A counter-proposal to merging the markets
By
AgentMountaineer,
Posted on: 2009-06-18 07:35 in The Market and Inventions
[ QUOTE ]
just merge the [censored] things already. no counter proposals will be heard, no half measures will be accepted. stuff your stupid rp fantasies and give a fair and equitable supply line to both halves of the game. if you're any kind of decent roleplayer anyway, you can use your imagination for a justification. and if it's just about the money you stand to lose, well go blow. if you're any good at marketeering you'll recoup your losses sooner or later. or you wont, I don't care.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think the RP solution is trivial just pretend they AREN'T merged. It's not like you ever see or even know who bought your stuff. Seems pretty simple to me. Who cares what's actually going on on some server somewhere in the real world?
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This gives a cross-faction market, keeps the RPers happy, and provides an extra Inf-sink, and one that people will FLOCK to. It's win-win-win!
[/ QUOTE ]
Other than competition being spread out over 3 markets instead of 2 and everyone under level 35 being blocked out you are right.
[/ QUOTE ]
There's a totally simple fix to that. Once DJ Zero in Pocket D sees how well the guy in Cimerora is doing, he sets up his own 4th market, not linked to any of the other 3. He also only pays in his own new currency, ZeroClix.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then the Rikti can open one in the War Zone, and they would have a 5th market, not linked to the other 4 - and they would have a new currency called "GuhR'eenbax" that you could only spend there.
T'uff Luh'k's Salvage:Recipe Purchase point
Owned and managed by the renegede Rikti T'uff Luh'k (and his partner Nah-T'Nuff), this ruthless negotiator will deal with anyone from any faction.
[/ QUOTE ]
Once they do that, the time-travellers will see how lucrative this all is and set up a 6th market. This market will accept influence, infamy, ZeroClix, Rogue-bucks, and GuhR'eenbax as payment for purchases, but would only pay out another form of currency. I'll leave the name to more creative types.
I'm liking the new marketeering possibilities.
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are
How about this, which would still allow eventually merging them, if that's desirable:
Instead of adding additional markets (with additional software, and possibly even additional hardware), put terminals that allow access to both WW's and the Black Market in the RWZ base. Charge extra for using the opposite side's market (influence sink). You'd have to select which one you wanted when you access the terminal, to keep it simple.
The level limit would help ameliorate "upheavals", as would the extra surcharge.
For RP, well, in the game canon, by level 35 you've learned that things aren't so black and white, and you're willing to work with the opposite side to battle the Rikti, so why not try to make a little money off the other side, too? If your RP concept objects to "supplying" the opposition, than only buy their stuff. If you object to giving them your money, then only sell. If you object to both, don't do either. 
[ QUOTE ]
How about this, which would still allow eventually merging them, if that's desirable:
Instead of adding additional markets (with additional software, and possibly even additional hardware), put terminals that allow access to both WW's and the Black Market in the RWZ base. Charge extra for using the opposite side's market (influence sink). You'd have to select which one you wanted when you access the terminal, to keep it simple.
The level limit would help ameliorate "upheavals", as would the extra surcharge.
For RP, well, in the game canon, by level 35 you've learned that things aren't so black and white, and you're willing to work with the opposite side to battle the Rikti, so why not try to make a little money off the other side, too? If your RP concept objects to "supplying" the opposition, than only buy their stuff. If you object to giving them your money, then only sell. If you object to both, don't do either.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a market idiot, but wouldn't level locking the ability to access both markets just cause more instability redside?
Branching Paragon Police Department Epic Archetype, please!
[ QUOTE ]
I'm a market idiot, but wouldn't level locking the ability to access both markets just cause more instability redside?
[/ QUOTE ]
don't pay any attention to Tripp, he only makes sense on accident.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm a market idiot, but wouldn't level locking the ability to access both markets just cause more instability redside?
[/ QUOTE ]
don't pay any attention to Tripp, he only makes sense on accident.
[/ QUOTE ]Nice, Nethergoat, very mature and noble, especially when you put me on ignore rather than answer challenges to your arguments.
