Fargo

You still dont get the point. Look up the post i quoted redii, there i explained whats wrong with that. I get that you dont care about it, but atleast try to be objective, to understand that other people do. Thats not true, you still dont realise what a working market is. Free LH has no advantage, it doesnt matter for how much you exchange it, everyone is generating the same amount of labour with no quality differences. If you think around the cornor you would atleast profit from a larger general player base. Trading has nothing to do with trade ships, all you need to do is buy and sell smart not even leaving the capital. Thats actually fun compared with mindless trading from npc to npc. Yet again you dont understand. Thinking that wellfare is helping anyone is very shortminded. When you knowingly sell lots of iron for 60, while people would buy it for more, what about other new players that try to sell iron for the market price of 100? Those assholes are simply acting rational. When you put easy profit on the market, you shouldnt blame anyone to make use of it. The best you can do for the market is setting contracts with the only goal to make profit, because then there is competition and prices actually can drop when there is enough supply. Assume a working market without massive inflation. Stuff is cheap when either there is lots of supply/competition, or people dont need those items. If you buy cheap stuff, your doin people a favour that didnt expect their stuff to sell so fast. Then they realise that the market is empty and produce even more of those items. You basically raised prices by faking demand, on a high cost for you. Without massive inflation you would think about that a little longer. Once again, thats how a broken economy looks like. It just looks like this, cause there is no competition. And people are not necessarily greedy, many just dont know what they are selling/buying for, cause the game doesnt tell you.

Youre not referring to what im talking about. Im talking about maximising profit in a working economical environment, youre talking about abusing a broken economy?!. Dont you see that youre just proofing how broken it is? Thats all i wanted to point out. Money and all your stuff became worthless already. You buy materials, not resources. Resource cost of a 5th rate is about 100k btw, bellona about 250k. And you must not forget labour cost. When you use 2k LH to craft a ship all alone, for a labour value of 300g/LH that costs you 600k gold. You dont directly loose 600k, but you loose a potential profit of 600k. Also it doesnt matter if you can do a bellona for 100k, when you cant sell it for more than 100k. So whats your profit.

Im not blaming clans for anything, im blaming mechanics promoting not to use the market. But you shouldnt carry it to extremes, trying to organise everything. Its hard enough with low pop to get a market running, even if perfectly balanced. "Wasting time with crafting and trading", is this all you connect with it? Using the market simply means buying and selling stuff. You neither have to leave the port, nor does it require time. A working market would help clans too btw. Do you think you gain advantages from internal economy? Thats wrong. In general its not a difference to supply 10 people with 10 people, or 1 guy supplying himself using the market. Its not a difference if everyone gives labour away for free (clan), or if you sell and buy labour for 1000 gold/LH. On the other side all advantages a working market brings would effect everyone, including clans. Youre advise is to get hired by clans? So youre admitting that economy is broken? Thats all i wanted to point out... You dont understand, and youre not a free shipbuidler acting on the market. Its not about making random profit, its about profit compared with other goods. You dont sell ships for less than you can sell basic resources for, cause its a production chain. Thats simple math. When i can sell resources for 300 g/lh, i have to sell ships for atleast the same. Ship cost doesnt matter, its just important what you sell your labour for. You dont gather resources as a shipbuilder btw. if you want to make profit, and greed is not effecting market prices at all.

I want you to realise how broken it is, instead of blanishing. I am a shipbuilder, and you should trust me when i say that i would have to sell ships for that prices. Its simple math. And i wont discuss this with one of the most greediest persons i know.

