Remove Cross-Tier trade restriction

[ajqtrz]

I'm not sure it's 64k T1 for 1k of T3 since the ratio is 1 to 16 from T1 to T3. But why limit it even to 64k? If it's that easy and large then there is point of having a restriction at all. My point is not in the value of the ratios but in the artificial restrictions. By "artificial" I simply mean "controlled" I say let the players control the resources and their relative value through an open market system. There is little chance of any, even large, group of players "controlling" the trade values. On the other hand, market fluctuations could occur and those of us who like to "play the market" can add that aspect of the game to our enjoyment. Overall I still think an open market offers a wider range of playing experience and the negative aspects are almost non-existent.

 

[Ashrem]

then there is point of having a restriction at all. My point is not in the value of the ratios but in the artificial restrictions. By "artificial" I simply mean "controlled" I say let the players control the resources and their relative value through an open market system

Because it's a game. and people who accidentally accept outlandish trades that deplete their entire resource base because the interface is clunky are more likely to rage-quit and stop giving them money.

 

[ajqtrz]

Your main point seems to be that because the interface is clunky mistakes can happen and that the result would be fewer paying players. The solution you see in the game is to limit the damage that a mistake can inflict and thus protect the players from the clunky interface.

That the interface is a bit clunky, especially if you have, as I do, a slow connection, is not in disput. And yes, it is possible to click on something and get whacked without intending to do so. I've, on occasion, purchased a large amount of goods from somebody because I clicked, the system updated the order of the items and the click got applied to an item where there was a huge hit because the person was neither in my fellowship or in the area of my discovered. That sucks. And I do imagine it would suck greatly if it were to have wiped out my resources. So there is that. But if you play the game you realize pretty fast that such a thing can happen AND you learn, very quickly, to avoid it. That too is part of the learning curve.

In addition, ask yourself which is worse: accidentally clicking on something that wipes out a resource and having only a limited ability to get help from your FS/Friends to replace that resource, or accidentally clicking on something that wipes out a resource and having a reasonably unlimited ability to get help from your FS/Friends to replace that resources? I prefer the latter myself. And I believe such a scenario would actually increase FS cohesion as players rose to the needs of their fellow member.

So in the end it would seem that you could have an open system and end up with fewer quitting exactly because in opening the market you also allow for methods of recovery not currently available. A wider set of strategies and tactics in any game usually results in a wider range of players...and more money for the developers.

AJ

 

[SoggyShorts]

@ajqtrz
Making allowable trade ratios larger or even unlimited wouldn't really help you to give resources to your friends/fellows.
It's already very easy with 4:1, after 5 trades you are up over 1000:1, and really, how often do you need to do that?
I too love the idea of "playing the market" I have been "E-rich" in a few games over the years (Runescape/wow etc) but it just wouldn't work here. The market is too localized, and all goods are equally easy to produce.

 

[DeletedUser7370]

The market should be even more open. We should be able to trade goods, coins, supplies, relics, runes, broken runes, spells, instants, and even diamonds. If the devs opened things up that way they would see people buying diamonds to trade them for all sorts of things and it would increase their sales. Of course the other result is that they would not have any control over the market, but with so many different types of object of value it is improbable that any one would undergo the hyper inflation that kills most MMO economies.

 

[SoggyShorts]

@TedGrau
That would be interesting, but I'm not sure it would help the devs with diamond sales.

For example if a player was going to use diamonds to finish a wonder where they are missing a rune, they could instead buy 10 of that rune from a player who has 100 sitting around, and for fewer diamonds. Then the player who sold the runes could spend those diamonds on whatever. The net result for Inno would be fewer diamonds spent.

There are billions of coins and supplies wasted every day in the wholesaler, and (I assume) a fair amount of coins and supplies purchased with diamonds. Players that would have bought the coins/supplies from the game would now be buying them from players, and the sellers would also have less need of buying diamonds themselves.

I think the "wastage" of having extra runes(way more than you'll ever need for upgrading your wonder) and coins/supplies is an important balancing factor in the game, if those were no longer wasted, but used instead by those who need them, then in-game costs would have to rise or else things would become too easy.

With a really open market pushing would also become a major issue that would need to be addressed somehow.

