Implemented A Fair /tp Market

Discussion in 'Factions' started by Gumee, Jul 19, 2018.

  1. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    I've announced it periodically, but I'm not a fan of the current--or I guess technically "old"--marketplace at /tp market. This is an old concept I posted ages ago, but feel the need to revive.

    I'd much rather see a grid shaped market center with color coded "blocks". Each block would have the same amount of shops, each with the same dimensions to work with. Every single shop, despite location would have an equal cost to rent.

    Now here's the most important part: When a player does /tp market, it warps them to a random intersection within the market. This grants equal advertising opportunity to all shops, instead of just the ones that pay the most money to hold an "elite" shop.

    Why is this design a better concept than the old version?
    For starters it prevents players from monopolizing the center shops and literally holding them for the entire three years I've played massive. Second, it allows more diversity in buying choice, creating a more dynamic market. No longer are the "rich shops" the price setters. Players now must gauge their prices based on shops within their "block" or, in all honesty, the entire uniformed market. If I spawn in near the orange market section one day, and find a price I like, I'll then return to that shop consistently. However, if the next day, I spawn near the blue market and find a shop that sells the item for cheaper as I walk towards the orange market, I'll start shopping there. This makes the market far more competitive and interesting. More players are able to participate, as the barriers-to-entry grow more marginalized than the previous model, thus making the massive economy more active and "healthy".

    I've attached a diagram as the simplicity of the layout probably isn't articulated as well through text as it could through visuals.
    [​IMG]

    Each colored block represents a color-coded (wool, clay, whatever floats your boat) section of a market. Each block would have several rentable shops available to the players. The off-white strips in between symbolize the main road. The pinkish rectangles adjacent to four blocks on the road resemble the fairly distributed spawn points that could be randomized. (Keep in mind that each color block represents a cluster of shops.)

    What about the lag????
    Well, if ya'll remember, the current/old iteration of /tp market had three rings. Entering each ring was like entering a different world. Instead of making rings, just divide the 4x4 block rectangle into four 2x2 smaller rectangles and make each of those its own "separate world" to solve the lag issue in the same way.

    EDITED COUNTER ARGUEMENT TOWARDS THE CLAIM THAT /TP MARKET SHOULD BE REMOVED:
    A centralized market does not degrade the factions world, it supports it. Having each faction run their own shops is problematic on several levels.

    First off, if each market is based on factions, it's increasingly difficult to regulate when needed. It makes far more sense to regulate market spaces through server-side player permissions than "unspoken agreements", server rules enforced by staff, and bureaucratic process on the forums. Those three things act as barriers to entry, making it harder for new players to interact with the economy, therefore making the market far more monopolized. Would you rather a large faction create Walmart-esque super shops that function like rich-shops that everyone goes to, while the smaller factions shops are ignored for having less selection/deals. Or, would you rather all market deals take place in a neutral territory where all players have equal space/"advertisability". A centralized market that promotes equal opportunity in the market, like the model suggested, is the most capitalistic and perfectly competitive option. It will boost trade, promote engagement with the economy, and insure trade happens in a stable environment.

    If you believe that there won't be enough space, a grid shape is easy to replicate and reproduce to expand. If you notice, the current market is full of empty slots. Those who want to participate, can and will under this system.

    The claim that faction-based shops will promote immersion and travel is false. What will most likely happen, is that players will set up portals and /tp fhome warps to their shops for convivence. Most of these shops will likely be underground bunkers similar to how darkrooms exist in their current state. This isn't any more immersive than a staff-built marketplace that could be rented by either players or even perhaps factions if that tickles your need for immersive political and socioeconomic relations.

    Having privatized shops that the owners can control, means that there will be exclusion among buyers. This is anti-capitalistic and stalls the economy. It will slow economic growth as all people won't be able to engage with the economy. If the player base was as large as the U.S. population, sure it wouldn't matter if one firm shut down production or stopped selling to certain players, then another firm would pop up and take its place to fill the demand. However, since we're looking at an average of 200 players (at best) indicated by prior massive player counts, if the major shop closes or rejects a player, there isn't a lot they can do other than farm for the materials themselves. The longer they spend getting supplies, the less they can spend building large cities or kingdoms and participating in faction disputes.