Why are you blanishing it? There is a single crafted ship for sale since two days. And a handful of resource contracts barley worth 100k tax. I dont keep track of it, but atleast some are there for a while. It just matters if there is player trade or not. But ofcourse clans dont care. Everyone is collecting resources to craft the materials he needs, and contacts a shipbuilder he knows. That is what it comes down to. Isnt there even a list in sweden with shipbuidlers crafting for mats? Thats working for you, but not for solo players, new players or anyone expecting a working player market or beeing able to do his own business. How shall this work, you advise every new guy to join a super rich clan that will supply him basically for free? Do you really think people want that? You can withdraw economy from the feature list if this is how the final economy looks like. See thats why burdening all responsibility on the community is not working, they dont really care. Why is nobody reacting when it already became impossible to act as a free shipbuilder?! Im just trying to point out the obvious here. Guess its kind of a dilemma. People playing this game dont care about economics, otherwise they wouldnt play this game.

Online numbers, battle numbers, combatnews showing losses, rewards/hour, resource value of ships and cannons, all observable. Playtime is an assumption, but peoples argument is that its more casual friendly now, so 2-4 hours should make sense. It doesnt even effect total numbers. When npcs fill my contracts, i pay taxes aswell. For example buying teak in basseterre via contract, or an european trader that is immediately filling my contract. I dont see stuff on the market, thats the point. You would need to sell about 3000 cannons for on average 4000 g/cannon each day to explain only 500k income.

Not much when 5th rates were selling for 1,5kk and a cannon set for about 200k. And thats what you would have to charge to make profit as a shipbuilder. But people are neither buying ships, nor selling mats.

I mean 1kk isnt really much. When i would buy mats and sell ships for actual prices, i alone would pay 200k tax in phil each day.

Regarding PvP activity, here a few numbers: Approximately 2-3k total players casually playing 2-4 hours each day are loosing less than 150 ships in probably more than 2500 battles each day. Thats a average ship lifetime of more than 10 days. If you assume that about 30% of ships are lost in a PvP battle, about 80% of battles are PvE. In terms of economy, 2500 people are earning approximately 2000kk gold each day + 300k combat marks, probably more. Thats enough to gather resources needed for 3000 Victories + Long cannons, and enough marks for 2000 Wasa, while actually less than 100 ships (boarded ships dont count) need to be replaced. @rediii Do you know what your ports are making money with? Is it actual economy, or people buying/selling upgrades/books expensive, buying from european traders , or setting large mark contracts? When i look at philipsburg, economy is as dead as in gustavia. No ship market, no material market, just a few resource contracts.

Only labour needs to be calculated. You know the base resource value and the amount of labour for every good, therefore you can figure out a labour value for each good. You could simply calculate an average LH value of whats selling on a nations market and base the tax for private trade on it. By implication the market trade does not fluctuate when people can avoid it.

I doubt anyone really thought about it, its basically the same simple system as always, you pay fees for placing contracts and ship. Just money goes to clans instead of AI. Its cheeky that this got advertised as a new tax system. Its not even a tax, but a fee system. A proper sales tax would: Tax goods when they actually sell, not when a contract is placed. Mark goods as taxed, so tax is only payed once. - Little complicated, but could work well together with a smuggler mechanic. Restrict/punish the trade/use of untaxed goods to not promote bypassing of the market. - Reputation seems to be a good way, while a reputation system in general would open many further possibilities. Maybe a risk to loose the goods.

I dont know, maybe even more ships are sinking now, its just unlikely with current repair, escape and gank favouring mechanics. The point is that its effecting economics. Changed ship lifetime has the same effect as changed cost or income.

I dont see how these comparisons are helpful. Lots of things changed, ships dont sink that often anymore for example. In the last PB i saw, less than 10 ships sank out of total 50, probably repair fitted, ships. Capturable ships now are reducing ship value. Crew is basically for free now, cannons more expensive. You couldnt make millions with trading prewipe. Selling marks is a huge income boost, also increasing inflation while ships can be bought via marks. Its not just about pure income and cost. Whats the problem to take the actual situation, analyse it, and make adjustments that make sense while not the whole environment is changing?! But why am i still arguing... you just admitted that you dont care. Atleast thanks for that statement, now we can deliberately abandon all reasoning and stop using our brains.

