[ QUOTE ]
(b) the devs taking action, either seeding the market or increasing drop rates.
[/ QUOTE ]
A major problem with the markets is the Invention system itself. Recipes badly need to be rebalanced with more logical salvage requirements either weighted towards Tech salvage instead of Magic. (Example: Generic Defense. What the hell were they thinking?!)
Never surrender! Never give up!
Help keep Paragon City alive with the unofficial City of Heroes Tabletop Role Playing Game!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(b) the devs taking action, either seeding the market or increasing drop rates.
[/ QUOTE ]
A major problem with the markets is the Invention system itself. Recipes badly need to be rebalanced with more logical salvage requirements weighted towards Tech salvage instead of Magic. (Example: Generic Defense. What the hell were they thinking?!)
[/ QUOTE ]
I absolutely agree. There would be less issue with some salvage costing an arm and a leg if some (again, say Luck Charms) weren't overused in recipes. When's the last time you used a Scope for anything? Or that - don't even recall the name, crystal skull thing?
While I wasn't fond of base (and empowerment) recipes now needing invention salvage, one thing they DID do right was to have three different recipes for each "thing." I'd *love* to see that come to common recipes so there are more options and demand for salvage is spread around. (Sets and such can, for the most part, remain as is.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How? Just because everyone uses the same sets, we know prices would rise.
fixt for errors. it is because everyone uses the same stuff that prices would rise. [u]you dont pay attention to the markets very well do you geko. [u]you really cant see how there would be a lack of supply and a growth in demand? or higher prices because of more demand? seriously, stop thinking in dollar figures and think about the casual gamer. and then think about why only about 15% of the population of both games use the markets. it gets harder to make money when the only people using the markets are the "flippers".
[/ QUOTE ]
No. You're right. My main only has money and enhancers worth well over a billion inf.
I was waiting for the casual gamer thing to come out. The flippers paradise we have redside is what hurts casual gamers. Why you and Bill think that economic theory that has proven itself for 200 years suddenly goes out the window when applied to this situation is beyond me.
It's almost time for me to head out for the weekend so I'll leave you to your opinion. Bill, as always, fun tussling with you. 
[/ QUOTE ]
See comments about supply control. And I'd say it's the lower *everything but price* redside that hurts the market there, frankly.
But, have a good weelemd. I'm busy typing up more guides...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(b) the devs taking action, either seeding the market or increasing drop rates.
[/ QUOTE ]
A major problem with the markets is the Invention system itself. Recipes badly need to be rebalanced with more logical salvage requirements weighted towards Tech salvage instead of Magic. (Example: Generic Defense. What the hell were they thinking?!)
[/ QUOTE ]
I absolutely agree. There would be less issue with some salvage costing an arm and a leg if some (again, say Luck Charms) weren't overused in recipes. When's the last time you used a Scope for anything? Or that - don't even recall the name, crystal skull thing?
[/ QUOTE ]
To be fair, Scopes and Crystal Skulls (or whatever they're really called) are Uncommons, which is another problem with the system: Uncommons have almost no value.
If they added alternate recipes for Generics that required, say, 1 Common and 1 Uncommon, that would be very interesting indeed.
Never surrender! Never give up!
Help keep Paragon City alive with the unofficial City of Heroes Tabletop Role Playing Game!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
look, all your theory of economics classes from college taught you was theories. doesnt mean that is how it works. if you increase demand w/out increasing supply(if you look at the markets, they are basically mirror images of each other for supply/demand) prices do not go down, they go up. even if suplly goes up(which inthis case, supply for high demand items might jump a whooping 3%) the demand has increased by at least 2 fold causing prices to go up.
[/ QUOTE ]
What are you talking about? If you merge the markets, demand and supply go up proportionally. Demand and Supply are based on relative population. The market would grow. Both demand and supply.
Seriously, what makes you believe that only one side of the ledger changes?
[/ QUOTE ]
What you are talking about is turn over and volume and you are absolutely correct about it's effects on price stability. The other factor at work in an anemic market (red side especially) is buyer confidence. With lower total availability (supply is a bad term to use here since people misconstrue it's meaning, ratios are the same but volume numbers means that fewer are being produced in a gross [or in total] sense rather than a per capita sense) you have hoarding and the quite correct perception that you "may need the item you found later and there won't be any available at any price in a resonable amount of time" this causes players to hang on to useful IOs and recipes that they aren't using rather than place them on the market.
