Patch 30: Trading feedback

[StuntPotato]

34 minutes ago, Routan said:

I think I like the rest I also have I right to have an opnion. It might differ from your idea, what gives a good gameplay. I respekt you idea, but does that mean I can not be of another opinion? 

But as you write there is more ways to succed in life, so is there also in this game. 

Scumbag, not sure where that comes from. But if it should be a reference to me, I don’t get it. Have I been name calling anybody? Told them there vision is stupid.

I have to my knowledge done 2 things since I started to debate here.:

- I have called for a more player based trade and crafting systems.

- I have tried to tell ppl this change that devs want, maybe is not the doom, end of days as some ppl think. That there is a Way for even cassuals to get what they want.

- That I think skill and effort should have a value.

I bit back I played with a trader, he simply made so much gold that he bought more PvP marks/VM then I could make with fighting. This patch will proberbly in the long run not change much in regard to players playing than other patches. But that is the way devs want this game to move, so why not find a way where you still can have fun in it?

Your use of the phrase 'even cassuals' I think is telling about your attitude. Without them there won't be a healthy game.

 

To keep them and make the game enjoyable I think something along these lines would help alot:

The difference between noble and base woods needs to shrink, alot. The difference between the elite mods and easily craftables needs to shrink. , more contracts, less npc seeding (ideally none) of craftables, larger capital zone where people can rebuild, better (as in fun) bugfree missions. No permits for rank  7-4 ships, allowing a swift rebuild of a favorite ship lost in combat. PvP marks granted on death or even better, No pvp mark mods (they should be crafted from base materials, blueprints purchasable for doubloons), pvp marks can be used to get permits for building the larger ships, permits should drop from missions. Surrendering in  battle should let you keep all 'people mods', like french gunners.

I don't believe any of these changes is of detriment to the 'hardcores'.

[Israel Hands]

1 hour ago, Routan said:

A couple of Pb’s that is around 20-40 I would guess.

 The idea of admin with the new change is that you can by using cheap ships kill off in the long game an expensive fleet. In all fairness can you tell it have been attemted. Think havoc as dutch made Bf give up. Would you say BF was the better players and have the better ships? Ore you think the dutch was better captains and there Cag/sab ships was better than the Danish Teak/Wo, LO/Wo?

Regard nr1 was that not allready happening before this patch. Sweden clubbing the entire server. Now GB/Russia. So where is the difference?

Regard nr 2 I would claim it is the same that stay in habor now as before(more ore less) and the same that go hunting. So where is the difference?

Your argument abouth GB actually prove that admin is right. As you write there Numbers alone should make them a force, where is the claim on ships, woods in that statement?

Yes this has already been attempted before, we've had the fine woods, we've had SoL locked behind permits of different values and in the end it resorts to the same lesson - If you'd been around for a while you'd know. I don't remember a 1v3 PvP match with you but it hardly matters, from what you write I infer that you lost. As I said - how many 1v1 PvP matches have you been in? How many PBs? - Any1 that has done either knows the significance of woods and the unbalanced of it - take a look through the 'great battles' thread, plenty of PBs where fx. the dutch loose an entire fleet and BF lose a single or two. Cag/Sab isn't even that much different from LO/WO, but in a PB it's the difference that counts. Now try to envision the same battles with oak/oak? - Do we really need to draw you a picture? - There won't be any 'long' game because the players won't stick around for it, and it won't matter a dime since the winning side will get combat medals, loot the ships that were sunk and be able to cap a lot of the losing sides ships which in turn can be sold to buy more of the rare woods aggravating an already increasing problem.

The only thing more expensive than a battle won is a battle lost. This won't be changed by your wishfull thinking..

[victor]

@admin

one suggestion: in order to speed up trade testing, it would be a good thing to point out clearly somewhere which are the differences (and the purpose) in the possible trade goods that are available on sale in the shop

- national goods

- local goods

- regional goods

this, I think, would help players in testing the trade routes having in advance roughly an idea of what they can do.

[StuntPotato]

3 hours ago, Routan said:

What would you ells Call the not hardcore players? Think casuals is a fine word fore them. “Even” simply states that the cassuals can work fine in a game that devs want to turn more hardcore. Can’t really see it reflect how I regard them, but maybe just maybe it says something abouth how you regard the word. But that I will leave that  up to you to decide.

