Hide unfair trades coming from outside the FS

[ajqtrz]

This is a valid point and exactly what is wrong with scrolls. The surplus results in 3 star trades. The bigger the discounts the worse the problem becomes.

So we agree that there is a problem with too many scrolls being produced AND that the over-production has driven down the price of scrolls. Sounds like a "real" market type of situation to me. What many disagree with is the solution. Some want the "government" to step in and mandate a change in either production or some kind or restriction on trading. The problem with that is, of course, it assumes those "in charge" actually understand what it means to value something. Value is not intrinsic but, like meaning, resides in the one making the value. In can thus fluctuate and vary depending on the players current situation and supply/demand. The game proves this exactly because it doesn't matter if the devs have determined the value of scrolls, we are all ignoring it and letting the market speak.

The big parasites are constantly online and would simply repost more often. I'm afraid you wouldn't see a noticeable difference.
Hiding zero stars from players outside of your own FS wouldn't be difficult to code at all, that's not the holdback. The only reason this issue hasn't been addressed is developer apathy partly fueled by a couple of selfish posters who can't see past their own egos to realize that such a change would be better for the health of the game.

I agree that the "parasites" would just repost more often. What is needed though, is not more regulation, but smarter players. I've simply cut my scrolls production and now my neighborhood isn't awash with scrolls at all AND when I do sell scrolls I get 2 star trades for them. I've simply notified each of my neighbors and fs that I'll take their scrolls if they post them 10% or more over the 2 star amount. Almost all of them do so immediately and I take their scrolls. Since I produce some with my moonstone libraries I can afford to use my scrolls to purchase silk and crystal at 15-20% over the 2-star level, which means they are always 3 star trades. By adjusting my output and working with my neighbors our neighborhood has only the smallest excess of scrolls. Teamwork can work if you go beyond your own fellowship.

In the end, the answer is to reduce scroll output, something any scroll boosted player (like myself) can, and should do. Why ask the devs to do for us what we, with a bit of leadership and imagination, can do for ourselves? And, as I've said elsewhere, the same idea can be applied to any "problem" with goods supply/demand.

Take for instance, the "parasites." If you want to break their hold on those goods you can work together to do so. It takes leadership. One way is to flood the market by producing more than the "parasites" can absorb. At some point they will no longer be able to take all the trades as the underlying value of the goods is determined by the demand and supply. In other words, since they are purchasing all those trades, but have a limited (though perhaps huge, I'll admit) ability to absorb those goods for reposting, you can, if you work together, overwhelm their ability. Produce and post 2-3 times the goods they are buying and they will run out of the ability to buy those goods. Then the price will come down. Another method is the boycott. Simply don't trade with them or anybody near them or in their fellowship. This is harder to do because you have to name those players who you think are parasites and shut down their ability to trade. You'd have to contact everyone with whom they might trade and get an agreement, but if everybody has the same frustration as you about the matter, it could be done. Again, it just takes leadership and effort.

In any case, changing the listing would help some people's frustration, but probably wouldn't amount to the type of change necessary to shut down the "parasites."

AJ

 

[Darielle]

Those who compare this to the stock market keep missing the point, over and over and over. It's been said many times, but for some reason they can't see it. Those who compare this to wanting the "government" to step in are missing the point again ... the "government" already HAS stepped in ... the government of Inno tells us what we MUST make ... not what we want to make. People have no choice in being stuck with three products and only those three products. In real life, if you don't want to sell your products, you don't have to. You can pick others. This is not the stock market. This is an artificial, Inno-regulated market and INNO is the only one who can fix it once and for all ... if only they would. But they won't, so the least they can do is make it optional whether you want to see those crummy trades and accidentally click on them and then stamp our feet.

