• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can
    REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.

Forwarded: Guild to Guild Exchange

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser

Proposal:

A fair trade exchange vehicle in which Guilds may trade between one another by way of each respective guilds treasury

Have you checked the forums for the same or similar idea:

Yes, Have found no similar ideas

Reason: / Details:

As we speak, alliances are being formed between different guilds. Deals are being brokered for the trade of sectors at the price of goods. These alliances are a good thing that, in many ways, reflect the way in which war is won in real life. Unfortunately there is currently no mechanism in place that will allow the (fair only) trade of goods between guilds. As these trades can require goods amounts in the thousands per sector using an individual player is neither sensible or possible. Players from any guild can donate goods to their respective treasuries now. With a Guild-to-Guild exchange vehicle, we will all be able to make these deals in a timely and safe manner[/QUOTE]
 

DeletedUser96867

Interesting idea. However with Inno's long list of very urgent matter which aren't being dealt with i wouldn't expect this to happen any time soon.
 

DeletedUser2989

Interesting, but with the recent surge in fear over cheating what would be done in the case of several guilds funneling goods into one? One guild could have the goods supply of 3 guilds through back and forth unfair trades.

I know a strech of the imagination for that to be a cheat but none the less, there is already a lot of complaints about over supplied guilds gobbling up sectors.

Personally I like the idea and wouldn't care if there was abuse. Could implement rules with it but i'd imagin it would be hard to monitor and enforce game rules to prevent my theorised goods push.
 

DeletedUser15432

very good initial point and excellent counterpoint but this is a very good idea that really should be developed further +1 from me
 

DeletedUser7719

Interesting, but with the recent surge in fear over cheating what would be done in the case of several guilds funneling goods into one? One guild could have the goods supply of 3 guilds through back and forth unfair trades.
Replace guild with player, and I don't see what's the difference...

So I will give this a +1!
 

DeletedUser13082

+1 From me. Very good idea that would expand GvG.

@Tankovy, a very good counter point however 1:1 trades only of same tier goods would be able to remove this possibility easily. Only goods from the same tier can be traded and only equal amounts for trades too.

@mink, I see your point about other exploits currently being permitted however I don't think that introducing more exploits would be a step in the right direction. There are already a lot of complaints concerning exploits and, as we all know, there has been a lot of negative feedback from previous updates, causing many players to quit the game in recent weeks, I don't think adding fuel to that fire would be very productive.

@byeordie, To trade all goods to a single player for that player to then trade them to another guild is a lot more time consuming and also difficult as that single player must have goods available to trade for the goods he will be receiving in order to trade those goods out. <-- I hope that makes sense? lol. This idea then removes that issue, speeds things up and makes it far more manageable to negotiate things such as what was mentioned in the OP. "Remove the middle man and save time, time is money, you just earned your wages" ;)

Again, +1 from me for a very good idea :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser1081

+1 From me. Very good idea that would expand GvG.

@Tankovy, a very good counter point however 1:1 trades only of same tier goods would be able to remove this possibility easily. Only goods from the same tier can be traded and only equal amounts for trades too.

@mink, I see your point about other exploits currently being permitted however I don't think that introducing more exploits would be a step in the right direction. There are already a lot of complaints concerning exploits and, as we all know, there has been a lot of negative feedback from previous updates, causing many players to quit the game in recent weeks, I don't think adding fuel to that fire would be very productive.

I meant that tongue-in-cheek, death ouron.

If it only allowed same-tier goods it would be totally useless in situations where hapless players piled in goods from ages their guild isn't GvGing in, because they didn't understand how the treasury works. Guild founders/leaders need to be able to trade treasury goods they don't need for what they do need, within the same limits as other trades, and not limited to just LMA-for-LMA or whatever.
 

DeletedUser13082

I meant that tongue-in-cheek, death ouron.

If it only allowed same-tier goods it would be totally useless in situations where hapless players piled in goods from ages their guild isn't GvGing in, because they didn't understand how the treasury works. Guild founders/leaders need to be able to trade treasury goods they don't need for what they do need, within the same limits as other trades, and not limited to just LMA-for-LMA or whatever.

It would still work however it would require a second trade but that would also require trusting the guild you are trading with to not attempt to rip you off. I still think it would work fine however, those goods that are added for ages that are not being fought in can come in useful in the future. Those being traded out in negotiations, having same age trading only, would still work, it would just mean you can't trade goods of a different tier from the goods you need. Wouldn't make it useless it would just mean those goods that you don't need from other ages would be stuck there until used.
 

