Fair Trades?

[BrinDarby]

but I think I remember that the smaller cities aren't asked for the same T1:T2:T3 ratios when they negotiate.

incorrect

 

[mephalia39]

The problem for me with the cross tier on some servers is that T2 is hard to get. So many are trading t3 for t1 and 2 that there is a huge imbalance happening. Very hard to get the t2. On one I can longer help my fs as I am in a chapter that requires high t2, and all they seem to put up is cross tier, no matter what lol. The problem isn't in the amount of the trade, its the type of goods.

 

[SoggyShorts]

Demand ratio would only make sense, if the players are getting more t2 or t3 then they need from event buildings. Otherwise they can just adjust their factories and the production ratio is all that matters.

I haven't had a T3 factory for years, and I have focused hard on anything that gives T1 (6 factories and spent diamonds to get a second pilgrim set etc) and my city still overproduces T3. Yes, I could destroy my T3 producers, but they take up basically zero space since they give so much pop/mana/we.

Starter cities obviously aren't doing Spire, and only a few Tournament sectors are available, BUT they still add basic goods to the trading pool and that somewhat compensates for the T1 demand.

Nah, like @Ashrem showed, players small enough to get planks as a reward from event buildings have basically no impact on the economy. Especially considering so much of their expenses are in T1 (often 100% of their costs) they add nothing to the pool.

For too many events the prizes gave scaling rewards with the top being T3 so you got something like this:

4 players with the exact same prize building
chapter 3 = 100 planks per day
chapter 6 = 300 crystal per day
chapter 8 = 1,000 gems per day
chapter 16 = 22,000 gems per day

as long as normal goods are regional, and not server-wide

You can get a pretty huge reach though, with 25 players having a hundred neighbors each that's potentially the whole active player base. Even if your FS is smaller, or more concentrated on the map, you are just a few degrees away from every other player.

i.e. if I can't trade with you, someone in my FS can trade with someone in yours.​

​

Failing that, there are only 9 goods and everyone does need all of them so it shouldn't be that hard to find someone willing to help out.
This is why I promote having filters that allow players to easily see reversible trades so that players with a bank of a few million can play middleman and help fulfill trade requests quickly and easily without getting stuck holding the bag. 2-star-same-tier FTW!

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

You can get a pretty huge reach though, with 25 players having a hundred neighbors each that's potentially the whole active player base. Even if your FS is smaller, or more concentrated on the map, you are just a few degrees away from every other player.

My main city has 263 discovered cities, none of whom are in my full fellowship. About 100 of them have visited in the past 5 days. I see maybe 20-25 different players posting trades for normal goods on any given day, including small cities who can't visit me back, so not in that 100. Right now, only 6 out 26 pages of normal goods are 2-star or better and same tier. 19 pages are cross-tier and 1 page is 0-star same-tier. Oh, and that 6 out of 26 is a good day for same-tier trades. I am not even sure how many years it has been now, since the last time I had to trade for normal goods, but I still take the reasonable trades from people who look like they need it.

 

[BrinDarby]

I have focused hard on anything that gives T1

Which means you got a few LuciousCakes last event, hopefully ....

 

[SoggyShorts]

I see maybe 20-25 different players posting trades for normal goods on any given day,... only 6 out 26 pages of normal goods are 2-star or better and same tier.

This is a perfect illustration of the issue.
If there was a setting so that you(and players like you)could see those 6 pages at a glance surely they'd be taken very quickly leading to a loop where posting "good" trade requests is rewarded and encouraged and repeated.

 

[SoggyShorts]

Which means you got a few LuciousCakes last event, hopefully ....

 

[StarLoad]

I got 9 in the event and that is good

 

[SoggyShorts]

I got 9 in the event and that is good

I wasn't keeping track but there was one "chest" that I won currency on for a profit almost every single time-- possibly my best RNG ever for that.
Sadly due to Typhoon Noru I didn't get to spend it all /shrug

 

[Killy-]

I haven't had a T3 factory for years, and I have focused hard on anything that gives T1 (6 factories and spent diamonds to get a second pilgrim set etc) and my city still overproduces T3. Yes, I could destroy my T3 producers, but they take up basically zero space since they give so much pop/mana/we.