But what I read from your suggestion is actually in line with what I say and actually also what admin is doing. Break your things Down, does they not to allow ppl not have acces to everything? That skill and effort is rewarded. It is all abouth where you make the cut and how expensive you make it. 

Lets see how we end up. Don’t think we have seen the last changes to balance the game.

You're right, was a bit on the offensive there, I apologize. I don't see the trend from admin the way you do, but maybe (hopefully) I am wrong about that. But yeah, nothing to do but post suggestions and wait. 

[Israel Hands]

4 hours ago, Routan said:

Did you read what I wrote? Pb 20-40 my guess. 1-vs 1 no idea, but enough to know the value of good build ships. 20-40 PBs and you should know that there's a reason why one side comes out with no losses and the other is obliterated.

So as you say the dutch had less good ships, right? They still won the war right? Have I anywhere said they would not lose more ships? They actually didn't. BF went inactive for a bit and so did much of DNP, look at the dutch now. And Cag/Sab is nearly as good as LO/WO, oak/oak is nowhere nearly as good as teak/wo or LO/WO.. Ppl won't lose more ships, they'll just not play.

But did we gain numbers when all woods was easy to get, all upgrades was easy to get, you could replace a first rate in a day ore to. Ppl even used first rates as fireships, so easy where they to get. Did we get higher Numbers, more PvP more Pb’s?. Look at the last year and tell me easy replaced ships have not been tried and, tell me that PvP and RvR was great at that time. Think you need to go much longer back than a year. I'm not arguing for 1st rates being cheap to build, I'm arguing that woods should be readily obtainable.. There's other ways to limit the amount of first rates, either by hard cap on players (max of 1 pr. account fx), increasing the time it takes to construct one like 2 weeks from the time you set it to the time you get it, or simply by making the mats req be exponentially more than what is required for a frigate. Or a combination of those. EDIT: And yeah, we had A LOT more players when ppl could harvest all woods and didn't have these artificial barriers.. Back when the game was part skill, and most part golden marines - if any1 remember those days.

Just search your heart and you will know when we have fought each other. You then will understand the wisdom of my actions. I honestly can't remember a single battle with you, can't have been that memorable.. Again I'm guessing you lost.

 

What we need to ask is basically: What kind of game is this? - Is it going to be for 500 max a night? Well then we're right on track. I personally prefer many players on the servers - that means more PvP, more PBs and more action all around. We don't get more PvP or PBs by making stuff rare - just look at Cartagena, only port to drop carta tar, and yet I can count on one hand how many PBs that has been in Cartagena. This has nothing to do with the skills of the defending side, but everything to do with the low player numbers and the efforts req to make PBs. 

I want a game that is populated - not a tomb for what could have been.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Israel Hands

[Aerospace]

Wood difference is too huge, there should be less difference. I hate the fact that teak/live oak/white oak are the only valuable woods  

Cag/Sab is not bad, but when there is Lo/Wo, Cag/Sab is trash. On you Port Battle Tank difference is 8 centimeters thickness, a Cartagena Refit can add only 5 cm thickness, while other thickeness mods increase base value with a percentage, thicker is more buffed !

Referance : https://na-map.netlify.com/

[Israel Hands]

1 hour ago, Routan said:

Think nobody wants a game with low pop and no action. Thats just not an argument to be honnest,  imo. You might think another way os better, but pretty sure nobody want a game without players. Then devs should stop pushing for mechanics that has already been tested negatively.

 Take the time from May and until patch 30. Have ships been cheap, woods easy to get, the same goes for upgrades. Do you think we had a lot of PvP pb’s. There was no reason to attack it, you could get all on an alt. The reason for no attack is imo more simple. The strongest will allways hold it. Ppl first went for it when Sweden was weak. Ships haven't actually been cheap, woods were locked behind national ownership which basically locked out fx. the dutch from getting decent ships which meant they were just lambs to the slaughter at the convenience of BF. Only when BF moved out to Russia and DNP went into hiatus did the dutch reemerge and look at them now. Again the bone to be picked by everyone who cares. We've tested this before.

The new RoE have basicly taken the RZ out, PvE battles stay open, so plenty of opertunities for PvP., if you dont mind jumping a battle. This too was tested before, give it time and especially a larger playerbase and we'll see all the old grievances come forth again. We've tested this before.

