Jump to content

Market Changes on Resource/Money Handling


Shakyr
 Share

Recommended Posts

So the current market is completely broken, in that I can have 500k Food and the system will allow me to post a Sell Offer for 10 million Food, providing I can be bothered creating 20 new Sell Offers.

This means that you cannot trust what any Nation is Buying/Selling and makes it possible to manipulate the market by posting spurious offers, that shift market opinions.

My suggestion is simple.

  1. When a Sell Offer is posted, the Resources are immediately withdrawn and held by the system in reserve.
    1. When a Sell Offer is accepted, the Resources are deposited in the Buyer's Nation and the Money (minus fee) is deposited in the Seller's Nation.
    2. When a Sell Offer is cancelled, the Resources (minus fee) are deposited back into the Seller's Nation.
  2. When a Buy Offer is posted, the Money is immediately withdrawn and held by the system in reserve.
    1. When a Buy Offer is accepted, the Resources are deposited in the Buyer's Nation and the Money (minus fee) is deposited in the Seller's Nation.
    2. When a Buy Offer is cancelled, the Money (minus fee) is deposited back into the Buyer's Nation
  3. All Trade Offers will expire after a certain time period (I suggest 1 week, real time), after which the Resources/Money will be returned (minus fee).
  4. Whenever a Nation is Blockaded during war, all existing Trade Offers are frozen and cannot be accepted. While frozen, Trade Offers cannot expire.

The fees are to make it less feasible that people will use the Market as a bank and act as a small resource sink. I suggest 1% as a small fee.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shakyr said:

So the current market is completely broken, in that I can have 500k Food and the system will allow me to post a Sell Offer for 10 million Food, providing I can be bothered creating 20 new Sell Offers.

This means that you cannot trust what any Nation is Buying/Selling and makes it possible to manipulate the market by posting spurious offers, that shift market opinions.

My suggestion is simple.

  1. When a Sell Offer is posted, the Resources are immediately withdrawn and held by the system in reserve.
    1. When a Sell Offer is accepted, the Resources are deposited in the Buyer's Nation and the Money (minus fee) is deposited in the Seller's Nation.
    2. When a Sell Offer is cancelled, the Resources (minus fee) are deposited back into the Seller's Nation.
  2. When a Buy Offer is posted, the Money is immediately withdrawn and held by the system in reserve.
    1. When a Buy Offer is accepted, the Resources are deposited in the Buyer's Nation and the Money (minus fee) is deposited in the Seller's Nation.
    2. When a Buy Offer is cancelled, the Money (minus fee) is deposited back into the Buyer's Nation
  3. All Trade Offers will expire after a certain time period (I suggest 1 week, real time), after which the Resources/Money will be returned (minus fee).
  4. Whenever a Nation is Blockaded during war, all existing Trade Offers are frozen and cannot be accepted. While frozen, Trade Offers cannot expire.

The fees are to make it less feasible that people will use the Market as a bank and act as a small resource sink. I suggest 1% as a small fee.

This allows people to essentially offshore through ghost trading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Suyash Adhikari said:

This allows people to essentially offshore through ghost trading.

I'm sure some people still will, but it'll cost them the market fees.

For example, posting a Sell Offer of 10 million Food and then letting it expire a week later, will cost you 100,000 Food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shakyr said:

I'm sure some people still will, but it'll cost them the market fees.

For example, posting a Sell Offer of 10 million Food and then letting it expire a week later, will cost you 100,000 Food.

Market fees sound like a horrendous idea, no thanks.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Suyash Adhikari said:

Market fees sound like a horrendous idea, no thanks.

 

No one likes taxes, but they serve a purpose.

In this case it reduces the incentive for people to abuse the market as a bank, while also providing a resource sink. Sure it stings to see a "1% of this transaction was paid in tax" message, but nothing stops you from raising prices.

Personally, I hate it when I get told "The Player doesn't have the Resources/Money", when I'm trying to use the current market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Shakyr said:

So the current market is completely broken, in that I can have 500k Food and the system will allow me to post a Sell Offer for 10 million Food, providing I can be bothered creating 20 new Sell Offers.