    By having a centralized market, when you spawn in randomly you'll be forced to look at new shops almost every time you visit. Therefore, you can examine several offered prices and visually gauge the worth of items. This makes it far easier for new players to know how valuable their items.
     
    • Constructive Constructive x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    #1 Gumee, Jul 19, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2018
  2. EmpressEvie

    EmpressEvie Inactive Plant

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    107
    I actually love this idea and totally support it. It'd be nice to have a different style market, especially one that allows other shops to succeed rather than only the rich shops.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. Alj23

    Alj23 Regalian Citizen

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2013
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    235
    From this thread.

    Honestly, removing any form of a /tp market is in my opinion a great idea. MassiveCraft has always prided itself on a 100% player ran economy, and while this held pretty much mostly true, I always felt like the /tp market kind of broke the idea. Why? Because anyone that managed to get one of the richshops on the first day of each version of a market release was pretty much grandfathered in and could make so much cash until the next version of the market, and even after that if they quickly grabbed up an ideal shop in a new version.

    I like there being no /tp market in the new server for two very big reasons:
    1. Player with richshops could pretty much grind money off of uninformed/newish players. They had a shop that could be seen as soon you did /tp market, and with the server announcements saying something along the lines of "For all your item needs, visit /tp market!", they could essentially be grinding money from people while they're offline.
    2. Chest based shops will now only be able to exist in the faction world, which takes being a merchant back into the faction world and integrates with all the conflict and drama of the survival world. Don't like someone? Blacklist them from your shop. At war with someone? Issue sanctions against them and their allies to force them to surrender. People will actually have to work to make their money from their new shops as they have to advertise that they're even selling stuff in a shop at their faction, rather than the server doing it for them automatically.
    We're also going to see a boom in trade chat usage from people advertising their faction shops and hopefully auctioning stuff off in the first few weeks/months of the new server as prices jump all over the place and people that don't want to put in the time to grind for an item just decide to buy it instead.

    All in all, no more /tp market = good.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Constructive Constructive x 2
    • Immersive Immersive x 1
  4. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    It appears your first beef with /tp market involves how you dislike rich shops monopolizing trade. This suggestion aims to remove that, as I clearly state, it was a huge issue that I disagreed with in the previous model. The entire point of the suggestion is to equalize trade closer to a perfectly competitve model instead of a monopolistically competitve model.

    Now you’re second idea involves how you think trade should be solely based in factions/survival. Call me a pessimist because I am—and for good logical reasoning. This is nice concept, except it won’t function well for a few reasons. For starters, little troublemakers like my faction exist. Imagine travelling to a neighboring faction to trade, then having an inventory full of supplies, just to be killed by a group of players scavenging popular trading areas. Second, this style of trade creates a higher skill wall for new players. Attempting to join an integrate into an unregulated, heavily volatile, location-based market is incredibly difficult. They’d have to learn all the factions with the best deals, and how to navigate and trade amongst them safely. Third off, local trade like this just increases the probability of scamming. I’ve already thought up several ways my faction could abuse a system like this and make a profit over people’s unpreparedness (I won’t disclose any, as to not give out an ill-mannered ideas too soon).

    If you want massive to have a stable, player run, economy, then trade needs to have certain elements.
    1) There needs to be a known, common area for trading to go down, in which there is no advantage or power difference between buyer and seller.
    2) There needs to be legitmacy and safeness to the deal, otherwise players will be hesitant to engage in trades and gamble away their belongings or regals.
    3) There needs to be constant competition, that can be visualy observed between competitors, to create a “dynamic and living” economy.

    Also with this idea, trade chat still gets a boom in usage as players can now advertise specific locations: “Come find Gumee’s shop in the Orange block for the best prices on ender pearls!”.

    If you really want it to be roleplay/faction controlled, then perhaps advocate for factions to rent out sections of blocks. For example my faction, Vanos, could have a series of stalls and call it “The Vanosian Trade Caravn”. The stalls dont have to identify with players, if you’d rather they identify with factions.

    All in all, /tp market = good
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    1. That can easily be achieved through advertising faction shops or coordinates. There is always a power difference between buyer and seller- one has the item that the buyer wants, the other doesn't. You'll find in most cases the buyer is more desperate than the seller is, which in turn creates a power dynamic.

