Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Correcting the Negative Impact of the Euro Trader Mechanic on Contract Markets.


Recommended Posts

@Norfolk nChance

Quote

We very rarely needed to buy any core components apart from the extras and permits. If what I believe could be around the corner, currency restrictions would force the clan into the market. The ALTs and extra Buildings couldn’t help.

This is exactly my point.  What is not needed to buy, nobody is able to sell.  It's not that there are no markets, or even no successful ones.  But the market at issue is for contracts in player-produced resources.  The Admiralty Connections DLC enables an individual player to become completely self-sufficient in this sector. 

It used to be quite active and where I did both quite a bit of buying and selling.  Now, a month after introduction of the DLC, this is what it looks like.  There are additional factors playing into this problem but you cannot keep undercutting the fundamental logic of a market without crippling it.

 

20180719044800_1.png

 

Self-sufficient individual players are unlikely to be beneficial for the game in the in long-term.  I suspect this is likely to adversely impact clan cohesion.  It probably won't affect clans that are successful at team-oriented combat, but some of the larger ones may very well start having problems keeping their warehouses stocked.  Although that problem may be easier to mitigate than what's going on in the markets.

 

 

 

Edited by Marcus Corvus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Marcus Corvus

Thanks for both replies fella...

...we need to see the Currency rollout before anything can be or will be adjusted

And my answer to your comment on @admin post is still the same unfortunately.

“The [ET] is a Control Mechanic to stabilize the market. Whether its effective is a different issue.”

It doesn’t actually work and requires actual human or Dev input into a single PORT on a specific Resource. What the EuroTrader[ET] does (or was designed to do) as you’ll understand already is stop a human Dev intervening allowing the NPC Overlay algo to interpret and fill the gap with resources or a bid for resources when PC bids are missing.  This clearly isn’t happening...

You know my view on the Currency Matrix and how it’ll already...

 

The Solo Player with all DLC access... This is very off the cuff...

Tell me what and how you have used the DLC?

I noticed if you BGT all the in-game DLCs it would cost about the same amount as a new account or in other words an ALT. This I believe was more by design than accident to help those anti-ALT players now can contribute to [GL] more than just the 1x account purchase. It’s a great idea allowing more input from @Jean Ribault and co and is a good thing.

Look at the DLC package as a whole all 34 redeemable. What does it sort of allow you to do?

The clue is the Partial Redeemable of Forged Papers and its replenishment rate. You can now do something similar to my Cartagena pirate jump on a closed market. No need for an ALT at all. WO is needed then target the PORT go in build 15x buildings collect store and stockpile for 30 days.

So, your answer to Q&A Guide to My ALT Trading question...

“The answer to your final question is whether a player without an alt is capable of competing in a market where this sort of thing is going on.”

Is yes, but difficult not impossible as before. This is why the whole DLC was rolled out in my opinion. @Jean Ribault and others have stated many times the ALT in-game abuse. They now can use A Partial Redeemable function to do the same thing...

Yes, planning and upfront cash needed but its there for a stand-alone Player without the use of [EDARK] or an ALT...

The market or economy I don’t think will improve until the currency mechanic is bedded in. Then the [ET] will or can be tweaked properly then as it was intended.

 

I feel your pain

 

Norfolk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Norfolk nChance, I appreciate the fact that you recognize some of my views on the subject.  But I don't really condone the DLC approach either, in the context of game purity.  While bypassing the ALT purchase to go the DLC route might in appearance produce the same result in a more legitimate manner, let me equate it to this situation: in one [U.S.] state it is illegal to purchase or consume marijuana, and in other state it is legal for medicinal purposes, but in either case you get the same result from extended use... your genitals shrink and you experience memory loss.  (...and you enjoy yourself in the meantime)...  Even if in one state the consumption is legit, and one it is not, the results are still similar for your body.

In case you don't like that analogy, if we play the game of Monopoly, and I play three separate players having three separate turns against your one player, equate that to having an alt.  Especially for those people that condone using software to do that simultaneously on one machine.  And if I am able to buy extra properties at any time I want to without landing on them, equate that to DLC ships.  Either way it aint fair and there's advantage where there shouldn't be.  If that's by game design, then there's no way it isn't P2W.

Edited by Jean Ribault
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jean Ribault

 

I loved the in-game analogy, top marks fella.

Personally, I was genuinely thinking about it from your point of view and as a more “legitimate” solution. That’s why I hope you didn’t mind me using your name. You offer a serious argument that’s from a long-time player in the game.