Cynical, I don't know either. I think any kind of access to both markets (even through a third common market) will cause quite a bit of "upset" for a while. Limiting access would, I think, spread it out over a longer period, making it less disruptive over all.
I'm hoping the Market Gurus will weigh in.
[ QUOTE ]
Cynical, I don't know either. I think any kind of access to both markets (even through a third common market) will cause quite a bit of "upset" for a while. Limiting access would, I think, spread it out over a longer period, making it less disruptive over all.
I'm hoping the Market Gurus will weigh in.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't really see it doing much. It's not as if there aren't a lot of people who are significantly wealthy who have or could easily get characters over level 35.
If you have the inf and want something from the other side on a higher-level character, all you have to do to bypass that limitation is have a level 35+ character. You use that character to buy what you want from whatever side is cheaper and give it to the lowbie.
As a result, I don't see this doing much to damp market fluctuations. All the players who will cause the biggest fluctuations would be unaffected except by the increased fees.
As a note, I suspect that it would mostly be villains footing the increased fees as you describe them, unless you charged sellers more at collection time - something I think players would significantly resent. ("I got less than I planned for because a villain bought it!") That leaves the increased fee to be footed by the buyer, and I don't think a lot of heroes are going to need to go looking on the Black Market for price deals.
I think a conversion rate would probably be a wiser course. When you pay X on the opposite market, it looks to the seller like X*C, where C is the conversion rate from your inf to theirs. This won't change the fluctuations that would result from supply and demand shifts, but it will damp the changes in currency value.
The downside to a conversion rate is all in the implementation. My feeling is that I would not trust it to an algorithm, but I'm also not sure I trust the devs to appropriately maintain it "manually".
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cynical, I don't know either. I think any kind of access to both markets (even through a third common market) will cause quite a bit of "upset" for a while. Limiting access would, I think, spread it out over a longer period, making it less disruptive over all.
I'm hoping the Market Gurus will weigh in.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't really see it doing much. It's not as if there aren't a lot of people who are significantly wealthy who have or could easily get characters over level 35.
If you have the inf and want something from the other side on a higher-level character, all you have to do to bypass that limitation is have a level 35+ character. You use that character to buy what you want from whatever side is cheaper and give it to the lowbie.
As a result, I don't see this doing much to damp market fluctuations. All the players who will cause the biggest fluctuations would be unaffected except by the increased fees.
As a note, I suspect that it would mostly be villains footing the increased fees as you describe them, unless you charged sellers more at collection time - something I think players would significantly resent. ("I got less than I planned for because a villain bought it!") That leaves the increased fee to be footed by the buyer, and I don't think a lot of heroes are going to need to go looking on the Black Market for price deals.
I think a conversion rate would probably be a wiser course. When you pay X on the opposite market, it looks to the seller like X*C, where C is the conversion rate from your inf to theirs. This won't change the fluctuations that would result from supply and demand shifts, but it will damp the changes in currency value.
The downside to a conversion rate is all in the implementation. My feeling is that I would not trust it to an algorithm, but I'm also not sure I trust the devs to appropriately maintain it "manually".
[/ QUOTE ]You'd choose which market you wanted to access when you clicked on the terminal. If you're accessing the opposite market, you'd get a warning that you would pay higher posting fees. The postings themselves would not be cross-market.
I suggested RWZ primarily because you don't have to do anything special to access the zone. If the terminals were inside the base, you wouldn't even have to face any of the hazards. I also thought the level 35 limit would help moderate any "upheavals", but you're right, that's not much of an actual limit.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a conversion rate would probably be a wiser course. When you pay X on the opposite market, it looks to the seller like X*C, where C is the conversion rate from your inf to theirs. This won't change the fluctuations that would result from supply and demand shifts, but it will damp the changes in currency value.
The downside to a conversion rate is all in the implementation. My feeling is that I would not trust it to an algorithm, but I'm also not sure I trust the devs to appropriately maintain it "manually".
