Gold bar market discussion

[Vane]

A smaller idea can be join to the requirment of GB for ships : the more boats sail the more they wear out. Thus, if they have an amount of time for loosing x% and at the end, every player will have to renew his fleets. this make a complementary use of GB and of any other ressources required for building ships.

We already pay upkeep daily. I think this would reduce the amount of ships sailing as players will want to cut back on those costs. That is exactly opposite of the direction the game is trying to go. We want more ships, larger fleet sizes, more shipping. This idea for GB's in my mind is counter productive.

[Stan Rogers]

At the speed some players climb a national rank, GB could be req't for more senior ranking missions perhaps.

[Haron]

Stan, that would actually be a side effect of requiring that gold bars be used to buy influence.

[Stan Rogers]

Well, I'm still hoping for new stuff to spend GB on like port cannons

[Haron]

Sure, that would be fun in many ways! :-)

[Haron]

Several points have been made about how an increased demand for gold bars si desired. Preferably for something that's done regularly (which is why I suggested goldbars instead of gc should be used to buy influence).

However, Danik also raised another point, which I don't see anyone addressing: Is it a good idea that gold smiths are pointless until they reach a very high level? Technologies generally have the property that each level gives you the same gain (from level 0 to level 1 gives you the same extra advantage as going from level 19 to level 20), while the cost to aquire each level increases with level. In my opinion, this is a good model. That means that to some players, certain techs will be worthwhile at low levels, but not at high levels. For the gold smith, it's an entirely different story. There is no point AT ALL in a low level gold smith. Making gold there will simply make you LOSE money. This is, in my opinion, a bad design. It would be better is the level of gold smith regulated only how fast gold bars could be produced, for instance. Regulating how many gold bars it can produce per unit time. By regulating the number of gc required to make a gold bar, gold smiths become useless at low level, and gives a potentially huge profit at max level (although with the tremendous cost, it still takes quite a while to get the investment back). I think this is something which should be considered for revision.

Or make the first 15 levels of gold smith into one single, extremely expensive and time consuming level, to show anyone considering this what minimum investment is necessary to get a gold smith at a level worth having.

[Vane]

I disagree Haron, the idea behind it is to limit the number of goldsmiths working in a short time frame. A player needs to spend lots of time working towards the wealth required to become a goldsmith. By doing so the influx of bars stays lower. If it was easy then the amount of bars sitting in ports would double making any goldsmith's job useless.

The hideout is meant to be expensive and take lots of time to progress through. It is not meant, and this was stated before launch, for everyone to be able to afford without great time and resources at their disposal. The other point made at release was that banks and goldsmiths would be intertwined. You want the capital get loans and pay them off when your profiting from said smith. I know one lad who did this very well and even wrote a basic guide on the principal .

[DezNutz]

I also disagree Haron. Again this all comes back to supply and demand. There is currently more supply then demand. Low level goldsmiths will become relevant when the demand exceeds the supply. The less GoldBars in the market, the more expensive they become. They more expensive they are at the market, the easier it is for a low level goldsmith to make a profit.

[Haron]

I disagree Haron, the idea behind it is to limit the number of goldsmiths working in a short time frame. A player needs to spend lots of time working towards the wealth required to become a goldsmith. By doing so the influx of bars stays lower. If it was easy then the amount of bars sitting in ports would double making any goldsmith's job useless.

The hideout is meant to be expensive and take lots of time to progress through. It is not meant, and this was stated before launch, for everyone to be able to afford without great time and resources at their disposal. The other point made at release was that banks and goldsmiths would be intertwined. You want the capital get loans and pay them off when your profiting from said smith. I know one lad who did this very well and even wrote a basic guide on the principal .

Which is fine enough. But why have 10-15 levels that can never be profitable? Would it not be better to have just 5 levels, then, where the first level has all the costs and time of the first ten or so levels today?

I don't have a gold smith myself, but can understand the disappointment of those who build one, just to find out that it's useless, and that the investment needed to get it profitable is WAY more than what that first level cost them.

[Vane]

So level 1 costs what the first 15 do, now you have 19 levels of bar cost reduction making the profit obtained absolutely ridiculous.. then when demand exceeds supply your making insane amounts more..

What you propose means a complete overhaul of the building cost per level "and" the cost reduction in bar production per level... which would mean making the goldsmith either less profitable per level (I see several current smiths who won't be thrilled with that one), or making the goldsmith construction costs higher in which case now you make it 3 times as hard for anyone else to get into if they wanted to...

Waste of developer time, when the current model does what it was intended to. As for the "disappointment" after building the first level and finding out its more expensive than you can afford... well, live and learn.

Perhaps the old discussion on "demolishing" a building for a percentage of investment returned might help solve part of your concern?