Add in that market slots are finite (another contributor red side of low availability almost a double ding) and you compound this problem.
It's a catch 22 that results in a downward spiral of availability at the same time as there is an upward spiral of price even though the drop rates are no different from one side to the other.
A market merger will nearly triple availability for redside players while increasing blue side availability by about 33% but it is a net gain for both sides and it is completely indpendent of drop rates and supply which haven't changed at all.
Peterpeter did an excellent write up about this effect in one of his Scoop columns. Smurphy is a real life economist and has posted extensive info about this subject in the Market forum.
In short the players that benefit the most from an unmerged market are the ones who are exploiting the lack of availability on the redside market.
Most of the anti-merger crowd fall into 2 groups. The Role players that wouldn't sell to the other faction and the exploiters that don't want to lose out on the opportunity for profiteering.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Yeah. We should just trust the economists. Got any CEOs of banks to go with them? They've done such a wonderful job in the real world, they couldn't possibly guess wrong...
I do love the bit of "blame the players" vibe going. At least you mentioned holding on to reicpes instead of salvage. Know why my SG doesn't deal with the market, but passes stuff around to each other?
Because 60k for a luck charm is f'ing stupid. Because I'd rather have a friend have that nice Armageddon proc for their tank than a bunch of numbers nobody but I can see.
Oh, wait, must be exploiting something then, right? Just like my listing recipes low is seriously damaging supply... even if they don't sell for weeks on end. Yeah, theorycraft! Really matches up with the real (game) world!
[ QUOTE ]
Most of the anti-merger crowd fall into 2 groups. The Role players that wouldn't sell to the other faction and the exploiters that don't want to lose out on the opportunity for profiteering.
[/ QUOTE ]
*snort* right. Go on with that. Just be sure to finish flipping something up to a higher price - oh, then blame the impatient for the high prices, can't forget that.
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah. We should just trust the economists. Got any CEOs of banks to go with them? They've done such a wonderful job in the real world, they couldn't possibly guess wrong...
I do love the bit of "blame the players" vibe going. At least you mentioned holding on to reicpes instead of salvage. Know why my SG doesn't deal with the market, but passes stuff around to each other?
Because 60k for a luck charm is f'ing stupid. Because I'd rather have a friend have that nice Armageddon proc for their tank than a bunch of numbers nobody but I can see.
Oh, wait, must be exploiting something then, right? Just like my listing recipes low is seriously damaging supply... even if they don't sell for weeks on end. Yeah, theorycraft! Really matches up with the real (game) world!
[ QUOTE ]
Most of the anti-merger crowd fall into 2 groups. The Role players that wouldn't sell to the other faction and the exploiters that don't want to lose out on the opportunity for profiteering.
[/ QUOTE ]
*snort* right. Go on with that. Just be sure to finish flipping something up to a higher price.....
[/ QUOTE ]
Well Bill even though you are being sarcastic you have for the most part hit the nail right on the head.
Most of the economists I listen to were predicting the current economic situation. Some of us moved our finances around and didn't suffer much at all. (Others actually increased their porfolio). Also CEO's /= to economists. The root causes of the economic situation can easily be traced to government interference in the free market and the main issues were caused during the Clinton and Bush II administrations. They are both equally to blame.
There's no blame the players vibe coming from me. The market is as it is because of the way the players use it. The problem arises when different players have differing and sometimes conflicting goals for the market. (Badgers, crafters, farmers, PvPer's, marketeers, and the poor, downtrodden, common, blue collar, "average" player)
The market on both sides is controlled entirely by the players. There is no outside agency of any kind involved in our CoX markets (excepting the RMT Spammers). The devs do not add "items" to the market and they don't take them away either (they do expire after 60 days in the CH but again that is a player responsibility to take care of their goods much the same as it is a person's own responsibility to manage the food in their pantry or refrigerator so that there is no spoilage).
