just a market rant

Anyone can be pretty darn super with nothing but SOs.
Anyone can be quite a bit more super than that using cheap IOs and some build ingenuity.
As for being "epic" with "minimal cost"- if its widely available it isn't epic at all, it's status quo.

*shrug*

Not seeing any validity in your complaint.


As defined by who, exactly?

there is no more a 'proper' way to use the market than there is a 'proper' way to run a mission- players define their own fun and efforts to legislate that will always be doomed.

a new player who wants all the rewards with little to no effort isn't doing the game any good and doesn't need an advocate.

I totally understand where you are coming from, and if this were a single player game rather than a MMORPG (or whatever the acronym is nowadays!) then I would agree with you 100%.

However, when you are playing with (and against) other people, it makes sense (to me) that people who work harder at being good at it deserve to have a step up over those who don't work so hard. That's the competition process.

If I'm playing tennis against someone who has taken years of lessons and trains for the pro circuit, then I really shouldn't be surprised when they whip me 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 ( I think that is the right terminology). I guess I could play on a court that is covered in ice on my opponents side, and where he is wearing blinders and 10 kg weights on each elbow, and then I might have a chance at an even game. (Call this option A). Or I could learn to play better tennis (Option B). Or I could just accept that I'm going to lose and just enjoy playing the game (Option C). Or I could play Wii tennis against the computer and dial down the competition. (Option D)

In my opinion, those who advocate radically dumbing down the system are asking for the equivalent of Option A. It penalizes people who have spent time and effort learning the system to become better at it.

Option B would entail learning how the system works (lots of good help in this forum for that). Option C would pretty much consist of gnashing your teeth silently but not posting market rants. And Option D would be finding an easier single-player game.

I'm not a fan of AE (it has led to the most exploits that I have seen) and if I had my druthers, I'd have AE missions give tickets only and no inf. It IS a simulated video game after all, and no one is paying ME to play CoH. But it is certainly not the ONLY issue that leads to inflation.

This forum is absolutely the wrong place for you to crusade on this. You are not going to find any sympathy for your position here. You are talking to the beneficiaries of the established order. The clique here can do anything they want in the game. This forum is filled with the winners of the market game and thus the larger game also. They have their own sub-culture. They use this forum to organize their own SG. That SG bought the way to the top prestige position on Virtue (and beyond). Nobody in that position would see anything wrong with the status quo.

Go to the offices of Walmart and tell them they need to change their business practices in order to let small local entrepreneurs start local businesses in clothing, hardware or grocery lines. You will get the same reaction that you get here. They know their way is good for the economy. It is dogma. You can not challenge it.

We have collectively accumulated enough observable proof of our market truths that "dogma" isn't an accurate description.

The economic Creationists and Flat Earthers we get in here with their exotic, unsupported theories about how things work have done plenty of challenging over the years.

Alas for them, wishing doesn't make it so.
Observable reality holds sway over this forum in the same way it holds sway over the market itself.

That's one way to look at it. Certainly, anyone who is benefiting from the established order is going to be hard to convince that changing it is a good idea.

But there's another way to look at it. Some of us are here because this forum, its topics and tendencies are a perfectly natural fit for how we already viewed, played and experienced the game. Only a few of the market regulars actually prefer the market itself to the rest of the game - most of us consider it a means to an end, and view it with varying degrees of favor ranging from outright enjoyment to grudging acceptance.

I am a firm believer that long-term, persistent video games should reward invested effort. If we don't want that, we should be playing something like Pac Man, where previous activity has no bearing on past or future play actually stored in game. In MMOs, our characters progress, and the implication of time and effort invested not influencing that is that our characters may as well progress on our their own completely independent of what we do with them. You could build a game like that, but I would not enjoy it. I like knowing that I get back something proportional to what I put in. The idea that I should get the same as everyone else even if I do more is anathema to me, even in entertainment.

High rewards, low cost, low risk.... Hmmm i remember playing a game like that recently.... Oh yeah I was playing Candy Land with my grandkids. I prefer to have at least somewhat of a challenge or better yet a variety. SOs are still a viable way to play the game at least with the original power sets, especially since you can pretty much customize your difficulty level. The people that really WANT IOs are the ones that work for it and want to continue playing. The game was SOs only for 8 issues and they work just as well now as they did then.

