DeletedUser28670
2:1 1:1 1:2 is the preferred ratio of most people on W.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
[Guide] Fair trading and trading guides
- Thread starter plinker2
- Start date
DeletedUser26120
Same with V.
DeletedUser26965
Because people are simplistic and controlling when it comes to trade in this game it's amazing. I don't think I've ever run across anything like it in any other game. I don't think even in real life dictators have even controlled markets to such a degree. The emotional knee jerk reactions to trades not within that standard I also find curious. Put up a trade outside that strict standard and people react as though you've just killed somebody and must be ostracized immediately.
Nicholas the Freelancer
Active Member
Adam Smith's invisible hand wears an iron gauntlet.
Freshmeboy
Well-Known Member
The mechanic exists right now to make trades visible to guildies only but they can STILL see your unfair trades...that is the difference. If this were the other way around, the market would be a little more open and guilds would look for players who carry certain deposits to help their guild. The issue here is gouging by your own guildies...if they can make a profit on rare goods why bother setting any other type of trade...? Which negates that players helping their guild...and round and round we go...Setting the bar tight on trade rules keeps the balance in guilds..which is good for the game...
slels
New Member
those 10=1 trades are generated by the game. if you want to take them check out the tavern bonuses
DeletedUser29352
1:2 works great trading down and the calculator works great trading up. Advanced (Age wise) players who are almost always trading down hate the calculator.
DeletedUser32232
I see many posts here on what constitutes a fair trade. Fair trade being a concept or ideal but no one has defined Fair Trading, the system, which most here are advocating against.I think it needs to be described here so all readers unfamiliar with Fair Trading will be able to put all the opposing posts in context.
Fair Trading is a trading system by the game designers where the value of goods is determined by their cost to manufacture. It takes into account many variables and is best left to the FOE Wiki to desribe.
Most posts are advocating a 2:1/1:2 between ages/eras. This is certainly a popular and simple method. The Fair Trading system itself uses this method in the ages prior to CA. Trading between eras after CA becomes more complex and you needs a calculator to compute amounts. The Fair Trading system is mostly used by guilds in an attempt to make trading prices consistant and uniform between all 80 of their members irregardless of market factors like demand. To my knowlege FOE does not promote, reward, penalize, or advocate the use of the Fair Trading system. Some guilds require adherence to Fair Trading so you must know what you are looking at when you select a guild. Outside the Fair Trading system you are free to trade as you choose. No control is placed on the market other then those Inno needs to prevent outright market manipulation.
So which one is the fairest one of all "calculator" or 2:1/1:2? The question has been asked on this very thread. I don't think INNO was attempting to be the fairest one of all. They designed a system based on the criteria they felt was important and threw it out there with all others. It's there for you to use or ignore. You choose which one suits you.
Fair Trading is a trading system by the game designers where the value of goods is determined by their cost to manufacture. It takes into account many variables and is best left to the FOE Wiki to desribe.
Most posts are advocating a 2:1/1:2 between ages/eras. This is certainly a popular and simple method. The Fair Trading system itself uses this method in the ages prior to CA. Trading between eras after CA becomes more complex and you needs a calculator to compute amounts. The Fair Trading system is mostly used by guilds in an attempt to make trading prices consistant and uniform between all 80 of their members irregardless of market factors like demand. To my knowlege FOE does not promote, reward, penalize, or advocate the use of the Fair Trading system. Some guilds require adherence to Fair Trading so you must know what you are looking at when you select a guild. Outside the Fair Trading system you are free to trade as you choose. No control is placed on the market other then those Inno needs to prevent outright market manipulation.
