The Great "Fair" Trade Debate

[DeletedUser26965]

Already answered in another thread. If you're going to stalk me down and start arguments at least keep it in one thread.

It's only because I had to piece it together from various posts that are related to the subject matter and your previous responses, if you want to characterize that as "stalking" and starting argument you are of course free to do so but by doing so it's clear you're only interested in false characterizations rather than the subject matter at hand.

 

[DeletedUser26965]

I will post your reply here in an effort to keep it on one post;

I don't view plundering as stealing, at all. I used to get very upset when someone plundered me, my stuff missing!

Then I convinced myself it's unearned production, I lose nothing. And since then I've viewed it from that lens and it's helped me not have any compunctions about plundering someone. It's true - they really don't lose anything. It's unearned production.

And they are more than free to hit me back and take something too. That's the remedy. There's no remedy for market greed.

The remedy is it's voluntary to take the "unfair" trade.

 

[DeletedUser26154]

"stalking"

You call this stalking?



You all need to get out more.

 

[DeletedUser26965]

Already answered in another thread.

I don't view plundering as stealing, at all. I used to get very upset when someone plundered me, my stuff missing!

Then I convinced myself it's unearned production, I lose nothing. And since then I've viewed it from that lens and it's helped me not have any compunctions about plundering someone. It's true - they really don't lose anything. It's unearned production.

And they are more than free to hit me back and take something too. That's the remedy. There's no remedy for market greed.

Okay I only direct quoted you once and put your other response in quotes so you don't get two notifications and think I'm stalking you.

So by your logic then if a player loses goods to a plunderer he didn't lose anything like time, coins, supplies, missed event criteria, missed GE negotiation etc. but if he voluntarily gives those same goods to an "unfair" trader so he can complete GE, events, tech etc. you consider that stealing and that he lost something? Just want to be sure I don't mischaracterize your thoughts.

 

[DeletedUser26120]

There's no such thing as an unfair trade. People pay what they want to pay.

My arguments were based entirely on people not doing the same ratio both ways.

Which is why I proposed sticking to a specific ratio, and I strongly disagree with coins/supplies/easy-to-get goods being used as a metric because those things are so easy to come by.

That's pretty much my complete view in a nutshell.

If I used the words "unfair trade" before then I misspoke.

 

[DeletedUser26965]

There's no such thing as an unfair trade. People pay what they want to pay.

My arguments were based entirely on people not doing the same ratio both ways.

Which is why I proposed sticking to a specific ratio, and I strongly disagree with coins/supplies/easy-to-get goods being used as a metric because those things are so easy to come by.

That's pretty much my complete view in a nutshell.

If I used the words "unfair trade" before then I misspoke.

I don't know if you said it but iirc I believe you refer to "fair" trade and speak out against having a free market. It's odd to me you can hold a position that "There's no such thing as an unfair trade. People pay what they want to pay." which is exactly the entire essence of free trade and what I'm arguing for, "everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it", let people trade what they want but then you always reply with something to the effect of some boogieman evil greedy dealers springing up to take advantage of the poor huddled masses type response I don't know what you believe. In one sentence you express free market values in others you characterize the free market like Stalin or Marx (maybe your Avatar is more than an Avatar lol). I just don't get it. Also I'll reiterate again, I am NOT advocating FOR a calc standard, quite the contrary.

 

[DeletedUser26154]

There's no such thing

I don't know

Okay you two convinced me you'd make crappy mods.



I'll withdraw my Petition to Draft you both.

 

[DeletedUser26120]

Tired of this argument tbh, I've made my views clear multiple times. I don't know why you keep asking me questions or trying to debate me.

People take trades like 30 papercrete, giving up 35 robots because yeah that's what the calculator says. That's fine, good for you.

But when they try to turn around and sell that 30 papercrete for 60 robots, that's exactly where there's a problem as far as I'm concerned.

If everyone tries to profit off their trades the market slows down tremendously. It's not all about being fair, it's a legitimate bottleneck in the game that's of a concern to players.

Any questions? Any comments? I'm tired of debating this and want to put it to rest.

