From YPPedia
Revision as of 01:16, 22 May 2018 by Brandishwar (talk | contribs) (Opinion: Replying to Therobotdue)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Wikicities Migration
This page migrated from Wikicities (now Wikia) in July, 2005. The following contributors agreed to relicense their material here:
  • Barrister
  • Mercano
  • Zyborg

Other games

I'm wondering why other games don't have economy like this. It seems such an obvious design element. Take Puzzle Pirates and remove the puzzles and the pirates and you still got the core design of a great game. I hope OOO makes more games like this in the future ;-) --Ihope127 26 July 2005 16:26 (PDT)

Skellies are poe fountains?

How could a skelly fight be a poe fountain when all their booty comes from goods/poe taken from players? Seems like a closed loop to me unless they start off with some sort of booty.

There's a starter amount of PoE for skellie fights. Otherwise, no one would want to be the first group to challenge the skellies. --Barrister 09:12, 2 August 2005 (PDT)
They do. They give a base amount of 800 PoE, plus the division of whatever they won from previous fights. So if you defeat the skellies on the first fight after they spawn you'll win an item, your 100 PoE back, plus the bonus 800 PoE.--Fiddler 09:14, 2 August 2005 (PDT)
Didn't know that skellies came with a booty chest. Makes sense, thanks. -- Ken
I thought the bonus was 1000 poe? --VPeric


So, i'm interested in doing some serious work on this page. One of the things i was thinking about is to create a section on doubloon economies, on the doubloon exchange and what effects doubloon prices, how the economy is different when you have a lot of people who have to do more work to get PoE to buy doubloons, and others who can buy doubloons to sell off and get PoE, as well as how delivery prices change other sections of the economy. This is not entirely clear, however. Do people have any thoughts on this? --Bendotc 11:35, 16 August 2005 (PDT)

I think that'd be a very nifty idea to have a doubloon economy section. Most of obsessed with writing major piles of text folks haven't been too doubloony, so that's the only reason that such a section hasn't been added yet...we're glad to see you interested in doing so! (I also have a minor thought that you should click on the signature button to sign your comments ;)) --Guppymomma 15:00, 15 August 2005 (PDT)
Heh, sorry, i should know better. --Bendotc 11:35, 16 August 2005 (PDT)


