|
|
http://license.netmovie.com.cn/w ... age=TheModelEconomy
经济模型
文 / Scatter - 译 / Jjgod (未完成)
生活中有个方面，在 mud 里边从未被处理得很好，那就是经济。有的 mud 完全不曾认真实现一个可行的经济体系，它们仅仅是给物件分配上一个一个的数值，就乐观地开始观望结果了。 当然也有些 mud 作过尝试，但由于种种无法预料的复杂因素和意想不到的游戏方式而失败了。但不管哪一种，我们都一下就可以指出失败的经济体系的明确标志——无论是什么玩家，只要稍微花点时间，总能可笑地获得大量的现金；即便在他急需金钱——这种情况很罕见——的时候，他也只要花一两个小时进行“收割”就可以轻松地满足自己的需要了。通常来说，所谓的“收割”都是些到指定的地方，在很小的风险下杀掉 NPC 们。然后现金就可以直接从他们的尸体上拿到，或来自卖掉这些可怜生物的装备的收入。
这些特别富有的玩家可以支付得起游戏中任何他们喜欢的东西。他们想要什么，他们就会有足够的钱买到。之所以这是个问题，不仅因为它使得本主题一点真实性都没有了 (设想如果金子是如此普遍，以至于所有人都有上百万的金币存在银行，它又怎么会用于流通呢？)，而且更因为它摧毁了游戏的挑战性。讽刺地，那些富有的友好玩家反倒成了游戏中的一个弊病，因为他们总喜欢把大量的金钱送给新手，以帮助他们起步。
为之烦恼的 mud 管理者经常尝试这样一些方法来解决这个问题。
第一个是减少或限制银行账号。这么做常见的结果是干扰玩家 (他们会自然地因为他们失去了或者被限制了财产而感到愤恨)，同时对解决问题一点用也没有， 因为玩家需要钱的时候还是可以轻松地获得。
第二个方法是限制“收割”， 通过诸如减少 NPC 身上的现金和减少他们身上物品的价格这样的方式。这么做的弊端很明显：实际上它只是减慢了“收割”的速度。这下玩家需要花更多的时间来筑构他们的金山，可到了最后，结果没什么区别。而且，这还让新手感到上手更为困难了——初级的玩家还没掌握足够的“收割”技巧，但他们仍然需要钱来进行训练和购买装备啊。
另一个尝试是通过创造一些特别昂贵的东西来榨干那些富翁。常见的例子是自造房屋、提供了一些可定制特性的帮派房屋，等等。确实，这会消耗大量的金钱，往往只建一座房屋就要花上几千黄金。不幸的是，这反而刺激了玩家更疯狂地攫取金钱的兴趣——为了支付如此大量的金钱——甚至我们可以说这是在鼓励他们进行这种行为。
这些方法都没有切中的关键问题是，生活所需的付出不足以抵消掉玩家的收入。在初级玩家那里，他们成长所需的花费总可以和他们的收入相等，可很快他们就有足够的能力获得远多于他们花费的收入了。我们需要的其实是一种随着时间不断变化的消耗。这样一来，玩家只要一进行这种“收割”，在获得收入的同时也会负上债务。如果平衡得足够好，一批批收入将马上被花在过长的时间上，剩余的利润是如此之少，以至于它和花去的大量时间不成正比。
显然，他们需要小心翼翼地应付这种有趣的游戏方式，使自己有足够的收入来填补生活的开支。
生活开支可能可以通过下面的一些方法实现：
税收 - 玩家生活的地方需要城市维护费、支付给军队的款项，等等。
租金 - 并非那种过时——但偶尔也会出现——的租赁物品方式， 而是在城市里租赁私人的房间或者房屋。
磨损 - 武器、盔甲、衣物，等等。 所有这些东西一旦受到了毁坏，或者用旧了，都应该换新的或者作修理。
雇佣 - 允许玩家招募佣兵、保镖等需要支付薪水的 NPC。
这当然不是一个完整的列表， 且不同 mud 有不同的主题，也就应该有不同的实现方式。毫无疑问，还有很多其他的可能。
一个经过仔细平衡的生活方式将可以把玩家大部分的收入都吸收过去——在往常这些钱是被储藏起来的。剩下的那部分收入则将被一些奢侈品——玩家想要的，但不是生活必需的那种物品——榨干。如果更理想一点的话，这些奢侈品要么是些零时的东西，一下子就被用光，要么就会带来更多的花费 (译注：其实很好理解，前者请想想香料一类的东西，后者则想想那个芭比娃娃的故事吧)。比如说，玩家如果买了一匹马， 他就要花钱把它寄养在马厩里，食物和马夫的服务也得计入开支。
另一个思路是使储藏本身变得更困难。比如说，我们没有一个安全的中央银行。在没有一个可以随意地把大量金币丢进去的账号时，最有希望也最精明的方法是自己建一个大量现金存放点。玩家可能会买下或者租借一个房子、安置一个保险箱、雇佣警卫——然而即便如此，那些钱仍然有被偷走的危险。
(译注：我们可能会注意到，在早期的类 ES2 mud 中，银行仍然有被洗劫的可能性，可惜到了后来，大部分的 mud 都去除了这个功能。)
With luck, what you end up with is a carefully balanced economy following the "faucet/drain" model. The basic idea of this model is that value constantly trickles into the world like water from a faucet (or a tap to us UK folk). This value usually takes the form of objects being cloned into rooms or into NPC in ventories. For example, an NPC that is killed and has its possessions taken will often be recreated after a delay period, creating a fresh set of possessions in the world - all of which are worth something.
