Replace Trade Ratio with Values of goods.

[DeletedUser28670]

Basically, this proposal wants us to officially indorse the really bad, unofficial trade calculator based on supplies and coin costs.

It also seems like they want us to not be able to sell goods and buy goods.
Automatic no.

 

[DeletedUser30143]

And if you want to stop goods sellers from selling

LOL. Hardly.

Simple 1:1, 1:2, and 2:1 for all ages is what I like.

Yes. But this also creates a pyramid, from lowest to highest era goods. Why shouldn't you be able to get 40 BA goods from a trade of 10 EMA? The market won't let you. It forces you to input less, even though you can still get the same 40 BA from 20 IA from 10 EMA. It's just a silly, time-consuming work-around.

I don't really care if sellers are out for themselves or buyers are gleeful about good deals. That's all part of the market. The issue under consideration here is purely about a function that would benefit all these same buyers and sellers. But some don't seem to get that it's purely about convenience of clarity and process.

Fair enough. "Argue for your limitations, sure enough, they're yours."

 

[Salsuero]

Pfff who said it's fair, FoE never says it's fair or not, just that that trade is acceptable.

I think the app shows "fair" trades as based on the ratio only. I think that's what they are referring to. I never use the app, so this didn't occur to me. I wasn't in favor of that change on Inno's part, personally. Don't mark anything as "fair" -- fair is an agreement between two parties, not something someone tells you is so.

 

[Salsuero]

LOL. Hardly.



Yes. But this also creates a pyramid, from lowest to highest era goods. Why shouldn't you be able to get 40 BA goods from a trade of 10 EMA? The market won't let you. It forces you to input less, even though you can still get the same 40 BA from 20 IA from 10 EMA. It's just a silly, time-consuming work-around.

I don't really care if sellers are out for themselves or buyers are gleeful about good deals. That's all part of the market. The issue under consideration here is purely about a function that would benefit all these same buyers and sellers. But some don't seem to get that it's purely about convenience of clarity and process.

Fair enough. "Argue for your limitations, sure enough, they're yours."

How would your system prevent me from trading 40 BA goods for 1,000 FE goods directly? And if it does prevent it... how would it NOT prevent me from trading 20 BA goods for 40 OF goods as a FP trade?

 

[DeletedUser]

Why shouldn't you be able to get 40 BA goods from a trade of 10 EMA? The market won't let you. It forces you to input less, even though you can still get the same 40 BA from 20 IA from 10 EMA. It's just a silly, time-consuming work-around.

It is a time-consuming work-around, but it is not silly. It is an intentional part of the game mechanics. It should be hard to get goods from more than an era or two away from the one you're in. It's part of the challenge of the game, and part of the incentive to find good friends and a good guild that will work around it with you.

Most importantly, though, as many others have pointed out, this change would be open to all kinds of abuse. And neither you nor the OP have addressed that objection at all. And, it would do nothing to help with the supposed problem of younger (I'm assuming he really means newer) players getting taken advantage of. People will still post unbalanced trades, and newbies will still sometimes unwittingly take them. It's part of the learning process that we all went through, as has also been pointed out.

In summation, the proposal is ripe for abuse and doesn't even solve the main problem that is stated in the proposal itself, therefore I say no to it.

 

[DeletedUser30143]

I think the app shows "fair" trades as based on the ratio only. I think that's what they are referring to. I never use the app, so this didn't occur to me. I wasn't in favor of that change on Inno's part, personally. Don't mark anything as "fair" -- fair is an agreement between two parties, not something someone tells you is so.

Hi, Salsuero. Yes, the app shows the quantity ratio as "rate" in the market interface. I don't use the app, either, yet the browser version also just lists "rate" in the interface. What "rate" means, all by itself, is confusing to a lot of players.

I can't speak directly for the OP here. He may be proposing changing the "rate/qty." label for a rate/cost/value label. He'll have to clarify that, if he wants to. But I believe he also wants to see the ratio changed in the market UI based on what functionally happens to the value of goods between multiple eras, and not just the ones adjacent.