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is why, IMO making the Infamy to Influence conversion market based, besides creating a new niche for market people, would be the best route to go. No need for different fees for Villains and Heroes then, and by charging say, only 5% on Inf for Inf transactions, you would create a new Inf sink that would probably see decent use.
(On a personal note, I find this whole thing kind of funny, didn't I suggest this like 1 1/2 years ago? )
I still think some sort of third market access point, with a currency exchange, is the best solution. It preserves the identity of each market as being somewhat seperate, creates a new niche, and overcomes what has consistently been (regardless of whether people want to believe it or not) the #1 Dev objection to an outright merger.
It doesn't need to take care off all cases, in our modern Inf economy it really doesn't matter if Alchemical Silvers pop to 50k for a day. Arbitrage between the markets would just take care of the worst discrepancies, which is probably more than enough to make it worth doing. (standard code rant)
Of course, I'd rather see a lot of other changes to the market implemented too, as I haven't been a fan of the double-blind auction system since I-9 Beta. And if it must remain, giving people who are casual market users more data about price history would go a long way towards leveling the playing field.
Currently, people who study the market, essentially have all this data, and on the items they actively trade, they usually also more or less know the exact best Bid and best Offer for those particular items. A 15 day Moving Average of prices, or mulitple Moving Averages to choose from (Like a 15 and a 5 day), would make it easier for casual users to feel comfortable pricing their items.
The added information alone would probably have the effect of lowering prices across the board. (I would say it is currently almost too easy to make Inf on the markets, as most people don't actually have a good frame of reference for what their stuff is worth which leads them to underprice and overpay too often)
So, I'd like to see a way to move goods between the markets that was implemented at the same time as a general update to the interface with improvements to make it more accessible to the average player. (I'd stop short of full transparency, and maybe show the best bid and best offer only up to the nearest million Inf. Someone looking at a Recipe might see that it is 2,XXX,XXX bid at 3,XXX,XXX offer)
/My 2 Infamy or 2.5 Influence, take your pick. 
[ QUOTE ]
One thing that comes up in this forum fairly often is the disparity between red and blue side markets, and the idea of merging them into a single market to "fix" the villain supply problem. While this is a worthy goal, it's often shot down on the grounds that such a merge would be a more or less cataclysmic event, and people who have a lot of expensive things listed stand to lose, big time.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess it might cause losses to a few players on the villain side. (What is this blue and red? Do they wear those colors? They aren't two sides of indeterminate alignment.)
The Hero side shouldn't be effected at all if such occurred. And the villain market would rise quickly rise to fit the hero market.
I am, however, against a merger of this type based on any grounds.
Influence was originally a reward for doing good things and gaining notability as a good character. It is still related to that.
Infamy was originally a reward for doing evil things and gaining a reputation as a evil character. It is still related to that.
Why should a currency based on alignment be usable by both sides in this kind of relation?
It shouldn't be.
The situation is black-and-white. There is no gray.
There is no physicality related to anything involved with infl/infa in any real game mechanic sense.
You can't steal someone's raptor pack in PvP. You can't even sell your raptor pack to someone of the same alignment. Same goes for wings, costume parts, etc.
It is not currency to exchange for physical things. It is currency to exchange for augmentation of good or evil.
[ QUOTE ]
Thus, I would like to propose a free market solution to the problem, one that is both simple and elegant. All we really need is some method for moving items (recipes, salvage, possibly inf but not strictly necessary) across faction lines.
[/ QUOTE ]
No. We don't. I've already stated that I'm against this. Multiple times in other threads.
[ QUOTE ]
This could be the form of a third, neutral market, some form of in-game mail that works by account,
[/ QUOTE ]
How is this any different from combining the markets? (which I'm against).
It gives an incentive to exploit the side-switching mechanic. It helps exploiters and cheaters to prosper. I'm vehemently against this.
This is solo-account-inter-character trade and is something completely different from market merger. I'm against solo-account-inter-character trade without a middle man and/or the markets. -- especially across alignments.
[ QUOTE ]
or even side switching with Going Rogue if it's not too painful to go back and forth.