 

[BrinDarby]

If you don't wanna click something accidentally ......
Try paying attention a bit more ....

lets eliminate anything other than 2star trades, and eliminate the trader fee,
then eliminate trader fee reductions in AWs ...
^^^^ the above is just as Absurd, as the Elvenar community assuming
all trades must be 1:1 ( 2star ) simply absurd !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ajqtrz]

Those who compare this to wanting the "government" to step in are missing the point again ... the "government" already HAS stepped in ... the government of Inno tells us what we MUST make ... not what we want to make. People have no choice in being stuck with three products and only those three products. In real life, if you don't want to sell your products, you don't have to. You can pick others. This is not the stock market. This is an artificial, Inno-regulated market and INNO is the only one who can fix it once and for all ... if only they would. But they won't, so the least they can do is make it optional whether you want to see those crummy trades and accidentally click on them and then stamp our feet.

I agree to a point that we are "stuck" with the products we can make. So are real life people. I can't grow bananas in Wisconsin even if bananas are suddenly like gold. I can't dig a well in the dessert if there's no ground water, even though water in the desert can be worth its weight in gold. Every producer in the real world is limited to a range of products and no matter where the profits might be in the world, they are stuck with the products they can produce.

Now Inno has told me I can produce more of three products than the other six. Great, as long as everything is nice and balanced. But it isn't. Scrolls are in abundance and silk is hard to come by in my part of the world. So I sell my scrolls at a discount and buy my silk. I do this, ultimately, because there are more scrolls being produced via the addition of the moonstone set. So I, in response, dumped my T2 scrolls mfrs and now make all my scrolls via my moonstone sets. Not sure why other scrolls boosted players haven't done this. If they did, we'd not have any surplus scrolls and the amount of scrolls in the system would drop AND scroll boosted players would have more room in their cities for something else, like another T3 boosted mfr, perhaps.

In any case, what your comments suggest is that you seem to have forgotten humans are making the trades. They don't consult a chart that tells them the value of their goods, they intuitively "feel" the value at the time of the trade. They may, often to their detriment, assume the chart (the star system) is telling them the value of their goods, but more often they are using their own intuitive sense in the matter. So if they need something in the next few minutes and all that is available are 1 star trades, they may decide the posted value of the goods they need, in their situation, is worth the added cost. If they decide they are worth it, it is their sense of the value of those goods in their current situation, not the devs desired value, upon which they make their decision. That's the basic difference between all the discussion on trades. One side wants the game to be in charge of something the players are actually in charge of -- the value of their goods. And all the complaining and asking for system changes in the world will not change how humans trade, in the real world or in some imagined one. Humans are the ones making the trades, not the game and not the devs. So let's be realistic. Any comparison to real world conditions may have some merit because in both markets it's real world humans making the trades. Ultimately trading is about what the players actually do rather than what the devs and/or a bunch of other players want them to do.

AJ

 

[Lelanya]

Lucky, lucky me, then. I have great fellows, and good neighbors.

I also possess patience and have years of experience in this game, so I produce my boosted goods and trade for what I do not have. I save the resources, so that I am not just trading for what I need now but for 2 or 3 researches ahead. When the goods or supplies start to run consistently low I upgrade for what I need not just what I think will look good or gain me a ridiculous surplus or silliest of all, ranking points.

Furthermore I come here and advocate for what to me is clearly good sense and solid game strategy. Keep in mind that I take note of players with, 'unusual trade theories', and do not game or trade with them.

 

[Darielle]

I do this, ultimately, because there are more scrolls being produced via the addition of the moonstone set. So I, in response, dumped my T2 scrolls mfrs and now make all my scrolls via my moonstone sets. Not sure why other scrolls boosted players haven't done this.

AJ

I think if you took a survey, you would find that less than half of Elvenar's players make regular use of the spire. Combine that with the fact that players in chapters 1 and 2 don't even see the spire. Now, going forward, new players will (supposedly) only have a chance for one set in the MA (notwithstanding the "glitch" for this week.) So I think with that combination, you have your answer.