But do you actually know how rare woods are for any nation/clan? How many jumping forest are there in the game. Now even the simplest port might matter. We have not seen the effect and how it works, because ppl have build plenty of ships before wipe of ressources. My guess best build ships, that anyway get wiped soon, why dont ppl go fight on those. It doesn't matter if the requirement to gain access to the wood is either be a clanplayer or have a clan on the friendlist of the owner. This won't make 'ports' matter, it'll just get the casuals and solo crafters to leave the game.

To hard to flip a port. Think depend on fleet it takes 1-2 Hour. What would you suggest so it not is a barrier. Warsupplies - it wasn't a foolproof solution, but it's better than the mindless grind we've got atm..

Actually woods haven't been easy to get - you either needed an alt or to know someone to get them. What I'm refering to is actually way back before they made the woods rare and where there were no skill books, no port management and clans had less influenze. Would I want it all rolled back? - no, clans need to matter, but they shouldn't be able to prevent someone else from playing the game. The main issue is that we've already tested this 'denial' of woods with the fine woods patch - the result was a disaster - the woods are simply too unbalanced as it is. Port ownership shouldn't be about denying someone the ability to be competitive but rather about denial of access and control of trade.

I want a skill based game where choice of wood isn't a choice between being a lamb or being a wolf, but rather a tactical choice. The current iteration with 'rare' woods and mods have basically moved the game away from being a skill-based game and being a question about equipment. There's no skill in killing off a player with an oak/oak ship.

Just to make an example: An endymion teak/teak is 0,5kn faster, 0,1 faster acceleration, 0,1 better turn speed, got 3cm more sidearmor and the 680hp armor buff that an oak/oak Endymion gets is worthless because armor/angling still decides the battle along with manouverability and the teak/teak endymion wins hands down in manouverability, faster, more acceleration = faster manouvers = win. In short - an oak/oak ship is worthless..

As I've written multiple times - we've tried it all before and the net result has not been more PvP, more RvR or more interesting battles, the net result has been fewer log-ins.

 

EDIT: Other than a rebalance of the woods, which is needed regardless of any mechanics change imo, then an option could be to make the generic woods that were common in the carribean available for harvesting (like oak/oak) in all ports but just make them prohibitively expensive so that for some tasks an oak/oak or cab/sab ship could be a true cost-effective choice.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Israel Hands

[Israel Hands]

2 minutes ago, Routan said:

You are proberbly right, just give ppl anything without they have to do anything for it. Then you proberbly will have more players and more fights. But is that what this game should be? 

I like you have to do an effort, somehow it just makes it more rewarding?

 

 

Pls don't reduce the discussion in such a juvenile manner. I haven't said 'everything should be easily obtained' but restricting crafting mats to clans is not making it rare - it's only enforcing an already hegemonic position of a few clans to the detriment of the game as a whole. There are other ways to make things more expensive and thus more rare - I've even given you a couple of examples, shall I enlighten you further or have you already decided that what you see is what must necessarily be the best? - We've tested it all before.

[Angus MacDuff]

11 hours ago, Israel Hands said:

prohibitively expensive so that for some tasks an oak/oak or cab/sab ship could be a true cost-effective choice.

There is no such thing as "prohibitively expensive", unfortunately.  The richer players will have it all.  I completely agree with all your other points.  Everyone need access to all the important mods/woods IOT make the game attractive and competitive. 

[Israel Hands]

31 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

There is no such thing as "prohibitively expensive", unfortunately.  The richer players will have it all.  I completely agree with all your other points.  Everyone need access to all the important mods/woods IOT make the game attractive and competitive. 

The richest players will be those that invest the most time at the moment. If all trading goods were to be playercrafted then every player account (and yes those with alts will have an advantage, but they will always have an advantage) would be forced into a choice: 'do I want to craft today or make reals today?'. This would limit inflation somewhat, in a sandbox there will always be inflationary tendencies, and it will ensure that atleast everyone has a cap limit to their daily earnings. As it is atm I can run 4 indiamans on 4 of my accounts and make reals while still be able to play on my main and I can do this in principle all day. It's a moneypress where you're just printing your own money.

Make SoL req a maintenance fee, have a cap on how many a single player can have in their docks and implement a total playerdriven economy, this would help curb the inflationary tendencies in the game.

