• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

Worlds Becoming Unbalanced on Goods Production

ajqtrz

Chef
Seriously? If I go to a store and see that they are charging "gouging" prices I will not go back to that store. I will go to a store who charges average pricing for the items I want to buy. They gain a loyal customer. Frankly, I think you are also forgetting that trades posted do expire after 7 days so that is where some of them go. The ones that don't go away due to expiring are shameful in my opinion! They are either laying in wait for someone to accidentally click going down the rows or laying in wait for a player who is in serious need right that moment, like when someone needs to finish something before nightly decay. Anyway, I really don't want to play MY game with players who gouge other players and that is my choice! FYI, it isn't my valuations. It is Elvenar's valuations.

Adding: This conversation is about trade imbalances that are of no fault of our fellow players. So isn't "gouging" akin to kicking people while they are down?

I agree that gouging is akin to kicking people while they are down. And if the person posting the trade says he/she is gouging then their intent is clear and they can be called gougers. But I've very seldom heard of anybody claiming they were gouging. It's not something of which most would be proud.

And for that reason, to call somebody a gouger (as implied by claiming their trades are gouging) when they post a trade because in your estimation the trade is "gouging" is an exercise in social pressure. Just as your not visiting the stores you don't like puts pressure on them to change their ways, so too, implying a person who is trading at a level you don't like is a gouger, is a moral judgment. People do, more or less, respond to being condemned.

More to the point, perhaps, though, you think your determination of what is gouging and what is not is sufficient to use the label "gouging." Think about a situation in which you are in the dessert. You are very, very thirsty and have no water. I have water. I also have a great need for food. You have bread. If I ask you for ten loaves of bread for a glass of water, is that gouging? It might be, even in my opinion, if I didn't really need the bread and you were in danger of dying from dehydration. It might be if I only really needed one loaf and asked for ten. It might be if I had 500 gallons of water. And it might be if you had 50 loaves of bread most of which you would never eat. But if I have 100 orphans I'm trying to feed, you have 21 loaves of bread and I have 101 glasses of water, it might be a perfect fit. I get to give my orphans food and water, you get food and water and we all make it out of the dessert in one piece. Who is gouging whom, in that case?

The long and short of it is that trades are complex. The value I place on my water is dependent upon a lot of factors and the circumstances in which you would trade 10 loaves of bread for a glass of water can vary widely. In my opinion one should probably just ignore such trades and refrain from harsh judgements about the trader that are implied with declaring the trade is "gouging."

Finally, those people who put up trades that are not taken haven't hurt anybody greatly. They haven't gouged anybody because nobody took their trades. And what they eventually do, is stop putting trades up at that level OR wait until the market conditions change so those trades are taken. It's basic economics and in spite of the attempts to control the markets, in the long run the law of supply/demand goes its way even if we don't like the way it's going.

AJ

[This post was edited and 1/2 removed to try to get to "brevity" ;>) Hope it helps.]
aj
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
The frequency of that rule means the majority views those trades as unfair, it's only simple logic. If the majority viewed those trades as fair there would be no need for the rule. You are in a very small minority and claiming the vast majority's rule is stupid, do you see how there is no logic in that?

The proliferation of that rule has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with social behaviour.

Most people accept the status quo, they don't even question the rules. They assume that they are there for good reason and go along with them. Here's a story I like to share. When my mum was teaching me to cook a leg of lamb she would always instruct me to remove the shank end and cook it beside the leg. I did this for years without question. One day I asked her why we did that. She told me that she didn't know. Her mother had taught her it was the proper way to do it. So I asked my nana why she removed the shank end and she told me that back in the day her coal stove had a very small oven and she couldn't fit a whole leg of lamb in it so took to removing the shank end.


In most fellowships I've been in I've asked why cross trades are frowned upon and every single time I'm told they're unfair because you can produce a greater quantity of t2 or 3 goods in the same amount of time as it takes to produce t1 goods. That response appears legit on the surface until you consider that same tier trades can be equally unfair if production per hour is the metric to determine a 'fair' trade. Tiny cities can't produce at the same rates as bigger cities therefore a 1:1 ratio is hugely unfair to lower level players.

It's a good thing to question the rules and to challenge accepted norms. If we didn't we'd still be selling people as property and imprisoning folk who say the earth is round.
 

Dew Spinner

Well-Known Member
The proliferation of that rule has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with social behaviour.

Most people accept the status quo, they don't even question the rules. They assume that they are there for good reason and go along with them. Here's a story I like to share. When my mum was teaching me to cook a leg of lamb she would always instruct me to remove the shank end and cook it beside the leg. I did this for years without question. One day I asked her why we did that. She told me that she didn't know. Her mother had taught her it was the proper way to do it. So I asked my nana why she removed the shank end and she told me that back in the day her coal stove had a very small oven and she couldn't fit a whole leg of lamb in it so took to removing the shank end.