This means that you cannot trust what any Nation is Buying/Selling and makes it possible to manipulate the market by posting spurious offers, that shift market opinions.

My suggestion is simple.

  1. When a Sell Offer is posted, the Resources are immediately withdrawn and held by the system in reserve.
    1. When a Sell Offer is accepted, the Resources are deposited in the Buyer's Nation and the Money (minus fee) is deposited in the Seller's Nation.
    2. When a Sell Offer is cancelled, the Resources (minus fee) are deposited back into the Seller's Nation.
  2. When a Buy Offer is posted, the Money is immediately withdrawn and held by the system in reserve.
    1. When a Buy Offer is accepted, the Resources are deposited in the Buyer's Nation and the Money (minus fee) is deposited in the Seller's Nation.
    2. When a Buy Offer is cancelled, the Money (minus fee) is deposited back into the Buyer's Nation
  3. All Trade Offers will expire after a certain time period (I suggest 1 week, real time), after which the Resources/Money will be returned (minus fee).
  4. Whenever a Nation is Blockaded during war, all existing Trade Offers are frozen and cannot be accepted. While frozen, Trade Offers cannot expire.

The fees are to make it less feasible that people will use the Market as a bank and act as a small resource sink. I suggest 1% as a small fee.

I think the issue can be solved by instead having the system calculate the total of all of your current sell offers (or buy offers when making a buy trade, but not cross calculating them), and if the new offer when making a new trade would put you below 0 of the rss (or cash for buy offers), then you cant make it. 

and to cover errors from depositing into the bank or being looted, maybe run a check on turn changes, as long as that wouldn't add a noticeable amount to turn change scripts, and any excess in the offer either be removed, or the entire offer cancelled altogether.


the system you are proposing is overly complicated, and making a fee when people may have to remove their offer and repost when people are undercutting only hurts traders not people that would be abusing it to hide funds, since 1% would be less than the 14% of a looting by a raid war in pirate policy, anyone not in a blockade on the final turn before beige could just drop everything in the market and pull it out for a 1% fee

Edited by Deborah Kobayashi
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:

I think the issue can be solved by instead having the system calculate the total of all of your current sell offers (or buy offers when making a buy trade, but not cross calculating them), and if the new offer when making a new trade would put you below 0 of the rss (or cash for buy offers), then you cant make it. 

and to cover errors from depositing into the bank or being looted, maybe run a check on turn changes, as long as that wouldn't add a noticeable amount to turn change scripts, and any excess in the offer either be removed, or the entire offer cancelled altogether.


the system you are proposing is overly complicated, and making a fee when people may have to remove their offer and repost when people are undercutting only hurts traders not people that would be abusing it to hide funds, since 1% would be less than the 14% of a looting by a raid war in pirate policy, anyone not in a blockade on the final turn before beige could just drop everything in the market and pull it out for a 1% fee

yeah, i understand your issue with some trades not working, but i think this ^^^^ is a better solution. 

 

Another solution is that when you loose a war, your assets in the market are also susceptible to being looted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the solution to fix possible abuse not just be if you lose a war all your currently standing trade offers are cancelled. Resources & funds are recalled as loot is divided up.

You could then have the mechanic where a person hides money for example using the market, but then can't use it during the fight. If the person is not blockaded they have this advantage, but once they're blockaded they're cut off from those funds/resources tied up in the market, and then can only access them if the blockade is broken, or if they lose the war and then they are automatically recalled to be divided up as loot to the winner.