[angriff]

OK there needs to be a way to stop making the regular players pay for clan's fun and advancement?  I make a trade run I pay 10% taxes both ends on buy and sell.  This apparently goes into a clan's warehouse for them to pay their taxes on the port.  Now as a regular trading player I have to carry the burden of the clan and i get zero benefits because I cannot participate in their Royal Grants by the Crown (game server) of hidden clan mission for secret sauce woods.  The trading game even with the investment of distance is only marginally playable as it is set right now. ( I have the time to invest 30 hours a week most dont)

There needs to be some even out scenarios here because spending 100% of the effort for no protection and no real benefits from a captured port including being able to participate in a port battle makes me and every player like me a bit pissed.  As a trader I care little if the port is my flag or another with the exception of reduced opportunity for capturing AI in the area when port after port is taken by these clans.

For me this latest adjustment to the trade word is not working.  I like the missions for passenger and letters.  I like that ports always have things to trade (excepting Bonnaca why I dont know).  I like that I can stimulate trade product drops with livestock and maize , etc.  It is well thought out and making sense for the distance thing.  However, if you are not spending as much time as I am to move around the trade game is not making sense as to the costs.  Even if I do find a trader with some rare woods or some product I can sell it is not not worth the time almost. It is definitely not worth attacking a player because there is no profit in it.   

So maybe a tweak is needed to reduce the amount of tax a clan can charge.  Maybe a better distribution of general player wood availability.  Maybe even a program for non clan players to get access to things that clans have to even up the play of this game.

Edited March 19, 2019 by angriff

[Teutonic]

17 minutes ago, angriff said:

So maybe a tweak is needed to reduce the amount of tax a clan can charge.  Maybe a better distribution of general player wood availability.  Maybe even a program for non clan players to get access to things that clans have to even up the play of this game.

It could also be in the interest of the clan to reduce tax income if it meant more people would use the market of buying and selling...but I suppose that's hard to get a clan to do that.

I don't think I've seen any other nation except Sweden actually have a tax rate lower than 10% - and they still make profit on those ports.

[Macjimm]

1 hour ago, Teutonic said:

It could also be in the interest of the clan to reduce tax income if it meant more people would use the market of buying and selling...but I suppose that's hard to get a clan to do that.

I don't think I've seen any other nation except Sweden actually have a tax rate lower than 10% - and they still make profit on those ports.

Great Britain has a port where I trade that has a tax rate of 7%. 

[angriff]

16 hours ago, Macjimm said:

Great Britain has a port where I trade that has a tax rate of 7%. 

What I found interesting is that now ports that have nothing much to trade become a burden on a clan and they either let it go neutral or fail to defend it if it has no tactical value or economic value.  It is somewhat similar to real but the strategic importance of colonies regardless was something nations held onto.

I still find it a burden on the middle class player to pay the taxes of the Clan Royal Barron's who control the game and wont let you play 40% of it unless you are some sort of known importance to these other players in the game.

[Palatinose]

10 hours ago, angriff said:

I still find it a burden on the middle class player to pay the taxes of the Clan Royal Barron's who control the game and wont let you play 40% of it unless you are some sort of known importance to these other players in the game.

Could you elaborate a bit further on this please? 

Count the ports in the map. New port features enable clans to give ports value. RNG rare wood distribution makes every port potentially even more valuable. Imo there is enough space for thousands of players to take part in actions they want to take part in, especially after a wipe. 

In sweden,  and I'm very certain in other nations aswell, we had trouble to distribute the ports of lesser interest. No one wanted them, so the bigger clans took them to pay the bills for the sake of a blue-yellow coloured homeland. 

New mechs: a port is, what those who own it, make of it.

[angriff]

6 hours ago, Palatinose said:

Could you elaborate a bit further on this please? 

Count the ports in the map. New port features enable clans to give ports value. RNG rare wood distribution makes every port potentially even more valuable. Imo there is enough space for thousands of players to take part in actions they want to take part in, especially after a wipe. 

In sweden,  and I'm very certain in other nations aswell, we had trouble to distribute the ports of lesser interest. No one wanted them, so the bigger clans took them to pay the bills for the sake of a blue-yellow coloured homeland. 

New mechs: a port is, what those who own it, make of it.