    2. Scamming is already illegal, regardless of where it takes place. If you're talking about deliberately camping shop locations, that can also easily be countered by the owner of the shop making the base unraidable.

    3. Constant competition can be observed through the use of Faction recruitment and trade chats. A "dynamic and living" economy doesn't get produced when you have essentially 20 players making a vast majority of the sales on the server.

    Sure, you can raid shops and kill people trying to buy stuff. In turn, everyone else will raid you and kill you when you want to buy things. It doesn't end well for people who do that.

    /ti c works regardless of location.

    It wouldn't be if people were advertising it often, which they would be doing if /tp market was removed and they had a shop.

    Potentially, but it also improves the general "vibe" of Massive- that there's a whole world out there to journey into, and a world they NEED to journey into if they want to acquire building blocks or that new God Sword they've been saving up for.

    I don't get it tbh
    you simultaneously want safe trading environments, yet campaign for the removal of portals. Surely not removing portals would contribute to a safe trading environment?
     
  6. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    First off, this and the portals thread are two seperate ideas with seperate consequences and ramifications that come along with their implications. They are mutually exclusive ideas, capable of being implicated with, or without the other.

    Now, as an economics student and server admin for several servers of various sizes and styles, I can confirm that local-world based trade does not stimulate a virtual economy as well as having an isolated neutral location would.

    I agree that the player based survival world trade meets my criteria for a stable player run economy, the thing I’m saying is that it doesn’t do it as efficiently as possible.

    There is an equal power balance between buyer and seller economically yes, but literaly there isn’t a power balance between two players if the trade is taking place on someone elses faction. You don’t walk into a merchants home and ask for their good or service, they have a neutral place of business for a reason.

    Second off, you can’t have a shop that’s unraidable. The idea of a shop is to have customers enter in order to shop. If they can’t enter, they can’t interact, and therefore they can’t buy anything.

    Your ideal, dream faction that’s trade oriented most likely won’t be full of top class PvPers. So they’ll need allies to defend them. If I were raiding, I’d just wait for their defending faction to log off, and then heckle and harass buyers to take their items through PvP. You’re prentending like the entire server will blacklist us, for bullying a few small trade factions and interupting those deals. That’s just not realistic because we’ve had allies who’ve come to aid us, regardless of our worst behavior. Plus you’re acting like people will swarm to raid us after one transgression because we were purposely provactive in the past, and people still refused to come raid us. It was one of the reasons we stopped playing (aside from PvP becoming a clone of every other kit PvP server and “massively” boring). So no, people will be able to get away with pummeling trade factions into submission.

    Your next arguement makes me think you haven’t read through my post in its entirety. This method aims to remove those “twenty players” from becoming the monopolists of the economy. This layout provides equal access to shops for all players, and doesn’t discriminate based on wealth. It pushes perfect competition and frowns on monopolistic competition. Each block unit could house multiple storefronts. Randomly spawning in means you’d have to walk through other people’s shops to find the one you’re looking for. Its a clear, record base for any player. A newcomer can easily log in, /tp market, and instantly gauge the worth of an item in their inventory.

    Now if you want to cross reference posts, what kind of backwards ideology wants to keep portals but still have an immersive world and “vibe” that you “NEED” to journey into to get supplies. What difference is there to /f home Faction or walk through a portal, or to just do /tp market. One won’t lead to economy spiraling out of control again. You’re limiting trade by scattering it, and adding a layer of convolutedness to it. By letting it distribute this way you also lose the ability to regulate it from an adminstrative side, if need be.
     
  7. Zacatero

    Zacatero give a quack to wingback
    1. *✴︎ Cadun ✴︎*

    Joined:
    May 2, 2015
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    1,439
    @Gumee I must say that's the best argument I've heard so far in favor of keeping the centralized Market
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    I can think of some ways to make a shop unraidable. An easy one would be to have a public iron door with known raiders removed from access to stop them from getting in, though I don't know if you can do that with the current lock system. Also, a server rule could very easily be implemented preventing PvP at dedicated shop zones for factions that make applications, with the unapproved faction shops being raidable. No one ever said you'd be making a shop in your f homr- you'd probably have a dedicated area for it.

