Forums » General

Economy changes and manufacturing

«12
Aug 14, 2020 Pandoram link
So people keeps bringing up how CD built trident , but noone mentions the profit people made those days by selling TTM kits.

I do heard people around that time made easy 4b and more by selling 1 TTM kit.

I am willing to Grind like CD if i get people buying kits off me for 4b.

These days not even a vet with trident can even make 800m and buy a goliath kit off players.(F to newbies)

Grinding is supposed to be hard but not that hard , like you can't force people to kill voys and steal the loot to get supplies because people with Billions from past are going to buy all useful stuff from stations.

Idk why it is always us who has to adapt , we play the game more , we pay for sub all the time.

And those players seems disappointed now because they can't make good amount of credits anymore , seriously you want people to go deneb to do trading now ?

I kept helping the playerbase in their capship construction , in hoping they will stick to the game and more money for GS.

But now they all seems sad , because these recent changes took away their goals for which they built cappies.

If these changes are already making a few vets quit , you can't expect much new players to stick for a long time either.
Aug 14, 2020 greenwall link
the ability to amass a huge amount of credits is the ability to succeed as a Trader

Yeah, well, that’s like your opinion, man.

Also, Pandorum: just wait until the floodgates are opened.
Aug 14, 2020 Whistler link
"Idk why it is always us who has to adapt"

The point of VO's ongoing development, the closeness of the dev team to us, and the Suggestions forum, is that things will change and that the devs listen to our feedback. Sometimes the devs will make changes as a result of what we tell them, and sometimes they won't because they have a different perspective. VO adapts to the players as much or more than players adapt to VO. I would get tired of VO if it did not change and provide players opportunities to adapt and innovate.
Aug 14, 2020 davejohn link
The point of a dynamic economy is to make the game more interesting for all players.

As it stands very few commodities are ever traded, some stations are hardly ever visited. Traders know which items to buy and where to take them for high returns and the pirates know where to intercept them. The whole thing has become rather stale.

I see no reason why a working dynamic economy should not generate some very high profit routes but they would by the very nature of it not be static. A demand driven economy should be made to generate some high profit routes with unusual commodities to a wider variety of stations alongside regular trade and mining to supply the daily needs of all stations.

The fun part would be for the skilled trader to identify those high profit routes and make money while they last. Of course it would be fun for the skilled pirate to identify the trader doing it and stop them.

Surely that would put some life back into the game ?
Aug 14, 2020 incarnate link
I do heard people around that time made easy 4b and more by selling 1 TTM kit.

I am willing to Grind like CD if i get people buying kits off me for 4b.


Yes, Pandoram, but that's because you view VO as Progress Quest, basically a game in which you want numbers to go higher, and higher numbers must be "better".

But that isn't what VO is supposed to be. Success in trading in determined by the value that a trader is able to derive from their time (and hopefully also, the entertainment in our case). But value is not determined by the absolute number of credits in play, but rather how those credits are perceived.

VO has experienced significant inflation, due to the bugs I mentioned in my prior post. This meant that 4B became a less meaningful number than it had been a few years before. To make a real-world example, in the Weimar Republic of post-WWI Germany, they experienced hyper-inflation so terrible that it took a wheelbarrow full of their paper notes to buy a loaf of bread.

By your rationale, that would be desirable, because you just want larger "numbers". Why stop at 4B? Why not 4 Trillion? Because.. that would be dumb and pointless.

Similarly, at the time when CD had a Trident, they were incredibly rare and exclusive, so of course people were willing to pay a higher price, and you had people who had been playing for very long periods of time doing the purchasing. Now all those veteran players own capital ships (if they want to), so basically your market of "rich people" has become saturated.

My job is to do the best I can for the game as a whole. This isn't a new thing, it's how things have always worked here. I do take feedback from the players, but then I make my own decision and move forward.

As Ecka posted earlier (EDIT: and also reinforced above, while I was writing this), the value of a more complex and interesting economy is not just about manufacturing capital ships. It underpins a huge amount of the game, and the more nuanced it is, the more interesting gameplay can be. This is a good thing.

The idea that fixing runaway inflation problems and making a more nuanced and robust economy is "anti-trader" requires really extensive cognitive dissonance.

Pandoram, you in particular have always been unwilling to acknowledge that anything is "broken", as long as it makes "numbers go higher". It's part of the reason why you aren't on Suggestions anymore, because your contributions amounted to objectively terrible gameplay advice, as they were always built around your own personal desire to see "Credits" get higher, or whatever other number you could examine, regardless of how negatively it impacted the rest of the game.