You could read my other post.  This game has been designed around clan players desires.  The design is not stand alone but rather some sort of clan conflict rather than nation conflict.  This effort has placed a burden on the lessor clan player and a non clan player new or old to pay taxes for the elite clans that will not allow port battle entrance. I can say that I have not experienced the inside of one port battle since my return to the game after a years leave.  Though I have had to move port cargo and lost my costly buildings due including the wharves themself due to failure to defend and on one occasion a decision that one port was more important than mine because the clan that owned it was on christmas vacation.

That being said what has happened now is that trade has been severely reduced in value.  On average you get about 60 percent return for an hour run.  Of that profit you have to pay 20 percent to clans.     Example

 

I buy Historistorical Artifacts in Belize/Turneffe area for 4568 Reals.  I pay 457 Realstaxes.   I transport it for one hour to South Cuba (Pinar Del Rio) for example.  I can sell those historical artifacts for 6835 Reals.  Appears ok, right?  But I have to pay a 10 percent tax on the selling port of 683.5.  That means I pay for that transport a tax of 1148 Reals and only make 1127 Reals.  The non caring Clan benefits more than I do from my game play. 

This is almost not sustainable if you want to craft or buy ship building products.  It has essentially made a joke of the trading game.  A joke that supports Clans exclusivity rights to special woods, Victory Permits and possible other specialized stuff.  They can use the Reals I pay into their coffers to buy ships and pay taxes and I get on inclusion whatsoever.

Clans will vehemently deny that they are elite and burden the trading players. They are wrong.  The very often discriminate and create an environment that does not make the game of value to new regular players.  The Clan tax system perpetuates a Royalty in the game that is the antithesis for a playable game.  They are given special grants of rare woods now that further exacerbates the discriminations.

The game is not playing  around nation conflict but rather haves elite clans players and have not suppressed middle class players.  I say that they need to adjust the profit margins and taxes that clans can charge  so that player benefit from their efforts not the Clans 

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by angriff

[Angus MacDuff]

7 minutes ago, angriff said:

The game is not playing  around nation conflict but rather haves elite clans players and have not suppressed middle class players.  I say that they need to adjust the profit margins and taxes that clans can charge  so that player benefit from their efforts not the Clans

I'm not a clan player, but the clans still need to profit. They do the hard work of capturing the port and keeping it.  I help when I can by joining their PB or screening, but that is a lot easier for me alone (as opposed to organising a PB).  I agree with you that the solo/casual player also needs incentive (profits) to be engaged. That is why I agree with the suggestions to allow casuals to share in the distribution of rare items and just pay some taxes.  @admin has already said that he is looking at the profits for trading.  I would like to be able to double my money on a trade run without spending several hours at sea (yawn!).  I keep saying this, but more money, more access to rare goods, means more players in OW. (get rid of the word "Rare")

[angriff]

24 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I'm not a clan player, but the clans still need to profit. They do the hard work of capturing the port and keeping it.  I help when I can by joining their PB or screening, but that is a lot easier for me alone (as opposed to organising a PB).  I agree with you that the solo/casual player also needs incentive (profits) to be engaged. That is why I agree with the suggestions to allow casuals to share in the distribution of rare items and just pay some taxes.  @admin has already said that he is looking at the profits for trading.  I would like to be able to double my money on a trade run without spending several hours at sea (yawn!).  I keep saying this, but more money, more access to rare goods, means more players in OW. (get rid of the word "Rare")

Ok so I am player that doesn't mind that time at sea so making longer runs to increase margins is an option but that is under my control. I could continue to make the short 45 minute runs each way for the slim profit.  No clan that I see charges less then 10 percent taxes.  Paying to the clan is only supporting their Bourgeoisie status.

You say they deserve to profit but on the backs of other players. I participate in screening fleets and lose ships but I don't get any tax revenue to replace my ship like the Clans.  So in fact I am paying twice once for my ship and once for the clan's in taxes. I don't get to enter the Port Battle to defend my home port that I pay taxes in and if the clan is no good and successful,  I lose twice.   

I dont get to participate in Clan Missions for Rare woods and if the only port in the game that has that Rare wood is owned by a clan of another nation that closes it to nation then I can't get the rare wood at all, excepting the luck of the dice.  The luck of hitting a trader that might have that wood on it or a wreck so I can no longer build my ship of a rare wood so it become a weaker and symbol of my Proletariat status.  I cant get a premium crafting and selling it with poor woods.  I can just lose it in defending a port for a clan outside that instance and likely lose it to superior attacking enemy clans I might also have paid for. 