In STEAM I was replying to a Question about an EA game offering really expensive DLCs. This then led me to look closer at the whole thing. My pen wasn’t too harsh but if the Dev’s just wanted cash they are offering the DLCs at too low a price.

This then was born the “Legitimate ALT-Lite” DLC Pack idea...

 

Unfortunately, I believe ALTs will never be banned. Only bad ALT behavior will be. This then leaves it to a Control Mechanic issue as I’ve stated before...

Thanks for the reply,

 

 

Norfolk.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if those "alts" are 3 players coordinating together to beat the 4th player? Is it suddenly fair now if it's 3 players instead of 1 guy with 3 accounts?

The issue I find with the whole alt scare is that it could just as easily be a very coordinated group of players doing the same thing.

Simply put, a group of players will always be better than a guy with Alts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

what if those "alts" are 3 players coordinating together to beat the 4th player? Is it suddenly fair now if it's 3 players instead of 1 guy with 3 accounts?

The issue I find with the whole alt scare is that it could just as easily be a very coordinated group of players doing the same thing.

Simply put, a group of players will always be better than a guy with Alts.

But its not. What would be a regular 1v1 is now a 3v1 gank which in a way is denial of fair content to the lone player. If everyone with an alt got a hold of this software it would be a serious problem. It's one thing to dual or tripple box another group for a laugh, it's another to use alts to give yourself a gankers advantage.

Running multiple instances of the game should be an immediate warning/ban type thing. Play as intended, some people take winning too far and if you let them they'll abuse with alts like in other games that allow it.

Edited by Slim McSauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

@Marcus Corvus

Thanks for both replies fella...

...we need to see the Currency rollout before anything can be or will be adjusted

And my answer to your comment on @admin post is still the same unfortunately.

“The [ET] is a Control Mechanic to stabilize the market. Whether its effective is a different issue.”

It doesn’t actually work and requires actual human or Dev input into a single PORT on a specific Resource. What the EuroTrader[ET] does (or was designed to do) as you’ll understand already is stop a human Dev intervening allowing the NPC Overlay algo to interpret and fill the gap with resources or a bid for resources when PC bids are missing.  This clearly isn’t happening...

You know my view on the Currency Matrix and how it’ll already...

I do hope you are correct on the currency matrix.  I am commenting on what I see at the moment while trying to work with these markets.  I am not convinced but am perfectly willing to be proven wrong.

 

Quote

The Solo Player with all DLC access... This is very off the cuff...

Tell me what and how you have used the DLC?

I noticed if you BGT all the in-game DLCs it would cost about the same amount as a new account or in other words an ALT. This I believe was more by design than accident to help those anti-ALT players now can contribute to [GL] more than just the 1x account purchase. It’s a great idea allowing more input from @Jean Ribault and co and is a good thing.

Look at the DLC package as a whole all 34 redeemable. What does it sort of allow you to do?

Bought the DLCs on the summer sale.  Additional copies of the game were actually cheaper but I am not interested in running an alt account.  I do not have the time.  And I am not actually anti-alt.  What I am having trouble with is apparent inability to compete with them in certain market sectors.

I used the Admiralty DLC to open additional building types.  Which is when it occurred to me that I could completely withdraw from buying in the resource markets.

And here we are, a month later, and look at the markets.  That took way less time than even I thought it would.

 

Quote

The clue is the Partial Redeemable of Forged Papers and its replenishment rate. You can now do something similar to my Cartagena pirate jump on a closed market. No need for an ALT at all. WO is needed then target the PORT go in build 15x buildings collect store and stockpile for 30 days.

So, your answer to Q&A Guide to My ALT Trading question...

“The answer to your final question is whether a player without an alt is capable of competing in a market where this sort of thing is going on.”

Is yes, but difficult not impossible as before. This is why the whole DLC was rolled out in my opinion. @Jean Ribault and others have stated many times the ALT in-game abuse. They now can use A Partial Redeemable function to do the same thing...

Whether this works depends on the nature of the merchant activity.  I can see this working for a highly mobile buy and trade.  Pretty sure I couldn't do this.

What was doing (until the resource markets started imploding) was integrated shipbuilding and resource sales.  Found a niche and went to town.  And started developing repeat buyers.  Which you really can't walk away from for 30 days.  There is the matter of the infrastructure (the level 3 shipyard cost about 2.6M to build when everything is factored in) and your customers go elsewhere.  My long-term plan was to shut down one of the production buildings as I had gotten pretty efficient at acquiring what I needed at contract.  And open a 2nd shipyard in a the Bahamas.