I wasn't talking about giving things to your SG mates. I was talking about storing away something that you have no current use for (you can take you in the broader sense of you all rather than a single individual). Giving your buddy an IO recipe that he's going to use isn't a problem here. If he wanted one he could get it from the market or get it from you either way the demand was satisfied with exising supply.
60k for a luck charm. So are you calling the person buying it for that price stupid or the person selling it for that price stupid or both? The second line in my sig is the basis of all economics and it's been known for centuries. Our market demonstrates it every time that a transaction completes.
You don't have to use the market at all for luck charms. I've run several tests and in the range the luck charms drop as long as you fight a mixture of arcane and tech foes you will eventually receive all the salvage you need to make all the enhancements you could use from level 7-25. If you only run arcane content you will have more than enough of the "hard to come by salvage" (The caveat to that is that you have to run all the content on heroic. Running it on higher difficulty reduces the numbers of drops below the satisfaction threshold on tier 1 goods though not on tier 2 or 3).
Listing goods below the going rate enables flipping. What actually damages supply is vendoring goods. Vendoring occurs for 2 reasons.
1)Arbitrage and selling badges (those 2 things go hand in hand actually).
2)Finite numbers of transaction slots.
I don't need to flip anything. As a crafter I can buy salvage and create common IOs for much less than a player that hasn't memorized them can create them. I can sell that IO on the market for more than it costs me to make it at the same time that the player buying it spends less than he would have had he crafted it for himself and he doesn't have to waste any time at the market trying to figure out which pieces of salvage he needs for what recipes and what a good price is or messing with a recipe when I do it in bulk.
I've made a billion inf on the market since I9 came out on that alone and I can't see how that harms anyone can you? I trade a little of my in game time to make some influence and provide a service (I believe that Fulmens does the same thing). I don't see it as any different from "work" in the real world.
[ QUOTE ]
oh, then blame the impatient for the high prices, can't forget that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that we should blame the patient for high prices? Even in the real world its the impatient that over spend. As an example, I never buy new technology the day or week or even month that it comes out. Mass production, efficiences of scale, and reduced demand from all ready satisfied customers serve to drop the price a significant amount by the time I buy something. That also has the advantage to me of having the impatient work out the unforseen bugs in a product with that company's customer service department before I ever purchase it.
If I have a piece of equipment that still works for it's intended purpose as well as I need it to work I continue to use that piece of equipment until that's no longer the case. Then I buy a replacement. I don't have to have or even want to have the new stuff the instant it's available. It's not well affordable at that time.
I do the same thing in game. I never purchase new IO sets the issue they are released unless I see an opportunity to do so for less than the value I assign that IO. If I get one as a drop I'll use it but by the time the next issue comes out all the impatient people that cranked the price through the roof have purchased the sets they want and the price drops significantly. That's when I start looking to respec.
How do you manage your IOs and in game budget?
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Jumping around a bit.
[ QUOTE ]
60k for a luck charm. So are you calling the person buying it for that price stupid or the person selling it for that price stupid or both?
[/ QUOTE ]
Those who are busy selling it, training those who would actually *like* the item, into seeing a "must buy" price *Far* higher than it should be... y'know, the folks who like buying up supplies and marking them up, for starters. The reason things can be 2:1 supply:demand and still be far higher than is, frankly, sensible.
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that we should blame the patient for high prices?
[/ QUOTE ]
The "patient," in many instances, won't get squat from my experience. "This IO/salvage/recipe is only worth X to me." *put up bid* - and I mean a reasonable one. Even a "high" reasonable one. Let it sit there, and see it notmove for weeks or, in some instances, months. I don't mean "Oh, 45k instead of 60." Hell, 40 will probably be flipped.
If I'm trying to craft to help out lowbies, my SG or what have you, and I need some of the "big" salvage, saying "Well, I'll need this in a month when we start those" and putting up bids for 10k won't get me a thing. That bid will sit, and sit, and sit. 20 won't. 30, *maybe.* After a while, congrats, you've trained people to say "Why bother, I either have to pay this stupid price or not have my bid filled."
It's not *worth* it to me, despite your sigged quote. It's an attitude, instead, of "I have no real choice. This, or hoping the RNG likes me."