 

[DeletedUser7370]

I think the "wastage" of having extra runes(way more than you'll ever need for upgrading your wonder) and coins/supplies is an important balancing factor in the game, if those were no longer wasted, but used instead by those who need them, then in-game costs would have to rise or else things would become too easy.

And that is where you are mistaken. I have 50 or 60 runes for GA and ToS each. Who would want to buy those runes? A player that is not highly advanced, just unlocked wonders, and wants to build their first 2 immediately. What could that player possibly offer me; I have tons of resources? Diamonds. And what might they offer another player to get diamonds? Nothing, or at least not any significant quantity quickly.

Sure there would be many non-diamond market options, and figuring out what is a good price for anything would be seriously nuts with so many different options. The end result is that no one feels pressured into buying diamonds because they can be obtained for other in game resources. The people that buy diamonds for resources will either use them for time, expansion, or other non-resource benefits; or else they will hoard them. The net market requires that some people routinely buy diamonds for cash to infuse the market with available diamonds or the diamond value will climb. When the diamond value climbs then Inno's quick click buttons to spend diamonds for a KP or resource should climb with the market. Inno should not only allow the market to exist; they should tie some of the in game systems to it.

And yes KP should directly traded as well.

 

[SoggyShorts]

And that is where you are mistaken. I have 50 or 60 runes for GA and ToS each. Who would want to buy those runes?

That's a pretty specific example to prove your side.
What about my 40 Shrine of shrewdy shrooms? would someone buy those for diamonds?

There are 2 possibilities
1. Players are willing and able to offer things for fewer diamonds than buying them in-game.
2. They are not

If not, then there's no change from the current system.
If they are, that means less diamonds were used to get players what they want.

And yes KP should directly traded as well.

There's a good example.
If a player wanted to buy 10 KP with diamonds they would either spend 450 diamonds to get them from the game, or from another player. If a player was willing to sell 10 KP for 300 diamonds instead, then only 300 diamonds will have changed hands. I don't see how that is good for inno.

 

[Ashrem]

Your main point seems to be that because the interface is clunky mistakes can happen and that the result would be fewer paying players.

No, that's a secondary point. My main point is that it's a game. Games require balance to be successful, and in this game the inability to offer trades that are outside of a band is currently part of that balance.

Games also attract cheaters, as the soggy one mentioned elsewhere. (I have a personal, general aversion to discussing it lest I put ideas in someone's head) Controlling trades makes it harder for pushing to occur, and easier for algorithms to identify if it crosses a threshold since more trades are required to accomplish the same thing.

 

[DeletedUser7370]

That's a pretty specific example to prove your side.
What about my 40 Shrine of shrewdy shrooms? would someone buy those for diamonds?
There are 2 possibilities
1. Players are willing and able to offer things for fewer diamonds than buying them in-game.
2. They are not
If not, then there's no change from the current system.
If they are, that means less diamonds were used to get players what they want.

And that is part of the point. Inno currently charges ridiculous rate for some things. If Inno made a market system that included automatically matching their rate to the market, then they would still control the market. They have unlimited supply for every resource, therefore any market push that is too far outside of what their algorithm does will be wasted. It really is looking at an economics 101 class and laughing, because they always were concerned about price ceilings and floors, but never considered the State as an average moderator.

If a player wanted to buy 10 KP with diamonds they would either spend 450 diamonds to get them from the game, or from another player. If a player was willing to sell 10 KP for 300 diamonds instead, then only 300 diamonds will have changed hands. I don't see how that is good for inno.

It is good for Inno because diamonds are used to create KP; thereby destroying the diamonds. All other details are irrelevant; because everything beyond the actual usage of diamonds is supposition.


The things I am suggesting tend to increasing diamond usage based on well proven economic principles. Usage is what makes sale for Inno. It would also mean that players are influencing the value of a diamond.

 

[SoggyShorts]

Inno currently charges ridiculous rate for some things.

This much I agree with. I've always been surprised by the pricing system in F2P games.
My favorite example is simple: 10 KP or your first premium expansion. Same price? What?!!?
Maybe it's a trick to make some items look better (like standing next to your fat friend), but when you compare basic purchases the prices seem crazy.
I wonder if a game like this could increase sales by running an algorithm that lowers the price of the least popular items each week by 10% and also raises the price of the most popular ones. Sure you lose that fatty comparison trick, but aren't they currently missing out by almost never selling some of their products? Like replacing troops lost in a fight. I feel like those prices could go down by a lot.