Sure, but that isn't the norm. The "average player" still needs t3 factories.

 

[BrinDarby]

The "average player" still needs t3 factories.

define average ??

 

[Katwick]

"Median" player leaves less wiggle room. "Average" has too many shades of meaning.

I'd suggest that months played is the relevant variable, as it can take a while to accumulate the various event buildings and AWs that generate Goods.

 

[ajqtrz]

If cross tier trades are inherently wrong and the stars given them unfair, then I don't see it as much a player problem as a problem the game developers have to fix. That being said, I almost always trade in the same tier.

The important word here is "if". If they are "inherently" wrong then yes, they are inherently wrong because they somehow damage the structure of the game and make players suffer. But if they did that, those engaging in the cross tier trades would suffer....which, if they continue, means they either aren't suffering, or don't see how they are suffering. Thus, the determination of the "if" can't be answered without an analysis of how cross-tier trades actually hurt the game. The evidence presented in the many discussions seems to focus on two possible harms: misclicks, and imbalances. Misclicks are, in my opinion, the fault of the buyer, not the poster. Again, "caveat emptor." The structural question is related to the free flow of goods. Is it more likely that an imbalance should occur when you can only trade a particular good for two other goods, or if you can trade it for 8 other goods? I think, thus, the imbalance is more likely caused by the restriction of the flow of goods, not the opposite which is called for in a cross-tier restriction.

Few people have an issue with reasonable profit. We face enough unreasonable profit int he real world that we don't need to acquiesce to it here.

Again, though, what is reasonable? If I'm in the dessert and about to die of thirst and you offer me a glass of water you bought and brought to the dessert, how much profit would I think "reasonable?" If, on the other hand, I'm standing next to a drinking fountain and you offer me the same glass of water, wouldn't any profit be a bit unreasonable? Reasonable profit is market driven and sadly, markets have no morals, people do. Thus, if I believe a million percent profit is acceptable under the circumstances, and you don't like it, but pay it anyway, all you are telling me is that, in those circumstances, whatever you are giving to me is worth the price you are choosing to pay. If my offer, including the million percent profit, is taken, aren't you, by example, saying that in these circumstances what he is offering is worth a million percent profit?

You can argue over all the ratios you want, but as long as normal goods are regional, and not server-wide like sentient and ascended, anything you come up with will benefit some people but punish others. And that big wave of scrolls and dust-boosted players quitting, before the changes to the moonstone set, continues to have long-term effects.

As you may have noticed, the whole wave of scrolls is pretty much past. All the devs did was reduce the supply, and thus, in response, there was a shortage of scrolls (since the production of scrolls during the waves dropped as people quit making scrolls). The whole scrolls thing we went through shows how markets adjust. When the devs changed things so scrolls became abundant they became worth less. Players, seeing them worth less, cut down on their production. The devs, in order to "fix" the problem then cut the production of scrolls, and that led, naturally enough, to a shortage of scrolls...though not as deep as the over-supply was. In my opinion each wave of response to a deep supply problem (too much or too little) returns as the pendulum swings, but not with as much arc, until the effects fade into the background of everything else.

My main city has 263 discovered cities, none of whom are in my full fellowship. About 100 of them have visited in the past 5 days. I see maybe 20-25 different players posting trades for normal goods on any given day, including small cities who can't visit me back, so not in that 100. Right now, only 6 out 26 pages of normal goods are 2-star or better and same tier. 19 pages are cross-tier and 1 page is 0-star same-tier. Oh, and that 6 out of 26 is a good day for same-tier trades. I am not even sure how many years it has been now, since the last time I had to trade for normal goods, but I still take the reasonable trades from people who look like they need it.

Taking the "reasonable trades from people who look like they need it" is exactly what I mean by intangibles. There is nothing in the game that requires you to meet the needs of those who "look like they need it," and thus, that, too, becomes a determining factor for the trade. If they didn't "look like they need it" you wouldn't make the trade, would you?