    I remember things very differently regarding pvp at vanos. I remember your faction being deliberately obnoxious and cowardly when "raiding" other factions through the use of flywater pvp. Then when peoplr raided you, usually KINGs, you'd scream in ally chat and get Deldrimor to defend you and you wouldn't come outside to help. I know this because I fondly remember fighting KINGs on YOUR soil because you couldn't be nothered defending your own land. There's videos on my channel about it probably

    What if someone can't get one of this shops? What if the slots run out? Then it's still trade limited to a set number of people. Though, if your shop has hundreds of stalls this could be remedied.
     
  9. Mazukii

    Mazukii Vanosian Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    3
    This would just lead to a decentralized Rich Shop dynamic. Mega factions would essentially become the Rich Shops because they have the influence to get their shops “PvP proofed” and therefore would have the draw that smaller trading factions would not be able to afford. Also, if your argument against abusing trade is disabling pvp/dampening raidability, what is wrong with the current system of having PvP disabled in a centralized market? Market, as it is now, is PvP proof, provided you warp back to your faction base after purchasing your items. I fail to see how scattering the market around the map just to disable PvP for huge trade factions is any different than the current system.

    This entire section is irrelevant and in no way disproves Gumee’s suggestion. Calling us obnoxious doesn’t make us wrong, especially when this is a serious suggestion post. Gumee knows how to separate flame/pvp chat from a well written, intelligent argument and he has clearly illustrated that here. This is unbecoming of a blue name.

    You solved this issue yourself.
     
  10. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    ...
    Except it isn't?
    It's a direct refutation of what he said about quitting the server because "no one raided them," which is categorically and demonstrably untrue. Is it so out of line to call your faction's FlyWater PvP over 2 years ago obnoxious, considering he himself called your faction "little troublemakers?"



    That's just one of the videos of the countless raids on Vanos. Can be safely assumed that Vanos was in fact raided.
    That was the part I was refuting ^, unless you mean to say that wasn't part of his core argument.

    Preferably the system would be available to everyone, not just "mega factions." Say it with me. Centralised markets are bad. Double bad if they're not in Factions, as it takes people out of the Factions gameplay, which is the exact thing that we don't want to happen.
     
  11. Zacatero

    Zacatero give a quack to wingback
    1. *✴︎ Cadun ✴︎*

    Joined:
    May 2, 2015
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    1,439
    I mean just look at the market now. The only people that have shops are the ones with all the money.

    the solution we want is to have it so everybody has an equal chance.. and the people that don't have a lot of money aren't behind the people that do have money just based on the fact that there are only X many richshops...
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Constructive Constructive x 1
  12. easels

    easels mami

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    15
    @Winterless
    Hey there Synth, just wanted to remind you of a few things in regards to how you think the shop should work! First off this isn't a small-scale server and the thought of using an iron door to manage a shop system is pretty much laughable - using a centralized market would look more collected and professional, rather than an after thought that was conceived by a clearly out of touch player (you).

    Secondly, why go through all of this trouble to make pvp-less zones within factions when all it would do would is enable players to camp their during raids, especially in larger factions like yours, my sweet, where the player base is probably inept when it comes to pvp. And hey, at the end of the day we may have used fly-water but after enough of your tantrums, it got nerfed. If you’re really still crying about how we used fly water to pvp over a year ago, I don’t know what to tell you, king.

    Also, just wanted to add that one of your main arguments is that we were annoying. Regardless of your emotional beliefs young man ): and the fact that apparently we may have hurt your very sensitive feelings; its ridiculous to try to debunk good suggestions because you're upset someone you don't like thought of them and not yourself, the all high and mighty. take the L and stop trying to be sevak. :/

    Although, to be fair, we do love a degraded king here at Vanos.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    I'm going to ignore the insulting remarks towards my prior faction, because I know the statements to simply be inaccurate nor is it entirely relevant.

    Basically, what I'm hearing is that you're advocating for shops to be scattered around the faction map, but receive the same treatment as a /tp market. It makes a whole lot more sense to just locate shops in a specific area, than have these random one scattered around the map and having server rules that need to be enforced by staff instead of player permissions.