This value then trickles out of the world when objects are destructed - like water running out of a drain. The trickiest part for muds is usually to make sure value drains at the same rate as it trickles in.
If value trickles in faster than it drains, then the amount in the world constantly increases - triggering severe inflation with ever more wealth available in the world. Alternatively, if it drains faster than it fills, poverty sets in as there is less and less wealth in existence. In most cases problems at either end of the scale are made much worse by fixed price shops which sell objects at given prices regardless of prevailing economic conditions.
There is an alternative economic model sometimes used in muds, which is referred to as the "loans standard" model. A key feature here is that there are no fixed prices - these are determined entirely by supply and demand. The idea is that in the real world, the amount of value is fixed - it neither grows or shrinks. When an object is created, it isn't built from nothing - it is built by converting other existing objects - raw materials into product. This conversion results in no overall change in value in the world. Prices are divorced from value - simply a convenient agreed exchange rate of objects. In effect, prices are continuously chosen by players - a sword is worth whatever someone else
is willing to give for it. All prices are relative.
In a mud, there are problems with running an economy this way - especially if the mud wasn't designed with it in mind from the start. It means, for example, that you can't have that reappearing NPC described before - it can't be recreated with a fresh copy of its possessions because doing so would add value to the world which is not allowed. You could allow it by treating it as a loan to
the world which must be paid back but this generates the new problem of ensuring that the loan is paid back.
The biggest problem with this kind of economy in the mud environment is that the mud world is neither static nor fully defined. In the real world, the amount of value is a fixed amount - everything that is, already is. Things are made by converting raw materials into products and destroyed by reducing products into raw materials. In the mud the amount of value is not fixed. The mud does not have a finite supply of raw materials that are put together to make objects - objects are generally created whole, 'as if by magic.' In addition, the size of the world is continuously increasing as more areas are coded.
So, in order for this kind of economy to work in a mud there has to be needs to be global tracking for object creation and destruction - effectively a 'world bank' to make the loans and accept return payments to ensure that the overall sum is zero. If the sum is not zero, then inflation (or less likely, deflation) occurs. It also means that every single object created into the game world must be tracked and listed as a loan, and every single object destructed must be tracked and listed as a payment. New areas added to the game significantly affect the balance, which must then be compensated for as a special case. Not only does this significantly complicate the mud's basic object management, it also adds a cpu overhead to operations that occur very frequently.
Further complications are added by the fact that huge chunks of the mud world are simply implied rather than simulated. For example, there may be a city with a population of over half a million people yet there will be nowhere near half a million NPCs wandering the city. Yet the economy needs to act as if they really do exist. The city may trade by sea and land with other cities that are unlikely to be coded for some time, but the economy needs to act as if they did exist. Players are the key 'effectors' in the mud, but the economy must behave as though they are a tiny fraction of the world.
My other main disagreement with the loans standard model is that of theme. In my own mud, I am aiming for a coherent, consistent, strong theme. I don't want prices to fluctuate arbitrarily depending on player actions, I want to be able to decide which areas are poorer, richer etc. I want to make sure the currency reflects a believable medieval system, with appropriate relative values and purchasing power.
Therefore, I'm following the simpler faucet/drain model, where the idea is to prevent inflation/deflation by keeping the amount of value in the world roughly constant, with valuing flowing into the world as objects are created (faucet) and is removed from the world as objects are destructed (drain). If the world is made bigger, the amount of value in the world increases and then stays at
this new level. The faucet is largely left alone, with objects created as needed by the game world. The management issues with this economic model are with the drain - effectively with making sure players spend money rather than hoarding, as described at the beginning of this article.
This kind of economy management allows you to manage things like pricing at the area-design level and lets you address problems without being forced to revalue your silver coins. It lets you assess pricing based on object rarity, effort etc. taking the implied parts of the world into account.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scatter is the High Lord of Dawn Whispers - a new custom built LPmud hoping to open for beta-testing in the near future. He is also a member of the Imaginary Realities Staff Writers. .
==================================================================================
Commented by Super:
我并不觉得MUD的经济就像scatter讲得这么简单。
MUD的既然能被成为一个dimension，就自然因该有完整的体制。
实际上就是一套完整的social science体系。
包括：
Economy（经济学，讨论社会的经济体系）
Sociology（社会学，讨论社会之间各个人之间的关系以及社会行为）
Psychology（心理学，讨论NPC的人工智能，以及玩家的个体行为）
这三者之间的关系是很微妙的，不能分开来讨论这三个层面的问题。 |
|
狗仔卡
发表于 2004-5-13 15:52:35
提升卡
沉默卡
变色卡
显身卡