Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 11AUG12 - MAJOR RELEASE (Trade)
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed11AUG12 - MAJOR RELEASE (Trade)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 11>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 2 Votes, Average 4.50  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 20:43
I am not happy about the non-refundable taxes on sell orders (along with no penalties for canceling buy orders).  This means that sellers of goods have substantially less flexibility than do buyers.  I can say personally it's going to make me a lot more reluctant to put up sell orders, since I have no desire to lose money based on market fluctuations.

I do not see any strong rationale for making the tax on sell orders non-refundable; if you want to avoid having people game the system, the existence of the tax on accepted sell orders should be sufficient for that purpose.

Can anyone explain to me the reason that having the tax be paid regardless of whether an item is sold is an advantage in any way to promoting commerce or prevents some sort of exploit?  (Other than making it harder for sellers to respond to market dynamics and therefore posting artificially depressed prices for their goods.)

Goods can be "hidden" from theft at a trade hub without ever placing a sell order and retrieved using an ordinary caravan as long as the player has a trader present, so this rule does not reflect or impose a penalty for using faction hubs to avoid theft.

If this was not implemented for any reason related to game mechanics and instead was put in place to simplify coding (such as how to assess tax on partially accepted sell orders), then I think that was a poor decision on the part of the developers.  

At this time, I see the rule as being unnecessary and unfun.  I am interested in people who disagree, in particular those who disagree based on some rationale other than "the developers worked hard and we are lucky to have an update."

Yes, the developers worked hard and lots of exciting changes are happening.  That doesn't mean that every choice they have made is the right one.

So ... what are the benefits of this particular choice?  I'm open to the possibility that this is a great feature I just don't fully appreciate yet.
Back to Top
Quackers View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2011
Location: Jeff City
Status: Offline
Points: 435
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 20:52
I like to view the idea as a gold sink, a way to pull gold out of the game. Every game needs a gold sink and this game is no exception. 
Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so you will not be dependent on anybody.
Back to Top
Salararius View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:00
Originally posted by Quackers Quackers wrote:

I like to view the idea as a gold sink, a way to pull gold out of the game. Every game needs a gold sink and this game is no exception. 

Units do that too.  It would be better if there were some control of the gold source.  Pop and dead animals just magically produces gold.  There is no cycle.  Pop/animal magically make gold and units magically make it go away and now faction hubs magically make it go away too.

In a real economy the troops would spend money on stuff from the pop and the local pop would buy/sell from itself (net zero) and other surrounding pops (local + or -, could be a lot of game variables here) and the king would take money from local pop (taxes) and the king would give money to troops.  Reinforcing troops would spend money in other cities, raiding troops bring money back.  Faction hubs would tax trade and buy from surrounding pop and kings...etc.

Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:04
Every game needs a gold sink? Why?  And assuming there is a rationale, what makes this a good or effective one?

Edited by Rill - 11 Aug 2012 at 21:05
Back to Top
Salararius View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:05
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Every game needs a gold sink? Why?  And assuming there is a rationale, what makes this a good or effective one?

inflation

Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:07
It seems unlikely that the tax on canceled sell orders will have any substantial long-term effect on inflation, unless it does so by inhibiting the overall growth of the economy.  Most economists believe that a little bit of inflation is a good thing -- it spurs consumption, for example.

Edited by Rill - 11 Aug 2012 at 21:09
Back to Top
dunnoob View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Location: Elijal
Status: Offline
Points: 800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:09
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

 I am interested in people who disagree 
I might disagree if taxes for orders at faction hubs are always paid by the trader, buy and sell alike, and if trade v2 scores are based on accepted orders, buy and sell alike.  But if that's really not the case I agree with your curiosity.Wink 
Back to Top
dmar View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:11
So when we send a trader to a non-local hub we can see stuff that is there, accept and place orders.  While sending traders to a local (visible) hub provides just  the benefit of placng orders at it.

Am I right?
Back to Top
Quackers View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2011
Location: Jeff City
Status: Offline
Points: 435
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:19
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Every game needs a gold sink? Why?  And assuming there is a rationale, what makes this a good or effective one?


Everyone likes to have the lowest orders on the market (which is not needed with this new system). I've played many games with this system and I have enjoyed it alot. It makes buying/selling off the market great and really improves the game. It takes millions of gold off the market and helps stabilize the economy.

You will come to love the system Rill, it is really a good one.

And yes this system will take millions of gold out of the game, I say at least 50-100m a month.

I am truly impressed that the developers are able and have went to this market system. It will improve the game and turn this game around. As long as they don't start getting greedy with the prestige.



Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so you will not be dependent on anybody.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 21:41
I actually purposely don't set my trade orders at the lowest price.  Never have.  I set my orders at the highest price that I think is likely to sell in a reasonable period of time.  This system is going to discourage actual thought and just encourage people to place their orders at the lowest price.

I am not sure I'm interested in selling under these conditions.  Black market for me and trade score be darned.

Please note: I have no objection to the tax, I think it's a great idea.  The problem I have is with a tax that is charged for NOT selling things.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 11>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.