Tried problems

[Flamesofanger]

You logic is flawed. You think nothing should cost more than 99m therefore the cap should not be changed.

Sorry to break it to you but instead of finding solutions to a theoretical situation which you assume “should” be true, lets find a solution to the truth of the matter

Many items cost above 99m and something needs to be done about it to avoid scams and multi trades

If you do not own anything of that value then it doesnt affect you in any way so wether the limit it 99m or 99bil whats the problem?

Raising the cap does not change my personal saving nor does it change my personal spending. Just makes it easier to do bigger trades so you can throw that paradox of thrift out the window too.

I agree 100% with what PatD said. His logic is not flawed.

Just from reading his post i can tell he studied economics/business thoroughly and knows what he's talking about.

There's a reason the developers don't decide with haste, because they got the entire backlog of the games database on their side and i believe there are a dozen theories to why it is as it is.

[Theory#1]

If we allow even more gold to be held then there will be even more gold entering the economy due to well-off players hoarding their gold thanks to a lack of alternative opportunities, thus rendering various items to artificially hike in value with great significance due to hyper-inflation.

[Theory#2]

If the developers implement a feature that allows players to convert gold; E.g: 99m to a chest/ingot that contains said sum but can go with a whopping 999x per chest/ingot stacking, there will be a surge in gold/account sellers finding loopholes within the system.

[Theory#3]

The more gold to aim for in order to make relevant transactions the more work & time players will need to put into the game. Thus consumer choice is limited.

(Even if the devs increase gold drops, theory#1 stands valid in that case)

Just my hypothesis, take it with a gain of salt.