There's no *cost* involved in getting them. You don't have to pay 5k to get the metal, 4k for jewels, pay labor, etc. It's purely "let's see how high I can go." Which is part of why I say you can't take real-world economics theory and graft it onto the game. Real world has to take materials, taxes, labor costs, etc. into account. In game (talking about salvage and recipes, obviously) - it's *luck of the drop.* (Barring buying with merits.)
"Vendoring hurts supply?" If I've got a recipe (as I do in several instances) for sale for weeks at *6 inf* - why would I waste time putting another up, versus vendoring it? Hurting the market? Someone wanting something on a fluke can pick it up for the price what they fight between the train and the market. Why *wouldn't* I vendor a pet recipe Heroside? Why put up any Snipe recipe other than manticore? *Lack of demand* for it also drives the lack of supply. Forget that reason?
Though, again, I *love* the comment that pricing things low like that hurts supply somehow. Not yours, I'll have to find it. I do believe it was Mr "trained economist."
[ QUOTE ]
Even in the real world its the impatient that over spend
<snip>
do the same thing in game. I never purchase new IO sets the issue they are released unless I see an opportunity to do so for less than the value I assign that IO. If I get one as a drop I'll use it but by the time the next issue comes out all the impatient people that cranked the price through the roof have purchased the sets they want and the price drops significantly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiight. That's why some IOs and sets, even reasonably common drops stay high regardless. All the impatient people finished getting theirs... wait, that doesn't work.
Hmm. Wonder why people like merits. And *will* like tickets.
[ QUOTE ]
I've run several tests and in the range the luck charms drop as long as you fight a mixture of arcane and tech foes you will eventually receive all the salvage you need to make all the enhancements you could use from level 7-25
[/ QUOTE ]
Great if I want to farm and/or solo, I suppose. Funny how I end up on teams with friends and blow past that nice and fast... Darn me and actually wanting to enjoy the time I'm subscribed with friends! I should be farming and digging my eyes out with sporks for a reprieve from the boredom!
[ QUOTE ]
How do you manage your IOs and in game budget?
[/ QUOTE ]
For the most part, ignore sets entirely. High level sets up lvl 15 IOs for lowbies, to get through the DO levels. One set, perhaps of SOs (typically respeccing to pull out the IOs for the next wave of lowbies.) Don't bother with IOs 'til they're 25-30. Leave them at that unless there's good reason not to.
<QR>
And give JoJo the keys to all our inf?
If the markets merge, the only winner will be JoJo.
*gets back to work on his "stop JoJo from dominating the world economy arc"*
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Back Alley Brawler
Did you just use "casual gamer" and "purpled-out warshade" in the same sentence?
|
Merging the markets would NOT cause inflation. The prices in a merged market would be between the prices of the two current markets. If you would like I can use simply forms of ADDITION to show you how and why this is true.
[ QUOTE ]
Ancient Bone. 680 bidding, 1689 for sale. 6-15k *each.* Better than 2:1 supply to demand. Shouldn't that be down near vendor level? Same with circuit boards (same ratio and 5-11k price range.)
[/ QUOTE ]
That is not "Supply" to "Demand" ratio. Your understanding of "Supply and Demand" does not correspond to the economic concepts of Supply and Demand.
[ QUOTE ]
If the markets merge, the only winner will be JoJo.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, due to increased competition, flippers lose in a merged market.
Ignoring that merging the market requires the devs to figure out the logistics of how to do it... the "Merge" verse "Don't Merge" arguments comes down to this...
If you want stable prices, more competition, and more availability then you want a MERGED market.
If you want unstable prices, less competition, less availability then you want an UNMERGED market.
Flippers wants unstable prices. In the interest of flipping an unmerged market is the most profitable.
Bill if you and your SG are not using the market because of what you see, I would have to say I will trust my experiences with it over your theories about it.
The red market is a mess because it lacked users for far too long and players reacted accordingly.
I don't think merging would cause a behavioral change at this point after nearly 2 years of its complete suckage but I haven't seen anything you have written about the markets that holds water to my experiences in both of them.
