Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
Contributor
User avatar
Team: Eminence Front
Rank: Soldier
Main: DarkSteel
Level: 3983

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:35 am
Posts: 2068
Location: Netherlands
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
Antilzah wrote:
lrellok wrote:
Your running out of legs here enk.

No u


You're*

_________________
~DarkSteel / Auxilium
Image
Image

Universe Map: http://www.starsonata.com/map/


Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:33 am
Profile
over 9000!
User avatar
Team: Traders
Rank: Director
Main: enkelin
Level: 5594

Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 11089
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
If you want to buy the ingredients of Sub-Shield Buffers, manufacture the buffers, and sell those to AI bases, be my guest. That is perfectly within the realm of what the system is designed to do.

_________________
Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live.

http://www.starsonata.com/features


Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:52 am
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
Max235 wrote:
Your proposition puts T0 Commods at maximum prices.


Strawman. ONE of my proposals puts them at maximum, and the one i flatly state is the worst. lemme repeat; 2) Drop buffer prices to single component level. This would enrage the current ws player base but probably be the overall best for the game, as it entails no risk of inflation and means you can no longer buy AI materials to build items. Also, it would encourage people to move up the IC chain a level or two. Dropping Buffer prices to 350,000 would put them on par with all the other IC at their level. I am curios why you have ignored it completely in your response.

anilv wrote:
If you want to buy the ingredients of Sub-Shield Buffers, manufacture the buffers, and sell those to AI bases, be my guest. That is perfectly within the realm of what the system is designed to do.


Is/Ought conflation. "If you want to kill peri at level 300 with primal jungle drones, be my guest. That is perfectly within the realm of what the system is designed to do."

The fact that all of you keep bringing fallacy after fallacy against me is what keeps me going here, i swear.

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:43 am
Profile
over 9000!
User avatar
Team: Traders
Rank: Director
Main: enkelin
Level: 5594

Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 11089
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
lrellok wrote:
"If you want to kill peri at level 300 with primal jungle drones, be my guest. That is perfectly within the realm of what the system is designed to do."


I also agree with this statement.

_________________
Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live.

http://www.starsonata.com/features


Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:05 pm
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
anilv wrote:
I also agree with this statement.


ANd yet you do not understand why i refuse to hand you money. But we will go with that then, so primal Jungle Drones are not being nerfed?

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:10 am
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Peon
Main: Maxathron
Level: 2360

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:16 am
Posts: 5777
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
"I will not give money to corporations that cannot prove they are successful."

The definition of success is subjective, as Uhmari showed us that his definition of success was 13 MILLION subscribers, to which the biggest MMORPG in the world, World of Warcraft, was an unsuccessful game because it's over 5 million subs, but under 13 million.

"I won't subscribe until Steam reaches 1000+ new members."

That's better, but your 1 subscription doesn't pull as much weight as the 1000 that Steam will supposedly provide. As such, there is no hurry to wrap things up before they are done and ready to go. Obviously the potential money is a good motivator, but the potential money of people saying they won't back before this mark is reached, isn't that big deal.

Sub-Shield Buffers need to drop to 200k per Buffer before it becomes unprofitable to convert prom into SSBs. 500k is fine considering you can't get the prom back if you crack them open. Considering how many things need prom, this is a valid trade. Personally I would not make any SSB because of the amount of prom I need for builds and the fact I can't get any back (Ignoring Industrial Crystals) once it's made. I will however my SSR because I have a bazillion enukes again.


Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:50 am
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
Max235 wrote:
Sub-Shield Buffers need to drop to 200k per Buffer before it becomes unprofitable to convert prom into SSBs. 500k is fine considering you can't get the prom back if you crack them open. Considering how many things need prom, this is a valid trade. Personally I would not make any SSB because of the amount of prom I need for builds and the fact I can't get any back (Ignoring Industrial Crystals) once it's made. I will however my SSR because I have a bazillion enukes again.


TY maxa, it is good to see we can agree on things when we both come tot hetbel with reasonable expectations and facts supporting them.

Max235 wrote:
"I will not give money to corporations that cannot prove they are successful."

