But they reduced safe zones at the moon gate and Moon City, returned the graveyard and large resources craters cannot be owned, only fought over. There is plenty of opportunities for PVP on the moon and around it. Fighting over resources for control isn't there yet but we can at least find people now.
You know what would make players more likely to leave the origin safe zone?
- Thread starter Foraven
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2020
- Messages
- 67
Well, to make that happen we first need the Inventory v2 to support volume-based limitations, as I've previously written in one of the update note threads. A lot depends on that already. Various modular crates of different sizes and purposes are in the works, but I still wonder if the modular inventory is something you offer as the first step in cargo technology. We have CLB and CLF and Tractor Beams and can attach stuff with bolts. Introducing the modular crates into early game heavily devalues all the forthcoming technologies apart from the Towing Beam.
Local scarcity would work even with the current environment. It already works with moon-specific ores. You could even do that with more common asteroid ores by scaling the maximum fraction of such ores in the asteroid volume (instead of trying to attach a whole new parameter of purity). You could do ore hotspots not by increasing the chance of an asteroid carrying the ore to spawn, but instead by making asteroids in such hot spots that have the ore dominating over the substrate material, to the point where asteroids can consist entirely out of the ore. I bet people would fight for such spots, but the problem with it is that lack of refining makes it waaay too effective and would break the economy even more than it already is.
Indeed. I was speaking about buy orders since the introduction of the AH. Before I got hooked to SB, I have been playing Crossout - a Russian vehicular combat game. Played 3200 hours to this day. They have the market model that you and I are aware of - the system where all orders of the same value are grouped into one block (although in XO they choose the orders to fulfill randomly from the bidders). And they have buy orders, because those orders inform the demand. At this moment we can only evaluate the supply. That is a great impediment to SB economy foundation.
In my personal opinion, all trading stations have to have a dynamic economy simulation. Selling ore to the station replenishes station supply and drives the reward down, making it better to sell ores that the station doesn't have in abundance. This ore supply is then linked to the station's shops. Shop sells completed parts, which the station can manufacture to a set number, using the ores it have been provided with and the items that players have sold through the Shop interface. Abundace of parts drop the price to buy and the reward for selling. Station cannot reproduce more advanced parts, but can sell them if players will sell such parts first. All these linked parameters are self-compensating, meaning that all shortages and excesses will automatically level out to norm over time to prevent freezes in player-station interactions, and changes to costs and rewards applies over time as well to avoid immediate exploitation.
I really don't think that a player station is a viable position for an entire AH, but I prefer for the players to be able to place Shop Interfaces the same way we now can do so for ship docks and resource networks. Players then would build various shops on their stations and moon bases, instead of just relying on a massive module providing all functionality.
Local scarcity would work even with the current environment. It already works with moon-specific ores. You could even do that with more common asteroid ores by scaling the maximum fraction of such ores in the asteroid volume (instead of trying to attach a whole new parameter of purity). You could do ore hotspots not by increasing the chance of an asteroid carrying the ore to spawn, but instead by making asteroids in such hot spots that have the ore dominating over the substrate material, to the point where asteroids can consist entirely out of the ore. I bet people would fight for such spots, but the problem with it is that lack of refining makes it waaay too effective and would break the economy even more than it already is.
Indeed. I was speaking about buy orders since the introduction of the AH. Before I got hooked to SB, I have been playing Crossout - a Russian vehicular combat game. Played 3200 hours to this day. They have the market model that you and I are aware of - the system where all orders of the same value are grouped into one block (although in XO they choose the orders to fulfill randomly from the bidders). And they have buy orders, because those orders inform the demand. At this moment we can only evaluate the supply. That is a great impediment to SB economy foundation.
In my personal opinion, all trading stations have to have a dynamic economy simulation. Selling ore to the station replenishes station supply and drives the reward down, making it better to sell ores that the station doesn't have in abundance. This ore supply is then linked to the station's shops. Shop sells completed parts, which the station can manufacture to a set number, using the ores it have been provided with and the items that players have sold through the Shop interface. Abundace of parts drop the price to buy and the reward for selling. Station cannot reproduce more advanced parts, but can sell them if players will sell such parts first. All these linked parameters are self-compensating, meaning that all shortages and excesses will automatically level out to norm over time to prevent freezes in player-station interactions, and changes to costs and rewards applies over time as well to avoid immediate exploitation.
I really don't think that a player station is a viable position for an entire AH, but I prefer for the players to be able to place Shop Interfaces the same way we now can do so for ship docks and resource networks. Players then would build various shops on their stations and moon bases, instead of just relying on a massive module providing all functionality.
CLB and CLF don't quite fit what I'm talking about. These technologies are good for transporting ship parts and asteroids. However, they are not at all suitable for at least 100 pieces of goods for building a base, for example. Because the carrier will take longer to place it than to transport it. Spare parts of capital ships could also be transported to the docking site. In general, we are talking about new parts and transportation from the place of manufacture to the place of use of a large number of different parts.
