Change the listing fee to a transaction fee

[fossil wave]

Right now, when I place an list on the exchange and it doesn’t get fully filled because the price is too high or for some other reason, I immediately lose at least 8% of my principal as a transaction fee. That’s completely unreasonable. The 7-day order duration isn’t the problem—the problem is that the fee isn’t refunded. This effectively makes players more willing to post trade information on platforms outside the game, but if that’s the case, what’s the point of having an exchange at all?
(translate by ChatGPT)
This might be due to the low player count on the NA server, but it exposes established traders to unknown amounts of risk, which increases as the player base decreases. Unless the official team takes significant action to attract new players to participate in trading, the exchange function is essentially dead.

Change the transaction fee

[rustic frigate]

good gold sink

[candid furnace]

Probably to prevent ppl from lowballing or overpricing something

Without cost to list it (refund if u cancel) then ppl gonna just keep trying to lowball/oversell

This limits them since cancelling or failed order means they waste their listing fee

[fossil wave]

In fact, this doesn't solve the problem of lowballing or overpricing, because merchants don't know the counterparty's acceptable price before listing.
Even if a merchant deliberately lists an order far above the actual price, there won't be any legitimate transactions (unless someone clicks by mistake or the price was pre-arranged outside the game). Similarly, if a merchant deliberately places a low-price buy order, there won't be any legitimate transactions either.
However, if there are no orders for that item on the market to serve as an anchor, and one merchant lists a huge sell order, then another merchant comes along and places a slightly lower, smaller order—immediately replenishing it whenever it fully executes—the first merchant will suffer a massive loss.

[candid furnace]

it's called undercutting. a valid yet scummy strategy used in open world
it happens in real life too
but just saying that while current system isn't perfect, its better than having no listing fee at all or allow refunds because more problem will just escalates than what it solves

[modern cosmos]

Listing fees are a pretty standard way to remove currency from the game - which is a very important function. I’ll admit I sometimes wish the money was removed on purchase rather than on list.

[fossil wave]

I don't understand your logic. The current strategy actually encourages vicious competition. Sellers deliberately drive down prices without worrying about whether the goods will sell, while orders with normal profits will incur an 8% commission loss if no one buys them after 7 days or they are canceled.

[candid furnace]

Vicious competition is what drives the market

Supply vs demand

This will normalize the price where buyer and seller meets middle ground. Buy order is same, lost if listing not filled

Healthy competition of prices

[fossil wave]

If the exchange function is merely decorative rather than facilitating player transactions, then disregard what I said. However, if the exchange's purpose is to facilitate player transactions, then the risk borne by the seller is equivalent to increased transaction fees. Even from a taxpayer's perspective, this strategy would lower the total tax amount, which is entirely detrimental to normal transactions.

I don't know if the game developers encourage off-market trading, but if the market function continues in this way, off-market trading and real-money trading cannot be fundamentally eliminated.

[candid furnace]

And this is precisely why u want to price is it correctly or sought buyer beforehand

Its there to punish lowballs or oversell pricesbut sometimes it hurts legitimate one, but it's part of a sale

[fossil wave]

The problem is that sellers can't price their transactions reasonably when they don't know what buyers are thinking, so they either have to abandon the deal or get a fixed price outside the game. But here's the thing: if players can't easily find out market prices through the exchange, or to put it more abstractly—what their trading counterparts are thinking—the exchange becomes largely meaningless; it doesn't provide the services of a normal exchange.

[candid furnace]

Perhaps what game needs is price list for the item
Last sold price etc

[fossil wave]

Excuse me, but are you the game planner responsible for this part of the game?

[candid furnace]

No just a well known user that played a year

[fossil wave]

it's hard to explaining this; it involves a lot of economic logic, and i can't copy and paste huge sections of textbooks into Discord, right? 😉

[candid furnace]

I get what ur daying buy there's no better solution than current situation

Listing fee at last will make ppl spam lowball/overpriced stuff

[fossil wave]

Do you mean that a large number of buy orders at excessively low prices and sell orders at excessively high prices will put a lot of pressure on the server?

[candid furnace]

not that but imagine if that happens then ppl can manipulate price that way, plus newbies will think oh it worth low may as well sell
and whoosh

[fossil wave]

In reality, I often create volcanic rock buy orders at extremely high prices when there are large buy orders for volcanic rock in the trading market, and then sell mortars at a very low profit. When someone competes with me in the mortar market, I maintain my monopoly by placing smaller orders at slightly lower prices but replenishing them promptly. I don't think there's anything wrong with what I'm doing; the problem lies with the game mechanics. So, I want to do something for those merchants who can't sell their products or buy raw materials.
In the end, my profit wasn't actually that much higher, but other merchants must have lost a lot in transaction fees due to my unethical competitive practices.