The definition of success is subjective, as Uhmari showed us that his definition of success was 13 MILLION subscribers, to which the biggest MMORPG in the world, World of Warcraft, was an unsuccessful game because it's over 5 million subs, but under 13 million.

"I won't subscribe until Steam reaches 1000+ new members."

That's better, but your 1 subscription doesn't pull as much weight as the 1000 that Steam will supposedly provide. As such, there is no hurry to wrap things up before they are done and ready to go. Obviously the potential money is a good motivator, but the potential money of people saying they won't back before this mark is reached, isn't that big deal.


Not quite what I was getting at here. Close, but not quite. Uhmari is a toon (his game project shut down a week ago without notice) and his expectations where absurd by any industry standard. When i say "Show me a 1k steam release" i am not saying "You must already be successful" as 1k on steam is pitiful. There are games that unilaterally got panned that had 1k steam releases. to get a 1K steam release for this game would would be like getting 1 kill in a teir 1 world of tanks battle, all it requires is that the developers to show up an try. That they take SS2 seriously as a game and a business and are interested in having more players. And no, i will not waste my money on clown shoes who do not care about game balance or player experience, we have all read enough steam reviews to know where that goes.

However, this would require the dev team to develop a skill set i am not cetain they have, the ability to look at the game from the perspective of someone who s not currently playing it. Massively OP content, or content that is disproportional to other content, is going to get downvoted to hell in steam reviews. Both buffers and PJD fall into this category, and what Enk has just told me is that he does not care that they are OP as hell, which means he does not care how the game looks to outsiders, which means he is not thinking about how the game will look to potential steam reviewers.

Which means we are going to get panned in reviews and get nowhere near 1000 players. Which means i will not be paying him any money. And if you think i am the only one doing this, you are mistaken, i am simply the only one who is continuing to play while waiting for steam.

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:32 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Peon
Main: Maxathron
Level: 2360

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:16 am
Posts: 5777
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
I personally think Buffer prices are fine because of the ridiculous team expenses you need IC/Colony income for. The average player can make a nice buck, but it takes more than one person to realistically produce the big numbers teams normally produce.

It's fine that you can basically buy component T0 IC to help produce T0.5 IC. The main cost is the commod that the T0.5 is made from. You need colonies for Cyborg Brigades, Promethium for SSB, and Enukes for SSR. All three are insanely profitable, but the raw commod income to make them viable is ridiculous. Like, when I say viable, I mean being able to sell 50k SSB per 3 days. You can use a trade bot to sell IC to an ai base, but either you get some ridiculously good panthers or you fortify those galaxies; either is more of a hassle than simply manual sale.


Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:47 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Operator
Main: Septagons Titan
Level: 2312

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:37 pm
Posts: 653
Location: Floof
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
lrellok wrote:
Max235 wrote:
Your proposition puts T0 Commods at maximum prices.


Strawman.


The only thing that is bothering me more than you repeately bleating out that word like a sheep is that you seem to either not care, or misunderstand what it means and what it applies to.


Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Peon
Main: Maxathron
Level: 2360

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:16 am
Posts: 5777
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
Septagon wrote:
lrellok wrote:
Max235 wrote:
Your proposition puts T0 Commods at maximum prices.


Strawman.


The only thing that is bothering me more than you repeately bleating out that word like a sheep is that you seem to either not care, or misunderstand what it means and what it applies to.


The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.

Rendghast's entire argument hinges on the very high default server values that represent very small transactions, numbers less than 100k of any given T0 commodity and Promethium/Enuke numbers that are below 1000 per day. However, a typical IC producer can produce billions of these commodities per same day (hundreds of thousands for Prom/Enukes).

He keeps throwing the phrase straw man out because everyone seems to not get that the "correct" price people should be buying and selling T0 commodities is this very high price that he sees when he adds trade goods to his base.

And of course everyone is dismissing his concerns because IC represents the bulk market, which does NOT use the same small quantity prices because the component T0 commodities are produced in such a quantity that it would effortlessly overwhelm the small quantity market.