So you can risk trying to stop your money being stolen in each individual ground attack, but you tie up your funds you may need to fight, and then if you lose anyway, you're not ahead of your opponent, and if you keep out of being blockaded, and then also don't lose the war, I would just consider that the superior force using its ability to protect some part of the nations coffers. Risk-reward. Any exploits there that I'm not envisioning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:

I think the issue can be solved by instead having the system calculate the total of all of your current sell offers (or buy offers when making a buy trade, but not cross calculating them), and if the new offer when making a new trade would put you below 0 of the rss (or cash for buy offers), then you cant make it. 

and to cover errors from depositing into the bank or being looted, maybe run a check on turn changes, as long as that wouldn't add a noticeable amount to turn change scripts, and any excess in the offer either be removed, or the entire offer cancelled altogether.


the system you are proposing is overly complicated, and making a fee when people may have to remove their offer and repost when people are undercutting only hurts traders not people that would be abusing it to hide funds, since 1% would be less than the 14% of a looting by a raid war in pirate policy, anyone not in a blockade on the final turn before beige could just drop everything in the market and pull it out for a 1% fee

You say my system is overly complicated, yet you propose something that is even more complicated? Having the system adjust everything "magically" for you in the background might sound nice, but it would be a complete pain to program (I do it for a living). It would also probably introduce way more bugs, especially adding on that "turn change" script. I can just imagine it accidentally wiping out all the resources on the market and the game having to be restored from a backup ;)

 

1 hour ago, KiWilliam said:

Could the solution to fix possible abuse not just be if you lose a war all your currently standing trade offers are cancelled. Resources & funds are recalled as loot is divided up.

You could then have the mechanic where a person hides money for example using the market, but then can't use it during the fight. If the person is not blockaded they have this advantage, but once they're blockaded they're cut off from those funds/resources tied up in the market, and then can only access them if the blockade is broken, or if they lose the war and then they are automatically recalled to be divided up as loot to the winner.

So you can risk trying to stop your money being stolen in each individual ground attack, but you tie up your funds you may need to fight, and then if you lose anyway, you're not ahead of your opponent, and if you keep out of being blockaded, and then also don't lose the war, I would just consider that the superior force using its ability to protect some part of the nations coffers. Risk-reward. Any exploits there that I'm not envisioning?

Yes they can drop money on the market, but is that no different to dropping it in the alliance bank and then it getting almost instantly shifted offshore? I remember the last global war that I participated in, nations in general were pretty quick about doing that.

So in this case, why bother complaining that people will abuse a new system, when they already have a way to abuse the system?

Personally, if you don't blockade the nation and they move resources out, that's your own fault. There's no reason to twist ourselves into a pretzel, trying to think of ways to give them free loot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shakyr said:

Yes they can drop money on the market, but is that no different to dropping it in the alliance bank and then it getting almost instantly shifted offshore? I remember the last global war that I participated in, nations in general were pretty quick about doing that.

So in this case, why bother complaining that people will abuse a new system, when they already have a way to abuse the system?

Personally, if you don't blockade the nation and they move resources out, that's your own fault. There's no reason to twist ourselves into a pretzel, trying to think of ways to give them free loot.

To clarify, I'm saying I think it's a fair game mechanic/you're right it's just like using the alliance bank. So I don't think my proposal is open to any "exploitation" more so than what currently exists :P

I was just asking if someone could think of such a way for that proposal to be used in a way I'm not thinking of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't this complaint be simply addressed with a process/program/function (whatever it's called) that the server runs after each trade offer is posted or a game action that reduces a nation's resources (performing an attack that consumes resources, being looted, turn change resource consumption, buying improvements, etc.), checking that all trade offers posted by that nation for that resource type can still be fulfilled and removes them if it's untrue?

Having said that, I don't think this type of market manipulation should be combatted mechanically as it's a part of game play and more appropriately addressed by player interactions. The trade market is really just a place where nations from all over Orbis shout offers at each other like, "Hey, want some steel? I've got steel, and I will sell it to you for $$". This makes sense when you consider each nation is just some dictator that presumes themselves the highest authority on what their nation does, we're not citizens shopping our local supermarket which does actually have to abide regulations on how sales are performed under threat of easily enforced laws. As such it makes sense that trades between players should really only be as good as their intent, or at least stated intent, to honour them. In fact, really I think trades should be two transactions each of a single quantity of a single resource going one way. This would make it possible to cancel a transaction in order to defraud other players of resources, placing more emphasis on developing trade relationships and trust. This could mean more opportunity for drama that may inspire conflicts, or the rise of more player driven regulation such as forming player regulated markets accessible only to vetted players.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Shakyr said:

