Sorry, was not trying to be even remotely serious with that statement.
Too late. Already making a hurt feelings thread
This thread is disjointed…what is this about? I think I missed something.
Some kind of planetary economy scanner that’s coming in the next patch. I think it allows to see item prices and locations on a planet.
Oh…I see. Thank you.
refrains from further comment
I like it, it’s kinda similar to some parts of my old idea for same planet trading.
" A new machine, planetary trading machine. This machine would allow you to access all other planetary trading machines and teleport the item you want to you at the cost of postage on top of tax. Additionally you will be able to see a location token/coordinates where you can travel to. This machine will only list shops in that planet.
How will it work for shops scattered around that planet?
Upon a player being able to create the machine they can place the machine in a beacon area thus allowing any requests/shop stand in the beacon to be listed across all planetary trading machines."
Why? With portals it is not like players cannot get to any planet they want. The only reason I can think of is to avoid competition between shops on different planets. Not sure why that would be a valid reason to not do it.
Arbitrage and similar activities are part of the entertainment that some people are looking for in a distributed economy.
I feel it is the shop owners responsibility to turn off the tracking to their shop when the door is locked for the locked door shops.
I did run into this with the boundless trade website, but less than a handful of times. and I learned which places not to go when looking for those items. Therefore never went there again.
I do get the frustration, but maybe you want “members” prices behind a certain door, and its in the same beacon. the whole beacon gets taken off even if only 10 out of 100 stands are behind a lock? how do we control this? blocks can also prevent interacting with a stand (signs I see doing this all the time), so it would become a manual process to sort all these out I’m afraid, and I don’t think there is a Dev in the world who has the time to sort through every single beacon with shop stands in boundless, let along each stand itself.
On testing, individual stands can be made to opt-in or opt-out to the system, or they can follow the beacon preference (which may be on/off).
You can still arbitrage even with the info. Happens in the real world finance all the time even with all the information out there. There seems to be some assumption that store owners are going to adjust their prices every time they see they are selling for less or more than someone else. I think some will not have the time to do that or might not be playing at that time in order to do that. Others may feel the cost they are incurring justifies their price.
I was referring to the “invisible hand” of the devs filtering things out if people couldn’t get to it. I would be more than happy to filter out individual stands if I used a “member only” section. I don’t have plans to ever actually do it.
The patrons section seems to try and correct this issue from the get go, and I don’t see why it couldn’t be implemented without a blacklist option, I can remember when a shop is attempting to trick me into giving them free footfall.
Right and it’s a trade off.
This retains some of the effort and reward cycle of dealing with separate markets. There are some people, likely a fair amount, that definitely won’t be bothered to monitor all 50 planets but who would travel as far as it takes to save one or two coins, etc…
Whether you enjoy some realistic economic simulation or not is a matter of preference, of course. And TBH the current situation with no concentration is a little much for me. I personally feel it’s a decent compromise.
I’m really not supportive of every person having the lowest price in the universe on a toplist for comparison at all times.
Perhaps a next page option would be nice? And eventually filter shops based on price and patrons. (With a cool down, if they don’t received patrons after so long their ratings goes down)
This looks like it’ll be an amazing update. It seemed to be one of the most common thoughts lately that we need a bare minimum market along these lines.
Hopefully a lot of people are working together in testing to cover all the scenarios we will see in-game. Without a mock settlement in testing, some practical aspects may be overlooked.
Kinda agree. Maybe it should be randomized instead of the cheapest.
Couldn’t a top-16-cheapest-store/stand list easily be manipulated by someone making sure they always have one stand with a 1c/giveaway price on that one item?
I think it would make sense, if each planet showed up separately. Lore wise the planets are many blink seconds away, so data would not transfer instantly to each. So each should have a slightly different economy, if we want to keep some lore feel to it.
It would also minimize travel times I think if they were on same planet
If someone abuses the system with inaccessible stands at low prices then either their beacon will be banned from advertising its plinths or the player would be cautioned and then banned.
For migration of existing worlds, any selling plinth with 0 prices or ridiculously high prices is defaulted as not discoverable (people use this for easter-eggs in their beacons i’ve seen)
Testing 230: World Shop Scanners!