The design of games like VO isn't about making one particular person happy, by increasing "a number" in their stats, it's about making the entire system reasonably balanced across all types of play and interaction.

The process of balancing things is always upsetting to someone who is accostomed to the way things "are". This is why I get to endure players being upset at me when there "isn't enough change in the game" and also just as many people being upset when there "is change in the game". It's certainly all the more challenging when we have to fix something that's been broken for a long time.

But some people will understand why the changes are better for the game as a whole. Others will want to give feedback and provide input on how the specifics are implemented (to the betterment of all). Still others will just never be happy with change, and perhaps the game isn't a good fit for them (and that's okay!).

This game changes, it has for 18 years of live operation, and it will continue to do so as long as I'm involved. Hopefully players will continue to help me change it for the better, by providing feedback, but, I have to move forward regardless.
Aug 14, 2020 rkerst link
Every newbie wants a cap ship. As soon as they see one in space, and hear on 100 that players can build them, that's all they can think about. When they find out how hard it is, they quit. I think this is bad for newbies, annoying to vets, and bad for VO.

If you want this to stop, you must raise the bar. Not in terms of grinding, which is already stiff enough. In terms of game accomplishments before you get to start. Higher levels, some number of bot or player kills, kill a Levi first, be premium subbed for a year, set a minimum number of hours in game. Anything that says to a newbie, you're not ready yet. Play the game for a while and do some stuff with light ships first.

Re earning creds, I note that there is a vigorous player market for all kinds of stuff, including complete Trident kits. If you reduce the money supply too much, you will force this market out of existence, which I think would be bad for VO. Kindly think this angle over before you tweak the economy.

I think grinding for advanced small ships should be lessened a little. I would like to see B8 come back. If you drop the bar for Valks and Proms, and raise it for cap ships, I think the game will vector in the right direction. Tweak, observe the response, tweak again etc. until you're happy that VO is what you want it to be.

I also think players should be able to buy ships outside their nation, possibly with strict requirements. But that is another discussion, and I am about to get slammed by ratdom just for typing that one sentence.
Aug 14, 2020 incarnate link
Every newbie wants a cap ship. As soon as they see one in space, and hear on 100 that players can build them, that's all they can think about. When they find out how hard it is, they quit.

Actually, a lot of them quit once they realize they have to spend $10/month to get one. Then they write angry one-star Play Store reviews about this realization.

If you reduce the money supply too much, you will force this market out of existence, which I think would be bad for VO. Kindly think this angle over before you tweak the economy.

No, it won't force the market out of existence. But, I do understand your concern.

Yes, I do think about this stuff before I do it. In fact, I've even delayed changes for years, while building big analytics systems to record information, so I can make data-driven decisions instead of just simply doing things willy-nilly based on my personal opinion. I make no claims that my decisions are perfect, but they are generally considered and studied at some length.

I'm not looking to kill off capital ship construction / trade activity. I think that much will become self-evident before long.
Aug 14, 2020 tradervyx link
More valid points made. VO gameplay is diverse so please devs keep it balanced... I never see a trader complaining about rats..and asking to nerf them
Aug 14, 2020 biretak link
I think it is important to leave some reliable routes for new players. Don’t want newbs quitting too early. We need more newbs, not less.
Aug 14, 2020 incarnate link
I think it is important to leave some reliable routes for new players. Don’t want newbs quitting too early. We need more newbs, not less.

Ecka just wrote, above:

I see no reason why a working dynamic economy should not generate some very high profit routes but they would by the very nature of it not be static. A demand driven economy should be made to generate some high profit routes with unusual commodities to a wider variety of stations alongside regular trade and mining to supply the daily needs of all stations.

The fun part would be for the skilled trader to identify those high profit routes and make money while they last. Of course it would be fun for the skilled pirate to identify the trader doing it and stop them.


Which is exactly what I'm trying to do.

A likely part of the reason why Ecka has that perspective, is because it's actually closer to how the VO economy worked (albeit simplistically), at one time. There used to be a far greater value to wandering and "discovering" trade routes. Bringing that back, and also making the whole system more dynamic, only makes the game better and more interesting.

The concept that static routes are "necessary" and the only way to "keep newbies" is a false narrative. We had an economy, without static trade routes, for years. It was better than the recent situation, not worse.

Static trade routes are boring and grindy. If the goal is to allow new people to accrue credits more quickly, we can do that without static trade routes, and still have a better game (like I wrote in my initial response, regarding profit-per-unit-time).. That's better for newbies, better for retention, better for everyone.