 

[DeletedUser28903]

sloppyjoeslayer, I love you dearly because you can THINK. But that is rare. Most people are STUPID--very, very stupid. They are math-challenged beyond arithmetic almost 100%. Arithmetic is rote memorization, and you can pound that into people. But actual comprehension of graphs, tables, statistics--rare.
Then there is economics. To stupid add selfish, greedy, arrogant beyond words. Here, ignorance improverishes and sometimes kills. Venezuela's dictator dictated what prices could be charged for goods. People were ecstatic to get goods at "fair" prices at last, no more greedy capitalists. Those prices were below the cost of production, so the economy collapsed. Now they are starving--and many are dying.
A lot of people died from crime following Argentina's economic collapse early in this century. That was also buyer greed. YOU understand that phrase, but most people find it utterly incomprehensible--even the current pope.
I once watched a video of a South African cowboy trying to lasso a gnu. The gnu evaded that lasso over and over with elegant grace and awareness. Gnus that were as unaware as nearly all human beings would swiftly be dead.
7 points of the stupid is fluoride in the drinking water. More is heavy metals in vaccines, antiperspirants and processed food. Some is insecticides. Then there are teachers with no real understanding of math themselves. The teacher problem and its proven solution is found on the web at www.constitution.org/col/one_room_schoolhouse.htm

There is also a remarkable book called "The Wisdom of Crowds," by James Surowiecki. That book will change the world when enough people read and comprehend it. It will tell you why the market is always far wiser than a few individuals, even if the few are as smart as you and me while the crowd is the dumb as a box of rocks people stupid enough to believe in "fair" trade.

 

[DeletedUser28903]

Tired of this argument tbh, I've made my views clear multiple times. I don't know why you keep asking me questions or trying to debate me.

People take trades like 30 papercrete, giving up 35 robots because yeah that's what the calculator says. That's fine, good for you.

But when they try to turn around and sell that 30 papercrete for 60 robots, that's exactly where there's a problem as far as I'm concerned.

If everyone tries to profit off their trades the market slows down tremendously. It's not all about being fair, it's a legitimate bottleneck in the game that's of a concern to players.

Any questions? Any comments? I'm tired of debating this and want to put it to rest.

Sorry, Dursland, you are never going to put this to rest because you are flowery to understand that forced prices cause economic loss. Far too stupid. Probably well above "average," but that is well below the level needed to understand this. Yes, I am being mean. People like you have HARMED me and I have a right to be angry about that!
I am a certified genius (certs in my filing cabinets), IQ around 150. Most of the time, I can easily explain something to others that i simply figured out. But economics is a toughie because it is not just brains, it is that desire for something for nothing. Wanting to get things cheaply is RATIONAL and Virtuous--the alternative is waste, starvation, and death. It is only when force is involved that there is a problem. That is stealing.

 

[DeletedUser28903]

From the beginning of Forge of Empires, 2:1/1:2 ratio has been acceptable.

...

This SEEMS acceptable because most people have NO CLUE, so they just follow the guide. But I have noticed that there are usually 10 trades offering 2 lower ages goods for 1 higher age good than offers to trade the other direction. This tells me that the ratio is incorrect and fails to reflect reality.
I nearly always want to trade up, too. I have been in the lower age and have factories, etc, and stockpiles. I do not yet have what I need for the higher good.

 

[DeletedUser28903]

I think we agree Joe?
Here is all what I have in my Guild Constitution:

4) Set trades with freedom & accept trades wisely.

End of discussion.

I could use a guild this wise in Arvahall.

 

[DeletedUser26965]

If "fair" trading is "fair" then why does it seem no one finds it "fair" to take my Paper offer for Tar? It just keeps expiring week after week, despite have many friends, guild in and around Colonial Age. It's not "fair"!!! Someone force them to take my "fair" trade!

 

[DeletedUser13838]

Honestly basing trade ratios on how much it costs in coins/supplies is utterly ridiculous, especially later on in the game when you're pulling in 1 mil coins a day.

And as GBs+wells/fountains in ME and beyond give you 20 of unrefined goods you need for that age, I don't think that's a very good metric in calculating cost either.

1:2/2:1 ratios work across all ages and if everyone stuck to them, the market would be vibrant and fast moving!

The problem is that in AF and beyond, building up a supply of goods is completely pointless as there is no use for them in GVG. A result is that a lot of players in these ages generated huge amounts of CE and and now TE goods.

 

[Houston Don]

If "fair" trading is "fair" then why does it seem no one finds it "fair" to take my Paper offer for Tar? It just keeps expiring week after week, despite have many friends, guild in and around Colonial Age. It's not "fair"!!! Someone force them to take my "fair" trade!