So which one is the fairest one of all "calculator" or 2:1/1:2? The question has been asked on this very thread. I don't think INNO was attempting to be the fairest one of all. They designed a system based on the criteria they felt was important and threw it out there with all others. It's there for you to use or ignore. You choose which one suits you.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser31540
Our guild adopted a new system
1:1 for same age
2:3 / 3:2 for going up / down 1 age
1:2 / 2:1 for going up / down 2 ages
For all ages BA to OF. Its been working well so far
1:1 for same age
2:3 / 3:2 for going up / down 1 age
1:2 / 2:1 for going up / down 2 ages
For all ages BA to OF. Its been working well so far
DeletedUser31498
It all depends on the World though. I'm in W, and since it's new, its almost always 2:1 for all eras. Oceanic to Arctic, Arctic to Future even. In advanced worlds where there are tons of all goods the INNO "fair" calc makes way more sense. But applying one rate to all servers obviously makes no sense. When someone gets to Future era in Z good luck giving them the "fair rate to trade your progressive goods lol.
DeletedUser32539
Fair Trade is a joke from ME onwards. Thee calcs from then onwards have it wrong.
For example PE to CE the FTC says 2:1 if fair, I am saying it is ripping off the higher age player.
Everyone argues that the footprints of both ages are near enough the same. I agree, that's right, as are the housing and road links. Too similar to not make a fuss about.
The GB argument is a non-starter. Who has not come across a player in EMA, HMA or LMA with a level 80+ Arc?
Forget GBs look at the basics.
If I was in CE and self sufficient, I would have CE goods buildings of course but I would also have the PE goods to supply the needed goods to produce the CE goods.
The footprint argument is off-track by the factot of the CE footprint.
If I purely traded, the FTCs all say PE 2:1 CE, it seems reasonable at first glance.
However, if I gave you 100 Bionics for 200 Asbestos I lose out. Why?
Each unit of bionics I trade to you has 1 unit of Asbestos in it in order to be produced.
You give me 200 asbestos, I give you 100 Bionics but I also "give" back to you 100 units of Asbestos it cost to make my 100 units.
The trade rate is therefore 1:1
The calculators are wrong.
"Fair Trade" is wrong, calculations should be made separately for each age that requires goods from another age in order to allow for production of goods or should take into account the double footprint (above).
'Nuff said
For example PE to CE the FTC says 2:1 if fair, I am saying it is ripping off the higher age player.
Everyone argues that the footprints of both ages are near enough the same. I agree, that's right, as are the housing and road links. Too similar to not make a fuss about.
The GB argument is a non-starter. Who has not come across a player in EMA, HMA or LMA with a level 80+ Arc?
Forget GBs look at the basics.
If I was in CE and self sufficient, I would have CE goods buildings of course but I would also have the PE goods to supply the needed goods to produce the CE goods.
The footprint argument is off-track by the factot of the CE footprint.
If I purely traded, the FTCs all say PE 2:1 CE, it seems reasonable at first glance.
However, if I gave you 100 Bionics for 200 Asbestos I lose out. Why?
Each unit of bionics I trade to you has 1 unit of Asbestos in it in order to be produced.
You give me 200 asbestos, I give you 100 Bionics but I also "give" back to you 100 units of Asbestos it cost to make my 100 units.
The trade rate is therefore 1:1
The calculators are wrong.
"Fair Trade" is wrong, calculations should be made separately for each age that requires goods from another age in order to allow for production of goods or should take into account the double footprint (above).
'Nuff said
Zatrikon
Well-Known Member
200 Asbestos requires 8000 Supplies and 8000 Coins to produce (after the one-time cost of the building).
100 Bionics requires 3200 Supplies and 3200 Coins, plus 100 Asbestos (which in turn costed 4000 Supplies and 4000 Coins) - again, after the one-time costs of the buildings.
Therefore the total Supply/Coin cost of 100 Bionics is 7200/7200 as opposed to the 8000/8000 cost of the 200 Asbestos.
So if you're getting 200 Asbestos for 100 Bionics, you're actually making a slight profit. 800 Supplies and 800 Coins worth.
The one-time costs of buildings is negligible, relative to the amount of goods you'll eventually be producing. After all, you're going to be producing a lot (if not most) of the goods for yourself - not to trade, but to use to build GBs and unlock Techs, and negotiate in the Map and the GE, and to donate to your Guild.
