| Author |
|
Roland Gunner
Greenhorn
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Points: 55
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 07:23 |
|
The sad part is the Devs seem to agree with you Salararius.
I worked for over a year to help bring the spreads down and make the Illy market more efficient, and I enjoyed my time doing it. I believe I was of some value to the market and the game as a whole. That may just be a misplaced sense of self-importance, but if the detractors are complaining about 7% spreads on Advanced goods, then I have to feel it was a job well done.
Thanks to all the other traders out there, maybe we were of no service to anyone but ourselves, but I had fun working with and against you all..
R.
Edited by Roland Gunner - 13 Aug 2012 at 07:26
|
 |
Granek
Greenhorn
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 63
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 10:30 |
Ebay, real world, charge fees just to list items. I don't see that it's such a big deal in Illyriad, except for the level of taxation. The trade hubs ain't charities ya know. ;)
I'd like to have a smaller fee to set up a trade sell order, and then a larger seller's fee if the order goes through. That way people have a degree of flexibility which a non-refundable 7% tax doesn't give.
|
 |
Granek
Greenhorn
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 63
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 11:55 |
Procurement & selling: a trade office (at basic level research) will allow 20 orders at build level 20. If I build a second trade office, and level it to 20, it will give me 10 more orders (again, at basic level research).
Are the trade offices counted per town, or for the whole account? If I have a level 20 trade office in town A, and a level 20 trade office in town B, will I get a total of 40 orders?
Also, if I knock down my merchant's guild, will my traders dessert me (the same way those ungrateful cotters do)?
|
 |
Granek
Greenhorn
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 63
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 12:32 |
GM Stormcrow wrote:
Third, for Faction Hub Orders, if you have a trader at the hub and providing you have the gold (or the goods) present in your inventory at the hub, you can choose to fulfill another players' order directly in the hub without involving any caravans at all.
|
Does this mean that you can see the buy & sell orders in a hub, no matter how far away that hub is, as long as you have a trader there?
If so, can the orders be seen by all of your towns, or just the one where the trader originates?
|
 |
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 15:45 |
I spent some time thinking about this so I'm going to post a quick "market maker" analysis. Feel free to skip this post as I'll use no additional "offensive language" and try to stick solely to constructive information:
I'm going to use the standard definition of a market maker as someone holding both a buy and sell order in a specific market. A market maker is offering a sufficient quantity of buy and sell orders to significantly satisfy the market volume. For this example I'll use the cow market, I'll assume a buy price of 750 and sell price of 843 (pulled from the current market prices). There are 133 buy/sell orders and a very rough WAG of shows an average volume of 1,000 units. That's a total volume of 133,000 units. I don't know how many of those trade every day, another WAG would be 175,000 cows traded per day (87 million cows traded to date over <2 years weighted slightly towards a higher current volume).
OK, so under the current system a trader makes 93 gold per trade. Under the new system a trader would make between 51 gold (5% sales tax) and 85 gold (1% sales tax) per trade. I know, less gold per trade, that sucks!
But, there is another factor in business and that is units moved/sold, etc... If I sell 1,000 units at 93 gold profit is that better or worse than selling 2,000 units at 85 gold profit? I think it's way better to make 170,000 gold than 93,000 gold and I think traders would agree. I think they would really agree if they could make 170,000 gold with less effort, but is that possible?
So, does the new market allow for higher trade volume?
Under the old market you had to offer trades in specific lot sizes. You had to pre-determine what size lot your customer wished to buy. Were there 1,000 people looking to buy/sell 100 cows each? Were there 10 people looking to buy/sell 3,000 cows each? How you posted your buy/sell sell offers in the global market effected how much of the potential market you could reach. Without omnipotent powers, you could not reach 100% of the buying and selling market with your buy/sell orders and others would post buy/sell orders and break your market. In addition, you were caravan limited to how many specific buyers and sellers you could reach. A player with 10 cites could have a maximum of 700 caravans offering a maximum of 350 3,000 cow buy orders and 350, 3,000 cow sell orders. I realize that you can buy more than that but that scenario leads to a trade imbalance and that isn't good for a market maker and greatly complicates his business so I unilaterally ignore it . So at most a market trader will buy/sell 350x3,000=1,000,000 cows/day. Which would net a profit of 93 million. But, realistically, there are not 350 people buying/selling 3,000 cows per day. Realistically, there are 350 people buying an average of 500 cows/day and you get a total volume of 175,000 and one trader with 10 cities can make that market. But he/she can only make the market if the average turn around time for his caravans is <24 hours ( unrealistic, but I leave this weak leg standing anyway). Anything more than that and he/she isn't making the market and the model breaks. This also assumes he/she can size his/her buy/sell posts to 100% fit the market. I'd imagine a more accurate ratio of around 30%. So, with the current market a market maker fills 30% of the total volume and makes a daily profit of 5 million gold assuming the caravans can get back in time. That leaves a lot of room for others to break his hold on the market and that limits his power to control prices and maintain the attractiveness of his prices.
