Quote:
Originally Posted by Demisis_P2P
What do you think the bailout was?
What do you think housing market bubbles are?
Should Era start buying back cars for 16k as well then?
These guys paid for an advantage; for a group of stats. They didn't pay for an item.
If the amount of the item mattered at all then MP5 would be worth 4 times less than it was 3 years ago since there were only 2 of them back then. Guns change price almost immediately after a buff or a nerf, regardless of how many of them there are.
The value (not COST) of items on Era represents the relative advantage over the average item in relation to the money supply, and people with the best item have no reason to ever sell, so as the money supply increases the price of the best item increases exactly in parity.
If everybody was using handguns and they all had 1k an AK47 would sell for 50k.
If everybody was using handguns and they all had 1mil an AK47 would sell for 50mil.
These guys aren't worried about their item losing its rarity, they're worried about losing their $2 million advantage.
And you can test this easily, by making a new gun with the exact same stats as the MP5 and releasing it for whatever price you were going to release the MP5 for, and these same people will still complain just as much.
|
*In my indian voice* Woah, buddy.
You missed my entire point, it wasn't the release of more of these items that I was aiming at. It was the price of their release, which is: 100,000$ instead of the 5x more they purchased it for.
If the item had been released at the 300,000$, the price it should of been back then, this conversation would not be happening. However, it wasn't. And those players that traded MASSIVE amounts of items and/or money to obtain them from whatever sellers there were, would really get the **** end of the stick if it were to be released at prices far less than that.
And if the players are still the concern, that shouldn't be the case.
This idea is not just going to screw over the rich players alone, but any player that has excelled in this market to a "solidified status" in weaponry.
Simply to compensate those players who were unsuccessful or otherwise to lazy to put forth the effort? Not logical nor just.
You don't place late runners in the middle of the race, right next to the ones that are ahead and call it "just". You appropriately restart the already almost finished race in which everyone is placed at the starting line and no one feels their efforts have been in vein.