Can you figure out labour values again? Would be fun to see how far it goes, we could make bets about it

Then support the economy, im not arguing against emergency mechanisms like european traders. But other than that fixed npc prices are either useless or messing up demand and supply by definiton. Competition relies on numbers, the number of contracts. Beeing able to selfsupply is a big problem for competition, and the general number of contracts/players can easily be increased. A proper tax system not promoting bypassing of the market would help too. I see thats very difficult, by then atleast dont increase those simple auctionhouse fees even further... Calculated based on what? I dont get how you can be so ignorant. Inflation crashed your game once, and its about to do it again. Someone recommended it already and i can just say the same. If you dont give a hellokitty about economy, get rid of it all together with crafting. The question then is whats the purpose of having an open world. What patch was that, the wipe? You cant just blame single changes while you changed multiple things at once. I saw players leave after you made upgrades and books impossible to get, an issue that did not get addressed until today?! What about rewarding PvP. The only issue with that is that stupid upgrades are more valuable than actual ships, so its worth to sacrifice a ship for a possible upgrade. This is nonesense, and its highly likely that ship cost isnt the problem here. Arent we developing a game anymore aiming for 2k+ players per server? How shall we ever get to 2k players and hold those if it is not designed to work for those numbers?! Take the NPC generated woods. Even if you manage to balance them, as soon as population changes, its imbalanced again. No, but it affects all palyers when the market dies. Well i guess then you can just continue to mine youre iron. Youre missing the whole point here. Its not about somehow supplying everyone, its about an economy that is fun and gives you possibilities. This applies to anything by the way. If you would actually focus on that you wouldnt have to worry about youre "ratings".

And whats the problem to just make ships cheaper, instead of increasing durabilities?! None, ship cost is not tied to durability. They changed durability, and at the same time they increased ship cost. It makes no sense to have super cheap ships either, thats why balancing is so important. The point is, its not working for the game, no matter if we like it or not. Im just asking for a simple explanation, and i dont see what following posts you mean. How are we supposed to make good decisions, if not based on reasoning that is based on the purpose/definition of the game?!

Youre good in avoiding reasoning and constructiveness. What do you think why there are no flying unicorns in the game? For the same reason there are no artificial durabilities.

Wrong, one dura is simply most plausible and realistic, while there isnt a single valid argument against it. The point is this game was defined as realistic. If you refuse realism, there have to be very good reasons for that, and in many cases there is. But in case of one dura there isnt a single reason. With calling it "design decisions" you can justify everything, that ignorant and the opposite of beeing constructive. Im one of the few persons here that actually figures things out, instead of arguing with pure opinions or trying to just fight through my own believes not matter what.

That AI prices dont react to inflation makes it even worse... Dont tell us something is not possible while you obviously dont know what youre talking about. Nobody asks for 0 sum economy, but have you tested it? Why dont you test 5% inflation, when you have the required data?! Every working economy has some inflation, you just need to control it. For example give rich players opportunities to spend gold for cosmetic stuff. Shall we remember people how you handled one dura, a simple logical decision that took weeks, that we had to force after you claimed multiple times its not possible?! How you seriously "tested" economy with 10 guys on the testbed spread over 8 nations?! The truth is that you dont know what youre doing, and that you cant justify your decisions. Ofcourse you dont have to justify your decisions, you can ignore all criticism and reasoning, you dont have to admit mistakes. But how are we supposed to help, and how are you supposed to make progress like this?! Im so tied of arguing against nonesense that got into the game for no reason, just to not make regress in the best case. Reading your comments in this topic is like a punsh in the face if you spent dozens of hours of your freetime dealing with issues, discussing, explaining and making serious suggestions. Just tell us, what data was this drastic change based on? Why dont you make adjustments to steadily improve balancings, based on observable data? What we get are foolish answers like this: After this paradox youre never able to cross a room of 2 meters. Reality looks slightly different. As another excuse you called drastic balancing changes "experimenting". But experimenting does not equal clueless try and error. You compared yourself with scientists. But science is about making predictions, not testing random stuff. Youre just trying to avoid and to conceal. I hope at some point everyone is going to realise what youre doing here. If you dont change your mindset, admit that the game isnt in a perfect state and start to seriously deal with issues and coherences instead of counting "likes", all we can do is leave the sinking ship. Sorry for harsh words, but someone has to point it out. I wouldnt care if you would only waste your own time, but its our time.