With the new model, a market maker with one city can operate in up to 20 regional markets (one trader per market). Each potential customer city can see from 2 to 8 faction hubs (regional markets) based on marketplace level (higher market place levels can see more faction hubs). There are about 150 regional markets so a trader with one city and 20 traders can fill buy/sell prices for roughly 50-90% of the available customer base. Remember, each buy/sell order can now be partially filled so a market maker can offer to buy 175,000 cows at 843 gold/cow and fill 100% of the orders for a region. Now, if the available customer base is roughly 175,000 cows then the profit in the new system would be between 4.5 million (175,000 total market size * 50% of market reached * 51 gold per cow) and 13.4 million (175,000 total market size * 90% of market reached * 85 gold per cow) gold. A good trader would work in faction hubs that provide the most coverage at the best tax rates and be much closer to 13.4 than 4.5. In the new system the customers are reached with 40 buy and 40 sell orders that the market maker rotates through as needed (old prices, new prices). He doesn't need to type in 700 sell buy orders for each of his caravans and he will 100% saturate any given (isolated) regional market with his offers. A market maker could focus on 2 or maybe even 4 of the now 100 or so markets that exist in Illy. A market maker facing competition from another market maker would have to cancel and reset his sell orders. That will cost some gold. Maybe that is unfair, I don't agree but maybe it is. But given what is offered to them don't they have enough to look forward to?
With the new system a player could plow all 4.5-13.4 million into troops/armor for his one city. He doesn't need to make/build anything and he doesn't really need any pop because he doesn't need 700 caravans (the people accepting his buy/sell orders supply them all). All he has to focus on is accumulating traders and knowing the regional markets and boosting his profits by moving goods between markets with his 70 caravans (or finding a way to hire others to move stuff for him/her).
I'll be the first to admit that any of my numbers could be off and it's possible that market makers are currently satisfying 50 or 75% of the market under the current system (11 million gold/day) and that the exponential price of traders will make it near impossible to satisfy more than 25% of the market with the new system (3 million gold/day). The new system still allows for a stronger market maker position with less incentive for any individual to undercut prices. If my goal is to buy cows and a market maker in the new system will sell them for 843 in any quantity I want and I can pick them up straight away from the nearest hub then...do I really want to post a buy order for cows at >750 (have to pay more than the market maker) and wait until that is filled (assuming I already have gold at the hub), then wait for the seller to send the cows to the hub while I send my empty caravans to the hub to pick up the cows and ship them back to me. Is it worth it to save <13% when what I want is cows?
My goal in this post is to constructively compare the two systems.
|
 |
GM Luna
New Poster
Community Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Location: Illyriad
Status: Offline
Points: 2042
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 16:05 |
Granek wrote:
GM Stormcrow wrote:
Third, for Faction Hub Orders, if you have a trader at the hub and providing you have the gold (or the goods) present in your inventory at the hub, you can choose to fulfill another players' order directly in the hub without involving any caravans at all.
|
Does this mean that you can see the buy & sell orders in a hub, no matter how far away that hub is, as long as you have a trader there?
If so, can the orders be seen by all of your towns, or just the one where the trader originates?
|
First question: Yes
Second question: No, just the town where the trader is from.
Luna
|
GM Luna | Illyriad Community Manager | community@illyriad.co.uk
|
 |
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 17:59 |
Salarius, thanks for engaging constructively with the content. I'm sure your post will be helpful to many players out there interested in trade at the new hubs. In fact, perhaps you should post it or a version of it in the Strategies section so it can continue to benefit people.
One advantage that I didn't see explicitly addressed for a market maker is that rather than having to transport cows back and forth to a city with each trade, the player could just keep the cows at the hub -- essentially buying and selling the same cows instantly with no transaction costs based on travel time. Huge advantage over the current system. Although I do worry about cow futures and credit default swaps. 