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
[ QUOTE ]
Most of the anti-merger crowd fall into 2 groups. The Role players that wouldn't sell to the other faction and the exploiters that don't want to lose out on the opportunity for profiteering.
[/ QUOTE ]
Most of the anti-merger crowd falls into a 3rd group. What would be the most polite way to categorize that group?
"Wary"
"Skeptical"
The words I am thinking of are much more... uh... not good.
[ QUOTE ]
Merging the markets would NOT cause inflation. The prices in a merged market would be between the prices of the two current markets. If you would like I can use simply forms of ADDITION to show you how and why this is true.
[/ QUOTE ]
mmmhnmmm.
Let's see.
- Supply (what's on the market *right now*) gets merged.
- Villainside supply, priced lower because, well, that's what the villain market is set on, gets snapped up by the "lower" hero bids.
- Villain bids don't get filled.
- Higher hero bids become the status quo again, because people heroside - admitted already in this thread to have a higher population - are used to pricing *and buying* them at the higher cost, forcing villains to go to the *same* price.
Or are you going to try to sell that bit of snake-oil and have us believe that there's going to be this massive attack of "Oh ma gorsh, we'd better pull down those high cost pieces, eat the fee, and reprice them lower!"
Not going to happen. Current bids (and sale prices) don't suddenly go "Gee, there's suddenly more people!" Asking prices don't automatically re-average themselves.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ancient Bone. 680 bidding, 1689 for sale. 6-15k *each.* Better than 2:1 supply to demand. Shouldn't that be down near vendor level? Same with circuit boards (same ratio and 5-11k price range.)
[/ QUOTE ]
That is not "Supply" to "Demand" ratio. Your understanding of "Supply and Demand" does not correspond to the economic concepts of Supply and Demand.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, forgive this humble, wretched, idiot of a layman.
Supply, as normal, everyday people would look at it, would be "what's out there."
Demand, again as someone without five hundred letters in Ivy Green after their name and solid gold plated nose hair would see it, is "How many people want it."
Now, I realize to oh such a demigod of Franklins as yourself, in your castle made of spreadsheets papered with IBM and Microsoft stock certificates issued at day of release for fifty cents a piece, it's some formula that would take three pages to write out, incantations written in blood, three dead chickens and the right candles to enact.
Then again, as mentioned, I seem to recall you being part of the conversation where "Putting something on the market cheaply hurts supply." Where the "demand" for some of those very same items, in - y'know, every day english, not highfallutin' econobabble - is nonexistant because... get this... nobody wants it, so the supply - again, pardon my poor choice to use everyday english, please cut out my tongue and tie me to the whippin' post, but "How much there is to fill a possible need" - is most certainly *there.* And remains "there" - as in, sitting, unmoving on the market, at a price someone could sneeze and get the INF for - for weeks on end.
Perhaps you should try a dictionary instead of an economic formula. And realize, again, that these bits of salvage and recipes are not manufactured and shipped items, and have no cost to recoup.
Edit:
And yes, I get tired of people wanting to redefine words. Have since Clinton insisted on questioning the definition of "is." So if you're reading *every ounce of scorn* I have for that into this, congrats, you're reading it correctly. You want to use jargon, use it in an economics class. There's a time and place for it, and *this isn't it.* You want to tell me "When I talk, and I say red, I mean blue. You meaning 'red' by red? Pshaw!" ... don't even bother replying.
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you should try a dictionary instead of an economic formula. And realize, again, that these bits of salvage and recipes are not manufactured and shipped items, and have no cost to recoup.
[/ QUOTE ]
Time.
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you should try a dictionary instead of an economic formula. And realize, again, that these bits of salvage and recipes are not manufactured and shipped items, and have no cost to recoup.
[/ QUOTE ]
Time.
[/ QUOTE ]
Space.
Well at least no one listed any retarded RPing reasons to no merge the market this time. So I will say /signed because it would make side switching alot easier to finally happen. 
Bump and Grind Bane/SoA
Kenja No Ishi Earth/Empathy Controller
Legendary Sannin Ninja/Pain Mastermind
Entoxicated Ninja/PSN Mastermind
Ninja Ryukenden Kat/WP Scrapper
Hellish Thoughts Fire/PSI Dominator
Thank You Devs for Merits!!!!