You say my system is overly complicated, yet you propose something that is even more complicated? Having the system adjust everything "magically" for you in the background might sound nice, but it would be a complete pain to program (I do it for a living). It would also probably introduce way more bugs, especially adding on that "turn change" script. I can just imagine it accidentally wiping out all the resources on the market and the game having to be restored from a backup ;)

I meant the system itself not the programing, which by the way your system would require adding completely new scripts and checks for a whole new deposit system, since your basically creating a second trading inventory for them, which is just as likely to have bugs.

 

Something like what you have proposed has been suggested and shot down by alex before.

 

Also why did you skip the more important issue of my post, that your tax hurts noone but traders, and serves no purpose at all. Actual traders have to change prices on their trades all the time, because markets aren't static. It doesn't discourage abuse, People using it as a deposit system take less penalty than getting looted, and have a protected trade account they dont have to worry about.

That's way more abusive than offshoring since Trading large quantities provides one of the few opportunities to blockade and loot those with secure banking networks, and this removes that opportunity.

 

so all you are really suggesting here is Protected trade inventories, a cash sink on trades, and discouraging healthy market competition since when someone undercuts you by 1, you cant change the price without taking a loss every time.

 

This is bad for global economics, war, raiding, and probably a dozen other reasons I don't have the foresight to see.

 

Edited by Deborah Kobayashi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:

I meant the system itself not the programing, which by the way your system would require adding completely new scripts and checks for a whole new deposit system, since your basically creating a second trading inventory for them, which is just as likely to have bugs.

 

Something like what you have proposed has been suggested and shot down by alex before.

Sure it would require new code, but the only ongoing scheduled script would be trade expiry, which is a fairly simple check. The other code for handling market transactions is simple and I could write it in my sleep.

If he's against it, nothing I can really do, but won't stop me from posting the odd suggestion like this, that can change the game for the better, in my opinion. As opposed to some of the changes that have been made. But that's a tangent from this topic.

2 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:

Also why did you skip the more important issue of my post, that your tax hurts noone but traders, and serves no purpose at all. Actual traders have to change prices on their trades all the time, because markets aren't static. It doesn't discourage abuse, People using it as a deposit system take less penalty than getting looted, and have a protected trade account they dont have to worry about.

That's way more abusive than offshoring since Trading large quantities provides one of the few opportunities to blockade and loot those with secure banking networks, and this removes that opportunity.

so all you are really suggesting here is Protected trade inventories, a cash sink on trades, and discouraging healthy market competition since when someone undercuts you by 1, you cant change the price without taking a loss every time.

This is bad for global economics, war, raiding, and probably a dozen other reasons I don't have the foresight to see.

A race to the bottom is in no trader's best interests. The current market seems to mostly swing between everyone buying up the resource, then people notice the "price" has risen, so they start dumping resources and undercutting each other.

Not only that, it's very easy for "Joe" to undercut by a large amount and post a few mill of a resource that he does not have. No one will necessarily call his bluff and try to accept the offer (which would be cancelled if it couldn't be filled), so people will just blindly undercut him and the price drops even lower.

I'd say the current system hurts traders a lot more than anything I've suggested.

Sure the tax is less than a penalty of getting looted, but there is already offshoring procedures in place for quite a few alliances, which costs the nation nothing. Here they would lose money/resources every time they cancelled the trade, then put up another trade with the remainder that they do not need.

Trades are public knowledge. This means that during a war, your opponents will be able to see any trade movements you make and if you are blockaded, no access to the market.

I also did not say that other measures could not be put in place, for example:

  • Cap the price, so that it can't be more than x% higher than the average, which stops people putting stuff up for $1 mill ppu.
  • Put a restriction on the number of Trade Offers that can be made.
  • Make Personal Trade Offers expire within 24 hours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.