I think that leaving the qty. ratio column in the interface could be okay if Inno added another "rate" column that also identifies value; how they would be make the differences clear in the existing interface, though, I'm not sure. You indicated that having this ratio show up in the interface is a "change" -- so, it wasn't there at some time before? It sounds like there may have been less confusion from players before this ratio/rate indicator was brought into the UI. It may also be a decent solution to just return to a UI design that removes "rate."

The so-called "Fair Trade" issue is already in existence. That's a debate for the guilds, themselves. As far as the ratio guide goes, that was set up by Inno; they are the ones who have established what they think are "fair trades," by proposing equal values of goods in groups defined by eras, and then doubling each lower era level's qty when inputting into the market UI's fields. (Yes, these ratios change some above LMA. This is accounted for in the charts and calculator.) And then they've made it impossible to actually follow their "rate" guide beyond a narrow band of trading activity.

 

[DeletedUser30143]

How would your system prevent me from trading 40 BA goods for 1,000 FE goods directly? And if it does prevent it... how would it NOT prevent me from trading 20 BA goods for 40 OF goods as a FP trade?

Sorry, wasn't online last night. Impossible to reply right away.

First, it's not my system. It's Inno's system, the same already in place. My main suggestion is that Inno uses the same coded formula as currently, and just extends the range a little bit so that it allows all the eras to be calculated via scaled-quantity ratios. They would have the same stop-gaps in place as they do now, which doesn't allow players to get too crazy with exploding ratios.

Besides that, the only thing that stops any greedy seller is a savvy buyer. I think that was the point Keith was making. If players aren't confused by qty ratios vs. values, they can make more informed choices, at the least. The rest is up to all the players -- just like it is now.

As far as FP trades go ... this has nothing to do with that issue, either. Even the FP transactions get calculated using the qty.-ratios ratings. The FP payment is only a surcharge, if you will, for transacting outside the guild. Transacting inside the guild just gives benefits. Like not having to pay the transaction surcharges. Preventing players from trading outside the guild is a political issue. It is currently not prevented by Inno's in-place system, either. This would not be changed by Keith's proposal.

Unfortunately, I have to get offline now, so can't stay to chat anymore.

 

[DeletedUser31498]

How would your system prevent me from trading 40 BA goods for 1,000 FE goods directly? And if it does prevent it... how would it NOT prevent me from trading 20 BA goods for 40 OF goods as a FP trade?

Without voicing my opinion, which I'm kind of torn on, Salsuero and Longshanks your points are just totally wrong wrt to abuse. You use the silly example of being able to trade 1 bronze for 2k Oceanic goods.

ummmmmm, ok, if i do it now i need to pay 1k bronze goods....who cares. You guys are smart enough to know that no matter what, if you can trade across all ages at once, abuse is as easy as can be. who cares if you need to pay half the BA goods, 1k bronze and 1 bronze are both worth zero.

So Longshanks' point about making it too easy to trade up is a valid point to debate, it simply encourages FP for good swaps over trading up two ages, but the abuse argument is so obviously wrong.

 

[DeletedUser31498]

And Nepholgia, your point of people possibly gettign ripped off accepting 5 bricks in exchange for 5 dye is also silly. You can only get ripped off id you trade DOWN at a bad rate. so in theory, the more advanced person would need to be ignorant as to the era of the goods? idk if you're in HMA and you dont even know the names of the goods in the eras below you, then parting with those goods is fine by me.

 

[Salsuero]

Without voicing my opinion, which I'm kind of torn on, Salsuero and Longshanks your points are just totally wrong wrt to abuse. You use the silly example of being able to trade 1 bronze for 2k Oceanic goods.

ummmmmm, ok, if i do it now i need to pay 1k bronze goods....who cares. You guys are smart enough to know that no matter what, if you can trade across all ages at once, abuse is as easy as can be. who cares if you need to pay half the BA goods, 1k bronze and 1 bronze are both worth zero.