I also generally don't consider the sizes of the buildings as relevant to trade value because you get all that space back when you eventually remove the building (not to mention a lot of the coins and supplies you used to build it). If you happen to get the Stone boost in Bronze Age, well unlucky you - you need to build a 4x4 building instead of a 3x3 building. But soon you'll be in a later age and you won't need that Stone Mason anymore, and you'll get back the entire 4x4 space to use for your newer buildings. Maybe in Iron Age, you'll get lucky and get the Iron boost instead of the Ebony boost, and you'll only need a 3x3 building instead of a 4x4. Or you'll get Honey instead of Granite in EMA, etc.
I use a "trade calculator" (actually a spreadsheet I created myself, because some of the online calculators are either inaccurate or not updated). But it's really only as a general guideline. The Coin/Supply cost ratio between OF and AF, for example, is 129:117. I might offer 129 Nanowire for 117 Plankton. Or vice versa. But because the game currently ends at OF, there is a shortage of AF goods relative to OF, so if I really need Nanowire badly, I might offer 100 Plankton for 100 Nanowires. Or if I think others are in dire need of Nanowires, I might ask for 100 Plankton in exchange for 100 Nanowires.
I find it hard to imagine a scenario where I am so desperate that I would offer 200 AF goods for 100 OF goods. But if there's a sucker out there offering 200 AF goods for 100 OF goods, I won't pass that up!
129:117 is IMO, reasonably close to 1:1 (or 100:100), but it's too far from 2:1 (200:100) for my liking.
Anyway, the bottom line is: Caveat Emptor! If you don't like the trade, don't take it. It's not other players' responsibility to make sure you don't get ripped off. Although if they're in your guild, you really shouldn't be ripping them off (nor they, you).
Zatrikon
Well-Known Member
Oh, and in case anyone wants to know what the actual Coin/Supply cost numbers are, either to create your own spreadsheet, or to refer to - even to just use as a rough guideline, here are the actual values:
Bronze .... 1
Iron ...... 2
EMA ....... 4
HMA ....... 8
LMA ...... 16
Colonial . 24
Ind ...... 32
Prog ..... 40
Modern ... 48 = CA+24
PostModern 60 = IndA+28
Contemp .. 72 = PE+32
Tomorrow . 84 = ME+36
Future .. 100 = PME+40
Arctic .. 117 = CE+45
Oceanic . 129 = T+45
So for example, Tar (CA) is worth 1.5x as much as Silk (LMA), and Algae (FE) is worth exactly 100 times as much as Stone (BA).
Bronze .... 1
Iron ...... 2
EMA ....... 4
HMA ....... 8
LMA ...... 16
Colonial . 24
Ind ...... 32
Prog ..... 40
Modern ... 48 = CA+24
PostModern 60 = IndA+28
Contemp .. 72 = PE+32
Tomorrow . 84 = ME+36
Future .. 100 = PME+40
Arctic .. 117 = CE+45
Oceanic . 129 = T+45
So for example, Tar (CA) is worth 1.5x as much as Silk (LMA), and Algae (FE) is worth exactly 100 times as much as Stone (BA).
DeletedUser29726
Personally my preferred rate atm is sqrt(2) between adjacent ages, regardless of age. My reasoning:
1) I NEVER want to trade up at 2:1 from lower to higher, but I prefer to only make my current age goods and someone has to make those one age down goods, so i try to give a better rate going down that I might personally consider going up. Would you want to run 2 bronze age goods or 1 iron age goods? I know my answer is always 1 iron age, so that ratio cannot be correct in my eyes.
2) The cost of coins/supplies method both results in wonky rates way lower than you need to accept going down in higher ages, and will almost never be taken going up.
3) You often do need goods 2 ages below your current age, it's useful to be able to make that offer in one trade. i.e. 1 FE : 2 CE.