    I do appreciate the insight that you're worried about size constraints. I think that's an appropriate concern. The beauty of a grid shape, is that it is easily replicable and not difficult to increase in size. If you go to the original /tp market, you'll notice that many shops are unused. These blocks could house several storefronts, lined up and stacked if need be. If all those get taken up, I see no problem with the area being expanded and more randomized spawn points being added. Each block on the visual aid does not represent a singular shop, but rather a cluster of them.
     
  14. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    Also to clarify @Winterless, this statement that you quoted:
    "Plus you’re acting like people will swarm to raid us after one transgression because we were purposely provactive in the past, and people still refused to come raid us. It was one of the reasons we stopped playing"

    I was referring to the two years after Vanos's first couple months. I agree, that we had a wild head start, as KINGs went for us when we were still a baby faction gaining equipment and skill. At the time, my axes and skills stat on McMMO were still under 100. However, after KINGs got bored, PvP began to slowly die down for us, as people grew bored of losing to our antics.
     
  15. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    Say it with me, you have no proof. There is no logic in stating that "Oh the last server factions was boring, and there was a /tp market". Correlation does not equate to causation. There were far too many variables in play that led to the downfall of factions in the last server. You cannot blame /tp market for ruining "immersion" as it was not the only factor. As I've stated previously, if you wish, you can tie factions to shops rather than players if that fulfills your trade roleplay fantasies. Having a /tp factionmarket where factions can sell goods and deposit the earnings into the faction bank is still better than no centralized market.

    Look at the player support for this thread, you're the only one who is providing dissenting opinions. Perhaps you shouldn't make the same mistake that old massive did and ignore its player's best interest to fulfill an unrealistic fantasy vision constructed by exclusive staff meetings.
     
  16. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    I was under the impression that you could blacklist people from a lock, i.e. make a public lock and then add people that can't access it to it. Seems like you can't, though I'd imagine it wouldn't be a hard change to make.

    Why would it enable camping? Again, a rule could easily be made "do not camp trader zones." I remember back in the Arma 2 DayZ mod that was a universal rule on every server, that you couldn't camp a safezone within 2km of the centre. That seemed to work fine, no reason why it wouldn't work on Massive as well.

    Nope, my argument was that people did indeed raid you despite your claims to the contrary, and that the cause of these raids was likely because of your flame in general chat and your use of FlyWater PvP, a behaviour that was unanimously despised by the PvP and Factions community throughout its existence. If people raided you for that, they'll definitely raid you for being bandits at trader zones. I know I will.
     
  17. easels

    easels mami

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    15
    @Winterless
    Stop trying to make this about our behavior and you wanting to raid us - join the club. A good staff member wouldn't allow pettiness and his emotions to cloud acknowledging a good idea lol.
     
    • Cuddles! Cuddles! x 1
  18. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    When did I ever say that?

    It was a big one for me. The whole "medieval RPG" aspect became far less impressive to me as a new player once I discovered /tp market.

    Ignoring the dangerous arrogance in that paragraph, there was a community desire for tp market to be removed, else we wouldn't have made the decision to remove it in the first place. Why do you think I joined staff? I joined the staff team in the first place because I felt like it didn't have enough player input. I can tell you that is absolutely not true, and that player feedback is what prompts us to make changes in the first place.
     
  19. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    Here's what I have to say. It's not going to be successful, and if the new server intends to truly remove /tp market and not replace it with a better one, then I'll just repost this suggestion when it starts to fall apart. Here's my specific reasoning behind it, enjoy.
     
  20. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    It's got nothing to do with my "pettiness and emotions." I'm refuting a direct claim that people didn't raid Vanos, which I have shown not to be true. You have acknowledged yourself as a group that you were deliberately provocative, so let's look at the definition of obnoxious.

    "annoying or objectionable due to being a showoff or attracting undue attention to oneself" (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/obnoxious)

    Would you say that you were being deliberately annoying, i.e. PROVOCATIVE, to get undue attention and get people to raid you? If yes, then it worked and people raided you, such as KINGs. If FlyWater pvp and flame in chat counted as provocative, you can be damn sure that killing people and harassing small trade factions will also be provocative enough to gain the attention of people who want to raid you.