Except it's academic because there are no customers.

Again, I really do hope you are right about this.

Edited by Marcus Corvus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Marcus Corvus

 

Currency Matrix – as I see it going....

To start with using the correct names in the correct language to describe an object can be a problem for the Dev’s. Now I’ve POSTED what I know plus @admin comments ONLY. I understand the currencies will be flooded in huge denomination diluting in game prices. It’s a wait and see game on how it goes... I’m guessing from the language.

The have no plans to sell in-game money for real money. Following [EvE] [PLEX] system to mitigate [RMT] my guess. Read this post I did last week...

http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/26376-usd-to-dlc-in-mmos-making-virtual-spaceships-worth-real-usds/?tab=comments#comment-563806

 

Read @Wraith point regarding marks and DLC. Again, reading the comments he’s ( @admin  )not too sure himself.

The MINT building if you’ve enough Victory marks will still need raw materials. This is going to be the Spanish REAL [R] per 8x you will create 1x [Po8]. OR maybe 32x REAL [R] will give 1x Doubloon [GDE] upon your choice. I would view it from a Control Mechanic in all cases. It won’t be easy...

Start dumping GOLD and SILVER ingots or if they’re bumed out already I’d try and job a few against mod builds etc. Prices of goods I believe will be diluted very quickly...

I need to see the linked routes between Marks, Permits, the MINT, DLC and real USD

Inflation will hit hard. In game money won't be transportable at first. That'll change...

 

Norfolk nClue  

 

 

What I know...

In-game Gold (Currency) will be replaced with the Spanish REAL [R].

New Building will be introduced called “The Mint” in which you can make coins. To build a mint you’ll need victory marks. I guess other metal resources needed or just a REAL converter.

Silver & Gold mines will be removed from the game. Silver & Gold Ingots will also go and finally the Silver and Gold Coins will also be removed. If you still have any of these items or structures at the time then you will be compensated for them.

New Currencies...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonial_real

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_dollar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piastre

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doubloon

 

[R]

In-game Gold (Currency) will be replaced with the Spanish REAL [R].

[Po8]

Pieces of Eight [Po8] will be introduced and as an official rate of 1x [Po8] = 8x [R] or piastr as its spelt in the forum I can’t find. If we add an “e” piastre (means any number of units of currency) so could imply a floating rate due to supply and demand.

[GDB]

Gold Double Escudo (or Doubloon) will also be introduced. Meaning Double was two esudo or 32x Real Coins. Another name Lous D`Or is its French equivalent.  The Spanish doubloon was created using 21 carat gold (6.77 grams) or originally worth 32x Reales [R] or two escudos (hence the name).

Virtual vales like Escudo is worth 16x [R] or the US Silver Dollar can be added. 

 

@admin Quotes listed...

 

Silver 8 Reals [Po8] and [GDE] will be freely convertible between each other, but they can only be received from the “government” (as rewards for battles or PBs or from the MINT building).

Money will be denominated (huge denomination will be applied reducing prices to the 18th Century Caribbean levels)

***************************

We have no plans to sell in game currency for money. and will never have this feature in game. You can hold up to this in the future.

***************************

We are focused on the priorities and normalizing the economy is part of it. We have full clarity now on things needed for release and this plan is set.

***************************

Q.Would we start carrying currencies on our ships? Because i hear the spanish are rich... 

A. it’s very tempting. but we talked to several players we trust who craft A LOT and opinions are mixed.

but its indeed tempting. Rob a player - carry gold to port, no more magic wallet.

***************************

Please keep in mind that this is a game.

Clan warehouse will act as a bank and will pay for all the ports.

When we talk about the idea of the physical currency transporting need we only talk about the trading and pvp rewards. Once you get it to clan warehouse it will not require additional travel.

What is being discussed: We want to consider the possibility to remove the magic electronic wallet for battle rewards and marks and from trading.

The interesting outcome from this feature would be actually increased PVP risks especially risks in hunting around capitals: Right now it is still safe to hunt around capitals. It does not feel like a raid; pvp players wins 2-3 battles sinks in the 4th one - but still keeps all the rewards. This feature might actually give some ability for the defenders to deny all rewards from the hunter by counter ganking him. which will bring the balance to the force universe

Also keep in mind that it is just an idea for discussion: Thus no need to get defensive and negative. Lets talk constructively about benefits and negatives of additional risk in pvp and trading. 

***************************

Marks to hold idea is still under review. Those are gold coins and will not affect your speed much. 