In most fellowships I've been in I've asked why cross trades are frowned upon and every single time I'm told they're unfair because you can produce a greater quantity of t2 or 3 goods in the same amount of time as it takes to produce t1 goods. That response appears legit on the surface until you consider that same tier trades can be equally unfair if production per hour is the metric to determine a 'fair' trade. Tiny cities can't produce at the same rates as bigger cities therefore a 1:1 ratio is hugely unfair to lower level players.

It's a good thing to question the rules and to challenge accepted norms. If we didn't we'd still be selling people as property and imprisoning folk who say the earth is round.
The Archmage makes the FS rules, so the vast majority of Archmages find those trades unfair and do not want them to take place within their FS's. Archmages are typically higher in the game and know the ropes of the game better, if there wasn't a great disdain for these trades you wouldn't see this listed as a rule so often. And I don't buy the reasoning that Archmages just don't change their overviews that often and so those rules are left over from the dinosaur ages. If an Archmage later came to the conculsion that there was absolutely nothing wrong with 0 and 1 star trades, I'm sure they would change their overview to reflect that immediately.
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
The game is progressive Tiny cities can produce what they need to advance. A 1:1 ratio is perfectly fair.
Please don't remove the context which gave my comment meaning.

Im not disputing "fairness" in terms of a socially agreed upon ethical value. I was pointing out how the reasoning I was given for cross trades being unfair was illogical.
 

ajqtrz

Chef
The Archmage makes the FS rules, so the vast majority of Archmages find those trades unfair and do not want them to take place within their FS's. Archmages are typically higher in the game and know the ropes of the game better, if there wasn't a great disdain for these trades you wouldn't see this listed as a rule so often. And I don't buy the reasoning that Archmages just don't change their overviews that often and so those rules are left over from the dinosaur ages. If an Archmage later came to the conculsion that there was absolutely nothing wrong with 0 and 1 star trades, I'm sure they would change their overview to reflect that immediately.

Eudaemonia is right on when she (?) says: "The proliferation of that rule has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with social behaviour." and "Most people accept the status quo, they don't even question the rules."

And when she says "In most fellowships I've been in I've asked why cross trades are frowned upon and every single time I'm told they're unfair because you can produce a greater quantity of t2 or 3 goods in the same amount of time as it takes to produce t1 goods." she's right on target. Why? Because the assumption that value is tied to cost of production is why most AM's get it wrong.

As an AM of a reasonably successful fellowship I find the attitudes of the AM's are usually just to do what has been successful in the past --"social behaviour" -- since most are not experts in economics or even informed. I do wonder how many have read Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" or know about the Chicago School of Economics or anything about the subject. So of course they base their opinions and rules on what others have done in the past. And the star system only reinforces and gives them cover for their wrong understanding of things. But they are to be commended if they do follow the past because, in general, doing so is a wise thing. But sometimes people are wrong and sometimes things change and the past general rule has to be re-examined.

So good for Eudaemonia. She nailed it.

AJ
 

ajqtrz

Chef
Why do you own 3 scroll factories and 12 steel?
Isn't that because it's easier to trade steel for crystal and silk than scrolls?

Why are you required to make that move?

I'm not required to do anything, I choose to do it.

But the main reason I'm doing it is the upcoming FA asks for a lot of steel to make Bracelet badges. After the FA 8 of those will be put away. I actually very seldom trade steel for anything. I don't need planks or marble because I use scrolls to purchase them too. I have about 25 or so scroll producing buildings in my Moonstone Library farms and that nets me about 125k of scrolls a day. With my three factories (I removed one to make room for a steel for the FA), I make a lot of scrolls....and that doesn't count the other sources I have in various buildings. Probably over 200k per day.

Glad you asked. Sometimes what people do isn't always clear and sometimes there are motivations for doing it that are mixed.

AJ
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
The Archmage makes the FS rules, so the vast majority of Archmages find those trades unfair and do not want them to take place within their FS's. Archmages are typically higher in the game and know the ropes of the game better, if there wasn't a great disdain for these trades you wouldn't see this listed as a rule so often. And I don't buy the reasoning that Archmages just don't change their overviews that often and so those rules are left over from the dinosaur ages. If an Archmage later came to the conculsion that there was absolutely nothing wrong with 0 and 1 star trades, I'm sure they would change their overview to reflect that immediately.

Whoa there missy! who said anything about 0 or 1 star trades? Certainly not me. I've been very vocal in my stand against them.

now, on to what we (I) were really talking about

I agree that there is a great disdain for cross trades. I just disagree why that is the case. Science proves that people seldom examine the truth of widely held beliefs because it's more beneficial to get along with others than it is to risk social exclusion by going against popular beliefs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dew Spinner

Well-Known Member
Whoa there missy! who said anything about 0 or 1 star trades? Certainly not me. I've been very vocal in my stand against them.

now, on to what we (I) were really talking about

I agree that their is a great disdain for cross trades. I just disagree why that is the case. Science proves that people seldom examine the truth of widely held beliefs because it's more beneficial to get along with others than it is to risk social exclusion by going against popular beliefs.
This forum is direct evidence to the contrary! :) Next Time you set your T1, T2 and T3 factories check how much cost difference there is. That is why it is common practice to make those trades 3 star.
 