[/ QUOTE ]
It should be very hard and time consuming to switch sides, and your character should be punished for doing so.
I still believe characters should be stripped of all infl/infa as they change sides. Also they should loose any gear that they are not carrying at the time - at least - I'm for stripping characters of everything - enhancements, salvage, insps, everything if they switch sides.
[NOTE:: we still don't know if you will start off as level one on the other side if you switch sides. This is not an impossibility. This would really limit what you could carry with you across to the other side with you.]
Jumping back and forth between good and evil should not be a frequent event.
If the point is just to allow characters to flip sides with the push-of-a-button - and I have no doubt that some exploiters will try to find a way to do this - then the whole concept of "Going Rogue" and "switching sides" because the idea of good and evil becomes a sham.
[We also don't know if "Going Rogue" involves making new characters in the "Going Rogue" zone and then the course of play makes the character a hero or a villain. This is also a possibility.]
While we are on "Going Rogue", I obviously don't like inter faction trade going on. Obviously the Wentworths of Paragon City would not be connected to any Wentworths that exists in the "Going Rogue" dimension; like-wise the Black Markets.
Why would the trading be inter-dimensional?
That being said, I am against a common market in the "Going Rogue" zone as well. Even separate markets are kind of a sham if you can take things out of the "Going Rogue" markets and move them to the markets of the good and evil worlds and vice-versa.
There is no reason to leave the "Going Rogue" zone if the markets are connected to both sides - even if it is hard to flip sides.
I can agree with the concept of a third grey zone market that exists in the Rogue zone only, but I think that any thing that has been "tainted" by this market should be removed from the character if they move out of the "Rogue" zone - to either side.
I think you are right that the market needs to be separate - but I'm for it being completely separate from both sides. One where the goods are coded to be removed if you exit to either Paragon City or the Rogue Isles.
This would ::
<ul type="square">[*]Give players that want an alignment-merged market what they want in a way that won't effect the current markets.[*]Tend to keep players that are trying to work the inter-alignment markets away from either-side of the current market structures.[*] Implements an incentive not to side flip quickly (because "side flipping" is really about moving between Paragon City and the Rogue Isles for some advantage[*] does not give an advantage to exploiters[/list]
In order to do this in a functional manner ::
<ul type="square">[*]Items gained on the hero side or villain side cold not be sold or exchanged in the "Rogue" market.[*]A new gray "alignment" of gear would have to be developed for exchange among characters that are in the Rogue zone only.[*] A new gray inf would have to be developed - and named -- inf-gray, IGs, Stateman's dollars (that cursed traitor), or some such - that could only be used in the Rogue market and only traded among characters in the Rogue zone.[/list]
[ QUOTE ]
The reason this would work is that opening an channel between factions creates a lot of opportunities for market arbitrage. If recipe A is cheap blue side and expensive red side, it becomes profitable to move them from the hero to villain markets. So-called Ebil marketeers are sure to take advantage of this.
[/ QUOTE ]
Another reason that the markets should not be merged.
[ QUOTE ]
Over time, the market that is over-supplied will begin to dry up, resulting in rising prices. The formerly supply-starved market will have more seller competition and undercutting, leading to falling prices.
[/ QUOTE ]
Using your thinking, Purple items will be moved to the villains and posted for blue side pricing. Obviously the villains have fewer of these.
The Purples (and to lesser extent all invention sets) are the primary reason that many want markets merged.
The transfer of Purples across the lines is the worst possible reason for market merger.
Prices won't fall. It will prompt cheating players to buy more infa from RMT spammers. Leading to more RMT spams and gain for players that cheat.
The RMT's would have a hayday moving stuff back and forth across the sides in order to manipulate the markets - and they do it as a full time job. Could players compete with that? Who do you think drives up the prices of Purples so high?
I certainly hope that your goal is not to promote cheating or to help cheaters, but that is in fact what will occur if an open third market or cross alignment trades are allowed.