A 1.41 up, 0.71 down ratio fills all 3 of my concerns and in most cases results in me getting the trades I need quickly. Trade calc folks are happy to take my trades up, and 2:1 folks are happy to gobble up my trades down.
But, above all I believe in the market... It can be seen for instance that it's difficult to ask for much more than even rates (on some worlds at least) trading down OF to AF... you either accept that and adjust rates til you find one that will be taken, or you just don't get any trades. The opposite is also clearly true that if you're determined you can keep trying higher rates til you find the one that still moves and optimise your resources - I personally don't find that worth the effort and if someone wants to take my trades to make a profit, that serves me fine - I got the goods I needed.
1) I NEVER want to trade up at 2:1 from lower to higher, but I prefer to only make my current age goods and someone has to make those one age down goods, so i try to give a better rate going down that I might personally consider going up. Would you want to run 2 bronze age goods or 1 iron age goods? I know my answer is always 1 iron age, so that ratio cannot be correct in my eyes.
2) The cost of coins/supplies method both results in wonky rates way lower than you need to accept going down in higher ages, and will almost never be taken going up.
3) You often do need goods 2 ages below your current age, it's useful to be able to make that offer in one trade. i.e. 1 FE : 2 CE.
A 1.41 up, 0.71 down ratio fills all 3 of my concerns and in most cases results in me getting the trades I need quickly. Trade calc folks are happy to take my trades up, and 2:1 folks are happy to gobble up my trades down.
But, above all I believe in the market... It can be seen for instance that it's difficult to ask for much more than even rates (on some worlds at least) trading down OF to AF... you either accept that and adjust rates til you find one that will be taken, or you just don't get any trades. The opposite is also clearly true that if you're determined you can keep trying higher rates til you find the one that still moves and optimise your resources - I personally don't find that worth the effort and if someone wants to take my trades to make a profit, that serves me fine - I got the goods I needed.
DeletedUser30900
just wondering, anyone buying this when you try to trade FE goods for AF goods?
Zatrikon
Well-Known Member
Do you mean does anyone take my trade when I offer 117 Algae for 100 AI Data? Yes, sometimes, depending on circumstances. Due to the current shortage of AF goods, this particular trade might take a while or need to be sweetened a bit, like say 125 Algae for 100 AI Data. But there is at least somewhat of a shortage of FE goods as well (at least in the worlds I play in) - some people are still trying to get Arcs (or Rainforest) and some are parking in Future or earlier, so both FE and AF goods are in a reasonable amount of demand. So it's not that unusual for these S/C-cost-equal trades to get taken.
Sure, if you need your trade to be taken *RIGHT NOW*, then yeah, you'll probably need to be more generous. But if you can wait a few days, you can get a more equitable trade rate.
In my particular current situation, I'm more likely to trade OF goods to get AF goods I need. So the "cost-equal" rate would be 117 Artificial Scales for 129 AI Data. So like I said, I'll probably offer 100-for-100, and yes, the trade gets taken. I would *never* give 200 Algae for 100 AI Data. And I usually wouldn't offer such a ripoff either, because I wouldn't expect anyone to accept it.
DeletedUser29933
I love the trade calculator rates over standard 2:1. Although a true free market is the best representation of a proper market, I find sorting through all the profit hunting trades tedious. In guild, the trade calculator over the 2:1 leverages the strengths of upper age players and promotes the advancement of any that follow and is an excellent aid to guild development. A set standard of any kind in guild makes the market predictable, allows those with goods to quickly move through guild offers and pick up any they can with a quickness as there is no need to be scrutinizing the value of each along the way. Any guild i have seen that did not use either the 2:1, the cost based calculator or another given standard suffered a market flooded with so much fishing garbage that yet another thread had to be created to post trades they actually expected anyone to pick up.
DeletedUser29726
Quite to the contrary, when i was in a calculator guild i found trade calculator rates promoted people camping in lower ages and feeding me garbage (colonial) goods so they could build every GB in the game while continuing to be useless to the guild
Eventually I just had to stop taking the trades.