***************************

 

Edited by Norfolk nChance
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Norfolk nChance thank you for posting this.  It may be the first place I've seen everything gathered together is a coherent fashion.

I see this addressing some of the current disconnects where marks and money seem to run at cross-purposes.

I guess what I am not understanding is how the currency redesign addresses the demand problem at the very bottom of the economy.  Unless there are plans to broaden this beyond the current pyramid that puts ship production at the apex.  Increasing the variety of end products (beyond one) might make the fall in resource trading irrelevant.  One player plus DLC or same-nation alt will no longer be self-sufficient.

I expect after the redesign I will look back and it will make sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

I've a strategy, I'm looking for ship building price lists in the age of sail.

How much was wood coal or Iron ore things like that

 

Here you have an example of a bill to build and provision a snow rig

9464d394-4eea-4721-ae46-45233af2c0ea.jpg.c659e15edda883d27468c591df106faf.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Norfolk nChance said:

@Hethwill

 

Give me a price of an in-game Victory and if possible an in-game Santi...

 

 

Price is easy and common knowledge. £63,176

note: The caveat, of course, is that ship construction costs are not incurred at the time of launch, nor does construction represent the total cost of acquiring, maintaining, and using sea power. 

Detailed bill is the hardest but will try to get it.

You have some nice starting points of prices here

Ship-of-the-line Cost % GDP % Def. Spending
HMS Royal James (1671) £24,000 .041
HMS Royal William (1719) £30,800 .05 1.17
HMS Royal George (1756) £54,700 .07 .99
HMS Britannia (1762) £45,844 .06 .30
HMS Victory (1765) £63,176 .07 1.03
HMS St. Jean d’Acre2 (1853) £107,5613 .02 .67

http://www.smartwar.org/2013/10/the-cost-of-sea-power-then-and-now/

The replica L'Hermione cost something like 20 million Euro (?) @Surcouf 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

I've a strategy, I'm looking for ship building price lists in the age of sail.

How much was wood coal or Iron ore things like that

 

 

As a recently very active merchant, I view the fundamental problem in the economy as not so much what is needed to build with as whether a crafter needs to buy any of it from other players.  Right now the DLC enables them to produce most everything for core shipbuilding in-house

Except for specialty woods and stuff used in upgrades which, incidentally, is where the alts provide an inordinate amount of leverage these are dropped and not player-produced. 

Cotton being the exception to this where I had no problem competing.  Put up a building, acquired the blueprint, and undercut the current quarter-million offer price for the upgrade in Charleston by half.  And sold everything I produced, with the ROI being well north of what I could get out of a trade run hauling dropped goods.  There's those pesky buildings again.

And in some cases player production competes directly against the AI, as @Jean Ribault pointed out is the case with repairs.

If the shopping list looks like what @Hethwill posted, what I've run smack into will cease to be a problem, provided it comes from player production, and not from AI drops.  In-house production will be insufficient for the core of what a crafter does.  If it does I've clearly misunderstood the developer traffic on the crafting reworks, which seemed to be headed toward much simpler builds with a lot less in them.

I am hoping I have misunderstood them.

Edited by Marcus Corvus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Marcus Corvus

What are you trying to do in [NA-OW] right now? Short term goals? Are you having fun?

Why I ask, you seem despondent with the economy and frustrated at it.

 

I’ve told you all ready the GAME’s economic system is about to (end of August) change dramatically. Before this it needs a partial materials wipe.   

 

Currency announcement was Apr 20th

Partials materials updated spreadsheet issued June 7th

In Feb we had 4x Patches, In March 4x Patches, April 2x and June 1x. We are overdue...

Yesterday @admin posted Mission Changes saying We are almost finished with the port UI and plan to deploy it soon. This UI was a major goal to complete.

 

Don’t look at it as an economy it isn’t working properly yet and NO input will be added till the Currency rollout which needs the partial wipe first is bedded in...

Read the Norfolk nBanker Guide slowly with all the web links.

This tells you exactly where all the in-game tradable items will be valued at by Christmas. You know the Currency, its FX crosses and the Date Range our prices must fit in.

So, what don’t I know? The Gold Currency cross rate to the REAL [R].... How can I solve this?

I suggest stepping away from trading for a bit, focus on craft or rank climbing and enjoy the other aspects of the game. You have everything already to make a killing in August apart from your plan...

Its not about now... and it will p/ss you off if you keep thinking that way. Does that make sense?

Have some fun...

 

Norfolk.

 

Ps I’m expecting a commission from you post August I hope...