[ QUOTE ]
While there would still be some disparity between the two markets, the most egregious cases would eventually balance out. It would be a slow process, meaning that people wouldn't instantly get burned by a merge -- they have time to adjust and adapt.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, you are either talking about two markets or three markets. I thought your point was about a third market, but you are back to how it would influence the two.
That's why I think that if there is a third -- and I can see why there probably should be at this point -- then the third should be separate from teh other two and the goods from the Rogue zone should not be allowed in either the hero or villain sides of the game.
[ QUOTE ]
A neutral third party handling the exchanges is also a lot less lore-breaking than the idea of WW and the BM cooperating.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this...except for the middle-man position of the third market. Rogue goods should be specific for use/effect and trade in the Rogue zone only.
[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm getting a bit redundant here, but this is the closing argument section.
1) I can see the reasoning for needing a third market that is specific to the Rogue gray-zone.
<ul type="square">[*]I think this calls for it's own currency that is seperate from the currencies of either side.[*]It should have it's own market that is separate from either side.[*]Characters should not be able to trade gray goods outside of the gray-zone.[*]Gray goods should not effect characters if they are outside of the gray-zone.[*]I feel that Rogue/gray goods should be stripped from characters as they exit into Paragon City or the Rogue Isles[/list]This reduces the ability to exploit the Rogue/Gray market and/or market merging, while still allowing both sides to trade in the same market while in the Rogue/Gray area.
2) Merging market by any means is a boon to exploiters and RMT's - don't reward the cheaters.
We already know they are working to exploit the system, don't make it easy for them.
3) The primary reason to merge markets is due to Purple and on a lesser level IO-sets in general. This is the major disparity between the two markets and the avenue that the exploiters will take to abuse the merger and/or middle-man market.
Biggest gain the fastest for the exploiters - right? What do you think that they will be "taking the time" to "side-switch" to move. If the market is not separate in the Rogue/Gray zone, exploiters will start smuggling across the line immediately.
This does not help the average player. It helps exploiters.
4) Allowing a gateway-market will benefit exploiters of the side-switching mechanism more than anyone else.
It was even brought up in this thread that "some" players are already looking to side-jump frequently for no other reason that abusing the markets. (another reason for no market merger at all).
I am against market mergers on any level for any reason. <ul type="square">[*]Keep the markets separate at all costs - this means separate goods and a separate currency.[*]Don't allow goods to be transferred across "sides".[*] Strip goods from characters when they switch from hero-to-gray, gray-to-hero, gray-to-villain, and from villain-to-gray. - or - at the very least, make gray and villain goods unusable in the hero zones and make gray and hero goods unusable in villain zones.[/list]
-----
On the last point, It made me think that possibility a way to give some flexibility to the "other side" of this discussion is to allow goods to go into the Rogue/grey Market (third market) structure, but not allow them to come out again (aka they items get [tagged] gray). That is to say, you can sell hero or villain items to the Rogue/Gray market, but once they are [tagged] gray, you can't sell them on on the blue or red markets.
This would mean that the Third World market would have some of the flavor of what some players are looking for without damaging either market. It would still be exploitable, but less so.
But remember this is all based on the fact that you can't utilize the Grey Items outside of the Rogue/gray zone.
As far as I'm concerned, Rogue/Gray items should be stripped form a character when the character enters the hero or villain side - and that goes for villain goods being stripped from characters going into the hero side and vice-versa.
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I think that the perfect solution lies in Cimerora.
Have a merchant set up shop near Julia Pria. He'll work with ANYONEm because he has no concept of modern "heroes" and "villains" - these are just the guys working for Imperius.
He functions just like WW or the Black market, with the following exceptions:
1> He uses a third database, separate from WW or the BM. Like those two, it crosses all servers.
2> He talks to heroes and villains, giving both access to the same database.
3> He charges twice the fee of the regular markets.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm against this idea.
The "going Rogue" zone would be much better suited for this.
I'm against market mergers.
See my other posts in this thread in regards to my ideas and discussion with the OP.
