Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Markups under 2.0

Never mind, deleted.
 
Last edited:
GoNi said:
I have to agree on the A101, its awesome amp on lowish weapons.

1250% for a B101 if bought from auction, not sure if this is really better than Shear40L at 120% :)
Someone can do the math, I am to lazy.

The problem here is: shear40 TT is 9.2 PED while B101 is available for 1 PED.
New non depositing players get the 1 PED amp from auction, simply because they can afford that from their puny loot, while Shear looks fairly expencive to them.
Click to expand...

true.
Lowest shear xr40 can be sold for, if crafted with lowest tt [~3.2PED) possible, is about 4-5 PED, private trade recommended :D

San said:
This exactly is indirect influence. I haven't said it can't be effective. Players don't just influence prices, they make them. As a collective that is, what you mean is the limited power of an individual.
Click to expand...

exactly, when someone just drops the MU by 33% below it's max-MU and many just list based on market history without actually checking supply and demand, then it's players fault that the MU is so low and as an indiviual player you don't have much of an impact if you actually do supply and demand research or even know what the max-MU is people are willing to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
GoNi said:
I have to agree on the A101, its awesome amp on lowish weapons.

1250% for a B101 if bought from auction, not sure if this is really better than Shear40L at 120% :)
Someone can do the math, I am to lazy.

The problem here is: shear40 TT is 9.2 PED while B101 is available for 1 PED.
New non depositing players get the 1 PED amp from auction, simply because they can afford that from their puny loot, while Shear looks fairly expencive to them.
Click to expand...

The obvious solution to giving life to items that fall into these niches is to recalibrate all items TT values and ammo burns/decays. Let's eliminate all TT value and ALL developer liability if things go bottom up by proliferating this idea to everyone. I am sure everyone would celebrate the new found peds on their card should all things be converted to 1 ped tt value and mindarks numbers would go up as people would tend to cycle those peds and buy MORE items rather than withdraw them in the short term.

Maybe the rework on the starter pack kit is simply the "soft impression" at this being a good idea and gaining acceptance for it, I do not claim to know if it is or not, but it is the first step I would take as a developer if I were one. Their is value in eliminating liabilities.



my 2 pecs:
Now as far as 2.0 markup is concerned: change the auction house fee on gathered resources only to 1 pec front end full fee on back end at time of sale. Prices will go up as people "stand their ground" for an auction fee they can sweat 100 relist fees worth in 1-2 hours rather than 1 list fee in 1 to 13 hours.
 
Tournament Spon said:
my 2 pecs:
Now as far as 2.0 markup is concerned: change the auction house fee on gathered resources only to 1 pec front end full fee on back end at time of sale. Prices will go up as people "stand their ground" for an auction fee they can sweat 100 relist fees worth in 1-2 hours rather than 1 list fee in 1 to 13 hours.
Click to expand...

Nop its not working like this

Lets say a ressource have 101.4% markup now. Ff you reduce auction fee to 1 pec you have this ressource at 100.1% in a couple weeks because people will undercut to sell and more people will list their stuff instead of tting it, because the risk of losing that 1 ped is gone.
 
Tournament Spon said:
my 2 pecs:
Now as far as 2.0 markup is concerned: change the auction house fee on gathered resources only to 1 pec front end full fee on back end at time of sale. Prices will go up as people "stand their ground" for an auction fee they can sweat 100 relist fees worth in 1-2 hours rather than 1 list fee in 1 to 13 hours.
Click to expand...

Buyers do not pay a fee outright, by this reasoning they could "stand their ground" and refuse to buy anything above 101%. For some reason that doesn't happen.
 
Fiona Simmons said:
Nop its not working like this

Lets say a ressource have 101.4% markup now. Ff you reduce auction fee to 1 pec you have this ressource at 100.1% in a couple weeks because people will undercut to sell and more people will list their stuff instead of tting it, because the risk of losing that 1 ped is gone.
Click to expand...

If you re-read, they clearly said "change the auction house fee on gathered resources only"

I could be wrong, but I see gathered resources as sweat, fruit, stones and dung.
 
Suza said:
I could be wrong, but I see gathered resources as sweat, fruit, stones and dung.
Click to expand...

Fruits and Stones are fairly good sellable, not necessary at auction.
We have tradechannels to offer it for PvP trades, where even smaller stacks around 100 can be sold fast at good rates, no need to waste auction fee on that!

If they make sweat auctionable, price on it will drop even faster than it actually does.
Its only auctionable if you refine it to sweat crates, but for that you have refiner decay and buyer has refiner decay again, not very profitable to auction it this way.

The fee for auctioning things is ok, as it is now.
 
GoNi said:
Fruits and Stones are fairly good sellable, not necessary at auction.
We have tradechannels to offer it for PvP trades, where even smaller stacks around 100 can be sold fast at good rates, no need to waste auction fee on that!

If they make sweat auctionable, price on it will drop even faster than it actually does.
Its only auctionable if you refine it to sweat crates, but for that you have refiner decay and buyer has refiner decay again, not very profitable to auction it this way.

The fee for auctioning things is ok, as it is now.
Click to expand...

O.O Really??? We have trade channels?!?!?
 
GoNi said:
The fee for auctioning things is ok, as it is now.
Click to expand...
I disagree, but didn't intend to make it a point in this discussion. Or just not yet - trying to work with existing parameters, and may move to suggestions if it's found unsatisfying.

I was asked to return to this thread which I initiated, and rightly so. Thanks for all the responses so far. I'm not sure yet where this is going or supposed to go. The main idea was to find out if the recent changes, which were cutting quite deep, aren't a solid attempt to address the constant yelling of "MA, fix the economy". And to see what we as community can do to make it work.

Maybe the question needs to be formulated more precisely, which is sometimes an iteration process. How about so: Does the current system provide motivation for markups (mainly of stackables, I forgot to add) to rise? -- Considering the increased volatility, mainly, with all its consequences.

It was argued that there are always people who don't (need to) care who will spoil prices. I want to try and view these two things separately. In the real world, the undercutters get picked up by traders and arbitrageurs who are happy about the additional margin. If this doesn't work, it can only mean that there really is more supply than demand for the resource in question, plus no outlook of a near-term change which would allow them to hoard it. Then the lower price would be the correct one. If this mechanism doesn't play out in our game RCE, then an alternative conclusion could be there aren't enough traders with the capacity to pick up so much produce. Personally I find this less likely, but here are folks with more experience in this field.
 
mastermesh said:
Originally Loot 2.0 seemed to be just swapping main TT value of loot over to shrapnel.
Click to expand...

That happend in what I call "loot 1.9".

As I define it:
- Loot 1.9: Only around 4 stackable materials from mobs; rest and ammo drops got replaced by shrapnel. Practically, reduced paint drop, and some materials on Rocktropia (like pop hide from pop dragons) stopped to drop.
- Loot 2.0: Change in how loot was calculated and change in how weapon economy worked
- Loot 2.1: Higher volatility (a few weeks after loot 2.0)

It didn't happen at same time.
 
GoNi said:
I have to agree on the A101, its awesome amp on lowish weapons.

1250% for a B101 if bought from auction, not sure if this is really better than Shear40L at 120% :)
Someone can do the math, I am to lazy.

The problem here is: shear40 TT is 9.2 PED while B101 is available for 1 PED.
New non depositing players get the 1 PED amp from auction, simply because they can afford that from their puny loot, while Shear looks fairly expencive to them.
Click to expand...

One solution to the b101/rubio/proton fiasco would be to eliminate the base fee from auction fees, leaving only the % of markup component. This same solution would also render the auction much more viable for new players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top