half a fullset used to cost to rent!
Zain 2004-06-04 18:04:46
Bagger, saying that the management think with their balls would imply that they had any.

Personally, I think they should remove rent costs altogether, and mend costs. I hardly think that the elves of Rivendell had to pay to have their armour mended, and that the people of middle-earth lived out of inns. Why do management only consider 'rp' when it suits them?
Hanne 2004-06-04 18:35:15
Well, beacause there are no receipts anymore, that could really work. Hoarding wouldn't be as it used to since carrying more than 110 lb is a disaster for any character.
Hanne 2004-06-04 18:42:50
This however, is how I would like it. Travellers who wish to rent at an inn should pay for the weight they carry, not the value of the items. Legendhome-owners, on the other hand, could of course store as much equipment as they wanted for free. They are instead inhabitants of a city or a region and should only pay some kind of tax (which could be this percentage of their cash that we are currently paying) and the upkeep for their home.
Zain 2004-06-04 19:31:11
It's sort of odd that only the richest people have homes. I doubt that the people of Bree for instance mainly lived in the inn, whilst only a few had houses. I'd bet that nearly everyone who lived there had a house.
And why would a traveller have to rent in an inn, why can't he just stay in a tent outside?

Perhaps everyone should get free BN-style rent, but renting at an inn would give you extra regen or something.
Scar 2004-06-08 14:53:35
The overall motivations for increased rent can be summarized by two points:

A) Gold were not being removed from the game as fast as it was being generated.

B) Pt A, made it possible for power-players to hoard equipment to an unprecedented scale. (30+ scrolls)

The results of the rent changes have been monitored for a while now, and we may soon experience further adjustments.

What would be your suggestion to achieve the following effects:

1) Near impossible chance of hoarding
2) Less impact on newbies
3) A reasonable balance between gold generation and gold consumption
Zain 2004-06-08 15:21:04
1) Exponential item cost perhaps. 1 scroll would be cheap, 2 twice as expensive, 3 would be four times as expensive, and so on. I don't know how difficult this would be to code.

Personally I think that if someone having 30 scrolls is a problem, then the problem is with how powerful scrolls are, not that someone can rent 30 of them. It takes the piss seing whats-his-name spam-reciting blue scrolls whilst killing hordes of characters with zero risk. The delayed-recite has gone some way to cure this I think. I think if someone is to lose their hard-earned items, it should be through a fairer way than them not being able to afford them because they don't have time to spend half their session making money.

The receipt changes stopped people hoarding armours and weapons, so increasing the rent costs to try to stop them seems pointless. It's a bit unfair that because happened to come into a valuable item they have to spend extra time collecting money just to keep it. This isn't so much of a problem for the
Tushie2004-06-08 17:21:06
1) Use weight to stop hoarders, Most of my deaths on this game have been moveless deaths I watch my wieght/moves very carefully.

2) Weight will not impact newbies, other than they will go moveless faster

3) Sell legend equip/items at vendors and I will spend all the extra gold I earn on draughts scrolls and weapons for friends. Other games I play have items you can spend your money on Mume is very different in that way.
Tushie2004-06-08 17:24:14
Make scrolls 10 lbs each instead of 1 lb. Then 30 scrolls would be 300 lbs every move is sheer torture.
Björn 2004-06-08 17:54:43
I don't understand why people who like to hoard shouldn't be able to do that. You were just speaking of how some things disappear from game too slow. Letting it stay in the hoarders' pouches is a good way!

You also seem to have a weird idea of what hoarding means. It means to be keeping equipment you don't need yourself. Therefore you can never be hoarding scrolls, as you might need them all. And as scrolls are worthless in close fights anyway, so I don't see a problem with someone having many of them.
Phantasm 2004-06-08 21:32:44
I think it sucks. period. and i think receipts suck. period. and i think the resize thing at noc sucks. period.
Amras 2004-06-09 02:05:59
Everyone that whines about "hoarding" are the noobs who can't get anything by themselves.
Beran 2004-06-09 09:17:38
I think the rent costs are quite ok atm. But yes, it causes problems for me too. Some chars i can't play short sessions with at all and leveling up lowbies with nice eq is not as smooth as it used to be. Rent costs being higher means that if i log on my new scout for half an hour a day, i need to pay just too much attention on getting the rent money.

Although this is only problem because my lowbie scout has nice eq, so i guess i shouldn't be whining.
Wojtek2004-06-09 11:00:46
I really like the changes a lot, only think I would change ... I wrote it allready .. is dont count gold agains rent ...
Amras 2004-06-10 02:19:10
It's the worst change in the history of MUME...orso!
Ghandi 2004-06-14 11:15:37
The only problem I have with rent costs is that getting the 3000 gold i need for Tharbad citizenship is much harder :(
Moortek 2004-06-15 03:46:46
The game is socialistic. The successful should be rewarded! Of course they should have higher rent, but of course the weight is more relevant... That stops hoarding since receipts is gone. I seriously think that management wants mume to be more and more boring and make people stop playing. I have no idea why, but lastest year's result of changes makes me more and more convinced.
Hope I didn't whine too much, cause that wasn't my meaning to do, just making my point...
Phantasm 2004-06-15 03:54:24
Moortek I completely agree. Alot that they have changed here has made the game morale changed slowly. Ever since the point of visible wps was changed, everything has gone downhill. Not only have things begun to suck for darkies more than usual, but things are beginning to suck for pukes as well. Changing stored spells, mending issues, receipts, etc. And even making the game eq suck more than usual cause of overtime damage.

WE CANT EVEN DO rogge anymore. for someone to do balrog now, it'd have to be 7 legend warriors with max sets that all crush in lowyn sanc :P The only people you see in full shining now are old players who retired after doing rogge in the old days or those lucky enough to pick off pukes/darkies with the right pieces :P

Some changes back need to be made.
Phantasm 2004-06-15 03:56:05
and for the rogge thing as well, they would all have to be over lvl 60, and in the middle of age 3.
Sogard 2004-06-15 06:37:43
The problem with Balrog now isn't doing the damage, it's killing it without letting the Balrog react it's insane regen throne I thought?

Balrog aside, the rent changrs just flat out suck. I rented a well-equipped dwarf in tbad a month before the change, and it was 3 gold rent without cit, I made the mistake of logging him after the change, and I couldnt re-rent because my rent was now 13 gold. Ended up getting pked on the way to bree by getting chased moveless as a 3rd age dwarf with fgc and gleaming(yay for dwarf nerf).

I don't log anyone other than my torc thief now, because it's the only char who I can get the money for to cover rent. nearly 3gp rent, with my best eq being a maxchanted fang and a mw shield..
Comment this:
Your name:


Your comment:

Avaliable characters: