Topic: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

I feel the games economy would be a lot more robust and interesting if the game wasn't slanted towards inside trading. Thoughts?

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

why would you trade with enemy entities if you could avoid it

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Supremacy wrote:

why would you trade with enemy entities if you could avoid it

honestly I feel it really comes down to the new player experience. There are a good number of items in the game that simply seem to not exist on the open market.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Population problem.

Sparking to other games

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Rex Amelius wrote:

Population problem.

balancing and game mechanic problem

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

If the population were large enough then the alpha dwellers that just wanted money would sell to the highest buyer. Since the only stable player groups in the game are vying for beta/gamma then they all have their own internal markets. There arent any middlemen and its because there is no incentive for people to continue playing the game if they dont intend to go to beta/gamma.

TLDR make missions and alpha industry interesting (not easy money)

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

To be very honest, using a dynamic mission system would be a good idea to helping remedy the issue of alpha being boring. if sections and subsections of a mission were chosen by a random gen, then placed together to make a 'mission' then it would keep things less mundane. This would also allow for missions to be upgraded by adding more 'subsection' modules that would be added to the ransom que system. By doing things similar to this to make alpha less of a bore then newer players wouldn't feel like the game is as much of a repetitive grind and are more likely to stay around long enough to 1) Seed the markets properly and 2) actually start looking into further expansion to PvP zones. Both of which would start driving more conflict and competition spicing the game up for new comers and old players alike.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Gwyndor wrote:

If the population were large enough then the alpha dwellers that just wanted money would sell to the highest buyer. Since the only stable player groups in the game are vying for beta/gamma then they all have their own internal markets. There arent any middlemen and its because there is no incentive for people to continue playing the game if they dont intend to go to beta/gamma.

TLDR make missions and alpha industry interesting (not easy money)

This has been brought up quite a few times. It's not a matter of population (well, it is), but there's a choice to be made about how you can go about kickstarting an economy. EVE had it for a few years, there were pretty much monthly devblogs on how NPC market orders were getting rebalanced. Anyway, since content expansion stalled a few years ago, there's not a lot of incentives left out there.

9 (edited by Burial 2014-10-29 21:02:00)

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Hard to stop the internal trading.

Even us, only couple of us sold items on the open market. Why? Don't need the NIC.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Burial wrote:

Don't need the NIC.

Sadly very true statement.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

11 (edited by Burial 2014-10-28 18:40:09)

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Can't really think of any NIC sinks besides buying teleport beacons. That's the problem right there.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

its a population issue.  I know you vets who don't play and only post don't like to hear that, but its the truth.

if there were enough players outside of your corp to keep the markets alive, you would make extra to sell to them.  simple as that.

I agree with grumpy gus burial, need more nic sinks.

Stranger Danger / Capital Punishment / Cyberdown
Pillar of the Community
Ruler of Recruit Chat
CIR Ministry of Truth

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Consider increased storage fees - for both corp storage and private storage - for example 10k per robot per month or 100 nic per kg per month.

If you're concerned about the newbie experience, say everyone gets the first 1000 kg/month free.

If you really want to see a lively market, add a nonlinear component - e.g. the monthly fee is proportional to kg^1.2 rather than strictly proportional to kg stored. Alternately, the 10% heaviest storages must pay an 'excessive storage' fee doubling their storage costs.

The point is it's a nic sink that is proportional to real (physical) wealth, making nic still relevant and valuable even at the highest physical wealth.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Untz wrote:

Consider increased storage fees - for both corp storage and private storage - for example 10k per robot per month or 100 nic per kg per month.

If you're concerned about the newbie experience, say everyone gets the first 1000 kg/month free.

If you really want to see a lively market, add a nonlinear component - e.g. the monthly fee is proportional to kg^1.2 rather than strictly proportional to kg stored. Alternately, the 10% heaviest storages must pay an 'excessive storage' fee doubling their storage costs.

The point is it's a nic sink that is proportional to real (physical) wealth, making nic still relevant and valuable even at the highest physical wealth.

No.  Sincerely the guy who has busted his *** for 3 years accumulating wealth.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Ville wrote:

No.  Sincerely the guy who has busted his *** for 3 years accumulating wealth.

Its not the game fault that you just log in to accumulate assets without using it.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

The games trying its damnest.  Red NPCs scare me...

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

All you would have to do to avoid getting hit by increased carry costs, Ville, is to transform the accumulated, but stagnant, physical wealth into something that actually goes out regularly and gets used to make profit, either physical wealth or nic.