It is no wonder player quit this game in droves.  There is little that they can do to control their destiny of paying taxes to ungrateful Bourgeoisie clans to put them into superior ships.  

Look at the example in the earlier post, the clans make more profits off my trading runs than I do.  If the devs were wanting to create an 18th Century naval combat game along with an 18th Century Economy game with royal clan houses, then they have succeeded.  The peasant players revolt by giving up and leaving.

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by angriff

[Teutonic]

50 minutes ago, angriff said:

 

Clans will vehemently deny that they are elite and burden the trading players. They are wrong.  The very often discriminate and create an environment that does not make the game of value to new regular players.  The Clan tax system perpetuates a Royalty in the game that is the antithesis for a playable game.  They are given special grants of rare woods now that further exacerbates the discriminations.

The game is not playing  around nation conflict but rather haves elite clans players and have not suppressed middle class players.  I say that they need to adjust the profit margins and taxes that clans can charge  so that player benefit from their efforts not the Clans 

 

So...

A clan should just be expected to pay for a port and a timer with no tax income?

I'm all for giving benefits to small clans or solo players, but this makes me feel you don't quite understand what a clan pays in maintenance fees to control a port - or maybe you do but you don't care?

it's 4,000 reals a day for a port - then it's 20,000 reals added on to create a timer.

Then if a clan wants the increase trade goods or reduce labor hours that's a 10-20% increase in the port maintenance. 

37 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I'm not a clan player, but the clans still need to profit. They do the hard work of capturing the port and keeping it.  I help when I can by joining their PB or screening, but that is a lot easier for me alone (as opposed to organising a PB).  I agree with you that the solo/casual player also needs incentive (profits) to be engaged. That is why I agree with the suggestions to allow casuals to share in the distribution of rare items and just pay some taxes.  @admin has already said that he is looking at the profits for trading.  I would like to be able to double my money on a trade run without spending several hours at sea (yawn!).  I keep saying this, but more money, more access to rare goods, means more players in OW. (get rid of the word "Rare")

This is a better solution and one I have advocated for. 

increase profits of consuming trade goods by 20-40% and I believe much of the gripes of traders will be settled.

if you bought something at 500 and sold at 1,000 with ports at 10% tax rate either side. You'd pay 550 and sell at 900 after taxes are funded. meaning a 350 real profit per trade good. that is around a 63.6% profit margin.

Example: Trade route to buy good at 500 and sell at 1,000. We include taxes into the costs:
Buy good at 550 reals (tax included)
Sell good and get 900 reals
Profit = 350 reals = 63.6% profit

If we increased sell price by 30% (so it now sells for 1,300)
Pay good at 550
sell good and get 1,170
Profit = 620 = 112.7% profit margin

Now it looks a lot better. Maize, Beans are cheap trade goods that regularly have trade routes that are only 10-20 minutes that are like this.

EDIT 

A trade route I do is buy Arctic fox pelts at 6,300 and sell for 14,450 (estimates) this is a 2.5 hour trade run. After Taxes included it looks like this:
Buy good at 6,930 reals
Sell good and get 13,005 reals.
Profit = 6,075 = 87.6% profit margin

If we increased good sell price by 30% (so it now sells for 18,785)
Buy good at 6,930
sell good and get 16,906.5 (but reals don't round so we round down) = 16,906
Profit = 9,976 = 143.9% profit margin

When I look at the Margins and the profit of money - I see a trend of the following:
1. You can make good money with short trade runs - but usually it's only 1 way.
2. Shorter trade runs are useful for players with a low amount of reals/assets or short on time.
3. Long distance trade routes are really only worth it if you have a lot of money, and I personally think the consumption price should be further increased.

Increasing the sell price of goods will allow more people to get more money in time frames that suit them. It will allow more tax income and more players to make a better thriving economy (at least in my opinion). BUT we should also probably have more money sinks so that we can all get richer, but not make inflation go crazy.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Teutonic

[Angus MacDuff]

4 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

If we increased the sell prices (consumption) by 30% (for example)

You'd be selling the good at 1,300. including it would look like this:

pay 550 and your real price sold at 1,170 after taxes included. This gives you 620 reals per item now. this now gives you a 112.7% profit margin.

Now that sounds a ton better.