The high volume of base building could involve large volumes of moving parts instead of making them locally. But the developers have simplified the progress of the technology tree and this is sad.
I also played Crossout. However, I played more in EVE Online (more than 3000 hours). The EVE market model is one of the most viable and convenient. In addition to the market structure itself, I would introduce a fee for placing an order (for example, 1% of the proceeds). This would be one of the money recycling taps. If we consider the economy as the basis of everything (including as the basis of hostilities and not the banal shooting of miners).
I don't understand at all why FB didn't use any of the current successful market models from other MMOs. Mystery.
Maybe I described the model incorrectly. Since the game assumes that players can develop the universe themselves, we are talking about player stations in deep space. There they could repair, refuel, sell and buy the necessary ores. The placement of AHs at the station must be balanced. For example, the maximum size of a station. Placement of special cargo modules on the page for the functioning of the market. Availability of sufficient energy. The space is large and points of interest could be formed by the players themselves. If only they had the tools.
The high volume of base building could involve large volumes of moving parts instead of making them locally. But the developers have simplified the progress of the technology tree and this is sad.
I also played Crossout. However, I played more in EVE Online (more than 3000 hours). The EVE market model is one of the most viable and convenient. In addition to the market structure itself, I would introduce a fee for placing an order (for example, 1% of the proceeds). This would be one of the money recycling taps. If we consider the economy as the basis of everything (including as the basis of hostilities and not the banal shooting of miners).
I don't understand at all why FB didn't use any of the current successful market models from other MMOs. Mystery.
Maybe I described the model incorrectly. Since the game assumes that players can develop the universe themselves, we are talking about player stations in deep space. There they could repair, refuel, sell and buy the necessary ores. The placement of AHs at the station must be balanced. For example, the maximum size of a station. Placement of special cargo modules on the page for the functioning of the market. Availability of sufficient energy. The space is large and points of interest could be formed by the players themselves. If only they had the tools.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2020
- Messages
- 67
I understand, but again, that requires Inventory 2.0 to be implemented in order to support item stacking, fluid item slot numbers and limitations based on volume. Otherwise using the current model, carrying massive ship/station modules in a volume of current standard cargo crate would beyond overpowered.
Maybe they just didn't finalize their idea at that point. I've only played EVE once and instantly realized it wasn't the game I would like if I just had to spend time there to level up and unlock stuff, so i don't know how their market works either.
Otherwise mostly agree, though I would even make a %5 placement tax by reducing the current market tax of 10% to 5% also.
I think more about the ability of station owners for profiting from their stations, instead of allowing others to profit from station's position all by themselves. If a station is located near a source of a material, other visitors of the station can use AH to sell ores in front of the owner. At very least that AH should be adjustable for taxes that the owners would receive from all transactions. I'd personally prefer to have the locaziled trade interfaces first, so that owners would be in full control of what they offer and purchase from others. And of course we need the ability to open the safe zone for everyone if we desire, which seem to be missing at this moment.
Maybe they just didn't finalize their idea at that point. I've only played EVE once and instantly realized it wasn't the game I would like if I just had to spend time there to level up and unlock stuff, so i don't know how their market works either.
Otherwise mostly agree, though I would even make a %5 placement tax by reducing the current market tax of 10% to 5% also.
I think more about the ability of station owners for profiting from their stations, instead of allowing others to profit from station's position all by themselves. If a station is located near a source of a material, other visitors of the station can use AH to sell ores in front of the owner. At very least that AH should be adjustable for taxes that the owners would receive from all transactions. I'd personally prefer to have the locaziled trade interfaces first, so that owners would be in full control of what they offer and purchase from others. And of course we need the ability to open the safe zone for everyone if we desire, which seem to be missing at this moment.
Last edited:
There, in a simplified form, it does not work that way.
There is a tax (which is set by the owner of the station). If this is an NPC, then the rate is fixed for a certain region. If the owner is private, then he can change this value in the range.
And separately there is a broker's commission for placing an order on the market.
What is the difference? The tax is deducted on sale. Commission is charged when placing an order. And for those who like to interrupt bets, it sometimes hurts quite a lot. By the way, in the same EVE, you can reduce tax rates with skills.
So the station owner's income is a tax. By the way, there may be a tax on production (a matter of mechanics and balance).
The broker's commission is simply a withdrawal of money from the game.
There is a tax (which is set by the owner of the station). If this is an NPC, then the rate is fixed for a certain region. If the owner is private, then he can change this value in the range.
And separately there is a broker's commission for placing an order on the market.
What is the difference? The tax is deducted on sale. Commission is charged when placing an order. And for those who like to interrupt bets, it sometimes hurts quite a lot. By the way, in the same EVE, you can reduce tax rates with skills.
So the station owner's income is a tax. By the way, there may be a tax on production (a matter of mechanics and balance).
The broker's commission is simply a withdrawal of money from the game.