View Full Version : One World Market
I would have one market with a set price or one that fluctuates with supply and demand. It sucks when you keep getting undercutted or you cant buy weapons when in time of need.
Yes, it does suck when your demand and markets supply doesn't meet, but hey, that's the charm of the game.
It sucks to say this, but choosing a wrong strategy to play is not the games fault. If the players mess up the otherwise decent market, then there's only other players to blame.
Having a plain market, with fixed prices would ruin more than it would fix.
I agree it's a unique aspect of the game, but do you want charm or members. Don't get me wrong I'm not bashing the game , but I've ran into this problem playing casher too. My set is ruined now cause I have 4m ships dry docked! lol
Missionary
04-22-2013, 15:55
tbh i think some of the "unique" aspects of the game make it to difficult to play. anyone heard of a game called mafia wars? my little bro plays it quite abit. the code seems to be open so there is a hell of alot of the same game with differnt names, but they are all exactly the same game. n loads of people seem to be playing it, and the only reason i can see for this is how easy it is to play. just saying, i rekon alot of our unique features are unique for a reason,and its not a good reason.
Like I said I'M not bashing by no means , this is one of the better turn based war games out there. But in this day and age of instant gratification I think players would stay more active with a set market that is auto regulated. This might be a silly comparison but could you imagine if you had to wait 2 or more days to obtain ammunition in call of duty or halo? I'm a patient person and don't even mind waiting a couple of hours for goods to reach market, but days? At least make it so goods get sold in order of sending them to the market. From now on if I play Indy I'm just selling at min.
it is only because of the small amount of players this game has now..
it is only because of the small amount of players this game has now..
yes, but 50% of the players are running indy at the moment. The farmers haven't bought anything for 20 days, they'll get their ships in the last days. Bigger states are all indy, so it's only logical that there's alot of stuff in the market.
Market with overall queue, without cost variation? So you are constantly waiting behind someone else? So, when you are preparing to use a lot of turns at once and need to sell a lot before hand, you are unable, because army is stuck? I see more problems than removing some strategical elements than this would solve. Queues and long waiting periods will remain.
This market has worked with hundreds of active players.
In the estonian version of the game we didn't have minimum prices, so I remember buying food with 30 when there were too many farmers.
I think the current market is not ideal (nothing is ideal), but it is the best solution yet. Supply and demand laws are perfectly visible in PM. Low demand for everything early in the set. Then the need for everything increases as the set goes on. And at the end of the set the demand is at maximum, while the supply is decreasing - need to find out when is the right time to buy!
And to LP:
I don't think dumbing down the game should be our goal. We can easen up the game as much as we want, but if we want to keep the game similar to the original, then I don't see how it can bring us more members. Browser based games are in decline and we have to happy that we have this game at the moment. If we want thousand members lets make this into a online casino or sports betting portal and -poof- thousands of members. Now, to come back to the subject. We started playing this game for a reason, we kept playing this for a reason, we will stop playing this game for a reason. But the reason for stopping are not small details in game design.
WOW, I am in total and complete agreement with Blaa here. I know, funny right? But as I have *****ed about relentlessly on these forums about undercutters, it all boils down to picking the right strat at the right time. It really is a pain in the butt when you can't sell because of some peoples impatience but it happens. I know that I switched strats 3 times this set alone simply because my nation mates couldn't get goods they needed. Then several others followed suit and switched too which flooded the market and caused goods to sit until they went down in value after 2 days.
I am looking for the "and to LP" connection in your last post as he hasn't posted in this thread...
I love the concept of the current market. I was posting on a new player's point of view" although I'm rusty with Indy and really did get pissed I miscalculated my sell and for not buying enough food when I had the chance!! I mean do you tell them "hey just wait and after a few years you'll get the hang of it just takes time and experience?" ....I don't know if they'll have the patience? Sometime in every set no matter what strat you play, you run into a time when you can't sell or buy when you need too...unless there's hundreds of players.
Sometime in every set no matter what strat you play, you run into a time when you can't sell or buy when you need too!
I know about the Black Market ...but I'm a value shopper!! :laugh:
I wasn't being critical, I was more amused that I agreed with Blaa than anything else.
killing the min price mmm feeding :)
Knowing what strategy to run doesn't come with experience. It's more or less of a lottery. Like dogma said, there were alot of strat switches this set, so that probably threw things out of balance.
Knowing that there will be not enough farmers in the set (so you can sell even at the start of the round) would mean that that farmer will most likely win as farmers produce the most. But usually farmers start selling enough food later in the set and then making up the gap with indies/cashers who can be efficient from day 1 is too big. I still remember this one set in wow where I was such farmer. Had a good run until wars started.
But then again, those ideals sets to be a farmer, or casher, or indy, rarely happen.
casher :) u all can sell your goods for ubber cheap to me
Missionary
04-26-2013, 09:52
maybe there shouldnt be a min/max price. or not as the way we know it now. but the min/max price could relate to the price of things already on the market. so say food is on at $90, then you can only sell yours between $85 - $95. still keep an overall min/max price. this would prevent people massively undercutting for no aparent reason.
and yes i agree its all about the strat picked, but not always. like now for example, i tried to put ships on the market the last couple days but couldnt put it on for the same price ships were on the market for because they had dropped below the minimum price allowed. ya should be able to either put it on for that price, or the market shouldnt be allowed to drop below minimum prices.
The name of this game should be changed to market or pricing wars!! It's a shame that you have to sit back and take hits and watch players pass you by cause you can't attack or retaliate even when you have full turns, cause you can't buy or get wnat you want when needed. (Im not buying from the BM, just to see that 5 minutes later what u needed is half the price on thE PM). I hope the charm and nostalgia for the select few is worth the sacrifice for broader player base. Not bashing,just saying. What happened to the slogan "CHANGE"? ...lol
Sure, change it. I am sure the broader playerbase will double within a few hours and the broader playerbase will start winning sets.
I was being sarcastical, if someone didn't understand.
Wow! I hope I didn't strike a nerve with anyone. Whats wrong with a little trial error? It's not like it couldn't be changed back or would ruin the game. What if there was a way that Mr.P could implement a automated price changer according to supply demands? I just think it would be more fun to have product on hand at all times instead of depending on other players and strats. That way not one strat or nation dominates.
Divine Intervention
04-27-2013, 20:29
make it easier to switch strategies without penalising people as much. maybe have a seperate higher bpt when converting as opposed too builing on newly gained land?
Missionary
04-27-2013, 22:06
merlin is definaly onto a winner i think. it ahouls be down to the individual player and not the rest of the community asto wether they can use turns or not. would also even out the competition for the top spots and give anyone, not just the guys who lives on the internet, a chance at doing well.
would also even out the competition for the top spots and give anyone, not just the guys who lives on the internet, a chance at doing well.
People, who you are referring to as the guys who live on the internet, took the time to learned how to play the game the first place.
Change whatever you want, they will still keep winning. They were once newbies too, you know.
Merlin, we just had a huge experiment, where we removed a lot. I don't remember new players winning those sets? I remember viali and k9 winning those sets, and in both cases top10 was dominated by the winning nation.
I was against the experiment, and then the experiment ended and we rather losed more members.
We have to understand that the current PM situation does not happen every set.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.