[ QUOTE ]
. I also thought the level 35 limit would help moderate any "upheavals", but you're right, that's not much of an actual limit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not really seeing how keeping lower level characters out of the merger market (which I'm against) would have any "positive" effect - especially since a large share of the marketing abuse/manipulation behavior comes from level 50's.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It would also likely really tick off the people that make their inf from in place flipping.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know about that. You *could* buy from WW and then go to the Cimeroran and turn a nice profit. It would all depend on price disparities on either side and it would require a little more travel time between markets, but I think profits would still abound. Anywhere there's a market, money can be made by those with a little effort and know-how.
[/ QUOTE ]
In WoW I "flipped" vendor junk for big profits on the AH. Buy stuff for a couple of silver, jog to the AH and sell it for a couple gold.
A marketplace will always be rife with opportunity for crafty players. The only way to "protect the little guy" and cheese off those mean, nasty eeebil manipulators is to shut them down entirely and only have stores.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let me guess. First Aid Books from Stromgarde before they changed all the elite mobs to normals? I used to fill up my bags with those things and sell them for 3 to 4 gold a piece. It's like Blizzard wanted us to do it. Putting level 38-41 Elites near a vendor selling stuff a level 20 or so would need.
"If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?"
- Abraham Lincoln
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. I also thought the level 35 limit would help moderate any "upheavals", but you're right, that's not much of an actual limit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not really seeing how keeping lower level characters out of the merger market (which I'm against) would have any "positive" effect - especially since a large share of the marketing abuse/manipulation behavior comes from level 50's.
[/ QUOTE ]
Using a system as designed isn't "abuse" my deeply confused friend.
And I for one do very little abusing/manipulating/baby sacrificing with my 50's, my main marketeers are all lower level.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
Deeply confused doesn't do it justice.
[ QUOTE ]
Influence was originally a reward for doing good things and gaining notability as a good character. It is still related to that.
Infamy was originally a reward for doing evil things and gaining a reputation as a evil character. It is still related to that.
Why should a currency based on alignment be usable by both sides in this kind of relation?
It shouldn't be.
The situation is black-and-white. There is no gray.
[/ QUOTE ]
Leaving aside the rest of the discussion for a moment, it seems to me that the devs made this argument obsolete when they decided to stop doing any significant faction-specific content develoment. Even before Going Rogue, every issue since i9 served to blur the line between Heroside and Villainside (with the single exception of VEATs, which IMHO were more like a late fulfillment than new development).
And for a while things were cold,
They were scared down in their holes
The forest that once was green
Was colored black by those killing machines
[ QUOTE ]
Deeply confused doesn't do it justice.
[/ QUOTE ]
@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
[ QUOTE ]
(What is this blue and red? Do they wear those colors? They aren't two sides of indeterminate alignment.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you colorblind or something? When the content differentiates very little, and in many cases not at all, between heroic and villainous alignment, the prominent colors you see everywhere depending on which side you're on are in a very real way a more accurate label than "hero" or "villain".
[ QUOTE ]
You'd choose which market you wanted to access when you clicked on the terminal. If you're accessing the opposite market, you'd get a warning that you would pay higher posting fees. The postings themselves would not be cross-market.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understood that. What was that meant to be in response to?
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
Leaving aside the rest of the discussion for a moment, it seems to me that the devs made this argument obsolete when they decided to stop doing any significant faction-specific content develoment. Even before Going Rogue, every issue since i9 served to blur the line between Heroside and Villainside (with the single exception of VEATs, which IMHO were more like a late fulfillment than new development).
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. Under this argument, it's nonsensical that my villains gain infamy for fighting the Rikti in the RWZ, the Cimeroran Traitors and 5th Column in the past, or holographic threats in the AE.