This most recent addition is the main impetus for my placing the {{opinion}} (Usage) tag on the article. Phrases like "it may become more desirable" "it could eventually become" and all the examples which "limit a player's ability" are clear indications that this information is more of a speculative, subjective "how-to" rather than objective and factual. There is also quite a great deal in here which is analysis and explanation, which is not strictly opinion, but is a higher level than simply reporting how the mechanics work. Furthermore, I am not sure why you think they would need to be "fixed". YPPedia allows opinion-based articles to exist just fine. If you feel they have no place in this article, then we could break them out into another one. Chupchup 17:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Could we flag just those paragraphs instead of the entire article, or do you really think the article needs to be tarred with the opinion warning? Are there other sections you think are too opinion oriented? Just flagging the whole article doesn't tell either readers or editors what needs to be fixed. Wrs1864b 19:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
All the examples which "limit a player's ability" are not "speculation" or "opinion". Those are factual, as evidenced by other articles on YPPedia: clothing, ship, etc. Indeed the page about the Pirate rank explains limitations on you just because you hold that rank! The clothing article says, "On subscription oceans, much of the clothing available can only be worn by subscribers." While doubloon oceans don't have many of the same limitations that subscription oceans have, you still need doubloons to fully participate in the economy, since they're required to deliver orders for a significant number of item classifications.
There's also a big difference between "speculation" and "interpretation". And it's clear you're confusing the two. Something being open to interpretation doesn't make it speculative. What makes it speculative is if there are conditions in which the statement may or may not be true. I've already pointed out how "limit a player's ability" is completely factual, so let's turn to these two: "it may become more desirable" and "it could eventually become". Better yet, let's call out the specific sentences rather than your trimmed examples:
  • "As doubloon prices rise, though, it may become more desirable, even necessary to purchase doubloons with real-world cash to defray the cost in game."
  • "As the amount of PoE raised by pillaging is not connected to doubloon exchange rates - since that could lead to inflation - it could eventually become prohibitively expensive."
None of that is speculation. As doubloon prices rise, players will be priced out of the doubloon exchange, either by being unwilling or unable to pay the going rates. And earning PoE from pillaging or other ocean activities (foraging, commodity trading, etc.) may not be able to earn enough to make the exchange rates affordable.
People can be priced out of markets. This happens when prices rise. Doubloon exchange rates are no different. As such, those who are priced out of doubloon exchanges will either use cash to buy doubloons or leave the ocean altogether. Again, none of that is speculation. It is based on sound economic theory.
So show me how any of what I've written in this article is speculation or remove the Opinion tag. I can also add add any of the explanations I've provided herein to the article if you feel they will help understanding. Brandishwar —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandishwar (talkcontribs) 17:09, 18 May 2018
Yeah, so it would seem that everything you just discussed is in the nature of a "How-To Guide" or otherwise interposing ourselves between the game and the player, and telling the player how he should feel. There are many subjective terms used here. Can you quantify how desirable it will be? Put a number on a prohibitively expensive item? Those are value judgements, and that's the source of opinion I'm talking about. Yeah, it's all quite plausible. There's nothing I'm calling into question because it's potentially false or misleading. And I still don't see why you guys have such a revulsion to this tag in the first place. Plenty of articles carry it, and they're accepted just fine by the community, and by our policies and guidelines. Yet you're insulted! Get over it! Chupchup 06:07, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
So now you're resorting to personal attack, and attempting to interpret my "feelings"... Ugh...
First, I don't have a revulsion to the "opinion" tag. I have made significant contributions to the YPPedia based on my experience on the oceans. I've written entire articles - e.g. Private crew. Added, clarified, and enhanced sections in existing articles - e.g. Fruit running. And completely rewritten articles to alleviate confusion with regard to terms - e.g. Commanding officer and Executive officer. Many of my most significant contributions have been tagged as Opinion, or have been made to articles already tagged as opinion. So to presume I have a revulsion to that tag is what is insulting.
You also tagged the entire article as Opinion. That was Wrs1864b's primary objection, and I renew it here. To say the entire article is "opinion" is far from correct. Especially since you said what raised the "need" for the tag was my most recent contribution to the section on the economic impact of doubloons. Yet you tagged the entire article.
That what is considered "prohibitively expensive" or "desirable" varies from person to person doesn't make that a "value judgment". Everyone has a threshold of what is considered "desirable" or "prohibitively expensive". That statement is not subjective in any fashion. The threshold varies from person to person, but what I said in the article merely points out that one exists. That I cannot possibly quantify such for every person doesn't change the fact everyone has such.
If the statements in an article are all objectively true, meaning they can be demonstrated to be true, it is not opinion and the tag is inappropriate. As such I won't get over it since I feel the tag is inappropriate. That other articles are marked as "opinion" doesn't make it prima facie appropriate here. You should have allowed discussion on adding the tag rather than unilaterally making the decision to add it.
So again, show what in the article is demonstrably subjective, meaning it cannot be objectively demonstrated to be true, or remove the tag. Or I will remove it myself.
Brandishwar 18:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Analysis and opinion tend to get grouped together under the same opinion tag on this wiki. While understandably annoying, the reason is so that folk can differentiate between someone's take on a subject (which may vary significantly in how well-founded it is) and the subject itself. The opinion tag is not a criticism or a judgement, and analysis is very welcome on the page - the ultimate goal is that the page is useful to the reader.

My suggestion would be to keep analysis in a separate section (with opinion tag) - if suitably well referenced it would speak for itself.

Some things I'd consider analysis (my opinion! discuss):

  • links to real world economies
  • parts of economic theory that are applicable to PP
  • what-if scenarios (e.g. inflation)
  • how the what-if scenarios could be avoided

And some I don't think are analysis:

  • The fact that PP has an economy
  • The unquestionable properties of the economy (e.g. which sinks, fountains, diagram of supply/demand)
  • Notable economic milestones in PP history

--Therobotdude 01:28, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Now that is what I was looking for! I'll follow on your suggestions when I get a better chance. I still stand by what I said above, that objective statements are not opinion, even if they can be considered "analysis". An example being "links to real world economies" wherein I show how pieces of eight were similar to how gold was once used in the world. But given I didn't actually link to any sources, I can see how it can be considered "my take". Brandishwar 01:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)