So Longshanks' point about making it too easy to trade up is a valid point to debate, it simply encourages FP for good swaps over trading up two ages, but the abuse argument is so obviously wrong.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. However, it is EXTREMELY easy for me to get 1 BA good. It is NOT as easy to get 1,000 of them. In fact 1,000 BA goods in HMA is not worth ZERO to me. I still use them on the tech tree and the continental map. It may be to someone in a higher age, but then it's also inherently easier to get higher age goods the further from BA you get. Though I thought they were used for refining goods at some point, so that would imply some sort of value other than zero. Is it foolproof? Nope. But my interpretation of what the OP wanted meant it would be made effortless to obtain those higher age goods. For that reason and until I am corrected, I vote no.

 

[DeletedUser31498]

i mean given the scope of trading future era goods in an abusive manner, the ability to pay 1 BA or 1k BA I think we can agree its pretty insignificant. You make it seem like if only you could offer 1 BA good tons of cheating would happen instead of needing to offer 1:2 to cheat. You know the ratio isn't what's stopping rampant cheating come on! Argue for the sake of arguing, fine, but thats ridiculous.

 

[DeletedUser28670]

This is accounted for in the charts and calculator.)

PLEASE NOTE THAT SAID CHART AND CALCULATOR ARE UNOFFICIAL.

 

[DeletedUser28670]

pretty insignificant. You make it seem like if only you could offer 1 BA good tons of cheating would happen instead of needing to offer 1:2 to cheat.

no, it isn't. 1k VS 1 BA goods is a pretty big difference.
Imagine you are in BA, and someone gives you 1 BA good.
A second person gives you 1k BA goods.

Which is obviously better?

 

[DeletedUser31498]

no, it isn't. 1k VS 1 BA goods is a pretty big difference.
Imagine you are in BA, and someone gives you 1 BA good.
A second person gives you 1k BA goods.

Which is obviously better?

Honestly i can't tell if you all are being serious. we're talking about whether or not the the 1:2 ratio is what prevents people from cheating.

Suero and Muggle, you guys seriously think that people aren't dumping goods to other accounts because the ratio limits them? If people want to dump goods, its unbelievably easy as it is. the ratio makes it a TINYYYYYY bit harder. you guys are being so ridiculous with this. how many people with connections to Future Era players who would dump them goods arent able to acquire Bronze age gods to cheat? so stupid. you two should be ashamed of yourselves if you're being serious, UNLESS you're trolling me, and it worked, well done!

 

[Salsuero]

Honestly i can't tell if you all are being serious. we're talking about whether or not the the 1:2 ratio is what prevents people from cheating.

Maybe that's what you're talking about. But we (seriously) believe what you are suggesting is ludicrous. 1 BA good ≠ 1k BA goods... no matter how you slice it. Seriously!

Suero and Muggle, you guys seriously think that people aren't dumping goods to other accounts because the ratio limits them? If people want to dump goods, its unbelievably easy as it is. the ratio makes it a TINYYYYYY bit harder. you guys are being so ridiculous with this. how many people with connections to Future Era players who would dump them goods arent able to acquire Bronze age gods to cheat? so stupid. you two should be ashamed of yourselves if you're being serious, UNLESS you're trolling me, and it worked, well done!

Did I say that or did you twist my words to fit your narrative? I never said they aren't doing anything. But, to be crystal clear, I do not advocate for making that any easier to do. I don't care how easy you think it already is. Let's leave it that way. I'm ok with it not being even easier than it is now. You can judge my words any way you like. But they aren't your words, they're mine. Ridiculous is your opinion.

I personally had to work very hard to get the Bronze Age goods to trade up for the goods to build my Arc... because I did so in EMA, just barely out of Iron Age. It's not a given that just because you have 250 EMA goods, you can post trades for 500 Iron Age goods and they will instantly materialize. Nor is it a given that 500 Iron Age goods will convert quickly down to 1,000 Bronze Age goods. That takes time and it takes effort to set up the right trades that will be taken. And losing that many "current age" goods was certainly "painful" to my bottom line so early in the game, as I think it should be if I want higher-age GBs.