With regard to the penalty for repricing: How do you see that as affecting the spread you described in the long term?
|
 |
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 19:21 |
Rill wrote:
With regard to the penalty for repricing: How do you see that as affecting the spread you described in the long term?
|
OK, you're trying to be a market maker in the new system at a specific hub. You set your prices (750 buy, 843 sell) and say you'll handle 100,000 units at those prices. At the end of the first trading period (day, week, month) you've badly misjudged the market and sold 60,000 units and purchased 80,000 units. You're accumulating cows at a 4:3 ratio and need to lower your prices. During the next period you purchase 20,000 units and sell 15,000. Your buy order is now filled. Your sell order still has 25,000 units on it at 843. You want to pay less for cows so you renew you're buy order at 740 (you could have canceled the old buy order and placed this one after the first period) and when your sell order runs out (or runs low) you renew that at 833. These lower prices should reduce your stockpile of cows. But, let's say you're impatient and cancel everything after the first period. So you cancel a sell order for the remaining 40,000 cows at 843. The cost to you at 3% is going to be 1,011,600 gold. Wow, that's a lot, but wait, you've just made a 67.71 (843 * .97% - 750) gold margin on 60,000 cows so after paying the "unfair" portion of the tax you've still earned 3,051,000 gold even while being impatient and really missing the market. Of course, you don't really have 3,051,000 gold because you purchased an extra 20,000 cows for 15,000,000 gold. But at the lower prices (833 sell) those cows are worth 16,660,000 gold so in reality you have over 4 million gold in profit from your screw up. But wait, the cows were selling at 843, just not as fast as you were buying them. You could have kept the current sell order at 843 and increase your profit even further by waiting until your imbalance decreases to 10,000 or less cows. Of course, you can only do so as long as you have the gold resources to make it through the imbalance created by miss pricing the market.
How much gold does this take? Well, you need 100,000 cows and about 100 million gold for this scenario. You'll "earn" about 5% per period from that investment. That assumes an "average" hub tax of around 3% and an inability to set margin pricing to market demand.
Most people just want to buy or sell cows. If your margin is reasonable, they aren't going to jump into the middle of your prices given the barriers to hub trading. Widening your margin from 93 to 103 (740 buy, 843 sell) probably isn't going to kill business and will also slow the accumulation of cows while avoiding the dreaded unfair tax but at an increased risk of competition.
Obviously, if you are accumulating gold then your sell order will run out first and there is no issue with the tax. Traders should keep this thought in mind when trying to set market maker prices.
With the old system, there is no way to do this sort of business. It really doesn't work, too much micro management. This new system is awesome for people trying to do exactly what you are saying this system will kill, with or without the tax. Heck, if I had any interest in trading I would be happy to pay the tax to have access to the trade hubs. Let alone have a situation where there is an even higher tax on non-trade hub trades pushing business to me.
This is all on the faction hub level. There will be trading between hubs between traders working in different markets. I'm not sure how that market will be arranged because I don't know if there is a mechanism for transfer of goods from trader to trader within a hub.
I can't tell you how many times I've gone to buy a certain size lot of goods at a reasonable price and distance and not found anything on the market. It's the only reason I ever set an order. In my opinion, there are no players actually making markets out there right now. If they are, they are doing so as silent players behind the scenes filling only "reasonable" orders. That is one way to do business but I feel the new way is more transparent and thus better. I feel this is true because it will allow us (the unwashed masses) to know what prices the market maker is offering and at what trading distance before we enter the market.
|
 |
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 19:45 |
Why I like the tax. I thought about it, and I like the penalty on cancelled sales orders because I think the new system offers real opportunity to good market makers. I can see an income stream for multi-market market makers in the 10s millions gold/day (for the right player). That's plenty to support a massive army, 10x bigger than any 10 city player. I imagine talented traders will build/move their capital cities in the middle of mountains in the most inhospitable places to make sieges as difficult as possible. They will not worry about pop, so will not have to be concerned with things like sov or food. They will have smaller "war cities" that are exodused to any location. After 5 days these war cities will unleash their hordes on the local populations. No trader city would support their own troops, but would rely on an influx of trading wealth to support their offensive armies. As such, exodus would do no harm to a trader's city as the city is just a shell for troops and not an economic engine. A talented trader could have an empire whose economic power is invulnerable to siege or blockade and whose military power is much more mobile and powerful.
I like that there are penalties on people who try this route but can't cut it. Limited grapes, tax on filled or unfilled sell orders, these are pretty minimal hurdles compared to what's at the end of the rainbow.
|
 |
Kumomoto
Postmaster General
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 20:54 |
|
My questions are:
--Does this, in essence, create a "safe hoarding area" where folks can put all their gold and goods where they are totally safe from thieves?
--What impact does this have on the value of thieves and thieving? (and associated strategies)
--Can you now have players who, even though they have very few cities (they were all taken away from them, for example) still have vast power in the game through their untouchable wealth?
-- Does this make the currently very wealthy players harder to unseat (the simple fact that I ask this is proof that I am a man of the people and a simple, harmless, proletariat farmer)? ;)
--Are the GMs planning on introducing the ability to thieve opponents offices in hubs at some point in the future? (industrial espionage?)
I don't have any judgement or commentary on the above, just thought the questions might be useful to ask...
|
 |