DeletedUser1081

To me the whole point of the idea is so that goods don't end up stuck in the treasury.
If we want to GvG in a new era someday we can amass the goods for it at that time.
Meanwhile we want to trade the useless goods trapped in the treasury for goods we need now.
So your amendment of the idea gets a big resounding minus one from me.

The idea as originally stated by the OP is a big resounding +1.
 

DeletedUser13082

I'm just throwing idea around to be honest. Personally I think that this way would be better than the previously mentioned way which opens up exploits however. Do you have any counter suggestions?
 

DeletedUser96867

Note: This doesn't even need to be a special guild to guild market place. All that has to be done is to allow guild treasuries to put up trades in the existing market. Instead of the merchant being a player, the merchant would be the guild.


Wouldn't make it useless it would just mean those goods that you don't need from other ages would be stuck there until used.


Most of those goods from other ages will never be used. Most guilds will never fight in all ages, and after all the npcs are all gone very few guilds will attempt to start in a new age. Right now 1 world i'm in we have over 1700 goods spread across the wrong ages, and in another world it's almost 2500. We barely have enough players active in gvg to mange to participate in 1 age never mind the 4 or 5 the goods are spread across.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser13082

Most of those goods from other ages will never be used. Most guilds will never fight in all ages, and after all the npcs are all gone very few guilds will attempt to start in a new age. Right now 1 world i'm in we have over 1700 goods spread across the wrong ages, and in another world it's almost 2500. We barely have enough players active in gvg to mange to participate in 1 age never mind the 4 or 5 the goods are spread across.

Have you considered merging with another guild of the same level as yourselves? 1 highly active guild is more effective then 2 slightly active guilds :)
 

DeletedUser96867

@ death ouron

And which of the 2 guilds would you suggest give up on all the sectors they have taken, and all the goods donated to their treasury? We are not going to start booting long time members who are not interested in gvg to make room for gvg active players, especially now that gvg has basically reached it's stalemated end point. There are already only about 50 guilds taking part in gvg should we merge a bunch of them to reduce that to only 30? Not a whole lot of point doing that so we can take part in 2 ages of gvg instead of just 1.

Honestly gvg is just so poorly designed, i wouldn't make any changes to try to accommodate a failed game feature.
 

DeletedUser13082

@ death ouron

And which of the 2 guilds would you suggest give up on all the sectors they have taken, and all the goods donated to their treasury? We are not going to start booting long time members who are not interested in gvg to make room for gvg active players, especially now that gvg has basically reached it's stalemated end point. There are already only about 50 guilds taking part in gvg should we merge a bunch of them to reduce that to only 30? Not a whole lot of point doing that so we can take part in 2 ages of gvg instead of just 1.

Honestly gvg is just so poorly designed, i wouldn't make any changes to try to accommodate a failed game feature.

A fair point. My guild merged another into us before the new treasury update and the guild didn't have much territory either so it wasn't too much of a loss. I guess with new treasury this changes a lot. The best option for merging, in my opinion, is to find a guild which has only a few members actively trying to take part in GvG and struggling. A few good active players from a few of these types of guilds will boost activity a lot :) Just a thought.

Falling off topic now anyway so back to the OP topic. Anybody else have ideas to rid the exploit possibility mentioned earlier?
 

DeletedUser96867

The best i can come up with to limit the feature being exploited is to allow only 1 to 1 same age trades from the gvg treasury to anyone outside the guild. Any cross age/non 1:1 trades from the gvg treasury would be limited to guild only trades.
 

DeletedUser

In my OP I stated that only fair trades would be allowed. It should be simple enough to develop code only allowing 1:1 trade for same age goods, 1.5:1 for goods one age apart, and 2:1 for goods two ages apart......etc.

I know I'm a noob, but I don't see how this formula can be exploited. Any help with this??
 

DeletedUser1081

I don't see why people are worrying about some kind of "exploit" either, or why it would require anything other than the trade ratios that are already imposed.
 

DeletedUser2989

@IBZFanatic While your OP said fair trades you didn't specify trade ratios so when I read it I assumed players would still be choosing the ratios as we do now. People in thie game have slightly different views of what fair trade is, some put it down to simple cost, if it costs twice as much then you should get twice the amount for it IE 4 Ebony for 8 Lumber. Others want to factor in the size of the building and would find a 1:1 trade ratio between Tar and Coffee unfair as the Tar producer has to use up more town space to build his building than the Coffee producer does. So my point here is "fair trade" means different things to different people.

With strict age limited ratios it would limit the ability to exploit this feature, takes away the freedom to value certain goods more than others but it does restrict exploits.

+1 for the resticted G to G trade system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top