 

[ajqtrz]

I think if you took a survey, you would find that less than half of Elvenar's players make regular use of the spire. Combine that with the fact that players in chapters 1 and 2 don't even see the spire. Now, going forward, new players will (supposedly) only have a chance for one set in the MA (notwithstanding the "glitch" for this week.) So I think with that combination, you have your answer.

I agree that many don't have the ability to make moonstone sets. But that's not the focus of my remarks, it's reducing production. If they have 3 scrolls mfrs, remove one and replace it with a dust mfr, or a steel mfr. Then do cross tier trades for any shortage of scrolls, silk or crystal you might encounter. It's easy and if you are in a fs that doesn't allow cross tier trades you are only hurting yourself. Find one that allows it. As long as the players don't adjust output there will be a surplus of scrolls and the attendant problems. But they aren't insurmountable and don't call for any radical changes in the game.

AJ

 

[StarLoad]

Okay, the "market parasites" have found a way to benefit themselves at the expense of others and thus, it appears to be claimed, they should be stopped!

AJ, I want to thank you for your great skills at debating, and for seeing the light about the parasite

Edit to clarify the "sarcasm" of the OP

 

[ajqtrz]

Fair enough, no pun intended, So how should we describe trades that as I and Sami did? We can agree the outcome is what determines the "fairness" so the offers are??

No trade is fair or unfair until the trade is made. Thus, describing the trade as fair or unfair, in any manner, before it's made, is impossible. You might describe it as a ratio but what's the point of that? Why describe it at all? Is it really that important to make a judgement about a trade you wouldn't take because your current circumstances don't justify the cost? About all you can say is "I wouldn't have made that trade." The only unfair trade a person takes is one is coerced.

When I said, "Okay, the "market parasites" have found a way to benefit themselves at the expense of others and thus, it appears to be claimed, they should be stopped!" I was speaking "tongue in cheek." Sorry if I was unclear. There are no parasites in the game, only people who feel a posted trade to be parasitical. A parasite takes from the host without the host wanting to give. All trades in this game are voluntary.

AJ

 

[SoggyShorts]

AJ, I want to thank you for your great skills at debating, and for seeing the light about the parasite

Ok, this shocked me enough that I actually had to take AJ off the ignore list for a moment. (it's been great BTW, highly recommend it. Five stars.)
After it registered that Ed was the poster I was 99.x% sure it wasn't real but figured I'd still check it out.
Since I went so far as to read Aj's post (LoL "skim" of course, who are we kidding?) I'll make a quick hit & run on the subject:

But what about 3 star trades?
Think about it. Some people say 0 or 1 star trades are "unfair," and "manipulate" the markets, but what about 3 star trades?

TL;DR: 3-star trades are nothing like the market manipulating parasites because in order to sustain them you'd have to actually produce some goods thereby adding to the pool.

Spoiler: The full version

3 star sentient trades are fine because they are generous and unsustainable. No one can corner the market by constantly posting 3-star trades unless they have a massive factory set up and are therefore actually contributing to the pool of resources. Whatever the opposite of a parasite is.

Non-sentient trades too really. Sure, scrolls have become an issue due to inno flooding the market, but that's a separate issue to this proposal.
The fact is that prior to Moonstone sets & parasites the market naturally balanced itself at 1:1 and no one complained about it.
Clever & and patient players could still post & take trades other than 2-star but the impact was negligible.

Back to the simple analogy of a farmers market(the only one in town, and farmers can't choose their crops nor consumers their diet):

Some guy buys up all (2/3 of each tier obv) of the produce and re-sells it for huge profits in the parking lot. He also camps out all day every day to maintain this advantage.​

= parasitic middle man​

vs

Some guy shows up offering produce at a steep discount, runs out of goods almost immediately, and doesn't come back for a day or even a week.​

= non-factor​

Likening zero-star trades to 3-star trades is beyond even your usual mental gymnastics. I imagine your synapses must look like a pretzel after that one. "Price gouging is bad, but hey, let's talk about the real evil: stuff going on sale!"