Just look at the thread "How best to spend diamonds" . Every time a thread like that comes up the answers are exactly the same- "builder, expansions, MA". No one ever says "You can use diamonds in loads of great ways, like replacing troops so you can fight more in tournaments"

 

[Ashrem]

If Inno made a market system that included automatically matching their rate to the market, then they would still control the market. They have unlimited supply for every resource, therefore any market push that is too far outside of what their algorithm does will be wasted.

For a game who's only real challenge is getting the resources you need from limited space, injecting a significant supply of goods into the game would kill it almost instantly. Even a (relatively) small amount of cheap goods injected in response to an algorithm could be easily manipulated by a group working in concert

 

[DeletedUser7370]

For a game who's only real challenge is getting the resources you need from limited space, injecting a significant supply of goods into the game would kill it almost instantly. Even a (relatively) small amount of cheap goods injected in response to an algorithm could be easily manipulated by a group working in concert

I am not suggesting injecting goods. Consider for a moment that you go to do a research or upgrade. If you don't have the goods required then there is the little diamond button that you can push which instantly creates all the goods and also immediately destroys them as it does the research, upgrade, etc. In that sense Inno has unlimited resources in the game and already has the mechanism to constantly inject them.

People likely don't use that mechanism because the price is too high. If Inno made those sorts of prices move according to a market system then they would come down to the point that many people would use diamonds. Diamonds being used up is what makes Inno money.

 

[Ashrem]

I am not suggesting injecting goods.

You said that Inno could get around anyone trying to control the market by dropping their prices. that is the exact definition of injecting goods. Exactly as a central bank lowering the cost of borrowing is injecting cash into the economy.

 

[DeletedUser8382]

at the very least, inno should change 2 star from 400% to 300%....

 

[DeletedUser7370]

You said that Inno could get around anyone trying to control the market by dropping their prices. that is the exact definition of injecting goods. Exactly as a central bank lowering the cost of borrowing is injecting cash into the economy.

I am suggesting that Inno should have the in game value of a diamond vary based on market influences and make everything in the game tradeable with no ratings about how good the trade is and no restrictions on how much of what gets traded for what.

 

[Ashrem]

I am suggesting that Inno should have the in game value of a diamond vary based on market influences and make everything in the game tradeable with no ratings about how good the trade is and no restrictions on how much of what gets traded for what.

I'm aware of what you are suggesting.

You suggested that Inno could provide unlimited goods at any price to control the market, then you said you're not saying they should inject goods into the game. Providing unlimited goods at lower and lower prices to match manipulators is exactly injecting goods into the game. Any time you make something cheaper to obtain in any system, you are injecting that item into the system.

The Elvenar system is based on being able to produce a certain amount of essential goods in a certain amount of space. Providing unlimited goods at whatever price is necessary to avoid market manipulation is going to destabilize that aspect of the game.

 

[DeletedUser7370]

Providing unlimited goods ... is going to destabilize that aspect of the game.

Providing unlimited goods as I am suggesting is already in the game.

Currently it costs 45 diamonds for a KP and 24 diamonds for a night essence. And Inno can inject as many of those things as people are willing to spend diamonds for, but at those prices very few if any people are willing to spend diamonds.

 

[DeletedUser3507]

Wait to you hit Halflings then you will see insane pricing for goods you need, I wish they would get rid of the required culture task as I have to wait to I finsh the chapter and get rid of the guest race cr#p to do the dang task. Of have two grapevines... Jesh....

 

[SoulsSilhouette]

Producing 1,000 gems takes about 5x as much space(or time) as making 1,000 planks, so they are not equal. 16:1 is also unbalanced when considering time/space.

I'm sure if you offer 1,000 gems for 4,000 planks your trades will get taken, so the 4:1 restriction shouldn't hurt you.
On the other hand if the restriction was lifted and you posted 1,00 planks asking for 1,000 gems no one would be dumb enough to take it, so you'd just be wasting your time.

An unsuspecting new person who is advancing but maybe doesn't understand everything might get hosed.