    So you're saying that the reason PvP died down for you was because they got bored of losing and thus didn't react to you in chat?

    What was it you said, that correlation =/= causation? Is that not what you just assumed right there? PvP died down mainly because everyone was busy, i.e. the owner of the most prominent PvP faction on the server going to college, etc. That sort of stuff creates a chain reaction and results in EVERYONE quitting PvP on the server because there's no one left to fight. It happened then, it happened literally like 4 months ago, and you can see it happening way back when with Magnanimus/Spectec going inactive, resulting in a massive drought of PvP on the server. That's when smaller factions rise up to take old faction's places, the very people you seem to enjoy raiding into the ground for the sake of being annoying and edgy and "provocative".
     
  21. easels

    easels mami

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    15
    @Winterless

    I'm still extremely confused as to how raiding that happened 2 years ago has any relevance when we're discussing a implementation for the future moving forward. If you spent less time upsetting yourself over the past you would probably be able to see how creating a central market - essentially a server mall - makes more sense than placing trust into players and expecting all of them to be fully capable of single-handedly upholding and supporting and entire server economy.

    Also Synth, you can say whatever you want about how we do or did handle ourselves in chat but if we chose to pull up your chat logs from two years ago, since apparently two years ago is relevant to right now, I'm sure we would see plenty of your flaming and "edgy" comments - especially the ones you chose to make in ally chat behind closed doors. We flame but at least we do so in the public.

    If this is your attempt at trying to be sevak you're failing miserably.
     
  22. Zacatero

    Zacatero give a quack to wingback
    1. *✴︎ Cadun ✴︎*

    Joined:
    May 2, 2015
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    1,439
    I'm pretty sure he was saying use massive lock, which is the best lock plugin out there... Not just an iron door...
     
  23. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    Because one of your mates directly asserted that your faction was not raided despite provocative behaviour, which I showed wasn't true. Therefore, it can be concluded that his assertion that no blowback will come from annoying or provocative behaviour is untrue.

    Sounds remarkably anti-capitalistic to me. "Citizens cannot be trusted to run the economy, therefore we the state must intervene and decide for them." That is the exact definition of a centrally-planned economy.

    Oh yeah, I was a flamey bastard two years ago. Still am tbh

    Though, I don't see what that has to do with anything, considering the question was about your faction's provocative behaviour and its effect on raids, not mine.

    The implicit threat isn't lost on me tho bigman, feel free to release the chat logs from 2 years ago of me being the antichrist, I'd like to have a good laugh, especially one in a coat of nostalgia.
     
  24. easels

    easels mami

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    15
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    If you have a staff complaint, please direct it to Staff reports. Feel free to debate me about in pm all you like.
     
  26. Mazukii

    Mazukii Vanosian Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    3
    Please stick to the topic. I've read through the replies to this thread and still fail to see how our behavior has anything to do with server's economy. While you certainly proved we were raided two years ago and threatened to raid us in the future yourself, I fail to see a consistent argument to the core of Gumee's suggestion which is, since you've seemed to lose track, that a centralized marketplace provides the most efficient, most egalitarian system for the economy of the server. Instead, I have read through 8 replies which attempted to take us on an illogical tangent. To be clear, I am not attacking you. Frankly, I don't care enough to.

    Now, you have made some serious suggestions towards the topic. However, rather than refuting the point that a central market works, they instead point to how a scattered economy could work on the server. I agree, that you could make a base shop, curate your clientele, and live a happy little life underground. Except, no base is completely unraidable. As long as a patron can get in, a raider could get in.

    Furthermore, what stops the development of a shop-traps? You get the regals, then lock your clientele in your base and kill them right after. What about shops that claim closer to world spawn? Those shops will get inherently more traffic because new players will not have to walk to visit those shops. While you could argue that factions could set up portals to their shop in order to bypass this issue, that would require a new player to grind the resources to be able to make a connecting portal to be able to access a shop. You could also argue that a faction could set up a /f home. This is entirely impractical for any faction that isn't a pure trading faction, or isn't a mega faction that can spare some fac power to create a separate "shop" faction. Therefore, creating a shop would be completely nonsensical for small to mid sized faction and/or any factions that are not trade focused. This would force people towards becoming trade only factions in order to remain competitive in the economy, pushing them underground, away from PvP and RP, and into a strict resource farming cycle.
     