[candid furnace]

i dont think i seen an issue with undercutting. world is like this too. hey dont buy at shop beside u, i'll offer cheaper price here

it's how real world works

[fossil wave]

However, this would lead to an absolute monopoly. Small businesses (new players) would often suffer losses due to a lack of orders and higher sales costs, ultimately leading to unhappiness and the possibility of them abandoning the game. I don't think this is what the game developers want to see.

[muted abyss]

THIS! This is the solution. The base problems not necessarily the wasted fee if it doesn’t get sold, that’s just an effect. The real problem seems to be the actual value fluctuates fairly quickly so people who don’t watch the market closely and often have no clue what a certain items value is that day. During the seahorse event you could easily buy marks for 500-750 at any port. Today I may have seen 1 listing for less than 1000 using the all ports options, with an average of around 1250-1500 So people not realizing the value had tanked during the event and posted a large quantity at today’s price, wouldn’t have sold any and would’ve had to eat that fee. A day/week/month graph of average sell price seems like the perfect solution. At that point if they overprice that’s completely they’re own fault

[candid furnace]

yep, now it's up to dev to implement this, as their homework
pretty much like rocket league insider site when they list items that got listed, sold, traded etc and steam market with fluctuation chart

[muted abyss]

Most games I’ve played with an even remotely player controlled economy have has this as the most basic function, it’s kindve shocking it’s not already implemented

[fossil wave]

This feature is indeed useful, but like the issue with the seahorse price, it can't reflect expected prices when there are too few orders or transactions in the market. Steam's market also has this drawback, so they only charge a fee upon completion of the transaction. Game markets could also pre-collect fees, only needing to refund them when the order is cancelled.

In any case, the goal is to explicitly remind people not to place such orders, rather than implying it through punitive mechanisms.(This order has been in place for 4 days, and the transaction volume is still a fraction of the total order volume. A simple calculation shows that the poster needs to pay 300 per unit of iron ore for the total cost, that is terrifying.)

[rustic frigate]

Gold inflation must be prevented at all cost. The game already has gold sinks and price control in auction market but imo, it's still not enough, we need more gold sinks.

[muted abyss]

I agree with some of this, while a small sample size would definitely make the data less accurate, and you’re right that it can’t predict changes. However, using your example of sea horses, there were a decent variety of offers during the event. Ranging from 1000 per, to 8000 per, there were higher offers but 8k was what i was noticing regularly as the highest offer at most ports. So one would assume at a glance that if they wanted a fairly quick sell they could post it at 8k per, and if they wanted to make a little more 10k wasn’t unreasonable, but I saw them for sell at 10k at almost every port with only a few days left on the 7 day timer. Meaning that 8k buy order wasn’t the high point of the average, but pretty much where demand topped out. So a quick graph would show this. I disagree with the refund almost 100%, it’d be far too easy to just cancel the order if it has not sold and there’s only a few days left. Obviously there are far more eloquent and detailed ways of doing all this but for the sake of what I assume is an easy addition from a developers side of thing, this would be an amazing first step

[fossil wave]

Let me give you an example from my own experience. As shown in the image, the material cost for this triple16pd order is 57,533, and the transaction fee is 6,853. I listed 45, and 29 of them didn't sell. The transaction fee per unit is 10,634, and the overall tax rate isn't 8% but 12.4%. This leverage effect is even more pronounced for blueprint fragments or other items with an additional 12% transaction fee. When there aren't many people browsing the exchange, the risk of the item failing to sell is greater, which further increases the expected cost. This forces me to set a higher price to hedge against the risk, but then even fewer people browse the exchange. You see, it's a vicious cycle.

Change the listing fee to a transaction fee

[muted abyss]

What’s your basis for material cost? As buying the resources at max price from the auction house? If that’s the case then what is the product you’re selling? Convenience is all the buyer would be actually buying as they could go collect the necessary materials themselves from the market and make them without paying for the transaction fee and your profit margin. Assuming that this is actually the case then you just figured out the supply/demand in that area and if there was a graph others would benefit from your sacrifice same as you would from others

[fossil wave]

My profits come solely from the buffs provided by the trade guild. My pricing is so high (or rather, conservative) entirely because of the high opportunity cost: if this order doesn't sell, I lose 8% of the selling price (not even cost, but the selling price). I prefer orders with clear demand, and I'm willing to give up half of the guild bonus as a consumer benefit. However, with the current exchange strategy, if any order goes unsold, I have to lose money from my meager profits, which is unacceptable—my net profit margin is only 12.5%. One unsold order reduces my profit margin to 4.5%, and two unsold orders result in a loss. My current strategy is to include at least 17% of the selling price as cost, ultimately leading to a higher final selling price, from which I don't gain any extra profit.