By the way it's not me that you are disagreeing with but a different set of marketeers entirely, Paragon Studio's Marketing department. Their job is to balance reward vs time to keep all the Pavlovian gaming dogs coming back when they ring the bell. The idea for them is NOT high reward, low cost, low risk but to give just the right (ie: lowest) reward that will keep people playing and paying their monthly subscription fees. When you get out in the real corporate world you'll most likely run afoul of the marketing department of the company you'll work for.

Actually the market rewards the players in a very balanced fashion. The more effort in, the more rewards out. If you are upset about how much purples cost in terms of A merits you should know that you actually got part of your wish. The devs told us that you would NEVER be able to buy purples with Merits because we couldn't hold enough merits to be able to buy even 1. They've changed their position on this recently. Also the market itself has undergone some "buffing." Posi told us for almost 2 years that it would be impossible to merge the markets due to reasons of DOOM that he was never willing to share with us, and even though they kept on telling us it was all one game, the last bit that stayed separate was the market.

Oddly enough one of the first things that happened when War Witch took over the reins from Posi was a market merger and it was smooth sailing. I've yet to see any DOOM as a result of the merger and rants actually decreased for quite a little time.

We were all new players once. They will learn as we all did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat Anyone can be pretty darn super with nothing but SOs. Anyone can be quite a bit more super than that using cheap IOs and some build ingenuity. As for being "epic" with "minimal cost"- if its widely available it isn't epic at all, it's status quo. *shrug* Not seeing any validity in your complaint.

You have a point. I would say not ANYONE can be arguably super given those specific conditions, but most can. True. So, I'll give you that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat As defined by who, exactly? there is no more a 'proper' way to use the market than there is a 'proper' way to run a mission- players define their own fun and efforts to legislate that will always be doomed.

'Proper', as defined by the same people in this very forum, constantly telling people that they need to learn how to use the market to their advantage. I could pull up specific examples, if you like, but I'm sure you'll find it. Someone even mentioned it in this very thread.

Usually that 'proper' boils down to being efficient, patient, and knowledgeable. And I'm not saying that's bad or that those people are not speaking sound logic. I'm just simply answering your question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat a new player who wants all the rewards with little to no effort isn't doing the game any good and doesn't need an advocate.

I'd argue that "effort" is quite subjective in this case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight Actually the market rewards the players in a very balanced fashion. The more effort in, the more rewards out.

Flipping Common Salvage for 1,000,000 a piece is effort? And allowing that to happen is balanced treatment of all users?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight If you are upset about how much purples cost in terms of A merits you should know that you actually got part of your wish. The devs told us that you would NEVER be able to buy purples with Merits because we couldn't hold enough merits to be able to buy even 1. They've changed their position on this recently. Also the market itself has undergone some "buffing." Posi told us for almost 2 years that it would be impossible to merge the markets due to reasons of DOOM that he was never willing to share with us, and even though they kept on telling us it was all one game, the last bit that stayed separate was the market. Oddly enough one of the first things that happened when War Witch took over the reins from Posi was a market merger and it was smooth sailing. I've yet to see any DOOM as a result of the merger and rants actually decreased for quite a little time. We were all new players once. They will learn as we all did.

I'm not upset about anything. I have no issues IO'ing out my characters and earning phat lootz (I usually pay more than needed too because I'm impatient, and fully aware of how much I could save if I waited some). I'm just concerned about the health of the market in the future and the perception of the more inexperienced or casual players.

Try it sometime. No, really, try it with common salvage. We have a good example of it happening in here with uncommon salvage, and even then it capped out around 300k, not 1M. And it took so much "effort" to sustain in the first 36 hours or so that the 30-second log-out timer was actually raised as a point of contention.

That sounds like effort to me, yes.


When something is really worth that price to enough people, yes, it absolutely is.

You know that stuff I just said about the work needed to drive up common salvage prices that high? There are times it does work, and is much less effort. There are really are times that you can flip salvage that high, even common. When is that? When supply plummets but demand remains high. Suddenly, hey, that' 1M inf for a common can become the price the market can bear without a ton of work trying to force the market to bear it. Why do people object to something's price rising to what the market can bear under these conditions? Because someone else wants it right then but isn't willing to pay that price right then? What's broken about that? Why is that such a terrible thing?