For example, if you turn your stacks of robots and ore into nic by selling them on the market, then you would cut your carry costs. (I am not proposing a wealth tax on pure nic). Alternatively, if you loan your robots to corp-mates (noobs), and they return the robots plus pay you back for the use of the robots, then the robots would be paying their own carry costs.

Think of it this way - nonlinear carry costs would decrease your head start beyond other players, but it would also get more potential PVP targets out of other corp storages, trying to earn their continued existence, actually doing stuff.

18 (edited by Ville 2014-10-29 19:31:59)

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Untz wrote:

All you would have to do to avoid getting hit by increased carry costs, Ville, is to transform the accumulated, but stagnant, physical wealth into something that actually goes out regularly and gets used to make profit, either physical wealth or nic.

For example, if you turn your stacks of robots and ore into nic by selling them on the market, then you would cut your carry costs. (I am not proposing a wealth tax on pure nic). Alternatively, if you loan your robots to corp-mates (noobs), and they return the robots plus pay you back for the use of the robots, then the robots would be paying their own carry costs.

Think of it this way - nonlinear carry costs would decrease your head start beyond other players, but it would also get more potential PVP targets out of other corp storages, trying to earn their continued existence, actually doing stuff.

For What though?  This games basis is built on Scaling up through the previous tier, or maybe you don't understand how production works in this game.

I have to have a T1 item to make a T2,  I have to have T3 to make T4.  You have to have assets in reserve to make modules.  Hell Even Robots have a T2 variant that requires them to have one version of the previous one.  And when a communist corp engages on the market with capitalist corps it can be devastating to the market.

A 1000 Heavys are nothing on a corporation level.  Then you got to have the modules to fit them.  Maybe you don't understand why war is an Arms race.  And it starts in the industrial sector.  Those "with" do much better than those "without".

And for something else you might not understand, people need goals.  Those Goals include production goals, like 1000 T4 LWFs, Sensor amps, or range extenders. 

For 1 Intrusion, an alliance can lose 1 billion nic in a blink of an eye:

http://www.perp-kill.net/related/260071

That's 1 BILLION nic gone, poof.  Why do you amass goods?  Well just in case my corp takes that kind of hit and can keep moving on.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

And when a communist corp engages on the market with capitalist corps it can be devastating to the market.

What do you mean by devastating the market? There's almost nothing there currently to devastate. The volumes are pitiful. I want to get people out of the (boring) business of stocking corp storages and into the public market.

Devastating a market doesn't mean lowering prices; I do actually understand that charging more nic for storage would put more things on the market, at least initially, which would definitely lower prices, at least initially. That's improving the health of the economy, not harming it.

However, low carry costs for storage (and irrational fears about 'trading with the enemy') are one of the reasons there isn't much trading via the (public) market now. There's no reason to sell titan ore on the market if your corp at least sometimes uses titan ore, and I'm told there isn't much use for nic at the highest levels of physical wealth. However, if the carry costs in between when you acquire the titan and when you use the titan exceed the transaction costs to sell the titan now and buy titan later, then you would prefer to sell it rather than stock it.

If the markets were lively, then your head-start in wealth could be kept entirely in nic. I imagine the primary reason you're fearful to keep your wealth in nic now is because prices would swing if you tried to buy a new fleet. That is evidence that the market is thin and dead. If the market was lively, then you could buy a whole new fleet without changing the price much.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

There are enough people in this game who can buyout every heavy mk2 ever put on the market.  Just to deny their capitalist enemies access to that bot.  It's not hard to do.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

21 (edited by Burial 2014-10-29 20:36:54)

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Don't think the stick works better than the carrot here.

NIC needs to become useful for corporations. It's absurd to sell items if the only use for that NIC is to later buy the items back.

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

And the problem with that is how easy it is even for small corps and individuals to build everything and complete research

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

23 (edited by Burial 2014-10-29 21:03:49)

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

Jita wrote:

And the problem with that is how easy it is even for small corps and individuals to build everything and complete research

Could be. Even if NIC gets more value, there's still nothing stopping the corporation from selling internally as long as members are buying.

Only difference comes if corporation needs NIC and nothing is bought internally.

Stranger Danger wrote:

if there were enough players outside of your corp to keep the markets alive, you would make extra to sell to them.  simple as that.

What would me/you/them do with the NIC?

Re: Removing overwhelming incentives of "inside corp" trading

I think there is an issue of producers expecitng a ready made market. A market cateogry with no supply orders? To them it means a dead market. I can see it interpreted as being one step away from ebing the only supplier of that goo ie making the market for that product where non existed.