Iyapo1

Well-Known Member
In most fellowships I've been in I've asked why cross trades are frowned upon and every single time I'm told they're unfair because you can produce a greater quantity of t2 or 3 goods in the same amount of time as it takes to produce t1 goods. That response appears legit on the surface until you consider that same tier trades can be equally unfair if production per hour is the metric to determine a 'fair' trade. Tiny cities can't produce at the same rates as bigger cities therefore a 1:1 ratio is hugely unfair to lower level players.
Small cities do not need the same amount of goods to advance. If small cities constantly need cross tier trades then their production is not balanced and they need to put up more manufactories of whatever tier they are short or they need to join a FS that allows cross trades.
Edit to add: nicely detailed
2nd Edit, lol derailed.
 
Last edited:

Dew Spinner

Well-Known Member
Small cities do not need the same amount of goods to advance. If small cities constantly need cross tier trades then their production is not balanced and they need to put up more manufactories of whatever tier they are short or they need to join a FS that allows cross trades.
Edit to add: nicely detailed.
Or they are rushing through the chapters and their cities are not ready (fully upgraded) to handle the requirements of the higher chapter.
 

Iyapo1

Well-Known Member
I have a question about S2 shortages.

Ink decays into scrolls. I would think it would be harder to trade off than velvet or obsidian.
True or not true?
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
Small cities do not need the same amount of goods to advance. If small cities constantly need cross tier trades then their production is not balanced and they need to put up more manufactories of whatever tier they are short or they need to join a FS that allows cross trades.
Edit to add: nicely detailed.
There are many reasons for and against cross-trades, some are even valid but I have yet to hear of a single logical reason that justifies making rules against it.
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
This forum is direct evidence to the contrary! :) Next Time you set your T1, T2 and T3 factories check how much cost difference there is. That is why it is common practice to make those trades 3 star.
This forum is direct evidence of what? I'm having a lot of trouble following your commentary - what does the cost of manufactoring have to do with whether you place 3 star trades or not?
 

Dew Spinner

Well-Known Member
This forum is direct evidence of what? I'm having a lot of trouble following your commentary - what does the cost of manufactoring have to do with whether you place 3 star trades or not?
That people don't go along to get along. A lot of players are against cross tier trades because of the cost to produce them. The next time you set all your factories check out the costs for those productions.
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
That people don't go along to get along. A lot of players are against cross tier trades because of the cost to produce them. The next time you set all your factories check out the costs for those productions.

What I see is a lot of people talking over each other and very few actually interested in learning to look at things from a different perspective. The fact that you've just claimed that the cost of production somehow justifies banning cross tier trades without qualifying your opinion is very much proof of that :)
 

Enevhar Aldarion

Well-Known Member
That people don't go along to get along. A lot of players are against cross tier trades because of the cost to produce them. The next time you set all your factories check out the costs for those productions.

That is not the total cost, though, as others posters have pointed out in the past. In addition to the actual goods needed to make productions, you also have to factor in the amount of population and culture per square that the factory requires. Plus, like I said before, the hate for cross-tier is left over from the days before the current ratios were put in place. Were you playing when it used to be 16:4:1? Do you want to go back to when a 2-star cross-tier trade was 1600 tier 1 for 100 tier 3? A lot of fellowships have just not bothered to adjust to the new, and much more fair, 2.25:1.5:1 ratio.
 

Dew Spinner

Well-Known Member
What I see is a lot of people talking over each other and very few actually interested in learning to look at things from a different perspective. The fact that you've just claimed that the cost of production somehow justifies banning cross tier trades without qualifying your opinion is very much proof of that :)
There is nothing that needs qualifying, the proof is in the pudding.
 

Dew Spinner

Well-Known Member
That is not the total cost, though, as others posters have pointed out in the past. In addition to the actual goods needed to make productions, you also have to factor in the amount of population and culture per square that the factory requires. Plus, like I said before, the hate for cross-tier is left over from the days before the current ratios were put in place. Were you playing when it used to be 16:4:1? Do you want to go back to when a 2-star cross-tier trade was 1600 tier 1 for 100 tier 3? A lot of fellowships have just not bothered to adjust to the new, and much more fair, 2.25:1.5:1 ratio.
With the costs you mentioned I'm pretty sure they are still against them and that is why they haven't changed the rule in their FS Overview, not that they have overlooked or haven't gotten around to changing the rule. Although I am in a FS that does not have rules about them, so I am fully aware that it isn't all FS.
 
Top