[ QUOTE ]
Edit: arguing with Evil isn't worth the effort.
[/ QUOTE ]
"I'm not scared of anyone or anything Angie. Isn't that the way life should be?"
Jack Hawksmoor, The Authority.
[ QUOTE ]
Or are you going to try to sell that bit of snake-oil and have us believe that there's going to be this massive attack of "Oh ma gorsh, we'd better pull down those high cost pieces, eat the fee, and reprice them lower!"
[/ QUOTE ]
If you call reason, logic and mathematics "Snake Oil" then yes, I am going to use "Snake oil." This thread needs some basic Economics 101 Lessons.
Basics of Supply and Demand:"The Law of Demand holds that other things equal, as the price of a good rises, its quantity demanded will fall, and vice versa." The key information from this link is the graph and the data representing Demand and the graph and the data representing Supply:
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos
Price Quantity Demanded
$5 10
$4 20
$3 30
$2 40
$1 50</pre><hr />
This concept cannot be applied simply to City of Heroes. One player was confused and misapplied this concept : "Ancient Bone. 680 bidding, 1689 for sale. 6-15k *each.* Better than 2:1 supply to demand." This scenario does NOT mean there is a demand of 680. This scenario does NOT mean there is a supply of 1689. Supply and Demand are rates that exist at a specific price. There is not necessarily a demand of 680 at a price of 6k nor 15k. The way this scenario should be interpreted is there is a price somewhere. One does not know what value that price is exactly (but the last 5 history may be a good clue). There are 1689 items listed for sale ABOVE that price. There are 680 bids for purchase BELOW that price. These bids and sales are "outstanding". "Outstanding" means that a buyer and seller have not mutually agreed to a certain price. When a buyer and seller both mutually agree a transaction occurs. In City of Heroes such a mutual agreement occurs when a buyer places a bid above or equal to the reserve price of a seller. Note how in this example the outstanding bids and sales mean that none of the 680 bids is above any of the 1689 listing prices.
Now let's apply our knowledge of Supply and Demand and see what happens when we combine two "markets." We'll go back to our Basics
First we have Demand:
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos
Price Quantity Demanded
$5 10
$4 20
$3 30
$2 40
$1 50</pre><hr />
Then we have Supply:<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos
Price Quantity Supplied
$5 50
$4 40
$3 30
$2 20
$1 10</pre><hr />
Equilibrium Price is the price where Supply and Demand meet. At a price of $3 there are 30 willing and able to be bought and 30 willing and able to be sold.
Let's create another "market", find that markets Equilibrium and then add the two together. Remember, Supply and Demand don't need to be flat. I'll be making up some slanted and crazy curves.
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos IN HELL!
Price Quantity Demanded
$5 11
$4 25
$3 35
$2 38
$1 45</pre><hr />
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos IN HELL!
Price Quantity Supplied
$5 11
$4 9
$3 6
$2 3
$1 1</pre><hr />
Equilibrium Price $5. Eleven wish to be purchased and sold at a price of $5.
Now let's mash Hell and Reality together and see what happens:
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos Reality + Hell
Price Quantity Demanded
$5 21 (11 + 10)
$4 45 (25 + 20)
$3 65 (35 + 30)
$2 78 (38 + 40)
$1 95 (45 + 50)</pre><hr />
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Example: renting videos IN HELL!
Price Quantity Supplied
$5 61 (11 + 50)
$4 49 (9 + 40)
$3 36 (6 + 30)
$2 23 (3 + 20)
$1 11 (1 + 10)</pre><hr />
Equilibrium Price is somewhere between $3 and $4. At a price of $3 more wish to be purchased (65) than sold (36). At a price of $4 more wish to be sold (49) than purchased (45).
So Equilibrium Price in reality was $3. In Hell it was $5. In our combined world is is between $3 and $4.
Go ahead, try it yourself. Come up with two Demand graphs where "as the price of a good rises, its quantity demanded will fall, and vice versa." Then come up with two Supply graphs where "as the price of a good rises, its quantity supplied will rise, and vice versa." Pair up your Supply and Demand graphs and create two markets. Then combine your two markets and see what happens.
