Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 8456846" data-attributes="member: 5889">This right here is my problem. I completely agree with you, which is why I think the buy price for such goods is crazy high. Who would possibly be willing to pay such a high price for goods that are SOOOO shoddy (basically one use items)? And if no one is buying goods at that price, why is that the &quot;standard price&quot; for such goods?We need to remember that this is not the scenario where the poor farmer can only afford shoes that last 6 months, versus the nobleman who has boots that last 5 years. This is the poor farmer who are buying shoes that last them one day....no one in their right minds would buy goods like that.I think a more reasonable approach is to consider the goods &quot;damaged&quot; instead of &quot;broken&quot;. That requires a lot of maintenance, but its something you can work with. Damaged weapons are a pain because of the draw clause, but they aren't useless.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Stalker0, post: 8456846, member: 5889"] This right here is my problem. I completely agree with you, which is why I think the buy price for such goods is crazy high. Who would possibly be willing to pay such a high price for goods that are SOOOO shoddy (basically one use items)? And if no one is buying goods at that price, why is that the "standard price" for such goods? We need to remember that this is not the scenario where the poor farmer can only afford shoes that last 6 months, versus the nobleman who has boots that last 5 years. This is the poor farmer who are buying shoes that last them one day....no one in their right minds would buy goods like that. I think a more reasonable approach is to consider the goods "damaged" instead of "broken". That requires a lot of maintenance, but its something you can work with. Damaged weapons are a pain because of the draw clause, but they aren't useless. [/QUOTE]

Verification