  27. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    ...
    Rules?

    Or they could join a faction with portals to that shop, or they could use a public tp that someone has set up with portals to various shops.

    What about people who can't buy premium to advertise their shop every 30s? What about the people who can't afford the rental cost? Why are you even assuming that people will bother to check every shop for the best deals? I sure as hell don't when I use /tp market, I often just go to salemslot because there's no reason for me to waste so much time checking every shop for getting an item at 1 regal less. The fact of convenience still becomes an issue here, all it means this time is that you're trying to prevent them from running to the shop that they know they can get an item at a set price for by making them randomly tp.

    Not really. If you set up the f home in the shop, and then have a door locked for only faction members that leads to the real f home, it wouldn't add any noticeable delay for faction members. This also has the added benefit of being able to disable f home abilities for raiders by doing /f enemy and preventing them from TPing. Circumventing that by using a different faction or by joining wilderness could easily be enforced through logs.

    Step 1: I argue that raiders would be discouraged from attacking people in shops because it would lead to community backlash and thus the argument of "a safe trading environment" is null because people wouldn't attack shops out of fear of being raided into the ground

    Step 2: Vanos member 256 asserts that this is not the case, and that provocative behaviour does not lead to raids, using their own faction as an example

    Step 3: I prove that Vanos were indeed raided in the past due to their flame and toxic behaviour ingame, therefore showing that people are indeed raided for their actions in Factions and thus proving that "a safe trading environment" could exist outside of a /tp market system.
     
  28. Mecharic

    Mecharic I'm tempermental, deal with it.
    1. The Second Alliance

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    1,043
    I do not like the idea of a server-handled marketplace, but if one exists it should be designed like this.

    Why don't I like the idea of a server-handled marketplace? Simple: It breaks immersion, renders faction marketplaces useless, lessens the need for interfaction/intertown travel/interactions, and looks ugly to have 50 identical shops next to each other.

    What I think SHOULD happen: Factions can act as Merchant Factions and set up large marketplaces of their own design where players from dozens of other factions can set up their own little shops or service centers. Such factions would be allied with most of the server - including most PvP factions - and would actively prevent people who start trouble from buying & selling in their marketplace. That would be the method of regulation - after all, I don't think a single rampage through a marketplace is worth your entire faction never being able to access that marketplace again.

    Just my thoughts on the subject.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Constructive Constructive x 1
  29. Mazukii

    Mazukii Vanosian Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    3
    This would mean that new players would be forced to join factions that have established relations with merchants in order to get easy access. Therefore, new players would be less inclined to start their own faction in favor of easy item flow. I don't mean to sound rude but that would be in your interest, wouldn't it? The drive for new players to come join your faction empire, rather than start their own?

    It is a fairly reasonable assumption people will bargain hunt. In fact, that is exponentially more reasonable that people would come to your shop because of your prices rather than your advertisement game. And for someone whose main argument is essentially "this is more like capitalism", you really asked that middle question? If you make money in your shop, you can rent the shop again.

    I'm still waiting on an explanation as to how your system is BETTER than this system. I would like an explanation beyond what essentially boils down to "I can ban you from my shop because you hurt my feelings." So far this system still seems the most practical, easiest to implement, most egalitarian, system to players with the added benefit of staff being able to regulate should there be a need.

    Congrats! You proved toxic players lead to raids! Still doesn't stop us from camping in our "PvP disabled shop" adjacent to our base in order to keep the god gear we stole off of you, does it? :/
     
  30. Mecharic

    Mecharic I'm tempermental, deal with it.
    1. The Second Alliance

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    1,043
    Okay, first off, don't you dare say that Winterless is opposing you for selfish reasons. That, besides almost certainly being wrong (It's not like Winterless is the only faction leader out there) is also immature. I also feel the need to point out that new players would still need to gather up the 300 or so regals needed to rent a shop, and THEN supply it - they won't be arriving on the server and spontaneously opening up a shop in your marketplace either.