People need to accept that the label is a nod to the RP considerations and not a constraint that is (or must be) enforced. Trying to declare it as being black and white when it the shades of grey are staring us in the face seems foolish.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
(On a personal note, I find this whole thing kind of funny, didn't I suggest this like 1 1/2 years ago? )
[/ QUOTE ]
I could be unclear on which thing you mean, but I attribute my 1st recollection of a conversion rate to Arcanaville in one of the 1st big discussions/arguments in here on whether/why/how to merge the markets.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(On a personal note, I find this whole thing kind of funny, didn't I suggest this like 1 1/2 years ago? )
[/ QUOTE ]
I could be unclear on which thing you mean, but I attribute my 1st recollection of a conversion rate to Arcanaville in one of the 1st big discussions/arguments in here on whether/why/how to merge the markets.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that was in a thread I started called "Market Merger Madness" where I laid out a plan to add a 3rd market access point with a market-based Infamy/Influence exchange (I suggested the creation of a new Inspiration as the medium of exchange only as it would seem to require less coding), I actually still have the OP from that thread on another computer from when I was typing it up.
But really, it is neither here nor there. I wholly support a 3rd access point that would allow people to buy from the other side, in the other sides currency and allowed players to determine the currency exchange rate through Inf trades made on that market. You would still be limited to listing your items on your own faction's market, as this would keep the markets as they are mostly intact.
The purpose would be to take care of the most egregious differences between the two markets, while not destorying either of them. Market players get another niche, and most people can just be completely oblivious to it and just benefit from the goods moved around by the marketeers.
Of course, a lot of has changed in the last couple of years, Infamy/Influence disparity has shrunk (althought according to Posi, hasn't completely disappeared), but it still seems like a fairly good idea to me that really doesn't have a lot of downside.
But in the meantime, I think that market interface improvements aimed at helping people who are casual users of the market might be development time better spent. Since the arrival of tickets, it is pretty rare to find things that are just not possible to buy at the Black Market. The stuff I mentioned in the previous post I would say would do more to bring items to market and keep prices down than adding a way to move goods between markets.
Information is what most people are lacking, it is the domain of those who constantly follow the markets. It wouldn't give those people any more of an advantage than they already have, but someone who just wants to put their stuff up there for a "fair" price and not feel like they were getting ripped off when they see if sell for double what they listed it for, would benefit greatly from more information about the price history beyond the last 5.
Well, fun trip down memory lane, I don't expect this thread to turn out much different than any of the previous market merger threads, but hey, ya never know...
[ QUOTE ]
Influence was originally a reward for doing good things and gaining notability as a good character. It is still related to that.
Infamy was originally a reward for doing evil things and gaining a reputation as a evil character. It is still related to that.
Why should a currency based on alignment be usable by both sides in this kind of relation?
It shouldn't be.
The situation is black-and-white. There is no gray.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why should there be a virtual reality center in the burned out husk of a warzone? The game has already stopped making sense.
If you believe Going Rogue will allow you to switch sides at anytime, and not merely at character creation - then a market merger is inevitable. That is the plain truth, regardless of whether it makes sense.
[ QUOTE ]
If you believe Going Rogue will allow you to switch sides at anytime, and not merely at character creation - then a market merger is inevitable. That is the plain truth, regardless of whether it makes sense.
[/ QUOTE ]
First, even if you can switch at anytime (which I do believe will be the case), it could be that switching is a non-trivial thing to do. In which case it doesn't seem to make a market merger inevitable in any sense.
Even if it was trivial I don't see how it makes it inevitable, they could be just as happy allowing people who want to, the ability to shuttle goods back and forth between the sides, without the need for a full merger. In that scenario a full merger might even be less likely because of Going Rogue instead of more likely.
But, since none of us really knows right now... it's fun to speculate. 
[ QUOTE ]
The only way to "protect the little guy" and cheese off those mean, nasty eeebil manipulators
is to shut them down entirely and only have stores.
[/ QUOTE ]
...and, as KeepDistance frequently points out, that won't work either. All that does is ensure
the BM won't do business from the back of a truck, but in a chat channel instead -- minus the
fees).
Regards
4
I've been rich, and I've been poor. Rich is definitely better.
Light is faster than sound - that's why some people look smart until they speak.
For every seller who leaves the market dirty stinkin' rich,
there's a buyer who leaves the market dirty stinkin' IOed. - Obitus.