If you were in my guild, I'd trade you tar for paper just like I currently trade existing guild members tar for paper. When I was about to switch to colonial, I asked around what people in the guild needed and tar beat out my other resource hands down (to build wire which many couldn't give away as they had overbuilt wire plants). Of course I see trades listed from outside the guild with people trying to get 2 tar for every stone (or equally lopsided trades) they are willing to sell, those trades almost certainly expiring given the supply and demand curves combined with people's expectations. Personally, I'd be fine with Inno loosening up the trade system as established but I don't want them to demand guilds adopt specific trade systems nor do I think they should remove the fair trade button for those who might want to use it (I'd rather they allow us to individually set specific ratios but understand it won't happen).

But there are other trade systems in effect too, modifying the limited 2:1/1:2 ratios by having one party donate FP's in order to get higher level goods (typically to access a better GB than they could otherwise get) or help secure a better reward spot on a particular GB leveling up. Still others have friends and guild members making wildly lopsided deals to help their buddies, I do that all the time as do others in my guild, but in general I do think loosening up the current structure makes sense even if the bulk of people equate the current system as "fair" simply because profiteers will inevitably factor in one more factor, a person's ability/desire to wait for a fairer trade to come along. With all these events this year, many of them putting people on stricter time tables, having the right goods at the right time does tend to loosen the pocket strings for those without a guild or in a guild that demands adhering to a narrow definition of fair.

 

[DeletedUser]

Personally, I'd be fine with Inno loosening up the trade system as established but I don't want them to demand guilds adopt specific trade systems nor do I think they should remove the fair trade button for those who might want to use it (I'd rather they allow us to individually set specific ratios but understand it won't happen).

I'd like to know where this "fair trade button" is that people keep mentioning. I've never seen it. Maybe it's on the mobile platform, because I never do any trading except on PC. And we are able to set a trade at any ratio we want in between 2:1-1:2, which are the outside parameters they've set.

 

[Houston Don]

I'd like to know where this "fair trade button" is that people keep mentioning. I've never seen it. Maybe it's on the mobile platform, because I never do any trading except on PC. And we are able to set a trade at any ratio we want in between 2:1-1:2, which are the outside parameters they've set.

Stephen, it is on the mobile version of the game (I prefer the PC version myself but saw it last month when my PC was in the shop). Sadly, you don't get to set anything, it is a fixed ratio.

 

[DeletedUser]

Stephen, it is on the mobile version of the game (I prefer the PC version myself but saw it last month when my PC was in the shop). Sadly, you don't get to set anything, it is a fixed ratio.

Well, yeah it's fixed, but all you have to do is uncheck the box and use any ratio between 2:1 and 1:2, like I said earlier. Now that I see what it is, I think it should be removed. No need to impose an artificial standard that no one can agree on. Best to let the market decide what is fair.

 

[Houston Don]

Well, yeah it's fixed, but all you have to do is uncheck the box and use any ratio between 2:1 and 1:2, like I said earlier. Now that I see what it is, I think it should be removed. No need to impose an artificial standard that no one can agree on. Best to let the market decide what is fair.

Yet why not let individuals decide for themselves whether or not to use it? Sure, I think it's flawed but those who appear to like the feature shouldn't have to suffer our demands, should they? Isn't that lack of choice just as bad if not worse since so many apparently have accepted the set ratios? The only people that "impose" it are those who make the choice to impose it on themselves, much like every other trading scheme tied to the game (so if you don't want to give me 200 coke for 100 stone, that is still your choice...lol).

 

[DeletedUser28670]

Sorry, Dursland, you are never going to put this to rest because you are TOO STUPID to understand that forced prices cause economic loss. Far too stupid. Probably well above "average," but that is well below the level needed to understand this. Yes, I am being mean. People like you have HARMED me and I have a right to be angry about that!
I am a certified genius (certs in my filing cabinets), IQ around 150. Most of the time, I can easily explain something to others that i simply figured out. But economics is a toughie because it is not just brains, it is that desire for something for nothing. Wanting to get things cheaply is RATIONAL and Virtuous--the alternative is waste, starvation, and death. It is only when force is involved that there is a problem. That is stealing.

Can you cut it on the Name- Calling?