This is a perfect illustration of the issue.
If there was a setting so that you(and players like you)could see those 6 pages at a glance surely they'd be taken very quickly leading to a loop where posting "good" trade requests is rewarded and encouraged and repeated.

One has to wonder why the "good" trades are buried in the many pages of trades? Isn't the whole ordering of the trader supposed to be "good to bad?" If all the "good" trades are at the top, what scrolling might be needed? If they are in the middle, doesn't that mean the trades above them are considered "good" by the system, and "bad" by the one scrolling (since he/she skipped them)? The only way to insure your trades are above the others is to make them 3 star trades! I do this 100% of the time and all my trades are taken very quickly. But that's because I want my trades taken quickly, an "intangible" value I add/subtract to the value of my goods.

AJ

 

[SoggyShorts]

Sure, but that isn't the norm. The "average player" still needs t3 factories.

define average ??

I would say logs in a few times per day and tries to follow the chapter quests more or less. Oh and never visits the forums.

The thing is I don't think average players are as relevant when it comes to this subject. Normally that's who every feature should be aimed at, but not here.

Here the relatively small number of players who are above average with millions, tens, and even 100s of millions of goods have the opportunity to fulfill the trade requests of hundreds of players each, thousands if they use their FS network.
In my FS alone I've got 20 "above average" players who could reach a total of over 4,000 players (not discounting overlap)
BUT
We are all in the same situation as everyone else where the demands on our city are 100% higher for T1 than T3 and struggle to output the same ratio-- Certainly not a single one of us is in a position to sustainably fulfill cross-trade requests in the opposite ratio.

Give us a filter to hide cross-trades (and one/zero stars) and we'll see if we can't make the game a little more fun and accessible for the 4,000 players in our areas, especially newer, more vulnerable players whose trade requests might get be getting lost in the pile.

I still remember the first player who took my frustrated trades back in 2016 @peaches10 you're my hero! I think forum visitors often forget just how huge an impact it can have on a new player.

 

[Ashrem]

Again, though, what is reasonable? If I'm in the dessert and about to die of thirst and you offer me a glass of water you bought and brought to the dessert, how much profit would I think "reasonable?"

AJ

1) nobody is dying in Elvenar
2) Wanting any profit fromsomeone dying in the dessert for a glass of water you "brought" is unreasonable.

 

[Ashrem]

One has to wonder why the "good" trades are buried in the many pages of trades? Isn't the whole ordering of the trader supposed to be "good to bad?"

AJ

Come on AJ. You can't possibly be oblivious to the the bulk of this entire discussion being over whether the game-assigned ratings are actually "fair" regardless of how many starts they've been assigned? What point are you trying to make with that statement in the middle of an argument about whether the ratings are accurate or if people should be allowed tools to overcome our disagreement with their accuracy?

 

[Killy-]

define average ??

Let me check for the right english word. I don't think I mean median, because it is cleary weighted, with higher ch cities producing way more goods. I guess arithmetic mean would be the correct word, taking all goods from all players produced and then taking the average. This player would have t1, t2 and t3 factories and could change his/her ratio between them to fit the needs. That doesn't mean every player can do this, for example I don't have any t2 factories and therefore cannot get rid of some to make space for more t1 factories.

 

[ajqtrz]

Come on AJ. You can't possibly be oblivious to the the bulk of this entire discussion being over whether the game-assigned ratings are actually "fair" regardless of how many starts they've been assigned? What point are you trying to make with that statement in the middle of an argument about whether the ratings are accurate or if people should be allowed tools to overcome our disagreement with their accuracy?

