Base Prices tweak?

[Captain Jack]

The more we analyze and study the future, the more things we need to tweak to go forward. This time, it is base prices.

Here are the current base Prices (at the bracket, their fluctuation):
Wood 8 (-3,+4)
Iron 12 (-3,+4)
Tools 20 (-4,+5)
Cotton 6 (-2,+4)
Food 7 (-2,+4)
Rum 11 (-3,+4)
Tobacco 10 (-3,+4)

Proposed

Food 10 (-3,+3)
Cotton,Wood 9 (-2,+4)
Iron 10 (-3,+3)
Rum 13 (-3,+3)
Tobacco 12 (-3,+3)
Tools 16 (-4,+4)

Also:
Warehouse Tycoon +0.5% per level instead of 1% (we are working through the numbers)

[Cutpurse]

how about increasing base price of both rum and tobacco both to 12gc? this could be first step away from party trade. these 2 resources currently offer most profit with party cards, and seem to be continuing to do so

[Stan Rogers]

how about increasing base price of both rum and tobacco both to 12gc? this could be first step away from party trade. these 2 resources currently offer most profit with party cards, and seem to be continuing to do so

If you factor in the price of a party card (2-3 credits) and the price of the w/h expansion.
Also, when running party routes, duke bonus and other perks (East/West india) are unusable or diminished.
When you work it all out, it comes out very close to equal to regular trade routes.

If you have saved your 'party cards" and procured them through presents over time, yea, a party route can be more lucrative but if you have to start buying a party card to cash in, you better have spent a big sum in w/h upgrades previously.

[Cutpurse]

only reason to why 90% of trade routes are useless is guaranteed profit from oversimplified party trade. i believe the idea is to make more routes more attractive. suggested base prices might only make party trade more attractive. this ofcourse remains to be seen what actually happens when they are implemented. but there should not be so high guaranteed profits as we see today from party cards.

they need to be eliminated from the game anyhow, before there can be any really open trade, where all goods will be available from any port

[DezNutz]

I have no objections. The transition of the +-2 to +-3 and an increase on the base price actually works out. Things may cost more, but you gain a larger range on sale price.

[DezNutz]

Tool cost reduction will effect skirmish earnings. While the loss is technically made up by an increase in value of the other resources. More skirmishes will have to occur to make the previous earnings.

[Vandalaxis]

I humbly agree.
Warehouse tool cost is too high.
I like the balance and the lucky 7 theme elsewhere.
If I may,
Perhaps a wider fluctuation of the base prices? (Modestly of course and in favor of the buyer.)
That way there is only occasionally a favorable fluctuation in the core dynamic for the warehouse buyer who is selective about the ports they choose to supply.

[Captain Jack]

Vandalaxis, base prices with the proposed new market policy will fluctuate more anyway.

This will also provide more competition for trade and will also spread trade fleets across the map which is more realistic and will open the road for the population consumption feature.

Cutpurse, we are not against Tobacco and Rum providing extra profit, through party cards. It is more balanced than it seems as Stan points out. As devs, we want to further improve the role of Warehouses.

Vandalaxis finds the cost a bit high, perhaps it is. However, warehouses are a gold sinker and we need gold sinkers more than ever before. The total coin in circulation keeps growing and it needs to be controlled. So, a player that consumes gc, turns and credits to create a better income for his fleet is acceptable. The party cards are not an issue we will deal with anytime soon. Like I said, they are more balanced than they seem. Sure they deserve to be reviewed or removed at some point in the future but I feel we are still away from this point.

Regarding skirmishes costs, I have not thought of this to be frank. The difference on a 600 crates fleet will be 4800 gc. Perhaps those who are skirmishing daily could provide more insight.

[sXs]

Quick question,

Can't most of the issues be resolved simply by changing the differences.

The only issue I see that could not be addressed this way is the warehouse tech discount for bulk tool purchase.

But considering that Warehouse tycoon 20 tech costs.

Total Gold Bars Required for ALL levels: Gold Bars 96,187(roughly 192,000,000)

Total Gold Coins Required for ALL levels: Gold Coins 165,329,762

Total Research Time Required for ALL levels: Time 99d 04h 35m 00s

Totaling 352 million gc.

It seems that if someone researches Warehouse Tycoon all the way to lvl 20, the perk of tools discount should have been earned.

to do the math....

Base price of tools = 20(+/- 4) so 16 gc
Warehousse Tycoon discount lvl 20 = 20% = 3.2gc

So you can bulk buy tools for 12.8 and sell for 24 max price. 11.2 gc profit.

352,000,000(warehouse tech cost)/ 11.2( possible max profit=31,428,571 total tools needed to buy and trade to break even on tech.

cost of total tools 31,428,571 X 12.8 = 402,285,714 total investment needed before you break even.

Average trade fleet can carry 540 crates and optimal 12 turns per day at 1 hour interval per leg.
31,428,571 / 540 =58,201 total route turns

now if you have 50 trade fleets, which I think is average or even a bit high right now

50 x 540 x 12=324,000 crates per day

31,428,571 / 324,000 = 97 days to transport all those goods just to break even.

Add the 99 plus days of research to get to level 20 Warehouse tech.

Total 189 days needed
402,285,714 total gold coin investment

before you make a profit.

Just my thoughts. All other concerns i think could be addressed with changing the difference(price swing)

[Captain Jack]

The problem does not lie in the overall profit but at the profit per crate where the generated discount is 3.2 (minimum)
For a general market policy that will change this to +2 for a port in need, it seems too big of a bonus.