I have some mild concerns about the effect of perception of prices on new and otherwise uninformed players. But I think the way to address them is to find more ways to drain more inf out of the system faster, not to try and constrain the ways we can use the market. And honestly, I don't worry very much about it in any case. Most people I've met in game (as opposed to on these forums) figured out very quickly that what seemed like wildly unattainable prices weren't that unattainable at all.

I'd argue that your position that "minimal" effort should be required to achieve "epic" results doesn't leave you much wiggle room for looking reasonable. You seem to be firmly in "gotta purple my casual warshade!" territory.

To *actually do that* would indeed take a huge amount of effort. And it would require driving the price point up far higher than equalibrium, which isn't "flipping" as defined by marketeers.

A for profit flipper wouldn't bother with commons, not with so many other easier and more lucrative options available.


Sanctimonious concern for the poor, poor "casual gamer" is what poker players call a "tell". You can keep pretending if you want, but we know your game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat Sanctimonious concern for the poor, poor "casual gamer" is what poker players call a "tell". You can keep pretending if you want, but we know your game.

...You see right through me! My cover has been blown! What shall I ever do now!

As with any game there will be people better at it than others. well there is progressquest but even there some people will play that longer than others and get further ahead.

So better players will be better rewarded, its part of the reason we play games it's the competition. This relates directly to the market in that some people are better at working the market. and are rewarded for their efforts and skill.

if the designers did their job well you will feel epic with minimal effort, you go from punching street thugs in the face to shooting aliens with your laser beam eyes ... that is a pretty epic. There will always be people better than you, or with better gear but don't judge your fun by the achievement of others.

Judging by the actions of your many predecessors, you'll keep whining about not getting everything for free because it alienates the poor "casual gamer".

Feel free to prove me wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat Judging by the actions of your many predecessors, you'll keep whining about not getting everything for free because it alienates the poor "casual gamer". Feel free to prove me wrong.

I've never ever stated that anyone should get anything for free. The bottom line of everything I've said has been this:

If the prices in the market continue to rise at the rate they've been rising since the introduction of market, within the next year or two, the prices of the high-end items in the market will be beyond control. There will be a massive increase in the total inf. in the game, which would result in a general increase in item prices across the board. This, in the end, would hurt everyone, and the new players the most.

I'm no economist, but that's just my theory. I'd happily like to be proven that my prediction is wrong for some logical reasons.

I always find it interesting that people think some how the sellers set the market price. often times I have seen a typo set the market price for a while. I saw a common going for ~1000 and then there was a bid for 10,009 and then with in minutes it was up to 30K+ before someone bid a 1000 and got his doodad...

I hold that more market prices are set by typoing buyers than any other factor.




There really shouldn't be any concern for the poor casual player, rumor has it somewhere in this very forum there is a player willing to give anyone that asks enough inf to buy all the SOs needed for a lv 50.

Here is the basic flaw in your theory. As the market price skyrockets people will be willing to buy things from the market for more and more, but the vendor prices stay the same; so say a common salvage that currently sells for 500 in the future sells for 5 million. A new player gets this salvage as a drop as he is punching street thugs in the face and being bombarded with SG invite spam, and other player created distractions. He is told to sell it on the market; it sells for 5.5 million and in less than 20 minutes of play time he has a bank roll that will buy all his SOs till he is 47 off of one drop! ....

nope I am not worried about the new casual player at all.

If all you ever do is buy buy buy and never sell sell sell, it might hurt you if prices continue to go up, but I'd wager the vast majority of players are both buying and selling their drops, which tends to even out the disparity. Since you have control over how much you're bidding, you'll come out ahead more times than not, since you can post things for low numbers and generally get big profits from the IWANTITNAO crowd that overbids.

Control of high priced items is always, and will always be, in the hands of those paying the influence, not the sellers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by _23X_ Here is the basic flaw in your theory. As the market price skyrockets people will be willing to buy things from the market for more and more, but the vendor prices stay the same; so say a common salvage that currently sells for 500 in the future sells for 5 million. A new player gets this salvage as a drop as he is punching street thugs in the face and being bombarded with SG invite spam, and other player created distractions. He is told to sell it on the market; it sells for 5.5 million and in less than 20 minutes of play time he has a bank roll that will buy all his SOs till he is 47 off of one drop! .... nope I am not worried about the new casual player at all.