Two universes ago, I had a personal galaxy. It was an average galaxy. It was DF180 (iirc), which is a reasonable DF for a newer team to fight for. If I could tap every single resource source out of that 1 star system, I would have at minimum 600m Metals, 500m Silicon, 300m Nuclear Waste, 400m Space Oats, and 400m Baobabs. Per day. I'm using 5000 credits per Steel Girder, 3000 credits per Sentient Chatbot, 8000 credits per Fusion Cell, 4000 credits per Fine Space Whisky, and 12,000 credits per Paxian Figurine. Those numbers come out to 13.3b credits per day potential out of that galaxy. At typical IC prices.

Rendghast wants to change T0 IC sale values to small quantity transaction prices. Using those prices alone, that gives me 54b credits per day from that galaxy on Metals alone. Even halving the money still comes to a ludicrous 27b credits per day. That's 1 of 5 commods. Totalling up *just* Metals, Silicon, and Nuclear Waste at the numbers he wants to use, the "correct" price, I get a ridiculously insane 234b credits per *day* from that typical WS galaxy.


Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:40 pm
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
Septagon wrote:
lrellok wrote:
Max235 wrote:
Your proposition puts T0 Commods at maximum prices.


Strawman.


The only thing that is bothering me more than you repeately bleating out that word like a sheep is that you seem to either not care, or misunderstand what it means and what it applies to.


A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.

Quote:
I can think of several options here.

1) Increase the sell price of the three single component t0 commodities to Sub Buff levels. This is in my view the worst option as it would entail giving people the ability to buy AI shop Materials and build IC infinity.

2) Drop buffer prices to single component level. This would enrage the current ws player base but probably be the overall best for the game, as it entails no risk of inflation and means you can no longer buy AI materials to build items. Also, it would encourage people to move up the IC chain a level or two.

3) Move t0 IC to Earthforce. As i have been consistently accused of proposing things benefiting myself even when i am making entirely neutral proposals, i will hence forward add one entirely selfish proposal to each recommendation i name simply to provide a point of reference for people. This would also have the added benefit of clearing WS of people who anticipate getting t0 IC but not t1 or t2 IC.


Maxa treated (and is continuing to treat) the option I specifically said was the worst as the only option i had presented, so yes, that does qualify as "Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version." Which is a form of Strawman.

I specifically state that Dropping buffer prices would be the better option.

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:44 pm
Profile
Member
User avatar
Team: Resident Evil
Rank:
Main: topbuzzz
Level: 4589

Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:31 pm
Posts: 4341
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
lrellok wrote:
Strawman. ONE of my proposals puts them at maximum, .


I thought a straw man would be a putting up a third proposal and attacking that, rather than your own proposal, which you admit his assertation was valid for?

_________________
Image


Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:57 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Peon
Main: Maxathron
Level: 2360

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:16 am
Posts: 5777
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
I don't see an issue with letting people buy T0 IC to make T0.5 IC. I did that when I had a shortage of certain T1 and T2 IC. It facilitates a market (however small) for those goods and raises the price of T0 IC (if you're doing Buffers in that quantity) or forcing the operation to utilize component commodities. You can't just do Metals only and expect to produce Buffers.

Promethium as a whole has always been extremely lucrative even before the advent of IC, and people used to fight wars over promethium belts, throwing Laconia and Demented kits into battle (Ada kits were way too expensive then) to secure belts. Once you start working with T20+ builds, you'll find that Promethium is used in one shape or another in 95%+ of said builds. Base related and high end equipment using some serious numbers of Promethium. Being unable to crack SSB back into Promethium is probably why the price is so high. If you could crack them back into Prom, in essence turning SSB into a Prom storage unit, then I would imagine their price would drop from the 500k range to the 200k or 300k range.


Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:02 pm
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
sabre198 wrote:
lrellok wrote:
Strawman. ONE of my proposals puts them at maximum, .


I thought a straw man would be a putting up a third proposal and attacking that, rather than your own proposal, which you admit his assertation was valid for?


This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.
For example:
Quoting an opponent's words out of context—i.e., choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent's intentions (see fallacy of quoting out of context).
Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then denying that person's arguments—thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated
Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version


THis is a perfect example

Max235 wrote:
I don't see an issue with letting people buy T0 IC to make T0.5 IC.


This statement implied that at any juncture i opposed people buy other peoples IC to build Buffers. At no time did i oppose that. I opposed people building AI base materials to build buffers, which is a completely separate proposition, as a player has to mine their resources to make profitable to IC while an AI station is effectively an infinite free material bank.