Cons: It doesnt fit the game. The more artificial restrictions, the less plausible it becomes. How do you explain to the guy not able to join in a first rate why other first rates were able to join? You can atleast explain 4th rate PBs with water depth for example. The total number of players in one battle has to be restricted, but thats it. It does not fix the cause of the problem. This is basically a balancing issue. If not everyone would easily achieve max rank and the largest possible ship, PBs would be mixed up more. Instead of a PB, the 25 vs. 25 1st rates battles would happen somewhere else. People want to use their heaviest ships, not the ships the game tells them to use. If your clan managed to build a full 1st rate fleet, then you want to make use of it. Its also removing the possibility to gain advantages from bringing heavier fleets than your opponent, call it an economic advantage. In general it makes no sense to give everyone easy first rates and then not allow people to use them. Whats the logic not to restrict SoL production instead? Its cheating on economy. When youre able to build more firstrates, but youre told to build smaller ships instead, this is causing inflation.

I dont think there are many pure PvP players in general. Then less general players make it harder to find PvP, what results in even less players, what makes it even harder to find PvP, etc. Even pure PvP players need something to achieve that keeps them motivated. A game like NA legends is going to have stuff to achieve to keep people motivated too. Look at similar games, and how long it takes to unlock new vehicles for example. NA wasnt ment to be quick action. I mean you probably could find quick action in NA, if it was a functional game with more players, it would just take a while to get started and combat is different (not always fair) compared with lobby based games. But the goal shouldnt be to please the largest possible playerbase, the goal should be to develop a functional game like it is described in steam. Devs should make clear what this description means, but they still dont even know themself.

Look, as long as devs dont remove economy and crafting from the PvP server, we have to make it work. Dont missinterpret the name, its the common server that contains all type of players. Economy relies on a reasonable cost/income balancing, so ships stay valuable and inflation is not crashing the game. Exactly that happened already not long time ago, thats why this change is so ridiculous and not comprehensible. People left the game, instead of happily sinking their meaningless ships. But hey, lets try it again... This does not mean that we need super expensive ships and PvE grinds all day long. We simply need a reasonable balancing that allows palyers to get the ship they really need, while ships remain valuable. There are also lots of options, just to increase income for low ranks for example, or change cost for certain type of ships. 5th rates could be cheaper while 3rd rates become more expensive, without increasing inflation. PvE grind is there cause they cant figure out how to reward PvP without allowing exploits, and PvE is so boring that it feels like a grind. But just a working economy is not connected with boring grinds. If actual ships were more valuable than those stupid upgrades and books (wtf?!), rewarding PvP wouldnt be a problem btw.

Cant you just write me a PM and i change it, so we dont have to mess up this topic!? Respond to the points i made here if you want, instead of picking on interpretations or phrasings. @admin pls remove these posts, i changed my original post.

What do you want to say with this otherwise? But ill change it if i missinterpretated.

Youre missing a few important points, and casuals seem to be total noobs in your eyes. If you only play 2 hours a week, you still get 7k LH each week. And dont tell me someone dont has the time to log in once every 24 hours for 2 mins to use his labour. 500-600k free money. Youre cherrypicking here, what if he looses his ship every evening... etc. You have absolutely no idea how long it takes average players to sink a ship. Especially while mechanics allow easy escapes in PvP, and safezones protect you in PvE. Youre assumption is that you need a new ship every 2 hours?! Base balancing on this (it probably isnt far off already), and you need a second wipe within weeks. Playing less means logically also loosing less ships, so it doesnt matter at all if you play 2 or 20 hours a week. The only difference is that you get more relative labour the less you play.