Yes, i'm more than happy to support our national clans (or even when I sneak into a Brit port!).  I haven't actually asked a friendly clan if I can access the rare woods yet, as I don't have the money, but I feel that I shouldn't have to be on a list.  Someone else has already suggested that 50% of the rare woods missions should be available to non-clan national players.  I think this is an excellent idea that allows more players to gain these items.  I know the old argument about alts, but honestly, we need to stop concerning ourselves with that.  Alts are a fact of life in a game and should be ignored.  We should certainly not be designing game features around them IOT combat their abuse.

[Teutonic]

3 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Yes, i'm more than happy to support our national clans (or even when I sneak into a Brit port!).  I haven't actually asked a friendly clan if I can access the rare woods yet, as I don't have the money, but I feel that I shouldn't have to be on a list.  Someone else has already suggested that 50% of the rare woods missions should be available to non-clan national players.  I think this is an excellent idea that allows more players to gain these items.  I know the old argument about alts, but honestly, we need to stop concerning ourselves with that.  Alts are a fact of life in a game and should be ignored.  We should certainly not be designing game features around them IOT combat their abuse.

I adjusted my math - it was not entirely correct on above post (I have edited it).

but yeah - Clans should all be allowed to take what they "deserve" but if Admin and players still want a Nation to matter in a sense, then the nation should be able to profit a little bit off the success of expansion. 

[angriff]

5 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

So...

A clan should just be expected to pay for a port and a timer with no tax income?

I'm all for giving benefits to small clans or solo players, but this makes me feel you don't quite understand what a clan pays in maintenance fees to control a port - or maybe you do but you don't care?

it's 4,000 reals a day for a port - then it's 20,000 reals added on to create a timer.

Then if a clan wants the increase trade goods or reduce labor hours that's a 10-20% increase in the port maintenance. 

 

This is exactly what I expected in defense of the clans.  The peasants don't understand the elite's plight and counter with a  let the peasant players eat cake sort of reply.

Maybe less ports taken and more emphasis on market actions.  You attract players to your port to pay a tax that is not overburdening.  No clans that i know do this.   There are no mechanisms that support the peasant players other than pay and slave.  There is no mechanism that makes the clan work themselves to move goods to keep the port open.  No they just want other players to do that. They have become the bourgeoisie.

The mechanisms should move more to a market.  Adjusting profits helps but also increases the clan's profits and balance.  There should be a requirement that 10% of all trade in a port should be clan based.

 

[Teutonic]

7 minutes ago, angriff said:

This is exactly what I expected in defense of the clans.  The peasants don't understand the elite's plight and counter with a  let the peasant players eat cake sort of reply.

Maybe less ports taken and more emphasis on market actions.  You attract players to your port to pay a tax that is not overburdening.  No clans that i know do this.   There are no mechanisms that support the peasant players other than pay and slave.  There is no mechanism that makes the clan work themselves to move goods to keep the port open.  No they just want other players to do that. They have become the bourgeoisie.

The mechanisms should move more to a market.  Adjusting profits helps but also increases the clan's profits and balance.  There should be a requirement that 10% of all trade in a port should be clan based.

 

maybe you're in a nation that doesn't help benefit players then - in sweden we have a number of ports with low tax rates and a ton of people use them.

but hey as you said "I knew that defense was coming - see look everyone, an elite player is beating up on us." 

A clan and the members in a clan took the effort to gain a port and take it. Why should they then lose or change something because someone asked to. 

I mean ffs - something that benefits a solo player or small group will ALWAYS benefit a large entity more. That's just how that stuff works. So why not take increases in trade profits, it helps you. it helps clans. it helps everyone.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Teutonic

[Teutonic]

5 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Yeah something must be done.

I liked trading but due to the low profits you earn with medium distance trips I just dont care anymore. 

My suggestion to improve this was to decrease the weight of all trading goods so you can hold more stuff in your traders. 

I think reducing the weight of trading goods doesn't quite solve the profit margin being low. you'd still only be making a 60% profit, it's just you'd be able to "move" more at once. I know that means you can also make more money per run, but your margin would still be low, and I think the margins of profit are too low.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Teutonic

[Cabral]

4 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Yeah something must be done.

I liked trading but due to the low profits you earn with medium distance trips I just dont care anymore. 

My suggestion to improve this was to decrease the weight of all trading goods so you can hold more stuff in your traders. 

Was made for you to travel more in OW... but you are lazy.