Gold Trading Discussion and Feedback Thread

DeletedUser46838

Guest
Arms hark, they are great suggestions, HOWEVER, thry are just " Beta Testing" it pretending they are. These days, has there any modifications? No. I've suggested on the develop a bunch of tips and restrictions but received no reply.

imagejpg1_zpsdd212e95.jpg


PS Joseph Nieves got your message :D


Saska you do realize one little thing. You receive gold for resources right? Here's a scenario, and I'll be very realistic about this

Scenario:

I have resources and you got the gold. You give 10 gold for 10,000 wood ( as the picture shows) now you got the resources AND the gold. While I just lost all my wood and can't build anything. That's why I dislike this a lot. No matter how much they tweak it, it will become a pay to win game.
 

DeletedUser44167

Guest
I just cant see me using gold to buy resources

I can put a request in the alliance forum for 5k silver
and get buried in silver :S

World map is covered in ghosts and inactives and
the Harpies are pecking at the bit to be unleashed

You can buy a CP for 50 gold (Olympic Games)
that be 48.000 resources if it was a festival
so resources be worth less than 1 gold per 1000

I could click on "Earn Gold"
Always a few "3 gold" advertisement vids to watch
Made 9 gold today
 

DeletedUser20948

Guest
The trades are roughly the same in other beta servers where the WW stage isn't active yet too
 

DeletedUser40768

Guest
I am fully versed in how the game works, and how gold can be used to a players advantage. I have played small accounts at the beginning of worlds and larger accounts as the game progresses. I played with gold and also with out, so I have a very board point of view in relation to how this could affect the game.

The farming was added to the captain if I recall because the caption wasn't used early on in the game by most players, adding that feature to the captain made that advisor evenly balanced in terms of how much they were used.

Maybe the captain wasn't getting used early on, as the commander is not used very often early either. However the captain gives a 20% ship fighting bonus, the attack planner, shipping resources off island is 2x faster, and them the farming village overview. Right now it is very useful, especially considering the captain gives multiple things. The other advisers gives one or two added benefits, the captain gives four. Yeah the conversation is for another thread, but the point of it was that those would be things that could really help non premium players with no gold without having to try gold trading which take a lot of resources to get enough gold.

I don't think it matters if someone thinks I can buy this in the market instead of using my debit card, because the gold has to be purchased by someone in the first place to end up in the market place, So in theory it wont affect revenue as if gold is the market place it has already been purchased by another player. I will add in I doubt (maybe wrong) that a player could earn enough gold in the game to combat buying gold (if that is the normal pattern) unless they were giving away an awful lot of resource which in itself would be counter productive, depending how the market goes you maybe able to cover an advisor or two but I doubt could fund all the -25%, and halving build times.

The point about not enough gold being put in the market place in the first place while is possible price would drop to almost nothing so 1 gold could get the maximum traded amount, so gold players would start purchasing it leaving the market to manage it's own price removes a lot of the blockers, and to be honest if you can in affect buy resources anyway with the -25% and the merchant this will have little impact overall in the game bar it gives away of spreading the gold around about instead of hitting the -25% button and giving it back to IG.

If I can save 25% the cost of the building for 25 gold, but at the same time I could go in the market and spend the same gold on getting the resources that is a much better option as it means the player that I trade with can use the gold instead. - The end result to the gold player is the same, but the non premium player gets the benefit.

The feature will not change the players who are already spending money on gold, but for the new players who see it in the market it could affect whether they want to. People in general like to take the free way, so if they are new to the game I am sure most of them would have no interest in paying for gold that is readily available in the market. If it doesn't affect revenue, and the idea is lopsided more to the people offering the gold, then there is no need to implement it. Probably you couldn't get enough gold on the market to do everything, but there are still free gold offers from Sponsor Pay available even if it is tedious.

Also later on resources are still needed, to rebuild nukes and for city festivals mainly but they are still useful later on. Especially during WW time as the Beta World is now in. So 1 gold for maximum resources is a lopsided deal, once again 1 gold itself can't get you anything. Yes 25% cheaper building construction saves resources, but unlike this feature it only cover buildings. Won't affect the cost of troops in the barracks or harbor, academy researches or anything else. This will essentially make it way easier to play, as you can be rebuilding your nuke and still have enough resources to construct buildings, put silver in the cave, etc. Then for the player who use the save 25% on a building, and also has gold on the market, he can build his city up without ever seeing a real loss of resources. That would be unfair and hurt non premium players.

Summary: Sacrificing resources for gold often will not be worth the resources you put in, unless someone make a mistake and types in one too many numbers when putting a gold offer in. There is not one thing about this feature that benefits a non premium player more than a premium player, making it unbalanaced and subject of abuse is many areas. As someone just pointed out, buying a culture point costs 50 gold while a city festival cost 48k resources total. I am still against the idea, and I hope that like with that Harbor Check incident, they will listen to the opinions of the players across each server and leave things as they were before the idea.
 

