Traders Feedback

[De-Legro]

Define "abuse".  There are ways to get around the no loss limitation, but it makes sense that it is there to being with. I see a trade offer from another realm at 40 and a region in my own realm with a buy order of 25 who will need the food, who cares if I take the loss?  It helps my realm (or my aims) so be it.

The problem here is that in the majority of cases taking the "loss" would be appropriate. However as soon as that is opened up you can guarantee the "stats" players will find a way to use it to increase the power of whatever realm is their favorite at that time. In some ways similar to how some players place characters in peaceful/rich realms for no other reason then to accumulate gold for the family to send off to their "active" characters. Sucks that we have to take precautions like this to try and limit the minority of players from playing against the spirit of the game, but that's a fact of game development.

[Azerax]

The problem here is that in the majority of cases taking the "loss" would be appropriate. However as soon as that is opened up you can guarantee the "stats" players will find a way to use it to increase the power of whatever realm is their favorite at that time. In some ways similar to how some players place characters in peaceful/rich realms for no other reason then to accumulate gold for the family to send off to their "active" characters. Sucks that we have to take precautions like this to try and limit the minority of players from playing against the spirit of the game, but that's a fact of game development.

1. Get rid of family wealth/asking for money
2. The minority who exploit weighs more than the majority who don't?  (Don't quote Captain Kirk to Spock!)

You might as well get rid of movement towards regions because some other family members might just fake it and not actually travel.   Get rid of messaging because someone may tell a lie to another player.

Taking a loss on trading can be a powerful political tool, or even just good hearted realm love.  Don't tell me that as Banker of the realm I can't spend my own coin to feed my own country because some schmuck may game the system.

[De-Legro]

1. Get rid of family wealth/asking for money
2. The minority who exploit weighs more than the majority who don't?  (Don't quote Captain Kirk to Spock!)

You might as well get rid of movement towards regions because some other family members might just fake it and not actually travel.   Get rid of messaging because someone may tell a lie to another player.

Taking a loss on trading can be a powerful political tool, or even just good hearted realm love.  Don't tell me that as Banker of the realm I can't spend my own coin to feed my own country because some schmuck may game the system.

Every change needs to be considered in terms of the potential and scale of possible abuse. Thats simply a reality of game development, otherwise you soon are only left with the minority that constitutes the abuses as all the regular players leave what they will refer to as a "broken" game. There is a good reason pretty much every game EULA talks about not abusing "exploits"

For similar reasons the maximum price is limited on the market.

[Sypher]

Doesn't it only limit traders who aren't region lords? As a region lord you can create your own trade offers and take the loss by doing two trades.

[Tom]

Define "abuse".  There are ways to get around the no loss limitation, but it makes sense that it is there to being with. I see a trade offer from another realm at 40 and a region in my own realm with a buy order of 25 who will need the food, who cares if I take the loss?  It helps my realm (or my aims) so be it.

It's not the traders job to take a loss. If you see such an offer, talk to the 25 region lord and tell him that if he offers at least 41, you can get him the food he wants.

[fodder]

question... you can't actually talk to the lord unless you walk to his place. perhaps when you are at a marketplace, you should be able to message the lord/steward who have offers up?

for traders/steward only

[Kai]

and the mechanics that manually requires you to repair your men's equipment, send out scouts, travel, join a religion, pay guild dues, etc?

Repair depends heavily on battle which is directly influenced by players. Food is the same week on week and the main variation in food harvest is RNG droughts. The rest of those examples are obviously irrelevant. Note that pay your men is automated.

[egamma]

Repair depends heavily on battle which is directly influenced by players. Food is the same week on week and the main variation in food harvest is RNG droughts. The rest of those examples are obviously irrelevant. Note that pay your men is automated.

That's why I didn't say men's pay.

Judge examples: fining nobles, banning nobles, visiting prisoners
Ambassador examples: drafting treaties, signing treaties, diplo work

I can go on all day.

My point is, without buttons to push, you won't have a game to play. Trade is a set of buttons--without them, there's less game. Some people don't like the trade game. They can stop being region lords, maybe be a duke only, maybe just a simple knight. There's plenty of game left for region lords who don't want to mess with food.

Also, there are regions that don't need to mess with food week after week. Towns, badlands, forest, mountain--all these region types have to deal with food infrequently. It's only city and rural lords that have to deal with food on a weekly basis.

[Azerax]

It's not the traders job to take a loss. If you see such an offer, talk to the 25 region lord and tell him that if he offers at least 41, you can get him the food he wants.

My trader character has been treated extremely well by his realm (and given the chance to be banker when he was unknown), his love for his realm causes him to want to be generous when he can as a thank you.  Under the old system I took losses constantly, but his income covered that.  In the current system you can get around it by being a region lord, so it just punishes those that are traders, but not lords.

I won't keep arguing this, if this is how it will stay, so be it.  I just haven't seen any compelling argument against it. (well, Because I Said So is one, and I'm actually fine with that)

best regards,

[Tom]

There are several reasons, from small to large. One is potential abuses, including back-and-forth trading to drive up the statistics graph, possible as long as trade is instanteneous. But there's also the trading skill gains that would need to work differently, and many other areas where the system could be gamed.

But the main reason is that trading at a loss is a rare exception that does not justify opening so many jars of potential issues.

[Kai]

That's why I didn't say men's pay.

Judge examples: fining nobles, banning nobles, visiting prisoners
Ambassador examples: drafting treaties, signing treaties, diplo work

I can go on all day.

My point is, without buttons to push, you won't have a game to play. Trade is a set of buttons--without them, there's less game. Some people don't like the trade game. They can stop being region lords, maybe be a duke only, maybe just a simple knight. There's plenty of game left for region lords who don't want to mess with food.

Also, there are regions that don't need to mess with food week after week. Towns, badlands, forest, mountain--all these region types have to deal with food infrequently. It's only city and rural lords that have to deal with food on a weekly basis.

I don't think you understand me. The entirety of this could be replaced with buy X00 per week, just like mens pay, and not at all like mens repair. Can you replace fining with fine X nobles per week? Write N treaties per month? It's not a game when there's no decisions to make, unless you count pleading people to put buy offers every week to be a game.

[Tom]

That's the gist.

Automating payment of your men is easy, because the amount is fixed and the only choice you make - when to pay - does not carry very much consequences. Food trade is different, it is highly consequential.

[vonGenf]

That's the gist.

Automating payment of your men is easy, because the amount is fixed and the only choice you make - when to pay - does not carry very much consequences. Food trade is different, it is highly consequential.

Actually, it's not so much the buying itself that could be automated, because as you say it is a complex process: how much to buy, where to buy from, the timing of the buying. However, the posting of buy and sell offers could easily be automated as it can be easily be fixed in advance (e.g. post a sell offer for 50 bushels at 20 gold every 7 days). The traders can handle the rest.

[De-Legro]

Actually, it's not so much the buying itself that could be automated, because as you say it is a complex process: how much to buy, where to buy from, the timing of the buying. However, the posting of buy and sell offers could easily be automated as it can be easily be fixed in advance (e.g. post a sell offer for 50 bushels at 20 gold every 7 days). The traders can handle the rest.

Yes, and as has been said many times, there is currently work to provide some sort of automatic system.

[vonGenf]

Yes, and as has been said many times, there is currently work to provide some sort of automatic system.

Yes, and thanks for that! Sorry, I didn't mean to push or anything. Keep up the great work!