And my comments generally are an argument that they are not a "fair" measure of trades exactly because "fairness" is in the mind of the buyer/seller, not the mechanics of the game. My point being that the order of the ratings implies a "fairness" and that means if you don't just start at the top and take the "fair" trades only, if you skipped any one of them you would have to say that, for you, they aren't "fair." "Fair," to me means you believe that each side of the trade benefits equally. This is the underlying idea of "reversibility." But even that idea is based upon the idea of a raw goods only measure. If you've been paying attention, and you no doubt have, you can see my argument is that there are many other ideas/desires etc... influencing the desire to make or not a trade. These, many other things, are part of the trade (I label them as "intangibles") and no raw system of measure (production, demand, supply, etc...) can ever or should ever determine the "fairness" of the trade. Only those who take the offer and those who make the offer can determine that. I also argue that since nobody is forced to take a posted trade when you include their particular intangibles, they trade is fair exactly because they determine that their needs can be met at the price offered. So, at the core of my argument is still that the game's system of ordering trades implies a measure of "fairness," and that it's inaccurate in many, many, trades and should not be, therefore, used as a measure of "fair."

1) nobody is dying in Elvenar
2) Wanting any profit fromsomeone dying in the dessert for a glass of water you "brought" is unreasonable.

The guy in the dessert example is just an extreme example to make a point. If you'd like a less extreme one and one applicable to the game, try this: Your fs is going for their first gold spire level. The are only a few minutes left and you are one chest from the top. You make that chest and your fs gets the gold. You fail, and good bye to the gold. You've run out of troops and goods and nobody in your fs is around to get goods from. You need about 6000 marble and have 0. So you look in the trader and find one trade for marble -- 6000 marble offered for 21333 gems (the most allowed). By the system measure it's a zero star bad, bad, bad trade. By your measure it may be an "unfair" trade on the surface, but once you add the intangibles of your fs getting it's very first gold Spire, it might very well be fair. The question is: is your first gold spire worth the trade? If it is you make the trade and by doing so with the added value to you of reaching the gold spire, it's fair. If you don't think it is, you don't make the trade and it remains until somebody else in in circumstances they believe make it fair.

As for not giving a glass of water to a dying man in the dessert being "unreasonable" without profit, in the famous words of one philosopher, "says who?" Again you bring your sense of morality/fairness and apply it to somebody else as if it's the right measure. I happen to agree, btw, but that doesn't make it so in itself. Even if everybody agreed it wouldn't make it logically so. (That wold be an ad populum fallacy) The problem is that, unless we can get into a long philosophical/religious debate we can't even discuss here if any standard of morality is right or wrong. So we won't to avoid breaking any rules.

Finally, I've been pondering the whole idea of "fairness" and found, I think, there are two, different, definitions underlying our argument. One definition seems to focus on "balance" in that by some measure the two sides of the trade are balanced...and thus, "reversible" no matter what the circumstances. The other seems to define "fairness" as "value," and argues that the sense of value for each side is such that they think they are getting what they want for a price they are willing to pay. One is more or less objective, the other more subjective. Just an observation of what may be at the root of any disagreement here.


AJ

 

[MichaelMichael]

I am in Chapter 20. For standard goods I only accept 2 & 3 star trades and only offer at 2 stars. I generally get what I need but never post less than 200k goods. At that level, it is a 2 star world but it would not be without cross tier trades. It takes time, but all trades ultimately close.

That said within my fellowship, I fill most of the lower chapter players at 2 and zero stars. Our fellowship does not have anything near balanced production and I personally find those that spout that model as elitist as all cannot do that. I typically have a few milllion goods out for trade. It may take weeks but they will close. Elvenar is a slow game.

I also intentionally bias to bottom tier. I find cross tier is easier to win when you offer the lower tier good. Some players just build tier 3 as it uses less space. I also usually take all high value 3 star trades which is most often where my excess tier 1 goods go.

 

[Ashrem]

Our fellowship does not have anything near balanced production and I personally find those that spout that model as elitist as all cannot do that.

It's pretty simple math, and there's nothing elitist about advising people not to waste effort. You get far more per investment for your boosted goods, so even if you offer 200 boosted for 100 unboosted, it is a better deal than producing unboosted goods. if you can't get people in your FS to take your trades for 2:1 and pass them on in their own area, then your FS is awful.