DeletedUser46838

Guest
Rock, you are using a screen shot of the beta server right? now if I am not mistaken that world is in the wonder stage where resources are plenty full, would I pay 10 gold for that much wood - I am honestly not sure I would pay that, using the Beta world as an example of the market only works if you show the state of the world so the top 10 players, so we can see the size and state of the world.

10 old for 10k resources on a brand new world would be out of the question, however on a world where the players have 20/40/60 cites for example it is a different matter.

You example of losing 10 in resources and not being able to build anything is fine as the beta world is later stage (and to be honest not a true representation of how it would work in reality) and you would have other cities to build in, plus you can hold 25500 resources in total so 10k still allows you 15k to build stuff in reality.

Doing that trade 10 times, would get you 100 gold, and cost you 100k resources, but lets for sake of argument say you have 10 cities, you could use the merchant and get 210k per city back over the course of 14 days so in essence you have a net gain of 2m resources. (210k * 10, - 100k).

The fact you start with 2400 gold make things a whole lot different.
 

DeletedUser46838

Guest
If you guys are wondering, one gold = 0.4 cents....so.... You are also saying 4 cents = 10000 gold. And people who spend money get 25000 bundle and they would be getting 25 M resources? This is insane
 

DeletedUser22940

Guest
I should let it be very clear that if Innogames introduces this feature, in any manner, I will be calling my Grepo career quits. Unfortunately, the simple fact that my post has not been "approved" on the DevBlog indicates that Inno will implement this feature whether we like it or not. No matter how many controls they put in place ,the reason for my departure is for the simple fact that Inno ignored their loyal fans and customers completely by implementing this in the first place.

I will, however, put my 2 cents in on how to balance this. Hopefully my input will help to soften the blow for any of my fellow warriors that decide to continue on the hunt after this is implemented.

In Game Economy

This is the biggest issue that I see. By implementing this feature, in any capacity, you will be creating an in game economy. An economy that, at it's most basic level, converts real money to in game resources and from player to player. There will need to be strict regulations around this or things will go bonkers. We could either wind up with players obtaining mass amounts of gold for minimal resources or vise-versa.

I would recommend one of two solutions for this:

- Establish a set ratio range at which players can trade gold for resources (and vise-versa). This is not a number that I can come up with since a ratio like this will never please anyone in every situation (as BT alluded to above). This will need to be established along with a per diem cap on trades, per player.

- Eliminate the player to player aspect. Introduce a once-daily merchant (such as the existing one) that will offer you certain deals that would function similar to the trading idea that is proposed. This merchant would not be able to be re-summoned. This would also eliminate the bully/extortion issue that several of you have expressed concern over.


World Hopping

Many of you have expressed concern over players entering worlds, making mass profit, accumulating said profit, and then joining one world to spend all of aforementioned profit. This is a very real concern of mine as well. It would create a severe disadvantage to players who did not take advantage of this tactic.

My solution for this one is simple - create a new currency. Make it silver or something like that. Any gold earned through this feature would be converted to silver and cannot be used on other worlds. This would also make players think twice about trading via this method and make trades more meaningful by making a player have some lvel of commitment to the current world.


Early World Advantages

If player to player trading is implemented, even if they restrict the currency to the world it was earned on, we will have the issue of several players joining the world with "friends" that will help boost their gold (silver) amount and/or resource amount.

Another simple solution - do not allow this type of trading for a certain period of time after a world starts. Even better, make it a minimum player points in order to participate in this type of trade. My suggestion would be 25K points.


Anyway, those are some of the main issues with my proposed solutions. I should also point out that even if all of my "solutions: are implemented, Inno will have an influx of bots and cheaters which will cause a tough decision (a) increase moderation/security costs or (b) let them run wild.

What I do not understand is that there are so many other ways to increase players with gold available, revenue, etc.... that I really just don't understand the logic behind implementing this controversial idea. I have made a couple of suggestions in my previous posts so I will not reiterate them again.

In my closing statement, I would implore Inno to do some research on games that implement features like this in order to increase revenues (cannot see why Inno would do this otherwise). A good example would be when Blizzard implemented the Auction House on Diablo 3 so that they could try and make more money on a game that already made them millions. They wound up deleting the feature in order to preserve the integrity of their game.

Anyway, off to go kill things in Nysa.....good luck with the petition.

~Saint/ED

P.S. - I should also add that all this talk about being the "vocal minority" is hogwash for the simple fact that there is no other medium of communication on this. It has not been expressed or announced in game. This is the only place that we can communicate. Therefore, based on the sample size, we are it......
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser23986

Guest
I am going to oppose all proposed restrictions on this feature, especially the ones like gold earned this way is not transferable stuff...