The whole premise of why we hate the parasites is simple:

They add nothing yet make a profit.​

That means someone else takes a loss*.​

In this game, this translates to several hundred (thousand?) players taking a loss* while a couple of players per server play their little mini-game.​

​

* "Loss" = they have to spend 10-40% more goods to accomplish their tasks either through bad trades or decay because they got unlucky random boosts assigned to them and parasites exist.

P.S. Don't forget: "Hit & run" I'll not be coming back, or at least I won't bother lifting the ignore again since there's still no payoff. So feel free to get the last word in or something.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I agree that many don't have the ability to make moonstone sets. But that's not the focus of my remarks, it's reducing production. If they have 3 scrolls mfrs, remove one and replace it with a dust mfr, or a steel mfr. Then do cross tier trades for any shortage of scrolls, silk or crystal you might encounter.

This has been suggested quite a few times and it seems some people agree with it and do it, but others are too strong in their entitlement and feel they should never have to adjust their gameplay because Inno let something get screwed up. Those people would rather complain than do something reasonable.

 

[ajqtrz]

Ok, this shocked me enough that I actually had to take AJ off the ignore list for a moment. (it's been great BTW, highly recommend it. Five stars.)
After it registered that Ed was the poster I was 99.x% sure it wasn't real but figured I'd still check it out.
Since I went so far as to read Aj's post (LoL "skim" of course, who are we kidding?) I'll make a quick hit & run on the subject:


TL;DR: 3-star trades are nothing like the market manipulating parasites because in order to sustain them you'd have to actually produce some goods thereby adding to the pool.

Spoiler: The full version

3 star sentient trades are fine because they are generous and unsustainable. No one can corner the market by constantly posting 3-star trades unless they have a massive factory set up and are therefore actually contributing to the pool of resources. Whatever the opposite of a parasite is.

Non-sentient trades too really. Sure, scrolls have become an issue due to inno flooding the market, but that's a separate issue to this proposal.
The fact is that prior to Moonstone sets & parasites the market naturally balanced itself at 1:1 and no one complained about it.
Clever & and patient players could still post & take trades other than 2-star but the impact was negligible.

Back to the simple analogy of a farmers market(the only one in town, and farmers can't choose their crops nor consumers their diet):

Some guy buys up all (2/3 of each tier obv) of the produce and re-sells it for huge profits in the parking lot. He also camps out all day every day to maintain this advantage.​

= parasitic middle man​

vs

Some guy shows up offering produce at a steep discount, runs out of goods almost immediately, and doesn't come back for a day or even a week.​

= non-factor​

The whole premise of why we hate the parasites is simple:

They add nothing yet make a profit.​

That means someone else takes a loss*.​

In this game, this translates to several hundred (thousand?) players taking a loss* while a couple of players per server play their little mini-game.​

​

* "Loss" = they have to spend 10-40% more goods to accomplish their tasks either through bad trades or decay because they got unlucky random boosts assigned to them and parasites exist.

How is it known that the 3 star good are being produced by the players posting them? I make a lot of large purchases and repost them for my fs and neighborhood, sometimes at a loss, because that's what I do. Does that make my trades unfair to me? No, because I choose to post them. But what if I need something really, really bad and, in order to get the goods I post a three star trade? Is that unfair to me? No, because I choose to post them.

In the same way if somebody takes my 1 or 0 star trade they choose to do so. It cannot be, therefore, unfair to that person, because they evaluated the cost and decided that the return they would get was worth the cost. It's their call, not yours or mine.

But let's take your farmer's market example and examine it carefully.

1) It's artificial. It's the only market in town? People have to buy from it or they what, starve? Everybody has their own garden (or they couldn't buy anything) and everybody produces something. If I grow carrots but find the price of carrots so low nobody wants my carrots, I switch to beans. There are 3 choices for every player and all three choices can be traded for any of 8 other things. Sentient goods are the same.

2) The guy who shows up early and buys it all up may be real but those selling to him will automatically either start producing more or start raising the price because the perceived demand has gone up. If you run out of a product consistently you know the product is worth more. So you raise the price and probably produce more.

