[Discussion] Intercontinental trade

Discussion in 'Discussions' started by Diamay, Apr 16, 2018.

Do we need this system in our game?

  1. Yes, good idea (only external ways, no harbor in Kingdoms County)

    2 vote(s)
    28.6%
  2. Yes, good idea (external ways and harbor in Kingdoms County)

    2 vote(s)
    28.6%
  3. Yes, good idea (you can deliver in any county, but cargo fee varies)

    1 vote(s)
    14.3%
  4. Yes, good idea (my way of implementation below)

    1 vote(s)
    14.3%
  5. No, who needs harbor cities and sea traders?

    1 vote(s)
    14.3%
  1. Diamay

    Diamay Count

    229
    380
    223
    Jan 17, 2018
    Instead of simply inquiry, we’ve would like to make a small note. Reading is desirable if you didn’t follow the project lately.

    Intro

    Everybody knows that creation of open world MMORPG is based on “one end tunnel” - when the player develops character from point A to Point Z and almost never return from point Z to A/B/C/D etc.

    This very model has advantage: Players spend whole time around same characters with almost the same level and don’t mess with noobies.

    However, this also may be turned into weak point when the project is getting old and dying. The biggest display of weak point is:
    1) Low activity in zones for starters.
    2) Dying economy as a result
    3) Players don’t have to gather low tier resources, to craft and get “non-capped” equipement.

    Right now we are making some mechanics that will at least help to distribute and mix resources within the world to avoid this “one end tunnel” system. We will discuss this system later in following articles about resources and craft.

    World’s Concept

    As we are finishing design of easter part of in-game world (which is desirable of Russian speaking countries) we’ve came out with new tool that will help to distribute players and has potential to become one of significant mechanics.

    Right now the map looks like this:

    [​IMG]

    In the middle there is King’s county - it connects 4 parts of the world. That should isolate East from West at the early stages of game and restrict trade between them. Also South and North will be discovered by players so initially those regions are Terra Nova.

    Also all landscape depicted is surrounded by water.

    So - what we would like to discuss

    We want to add NPC traders that will deliver goods on ships between different external parts of the Counties.

    How it works:
    1) Each trading association cupola in N county pays absolute fee to sea traders - the fee regulates speed of delivery and chance of cargo to be lost (it also regulates guard’s level, skill of captain and etc).
    2) Exporters (players) that put cargo to the market on another continent also pay fee (in %) that depends on cargo’s total cost (from 0% to 20%) and choose how much days their goods can participate in auction trading.
    3) The importer face the internal rules of deal’s calculation - so importer pays commission fee and trade tax.
    4) After sale money gathered for trading time period goes to initial trader.

    So trade load for each deal may go to 50%
    20% - cargo fee
    15% - commission fee
    15% - trade tax
    Not bad, huh? But please remember that trade load may be even 0% and the stone that costs nothing in Eastern part may be valuable resource on the West.

    Moreover players aren’t protected from the following situation - upon importing, the good isn’t obliged by taxes or fees because of fringe benefits. However, while goods were in process of movement, the importer increases the taxes with total tax load of 50%. This situation makes importer infamous of course.

    What are results of implementing:

    1) This should increase volume of business between low tier counties.
    2) This also allows to distribute resources unevenly between different parts of word to create and stimulate “demand and supply” basis.
    3) Point 1 also allows high-rank guilds to be interested in low tier counties. However, castles with level restriction will stay in the game to prevent new players from harassment by high rank guilds.
    4) Sea trade expenses can be taken by Associations
    5) The system shall increase role of economical and political manoeuvres - guilds can even make blockage or embargo.
    6) Kingdom county’s role won’t be as dominant - if economical situation is bad in Kingdom’s county, traders can always use sea trade.
    7) And also - this should provide balance between player’s caravans trade and NPC’s sea delivery.

    What do we want to know:

    1) Do we need this system in our game?
    2) If you feel like we do, please share your feedback and how you see implementation and work of these mechanics.
    3) Do we need to put restrictions of delivery only by external ways? Do we need to deliver cargos via harbors only?
    4) Do you think we need harbor in Kingdom’s county?

    P.S. for now we won’t discuss any additional naval content.
     
    • Like! Like! x 2
  2. Obscure

    Obscure Модератор

    24
    47
    62
    Dec 5, 2017
    It is logical to make those harbours in external parts of continents only, I suppose. In order for Kingdom County to be less load.
     
    • Like! Like! x 1
    • ... ... x 1
  3. Sirdbarris

    Sirdbarris II degree of vocation

    2
    0
    39
    Apr 16, 2018
    Hmmm sounds interesing. I can imagine a lot of pirates and easy money for gankers
     
  4. Googlemo

    Googlemo III degree of vocation ROG Club

    20
    9
    50
    Apr 3, 2018
    Only if we have such features implemented, as far as I understand this one, you won't be able to gank anything at first, its mostly a simple auction house(like in warcraft) with cool lore to it.
     
    • Like! Like! x 1
  5. Sirdbarris

    Sirdbarris II degree of vocation

    2
    0
    39
    Apr 16, 2018
    Oh I see, thx

    Pity, I dreamed about pirates here
     
  6. Kozzion

    Kozzion III degree of vocation

    13
    11
    50
    Apr 8, 2018
    I understand the riskful trade but I would like to see it happening where there is more guild trading and player to playertrading.
    In person that is.
    Guilds shipping goods from A to B or players meeting up somewhere to trade or even open up tradeshops where they have to caravan their goods to their shop.

    Paying an RNG system with risks of losing stuff and wich takes days for transactions seems a bit unfair and generates less player involvement between eachother.

    Just my two cents.
     
  7. Radvald

    Radvald Администратор ROG Club

    57
    43
    78
    Jan 25, 2018
    As i understand, the main point here is to give players who are unable to interact an opportunity to do it.

    Now, there is plenty of ways to ensure player-driven trading prevalence inside the counties: trading squares and different auctions.
    Some ways to ensure trading between counties that are close to each other: caravans.
    But no ways of intercontinentional trade or smh "remote" trade.

    That's why, in theory, it might not reduce player involvement in trading.

    The main problem is that with the desire to make trading more convenient and involve more players, here, we can inadvertently make trading clunky and biased towards one trading method and, as a result, decrease the number of trading players :)
     
  8. Miroku

    Miroku III degree of vocation

    5
    6
    44
    Apr 16, 2018
    You guys can implement port owners to put sanctions on specific goods.