Max235 wrote:
You can't just do Metals only and expect to produce Buffers.


Also, at no juncture did i propose that people should be ablet o make buffers out of metals only. My proposal was that the prices of buffers and the other lower tier commodities should be a fixed proportion of the materials costs going into them. Neither of these responses has any relation to my original proposal, and would boarder on Red Herrings if maxa was not treating them as a response to something i had said.

Quote:
Promethium as a whole has always been extremely lucrative even before the advent of IC, and people used to fight wars over promethium belts, throwing Laconia and Demented kits into battle (Ada kits were way too expensive then) to secure belts. Once you start working with T20+ builds, you'll find that Promethium is used in one shape or another in 95%+ of said builds.
Now this is a full on red herring. Metals are also used in nearly every single build but the price of Steel GIrders per metals is significant less then the price of buffer per prom. In addition Metals in the form of Y extensions where extremely lucrative, so this is two non sequiters for the price of one.

Quote:
Being unable to crack SSB back into Promethium is probably why the price is so high.
THis is a Post Hoc Egro Porpert Hoc, as the cost reduction in t0 ic occured around the same time as the change of IC to mat storage. There is no reason why being able to use buffers as prom storage would lower their price, if anything it would raise their price as prom storage is very valuable. Had Buffers being breakable into prom and RETAINED a 1 million price, that i could see, but there is not argument made here why not being breakable would cause them to be worth more.

This ends our lesson in common logical fallacies, i would like to thank maxa for going through most of the basic ones in a single post.

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:36 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Peon
Main: Maxathron
Level: 2360

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:16 am
Posts: 5777
Post Re: Rebalance IC prices to All t0 are market viable.
Rendghast, I'm going to attack you. You're a git.

AI stations are not free infinite material banks. There IS a limit to which they will buy commodities. If you're ONLY doing small quantity transactions...like, 10,000 maximum of say, Metals, then the price remains high. But as soon as you start working with the more typical galaxies (aka w2 and up), you will find:

1. There is actually a limit to how much an AI base will buy for.

2. To keep up with your production of commodities, you need more and more efficient hauling (either manual drop off or trade slaves), of which will eat into your time to play or significantly degrade your trade slave network of the galaxy.

3. The scale of your production will vastly outweigh the consumption each AI base is capable of doing.

I have three AI bases in my sector of galaxies. Assuming I could maximum tap all of the Metals sources in that sector, I'm looking at 4-8b Metals per day. Those three AI bases are only capable of consuming something in the neighborhood of 30m Metals per day.

The difference between Metals and Promethium is this:

1. Metals can be found nearly everywhere. Looking at my sector, ten galaxies have 4-8b Metal production. Promethium cannot. From those same 10 galaxies, I think we have a grand total of 30 extractors worth for Fermium? We actually have no belts that produce Fermium asteroids; a teammate who manages our personal prod supplements his fermium extractors with prom imported from elsewhere.

2. Promethium decays and thus it is impossible to *automatically* store a large supply of Promethium without resorting to Industrial Promethium Crystals, which not every team or prod has access to. People (goofy) have dedicated freezer ships for Promethium, but that is a manual storage.

Cracking open a Sub-Shield Buffer nets you the same T0 resources as cracking open 1 Steel Girder, 1 Sentient Chatbot, and 1 Fusion Cell. It does not gives you back the 25 Promethium.

There is a limit to which you can profit off of SSB per day under current circumstances. Do note that the "massive" 1.3m price on SBB is due to New Universe and does not represent the normal price.

Research (aka me selling SSBs to Promethium IC bases) over the course of last universe has concluded that each AI base (of which there are about 10 in the universe) will consume about 15,000 SSB per 3 days, or about 5000 a day. Total Promethium production is a lot more than that, but I reason some people are either too lazy to sell, or are using that Promethium elsewhere.

It would take SSB being 200k to make it unprofitable for people, but I suspect anything below 400k average would be not profitable enough to use their Promethium operations for money making. The vast majority of Promethium operations are nowhere near Promethium IC bases.


Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:13 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.