3) The buyers will buy less. They do need a minimum, but if the producers start making more the guy showing up to buy the stuff will have to buy more and more. Soon enough he will have more than he can sell as the demand drops (due to the price) and the production increases (do to the artificial demand). The market will adjust itself though it may take some time.

4) The guy who sells at a huge discount doesn't show up for a week or more because he's lost his shirt.....unless he can buy at an even steeper discount than he's selling it for. Thus, while he can do it once or twice, in the long run it's just bad marketing and the only thing his showing up will do is bring the prices down to his level for a short while.

So real market forces will prevail even in your monopolistic farmer's market in the long run.

But does this work in this market? It can, and probably does.

First, the price the guy pays is limited to a ratio of 8:1. The closer he gets to paying that price the less margin he has. And since as the price goes up less is bought, he will be sitting on a huge stockpile of the targeted goods. Whenever production outpaces demand stockpiles occur that, when released, drive the price down. Pretty simple supply and demand.

Second, the price the guy requests is limited to the wholesaler price. He can't ask more because nobody in their right mind would pay more than they absolutely need. Thus, there is a limit to his profits.

Thus, in the long run all that needs to be done is for those buying to stop buying as much as the guy is purchasing, a natural effect of his raising the price and producers producing more because he will quickly take whatever they have. The alternative is the boycott, and that too, can work if it's done right. Don't take anything from the guy at all.

Again, judging the trades as moral or immoral isn't the answer, trading smartly is.

Finally, the balancing of the markets before moonstone sets proves the point that the markets will balance themselves eventually. I've seen it happening in my world and while it's suffering in some ways, smart players will just adjust their output to acomodate the fluctuations. It's not rocket science. If a product is being overproduced, either cut back on your production and replace it with some other goods you can trade for it, or produce enough to sell what you produce at a discount and still maintain your needs.

AJ

 

[BrinDarby]

There are 3 choices for every player and all three choices can be traded for any of 8 other things.

But you forget, most FSs discourage or ban cross-tier trades just as much as non 2/3 star trades.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

But you forget, most FSs discourage or ban cross-tier trades just as much as non 2/3 star trades.

Most older fellowships who do that, started doing that before the trader had the ratios improved. And I would bet a lot of them don't care as much any more and just never changed their fellowship description to remove that restriction.

 

[ajqtrz]

But you forget, most FSs discourage or ban cross-tier trades just as much as non 2/3 star trades.

Sadly, you are right. I thought about it when I wrote that, but figured that since I've been pretty vocal about player imposed rules, people would remember how much I oppose the one against cross tier trades. In any case, you'd think that if the game allowed it so would the players. But somehow, somebody, way back before I came, computed the production costs of each tier, found out that there was a slight difference and the higher tiers were a bit more expensive, so they banned players from doing cross tier trades. At least that's how I understand it. Again, the supposed value was derived from a production cost evaluation as if that's the only and ultimate determiner of the actual value of goods. Short sighted at best. And then to impose a rule to enforce your evaluation of the relative value of goods? Sad. The irony is that it actually hurts players because they think cross tier trades are bad and refrain from using all their resources effectively in the market. Restricting trade in just about any way, restricts a players ability to play as he/she wishes. A trade is only bad when the one making or not making the trade says it's bad....and if he/she says it's bad he or she probably won't make the trade in the first place. Again, imposing you value of a thing upon another person is probably harming them more than helping.

AJ

 

[StarLoad]

OK Aj I will stipulate that the issue of Fair is off the table, so when a player is able to "corner" the market or by some means other than PRODUCING Sentient goods ( and I looked and they do not ) to allow them to accumulate goods to the extent that trades, like I show, are possible isnt this a problem in your mind

 

[StarLoad]

@ed1960
Bless you for trying, but you're talking to someone who believes their position is the only 'right' position and has no idea how they could be wrong. They were doing the same thing in other games (where they were banned) years ago. True irony is a thread in the Lounge.
Note: I don't block anyone's posts, I just don't engage. Reading unenlightened drivel can be entertaining when I'm bored...