True. And yes, you're right. It'd far and far easier to obtain SOs and other vendor items then. However, there would a much larger gap in price between using IOs and SOs.

Having 5.5 million in a land where everything slightly better than the norm (IOs vs. SOs) costs 5 million at the very least isn't exactly being rich.

There was a time I had 2 million inf. and I considered myself a rich kid on the block!

Now I have a total of about 2 billion on my main characters, with most of them IO'd out to the teeth, and I don't even consider myself remotely rich. That's my concern.

The concern that the value of 1 inf. is dropping, and dropping FAST as long as anything beyond SOs is concerned.

The difference between everyone should get everything for free and everyone should get epic performance for minimal investment isn't much.


The market does NOTHING to create inf, it only facilitates moving it around between players (while taking a cut, making it one of the few inf SINKS in the game).

Inf is created by players beating stuff up and running content, not by marketeers plying their trade. Complain about the devs doubling the earning power of 50s if you want to tilt at the windmill of inflation- leave the market out of it.

You'll find welcome among the flat earthers and creationists I mentioned earlier.

It is expensive to IO with sets for a toon. But if you were to replace your SO with generic IO, and is good for the time being stuff. It is cheap. way cheaper then SO. There is absolutely no reason why you shouldn't craft generic IO on your toon till you can afford sets. It wouldn't be quite 5 million. And you do realize that if you were to buy all lvl 50 SO it would cost several million. But you have a advantage with IO you dont have to slot max lvl ones and still retain the benefits.

But with sets the way they are they are expensive but earning them is quite easy now. There is no reason you can't earn the sets for your toon, no reason at all. It is only expensive if you don't want to put in the effort and want it NOW. And that is the way it should be. You shouldn't be able to set your toon up without doing any effort either buy earning the money to pay for it or earning them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat The difference between everyone should get everything for free and everyone should get epic performance for minimal investment isn't much. The market does NOTHING to create inf, it only facilitates moving it around between players (while taking a cut, making it one of the few inf SINKS in the game). Inf is created by players beating stuff up and running content, not by marketeers plying their trade. Complain about the devs doubling the earning power of 50s if you want to tilt at the windmill of inflation- leave the market out of it. You'll find welcome among the flat earthers and creationists I mentioned earlier.

I don't get why you're taking such a hostile stance against me. I'm not trying to say you're wrong. I know you enough to know that you probably know more about the economy and the market! xD

And yes, I do realize that the market doesn't generate infamy. But that's what I'm saying! What you and your "people" do by destroying infamy, along with the market transaction fees isn't nearly enough inf. sink to stop the vicious cycle that the market is stuck in right now (according to what I see. I could be wrong!). And from what you say, I think that's what causes what I'm observing: Increase in prices, and drop in value of 1 inf.

That's my observation.

From that, I draw the conclusion that this causes a high rate of inflation. This high rate of inflation is reducing the value of 1 inf., which makes everyone "poorer" as a whole. No matter how much inf. you have, your X inf. would then be worth X/Y inf. This would have a more significant impact on those with less total inf. And soon, it'd reach a point that in order to be a consumer in the market, you -have- to first be a seller. Currently, being a seller is rather optional, since you can still get quite a lot of raw inf. from just doing the content and using Merits to buff up your characters. But when it reaches a point that you have to pay 1,000,000 per common salvage, being ONLY consumer wouldn't be an option, and some players just aren't interested in being sellers. Should they simply accept that and say bye to shiny stuff?

That's it! That's all I'm saying!

I'm not saying I have a solution. I'm not saying the marketeers are doing wrong. I'm not saying we should give everyone candies and lollipops. And certainly, I'm not trying to prove anything.

I think this has been covered...but it bears repeating. The market works both ways. Today I logged on my 50 Brute that I havent touched in a long while. He's SO'd for all he could be SO'd without an IO to be seen. I only had 12 million inf on him.

So I logged on and ran one AE mission then another....40 mins of work and a couple of bronze ticket rolls later I have 89 million

No one only has 5 million anymore unless they want to