Go ahead, try it. Show me if you can make one where the price "Inflates" above either of the originals.
[ QUOTE ]
Then again, as mentioned, I seem to recall you being part of the conversation where "Putting something on the market cheaply hurts supply.
[/ QUOTE ]
Putting something on the market too cheaply does not "hurt supply". Putting something on the market too cheaply may cause a "Shortage." A "Shortage" is a price where more people are willing and able to purchase than willing and able to sell. In a shortage there is low availability. There is low availability because there are people willing and able to pay the prevailing price but unable to obtain the item.
I consider shortages "bad".
[ QUOTE ]
And yes, I get tired of people wanting to redefine words. Have since Clinton insisted on questioning the definition of "is." So if you're reading *every ounce of scorn* I have for that into this, congrats, you're reading it correctly. You want to use jargon, use it in an economics class. There's a time and place for it, and *this isn't it.* You want to tell me "When I talk, and I say red, I mean blue. You meaning 'red' by red? Pshaw!" ... don't even bother replying.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fine. Mathematically in your little spreadsheet, you get some nice median price, blah blah blah.
Meanwhile, the markets here get merged. There's no "nice median price." There's "Hey, cheap salvage from redside!" *buy* *raise price because people are used to 50-60k." And a bunch of people sitting on bids that will not get filled, period.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And yes, I get tired of people wanting to redefine words. Have since Clinton insisted on questioning the definition of "is." So if you're reading *every ounce of scorn* I have for that into this, congrats, you're reading it correctly. You want to use jargon, use it in an economics class. There's a time and place for it, and *this isn't it.* You want to tell me "When I talk, and I say red, I mean blue. You meaning 'red' by red? Pshaw!" ... don't even bother replying.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fine. Mathematically in your little spreadsheet, you get some nice median price, blah blah blah.
Meanwhile, the markets here get merged. There's no "nice median price." There's "Hey, cheap salvage from redside!" *buy* *raise price because people are used to 50-60k." And a bunch of people sitting on bids that will not get filled, period.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if Hero prices are "A" and villain prices are "B" then merged market prices are somewhere at or between "A" and "B". I fail to see how you have said anything in opposition to that statement.
In your scenario it could be "A" = 60,000 and "B" = 1. Then merged it is 60,000.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then again, as mentioned, I seem to recall you being part of the conversation where "Putting something on the market cheaply hurts supply.
[/ QUOTE ]
Putting something on the market too cheaply does not "hurt supply". Putting something on the market too cheaply may cause a "Shortage." A "Shortage" is a price where more people are willing and able to purchase than willing and able to sell. In a shortage there is low availability. There is low availability because there are people willing and able to pay the prevailing price but unable to obtain the item.
I consider shortages "bad".
[/ QUOTE ]
More "Red means blue."
[ QUOTE ]
A "Shortage" is a price where more people are willing and able to purchase than willing and able to sell. In a shortage there is low availability. There is low availability because there are people willing and able to pay the prevailing price but unable to obtain the item.
[/ QUOTE ]
And meanwhile, here I sit, looking at recipes put on the market cheaply. A level 1 character who has defeated exactly *one* even con anemy could afford them.
"Willing and able to pay the price but unable to obtain the item?"
Yeah. THat's *exactly* what it sounds like... oh, wait.
Honest question to you Smurphy-
Why do you think the Devs have NOT merged the markets yet?
"I'm not scared of anyone or anything Angie. Isn't that the way life should be?"
Jack Hawksmoor, The Authority.
[ QUOTE ]
Honest question to you Smurphy-
Why do you think the Devs have NOT merged the markets yet?
[/ QUOTE ]
Merging the market requires doing something. Not merging the market requires nothing. Also, a long time ago in a post long eaten by the forum monster Ex Libris stated that she enjoyed a "dynamic" market. I believe those were her words.
That is a rational and logical opinion. A dynamic market where the prices change frequently can be more fun and more game like. A merged market would be more stable and less dynamic. A merged market would function more like a store than an flea market where bargains can be found. Perhaps the dev team has the "we like dynamic environment" attitude towards the markets.
Edit: arguing with Evil isn't worth the effort.