Understood, however I wont argue the "fair/unfair" side because that can be subjective. But, I will argue that the trades themselves in the amounts do not make sense from a game standpoint unless someone is breaking the rules. How many Sentient Mfg would it take to make 1M in goods in 1 day?

 

[OIM20]

I don't think the problem is with regular goods, it's the sentient goods

It's a mock-up graphic. It's not meant to be directly representative of the market issue because I don't have access to the sentient trader in any of my cities. It's a graphic to show potential options, to demonstrate visually what might be done to resolve the issue. This is standard practice in many companies (providing graphic mock-ups) in programming that uses GUIs when proposing changes to the GUI itself. But since I don't work for the company I'm potentially proposing the GUI change to, I'm limited to what GUI access I have as a user and can only do a mock-up based on the GUI in front of me.

However, in point of fact, I do have a neighbor who engages in hoarding behavior at the basic/crafted/magical goods level. Despite their FS stating they have a requirement for 2-star or 3-star trades, I have never seen a trade from this person that is more than 1-star. Not a single one, in the months I've been their neighbor.

View attachment 10211
View attachment 10212
View attachment 10213

That is frightening.

But here's a different thought:
tl;dr - What about moving the 'bad actors' to a neighborhood all by their little lonesomes far enough away from everyone else that they only have each other to trade their hoarded goods with?

Spoiler: maybe...

Inno can build criteria to move people within a server. I'm working on getting examples for a different criterion I'd like to see them use, but that's a different thread (when I get it ready).

So we know they already (allegedly) delete cities that have not spent diamonds and are in chapters one and two after so many weeks. What if they used a criterion that cross-checked trader activity with production buildings in one's city?

It would need to be a multi-pronged query that then built a list to be reviewed by staff before slating the cities for rehoming on the server. Something like "production level [for good X] = NULL" and "trader activity [for good X] > 25" and "trader rating [for good X] < 2" (where the trader activity is a reference of how many trades are placed per day). Not necessarily that exactly, it's just an example.

Would that be a viable alternative to altering the GUI or the trade expiration (which would easily be remedied by the hoarders choosing to make less of a profit by making their trades 1-star instead of 0-star)?

Yes, they could eventually modify their behavior to prevent themselves from being moved further out, and eventually be moved back into the hub of decently trading neighborhoods. But inward movement is rare enough on many servers, and it could take much longer than it is viable for them to hold on to the sentient goods (due to decay) to be moved, thus requiring them to build manus for those sentient goods while they wait if they require them for any reason other than simply making others' gaming experiences miserable.

They could create an FS with a feeder city (I don't think they're called that, but I hope it's clear what I mean by that) - but that is against TOS and can get their account deleted entirely as I understand it.

And I'm sure there are numerous other very time consuming methods they could use to bypass being moved to the outer rim as, basically, a punishment for bad gaming etiquette. But, without enumerating all of them, would the equivalent of exiling these players from neighborhoods with decent trading partners - where the list for those cities/accounts to be moved being manually reviewed by a human to make certain they aren't gaming the criteria or that someone who is helping their FS isn't going to be included unfairly - would that be a viable solution?

As I said, this isn't a problem I'm personally experiencing since I'm not in those chapters. So my proposals on the matter are based entirely on the comments I see from others. Thus, they may seem naive, but I am trying to keep them relevant (and relatively brief).

 

[StarLoad]

What about moving the 'bad actors' to a neighborhood all by their little lonesomes far enough away from everyone else that they only have each other to trade their hoarded goods with?

Except that Sentient goods are traded server-wide and not restricted to discovered and nearby cities, so moving them would not fix the issue

 

[OIM20]

Except that Sentient goods are traded server-wide and not restricted to discovered and nearby cities, so moving them would not fix the issue

Ah. See, things I don't know because I'm not there yet.