    But then you never get access to more god-gear because nobody is ever willing to trust you again. You lose access to the merchants (and thus the ability to buy/sell items and make money/get gear) as well as making enemies out of everyone you've attacked, which can result in steady sieges on your faction to the point of driving you off the server. And even if you make your own market, who would ever trust you enough to shop there? You'd be cut out of the economy entirely.
     
  31. Mazukii

    Mazukii Vanosian Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    3
    I didn't accuse him, I insinuated it. If the shoe fits, he can wear it, just as any other faction leader calling for a scattered-market. It seems like a reasonable assumption given I have yet to be provided proof of why a scattered economy is better than a centralized one other.

    This is a completely fair and valid criticism, and I thank you for putting us back on track. I would argue lowering the regal cost to own a shop. Supplying a shop is a challenge for anyone, but the cost for supplying a shop would be time, with a minimal equipment cost, and this issue isn't exclusive to the central system, as any shop, scattered or central, would need to be stocked. Players won't join and open up a shop, and that is completely valid. I would argue that new players would funnel regals towards these shop factions, again, the closest ones to world spawn or ones that have enough power to make separate shops.

    If I get banned from shops because their owners don't like me, I will just sit on my pile of regals and not contribute to the server economy which would stilt any progress. And I would say, I could simply become the shop that preys on new players.
     
  32. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    >Implying that going to a market with random TPs and searching for an hour through shops is less alien to a new player than joining a faction

    Not true whatsoever. It's always been the shops that advertised more in chat that get more customers. That's why people advertise. The ONLY exception to that was SalemsLot because of its easy tp access and wide variety of items, which became known to other players through ADVERTISING. Why would people know your shop has good prices- are you assuming that every new player will have the patience to search through every shop, and won't just keep buying from a shop they know? That's a big assumption and goes against human nature of habit.

    You posted an idea, I'm explaining why it isn't a good idea, and elaborating on the alternative. There's actually very little burden on me to "show" you anything, unless the burden of proof suddenly doesn't matter anymore.

    Huh, must be Shoulder day with all that reaching you're doing. And for the record, I try not to recruit new players since Belegost isn't equipped to deal with newbs, and more often than not they end up bored and steal things instead of playing actively.

    You can throw around "egalitarian" apl you want, but buzzword soup doesn't change the fact that it is your opinion on a feature idea propoed by your faction member.

    Until me or any other upstanding citizen of Massivecraft teleports in, kills all three of you in under a minute, and promptly has your access revoked and your faction publicised as bandits and thieves, after which you won't be able to buy anything from any faction shops.

    Crime doesn't pay
     
  33. Zacatero

    Zacatero give a quack to wingback
    1. *✴︎ Cadun ✴︎*

    Joined:
    May 2, 2015
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    1,439
    I'm totally 100% fully against the idea of the server giving out PVP-Free zones. At that point we might as well just have a /tp market.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  34. Zacatero

    Zacatero give a quack to wingback
    1. *✴︎ Cadun ✴︎*

    Joined:
    May 2, 2015
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    1,439
    Yeah... @Mazukii idk.

    I mean after a bit, there will be a settled economy and stuff will cost basically the same across the board with no more than 1 or 2r difference.. at that point its about convenience not bargains.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  35. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919
    Correction- you would be banned from shops because you steal items and disrupt what is supposed to be a public facility.

    That kind of reaction demonstrates the kind of attitude that you have, and makes me highly doubt that your intentions are "egalitarian" with this idea since you've admitted your intent to bully new players and small factions trying to make money in the Survival worlds.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  36. Mazukii

    Mazukii Vanosian Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    3
    E X A C T L Y
     
  37. easels

    easels mami

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    15
    • Immersive Immersive x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  38. Mazukii

    Mazukii Vanosian Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    3
    Read the thread again if you don't get the point he's making. I can't explain reading comprehension to you.
     
  39. Gumee

    Gumee Flywater Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    30
    This is the exact point I've been trying to convey. Its redundant to have PvP free zones, so let's skip all the unnecessary bureaucratic systems that will need to be enacted as issues surrounding the removal of a /tp market and instead, let's just build a /tp market the right way from the start.
     
  40. Winterless

    Winterless Very super famous Supremium
    1. Argost

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,472
    Likes Received:
    919

Share This Page