It takes effort to do the tasks. In short... it's time and effort that people may not be willing and/or able to do to get higher-age goods. I don't care if you think the higher-age folks could just take all those trades and make it happen. The fact is... not all guilds can. And so if you think it's not "harder" to come up with or convince a "friend" to spend all the FPs needed to do out-of-guild trades, congratulations to you because you have a wonderfully generous group of friends. Maybe everyone could find these same friends... but that, again, takes work.

But if you take all of that away to say... yeah, here's 1 BA good... you make it VERY EASY to abuse the system. And I know players who would love to have an Arc, but are not savvy enough to figure out how to get one. They don't have enough goods to trade or they are unwilling to part with them... whatever their situations, that's on them. Making it only cost 1 BA good would make it "easy" for them to pull the trigger that they otherwise are not. The system isn't perfect the way it is, but unless you have a "perfect" solution, I will take the "harder" way to the "easier" way. If you can't see this as a serious position, then I will argue that it is you sir who is ridiculous.

Your choice of attacking us, by the way, doesn't give you any sort of credibility, nor does it cause us to respect your opinion more. A little attention to spelling, capitalization... the proper use of an apostrophe for contractions and possessiveness... these things would, however, add to your credibility, at least from my personal perspective. And if you're going to take the time to level accusations and lob insults, please at least have the courtesy of spelling my name right... seriously. Have a nice day!

 

[Keith96olds]

By showing the value of goods you will be able to see if a trade is ridiculous. Whether or not to take it would still be a choice.

 

[DeletedUser]

By showing the value of goods you will be able to see if a trade is ridiculous. Whether or not to take it would still be a choice.

The trouble with this proposal is that no one can agree on an objective value of goods. And if a player can't figure out when a trade is unbalanced now, just changing the terminology of the trade listing isn't going to help them.

Even if someone could come up with a set value for each good that everyone would agree on, this is just another easy button. "Don't make me learn the goods and their relative values on my own, spell it out for me in big letters with a bouncing blue arrow pointing to the 'fair' trades." The game is challenging in various areas. That's what makes it enjoyable to play. Using your brain is good for you, look it up.

 

[DeletedUser31498]

Maybe that's what you're talking about. But we (seriously) believe what you are suggesting is ludicrous. 1 BA good ≠ 1k BA goods... no matter how you slice it. Seriously!

"but are not savvy enough to figure out how to get one. They don't have enough goods to trade or they are unwilling to part with them... whatever their situations, that's on them. Making it only cost 1 BA good would make it "easy" for them to pull the trigger that they otherwise are not."

I love how everyone who thinks they're smart denigrate ppl for online grammatical errors. I'm sorry if my low IQ typing made my points confusing.

You suggest that a serious limitation in getting goods for the strongest and one of the most advanced GBs is difficulty in getting the BA goods to trade? hahahaha ok.

AS you mention, possible people arent savvy enough. But to go through the ringer in reaching out and finding someone willing to sell and donating that many FPs, getting 1k BA goods is a joke. If you were able to trade for Future goods and not for Bronze goods you dont deserve to get an Arc. I'm sorry you had difficulty trading down, but you couldnt possibly have been in a guild or had any friends if thats true. You can offer 5 FPs and 30 people in your hood would trade. ridiculous, not an opinion in this case, a fact.

 

[Salsuero]

I love how everyone who thinks they're smart denigrate ppl for online grammatical errors. I'm sorry if my low IQ typing made my points confusing.

Nothing about your "low IQ typing" makes your points confusing. Your trashy attitude and your piety, however, make you appear ignorant. Make your case without calling people ridiculous, arguing that they aren't serious, or accusing them of trolling you... and then maybe I won't call you out on your grammar or your inability to properly quote a message.

You can offer 5 FPs and 30 people in your hood would trade. ridiculous, not an opinion in this case, a fact.

Agreed. It is very "possible" (though not a fact) that people in an EMA hood would be willing to trade away 1,000 BA goods for 5 FPs. All I see is you proving my point that it would be "harder" than to simply offer a 1 BA good trade for the same result.

 

[DeletedUser31225]

...Replace trade ratio with the value of goods...

...Value is the cost of goods...

Keith96olds, how do you determine cost of goods?