Trading profitability has nothing to do with the existence of static routes. People need to separate those two concepts in their heads.. they're unrelated.
Aug 14, 2020 Pandoram link
"This game changes, it has for 18 years of live operation, and it will continue to do so as long as I'm involved. Hopefully players will continue to help me change it for the better, by providing feedback, but, I have to move forward regardless."

18 yrs isn't a joke seriously hats off to you sir , yea i also feel you ,
some people are upset all the time.

Inc i was just doing this arguements for my friends and upcoming player base.

I want more people to play and stick to the game , it is still best space mmorpg no doubt.

Also i'm not vouching to add statics again , all i was asking is a little better profit and better reset timer for trade routes.

I don't see how it will negatively effect the game.

Tbh i won't argue anymore if you already made up your mind.

If your doing this , you must have a good reason to do it.

Take care o/ Long Live VO
#GSLivesMatter
Aug 14, 2020 We all float link
If you drop the bar for Valks and Proms, and raise it for cap ships,

The bar for Valks and Proms is pretty low already. If a new player hooks up with a major nationalist guild, they can participate in Border Patrol. Border Patrol allows player to fast level to high enough levels to buy Valks or Proms (depending on their nation). Fast meaning: less than a week. Really dedicated players can do it in 48 hours. For a brand new player, i'd say seven days more or less. 14 days max if they are really slow at learning combat concepts.

I don't know how much lower you want it. SVGs and IBGs can be acquired very early in the leveling process.
Aug 14, 2020 look... no hands link
First off, I must say I've been enjoying this thread quite a lot. There has been very little sniping amongst the various posters, plenty of disagreement, but those are largely aimed at the IDEAS presented, not the PERSON giving them fourth.

The 'dessert space bus' issue is why I don't do any trading to speak of, some occasional hauling for my own logistics, a bit of faction repair, and spilled cargo recovery is about it for me.

That being said, some people do seem to enjoy the 'dessert space bus progress-quest' aspect of trading and will trundle stuff hither and yon with no goal for the credits they produce other then making the pile higher. Perhaps what they want to to see how high they can make said pile?

A part of the problem for me at least with trading is that I've no clue what to do with the cash I've already stolen. My best guess is that at my current rate of expenditure, I'll go bankrupt somewhere around 2040 or so.

I see two ways to fight inflation, supply and demand.

On the supply side payouts for trade routes could be lowered. This tends to anger some people, but does increase the value (how much work it takes to acquire) of currency, but not its usefulness (what I can get for it).

On the demand side prices for existing purchasable things could be increased by some factor. This brings with it a host of other problems I've stated before, though which thread it is escapes me at the present time. It works by tightening the money supply, decreasing the usefulness of currency. A universal difficulty increase is the best way I can describe it.

Also on the demand side NEW building things could be introduced that require a great many large and raw material intensive sub-assemblies to build. This I think is the best solution. Incarnate teased the new trident variants some time ago. I think this will help some with giving usefulness to credits.

I do not know how many 'dessert space bus progress-quest ad-infinitum' players there are in VO. I suspect a low-value, low-usefulness currency would probably satisfy them.

Either way I will be interested to see what Incarnate does in the future to the game.
Aug 15, 2020 tradervyx link
Just for the record, people, including myself don't just trade to see the pile of credits grow and grow... Once I reach my desired amount, I go and do other things like skirms, mining and farming stuff... It is a means to an end for me.
Anyways
Long live VO!
Aug 15, 2020 biretak link
Inc, I use my credits to pvp. If they dry up, I’ll be broke. Why don’t you show us the other system is better before getting rid of the current system? You could phase it out and we won’t miss it cause we won’t go broke because we haven’t exploited the previous system.
Aug 15, 2020 biretak link
In the alternative, reset every individual and guild total credits to 1 million. Then the new economy starts fair.
Aug 15, 2020 incarnate link
Why don’t you show us the other system is better before getting rid of the current system?

No one will use the "new system" if there's a trivially exploitable set of trade routes that never degrade. Why would they bother to learn about it, even?

Plus, half the point of doing this is to normalize expectations about relative income from trading. We can increase it, but not to what it was with the super-broken static routes. Otherwise, we'd have the same inflationary problem as we had before.

This discussion is also not about making things "fair", it's about making the economy reasonable. "Fairness", or the perception of fairness, is a completely different discussion. Keep in mind, there will always be people who played longer than you, and earned their credits. Not everyone exploited static routes, or was even playing during that period of time.
Aug 15, 2020 biretak link
Inc, thanks for the additional explanation. I will wait in anticipation for further opportunities for profit and I hope to be able to contribute to the universe.