| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Raritor 
Wordsmith
Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 151
|
 Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 11:42 |
 GM Stormcrow wrote:
- What happens if you run out of Gold in your town and we have to disband caravans... but those caravans are carrying goods...? Or even worse, someone else's goods as part of a trade order?
|
If you run out of gold the caravans already moving will be disbanded when they are back home (as they are not home, news of the lack of money have not been received).
GM Stormcrow wrote:
- Would this make assessing profit on a trade deal quite difficult to
do, as you'd now have a new "overhead" number (time the caravans sat on
the marketplace servicing the offer or travelling, and therefore costing
gold); but that this overhead would only apply to some orders and not
others?
- This would fix a minimum price (for all items) if a
player wished to recoup the cost of the caravan upkeep. Generally we
want market pricing to be as free as possible from system impositions.
- Would
this not (as things are currently, before "trade visibility" is
implemented) create an out-of-your-control variable P&L on a trade?
A player at the other end of the map who accepts your trade deals and
thereby tying up your caravans for a 6-day round trip, costing you X
gold, might then turn your trade into a loss - and you had no control
over it.
SC
|
We are talking about upkeep cost when you caravans are above a number, so if you decide to build them, you take those risks. Now all have 40 caravans, soon many will have 70 (that's almost double). Some of us want to have more. The first 70 are for free, you will pay for the others, so we have to decide if the cost is reasonable, if we made a wrong decision and lost some money... bad luck. Hope it helps Thanks
Edited by Raritor - 14 Mar 2011 at 11:43
|
 |
Createure
Postmaster General
Joined: 07 Apr 2010
Location: uk
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 11:32 |
|
Some welcome changes here I'm sure, they make the system make a little more sense, and again a bit more nooby friendly.
But essentially, for an advanced player, all this means is that they now you get to transport 210k resources instead of 120k per city per shipment.
|
|
Rupe
New Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2010
Location: Ch
Status: Offline
Points: 39
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 11:04 |
Raritor wrote:
Good!! 40 caravans were getting small.
Going back to what you mention about not adding upkeep to caravans, i think some players will not be bothered at all for paying for more caravans, maybe you can leave the first 40 or 70 for free, and then start charging for them, say 10 for the 1st, 20 for the 2nd (30 for all), 30 for the 3rd (60 so far), and so on. This way you can get many more, but after a quantity not really interesting.
|
Perhaps these charges are a little low. The rate is good but if started from 0 it would be simpler to follow. I would say 1 gold per hour per caravan would fit in well and an option to retire vans would also be nice. Lets get ahead of ourselves and say in V3 vans can be hired out. 
|
|
GM Stormcrow
Moderator Group
GM
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 09:58 |
On the upkeep front, it's definitely something we've considered - and haven't yet written off as a possibility. However, we were slightly concerned about a number of things. For example: - The display of this upkeep in an easy-to-understand way, consistently across the site (ie on the Trade Summary, on the Castle Taxation page etc)
- We'd need a "disband caravans" option in place
- What happens if you run out of Gold in your town and we have to disband caravans... but those caravans are carrying goods...? Or even worse, someone else's goods as part of a trade order?
- Would this make assessing profit on a trade deal quite difficult to do, as you'd now have a new "overhead" number (time the caravans sat on the marketplace servicing the offer or travelling, and therefore costing gold); but that this overhead would only apply to some orders and not others?
- This would fix a minimum price (for all items) if a player wished to recoup the cost of the caravan upkeep. Generally we want market pricing to be as free as possible from system impositions.
- Would this not (as things are currently, before "trade visibility" is implemented) create an out-of-your-control variable P&L on a trade? A player at the other end of the map who accepts your trade deals and thereby tying up your caravans for a 6-day round trip, costing you X gold, might then turn your trade into a loss - and you had no control over it.
There are quite a few considerations here, and given the imminent introduction of taxation on trades we felt that this taxation itself might serve the equivalent purpose of upkeep. This trade offer taxation doesn't, of course, effect the direct sending of goods town-to-town, but we have another plan for influencing that somewhat (details to be announced). Regards, SC
|
|
GM Stormcrow
Moderator Group
GM
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 09:42 |
Mr Andersson wrote:
It says in the research tree that Commerce i available from Lvl 18, but above it says Lvl 20...
|
Ooops. Fixed in the description above. It is available from L18 marketplace. SC
|
|
Mr Andersson
Greenhorn
Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 56
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 06:51 |
It says in the research tree that Commerce i available from Lvl 18, but above it says Lvl 20...
|
|
MrA
|
|
Mr Andersson
Greenhorn
Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 56
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 06:47 |
Sweet, appreciated changes!
Also joining the Raritors choir
|
|
MrA
|
|
deansieboy
New Poster
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 9
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 06:12 |
|
what Raritor said.
|
|
G0DsDestroyer
Postmaster
Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Location: Ásgarð/Vanaheim
Status: Offline
Points: 975
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 03:10 |
Great changes!!!!  And good Idea Raritor!!!
|
|
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924
|
Posted: 14 Mar 2011 at 01:10 |
HonoredMule wrote:
I also support Raritor's suggested amendment (allow additional caravans outside current capacity, but with upkeep).
|
Concur
|
|
Tweet
13MAR11 - Early trade changes