 

Edited by Norfolk nChance
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

 

I suggest stepping away from trading for a bit, focus on craft or rank climbing and enjoy the other aspects of the game. You have everything already to make a killing in August apart from your plan..

 

I actually WAS having fun until I started smacking into stuff that undercut what attracted me to the game when I started playing around the first of the year.

First MMO, first sandbox, and what actually interested me was competing in the player economy.  Being chased around now and again after moving to PVP was a bonus.  But it's not what holds my attention.

I`m on the sidelines until after the crafting and economy reworks.  If the game holds my interest thereafter I will be back.

(with your commission) 😁

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Marcus Corvus

Do me a favor. Have a think about my problem...

what don’t I know? The Gold Currency cross rate to the REAL [R]…. How can I solve this?

 

That would then solve this...

I need to see the linked routes between Marks, Permits, the MINT, DLC and real USD

 

This is what @admin posted May 4th

http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/25771-partial-materials-wipe-advanced-warning/

So, looks like Victory Marks are the only marks that remain

 

This type of trading, arbitrage is what I like to do both RL and in-game. They create forced multipliers when spotted and take a hefty amount of brain work...

 

Norfolk.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

@Marcus Corvus

Do me a favor. Have a think about my problem...

what don’t I know? The Gold Currency cross rate to the REAL [R]…. How can I solve this?

@Norfolk nChance Would knowing the total in-game crafting cost of a ship give you this?  If a ship value is being used as common the point of reference.

Assuming I am properly understanding the question you are asking.

For any of the (limited number) of ships that I built for sale I ran the crafting recipes out to the individual resource level and then ran totals based on 1x, 2x, 3x, and 4x building production costs of basic resources.  Once that was known option woods for planking and hull could be factored in. 

1x is the minimum cost, assuming all basic resources are owned.  2x gave me a rough way to gauge when I was overpaying for the resources I didn't control without having to track inventory.  Between 3x and 4x I was making money on the ship and able to factor in labor hours.  4x is the ET price.  Much above that the ships tended to sit too long in the market.  Because too far above 4x a player might as well put up a shipyard and buy everything from the ET.

Didn't actually need to do much with the option woods though.  My bread and butter turned out to be fir/fir T-lynxes.  New players found them to be an ideal gank evader.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Marcus Corvus

 

“Would knowing the total in-game crafting cost of a ship give you this?  If a ship value is being used as common the point of reference.”

You are on the right track. In the nBanker Guide I use a real world 100-Gun Ship costing [GBP]67,600. Then crossed into [GDE]78,701. This the 18th Century Price is my target guess @admin wants to reach for a 100-Gun Ship in-game or thereabouts.

If we could get 18th Century prices of the 12 BASE resources our craft spreadsheet would be able to give a more accurate target to an actual specific ship build, not a generic 100-Gun model.

Instead let’s work with what we have...

You’ll know better than I at the moment with gameplay, but A 106-Gun Victory LO/WO would cost to build in Gold Currency [GC] 3mil. In K/PR a similar Victory is on sale at [GC]4mil so we are not too far away.

We know [GC] will turn into REAL [R] the base Spanish one, but not its cross rate? That’s @admin choice but let’s try 1 for 1 to start. Our Victory Build will cost [R]3mil. The Currencies [R], [Po8] and [GDE] will start on a locked fixed rates 8x and 32x when reducing into REALs. With creation needing a Mint or Government assists.

If we turn my target [GDE] level into REALs we can compare like with like. [GDE]78,701 x32 = [R]2,518,432. This Target against the Victory Value of [R]3m. Makes the SHIP 20% too expensive.

Getting more accurate resource pricing data and an exact build model will focus in the target more. You can see in this small example the Price differentials occurring and why BIG opportunities can be gained.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

If we turn my target [GDE] level into REALs we can compare like with like. [GDE]78,701 x32 = [R]2,518,432. This Target against the Victory Value of [R]3m. Makes the SHIP 20% too expensive.

 

On 7/20/2018 at 10:26 AM, Hethwill said:

note: The caveat, of course, is that ship construction costs are not incurred at the time of launch, nor does construction represent the total cost of acquiring, maintaining, and using sea power. 

 

The 20% above is actually on spot regarding acquisition - shipyard contractors share - not only the buiding cost. 

Does not cover maintenance and usage.

While we can assess the lifetime of such ship ingame and try to speculate on value of repairs + crew it will fall short.

Values of lifetime would probably be 100 times over the construction cost, involving all costs to put to sea  (victuals, armament, etc ) and on top of that the wages for all the crew.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...