MY thoughts-

This should be available in select worlds, that is, it should be made a world setting.


thats exactly it. If people want a 'pay to win' world, they should get exactly that. Those wanting gold can go there and mine it, bringing a bit more balance in other worlds.

-Gold spenders on 'pay to win' worlds are happy.
-Gold miners on 'pay to win' worlds are happy.
-More players have gold, so we have a more balanced game in other worlds.
 

DeletedUser42857

Guest
I am going to oppose all proposed restrictions on this feature, especially the ones like gold earned this way is not transferable stuff...

MY thoughts-

This should be available in select worlds, that is, it should be made a world setting.


thats exactly it. If people want a 'pay to win' world, they should get exactly that. Those wanting gold can go there and mine it, bringing a bit more balance in other worlds.

-Gold spenders on 'pay to win' worlds are happy.
-Gold miners on 'pay to win' worlds are happy.
-More players have gold, so we have a more balanced game in other worlds.

And gold miners can still use those worlds to harvest gold to give themselves a big advantage in other worlds, so your solution fails to cover a major flaw in teh whole idea.
 

DeletedUser23986

Guest
And gold miners can still use those worlds to harvest gold to give themselves a big advantage in other worlds, so your solution fails to cover a major flaw in teh whole idea.

As long as it is option to everyone, i don't see whats wrong? You can do that, if you can't buy gold for some reason.

And I don't think with enough miners, anyone is gonna get thousands of gold. So whats wrong, if more players can now afford the advisors. Its only more balanced, as anyone would be able to afford advisers.

PS: Good news is devs are now working against bots, so that won't be a trouble either.
 

DeletedUser36743

Guest
I like the idea and think it will help level the playing field (instead of the opposite as many here suggest)...

a few thoughts on abuse control

1) Gold earned through trades in a world can should only be usable in that world...cannot be transferred to another world (this is so peeps dont start harvesting gold in multiple worlds to use elsewhere)

2) Trades to be suspended during BP

3) Trades to be blind in the marketplace so peeps cannot 'fix' trades....

4) Gold Trade to be permissible if the Marketplace is atleast Level 15

5) There should be a trade limit per city per day.....this would need to be tested and tweaked....to my mind it should be lower in young worlds that have started out and should progressively go up as the world matures

these are some that come to mind now...will add as I think of others

Edit
6) Have a limit on the Trade ratio like exists at present (1:3)....lower trade ratio in early worlds and this to go up progressively as the world matures
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I like the idea and think it will help level the playing field (instead of the opposite as many here suggest)...

a few thoughts on abuse control

1) Gold earned through trades in a world can should only be usable in that world...cannot be transferred to another world (this is so peeps dont start harvesting gold in multiple worlds to use elsewhere)

2) Trades to be suspended during BP

3) Trades to be blind in the marketplace so peeps cannot 'fix' trades....

4) Gold Trade to be permissible if the Marketplace is atleast Level 15

5) There should be a trade limit per city per day.....this would need to be tested and tweaked....to my mind it should be lower in young worlds that have started out and should progressively go up as the world matures

these are some that come to mind now...will add as I think of others
the thing is I guarantee you most gold users will take advantage of those desperate or even a scrap of gold and make completely unreasonable trades, so it won't even anything out
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Let's just scrap it and just stop with this nonsense.

honestly I have an idea that could have spared inno all this trouble, as they're obviously implementing this, but it's a very complicated idea so I can see why they couldn't come up with it, but they could have asked us if we liked the idea BEFORE they made the coding for it.
 

DeletedUser46838

Guest
Well obviously half of Grepo is going to quit. So why risk this?
 

DeletedUser36743

Guest
the thing is I guarantee you most gold users will take advantage of those desperate or even a scrap of gold and make completely unreasonable trades, so it won't even anything out

Well lets say you want to take 'advantage' - first for you to do so...it requires a lot of persons who are willing to give (donate) resources for gold... big assumption....yes there will be those who will try and game the system...but fortunately as common sense does exist...it is unlikely that you could put an outrageous trade and see it to conclusion everytime (exceptions aside)

Second dont forget the person who is supposedly at a 'disadvantage' now gets some gold to use as he/she wishes...Also dont just assume people are pining and hungry just for a scrap of gold...

Now expand this to 20,000 players in a world....and the system becomes sort of self correcting...

For example how may times have you put a trade with 1:3 ratio in the marketplace and seen it concluded (and how soon) ?...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser46838

Guest
The only way I'll accept if the trade ratio is at most 1:4 ratio or else I quit
 
Top