I don't know if these fees are paid in full to the guild that owns the port. If so, perhaps the trade guild that runs quests in the port could be listed in the town hall and could claim tax breaks from the port owner.

I have to say, the current market mechanism is a complete replica of the Soviet Union's Council for Mutual Economic Assistance market. Where did the game developers find their economic advisors?

Or, for example, consider this 42pd order in the image. I estimate the raw material prices as bronze 1500, iron 15.25, and volcanic rock 550—this is essentially selling bronze, so the material cost is 31846, and the order fee is 2800. If this order cannot be completed, I will completely lose the fee. Based on past transaction volume, this order is almost impossible to complete unless someone is willing to buy things at high prices.
If I list 10 42pd guns at a price of 34,999 and immediately replenish them upon completion of the transaction, the other person will lose their 280k transaction fee.
The ability to immediately replenish stock upon order completion can even be achieved using AI scripts, and theoretically, the game developers are completely unable to detect such scripts. I'm not threatening anyone, but I know that even the world's most powerful anti-cheat systems are suffering from this problem.

[muted abyss]

This may just be me not fully understanding, but using your example if you did NOT sell the remaining 29 and took the 8 percent fee as a hit. You would have grossed 1.37 million, assuming your math is correct and the profit margin of 12.5 percent is after the 8% tax you would have made around 170k profit from the 16 sold, and lost 198,738 from the fee on the the remaining 29 unsold. For a net loss of 29k. Also your factoring in a fee on purchasing materials which could be negated by purchasing materials from existing orders instead of posting your own orders to purchase the raw materials which would save 8% per item on cost, increasing your profit margin considerably. Based on my understanding of your example the only thing you have into the entire transaction the gold to front the orders, then wait for other people to sell you their materials at your chosen location, and then the wait for your items to sell. All of which does not require any “input” time which you could spend either shopping for better deals on materials, gathering materials yourself, trading trade goods, or not even being on the game at all. It’s not necessarily a bad approach by any means as obviously it has been working for you, but other than gaining the initial investment gold it’s a very low effort system. Low effort strategies should always have a higher risk for the same reward as strategies requiring more in game time spent.
Just realized I may have swapped 2 numbers in my calculations but the point should still be there.
Also effort=time investment. Just for clarification lol

[fossil wave]

So, what I'm saying is that I'm essentially just selling the bronze I produce; processing it into cannons is just a side effect. Essentially, once this work is done, I can sell the bronze for 1500 with zero commission.

The loss is shown in the 42pd chart below. The triple 16pd order did ultimately turn a profit due to a conservative pricing strategy, but at the cost of buyers paying significantly more than my profit.

The break-even point (my target price) for 16pd x 3 bronze at 1500, including commission, is 62807. Material costs are 57783, and commissions are 5024. My price of 85000 ensured that selling 20% ​​would cover the remaining commissions and achieve my target. Ultimately, I sold 50%, but I had no idea how many would sell when I listed it. The excess costs were borne by the buyers. The 42pd order represents the situation when I didn't sell a single piece.

Also, it's best to only calculate the unit price; I'm showing the quantity only to illustrate that my total loss was substantial.

[long lake]

I am confused here, are you not mining materials as well instead of paying top prices for them?

[fossil wave]

Do you expect me to calculate all supplies at cost price, ignoring all intermediate transportation costs and labor (slave) costs, and sell them to you at full cost price? Am I your slave?
I only used a premium on the bronze item, isn't that enough? All other prices are cost price.
Or do you expect me to handle the entire process myself, even if it significantly reduces total output, by spending a lot of time mining volcanic ore, calculating costs at the lowest market price, and then selling it to you? You must explain clearly how you determine a reasonable profit and approximately how much value is produced per hour.

[candid furnace]

so tldr it's maximum price is the problem, so it needs to be adjusted, rather than removed?

[fossil wave]

The problem is the timing of charging fees.In simple words,I pay you,you promise me these can be sold,right?
u cant ask me to pay u,then u sell nothing,then u say u dont pay me back.

[candid furnace]

nope, thats now how ads works
you pay newspaper for ad spot, it doesn't guarantee your product sold
you pay first, regardless it will sell or not
Can you ask refund if you don't even sell any to the newspaper?

[fossil wave]

interesting.That's why newspaper was replaced by internet media.
and now is the internet era,and u tell me your prise is the front pages in paper era and now internet era u give me sameservises???

[candid furnace]

which also charge you for the ad, regardless your product sold or not. same thing, nothing changed

[fossil wave]

i mean,i have to sell my best prices guns in discord or other platform now,and if they do a little change,Exchange Function will be better and I won't need to organize exchanges outside the game anymore.

[candid furnace]

im not blaming you, but any other solution you provided will just cause more issues/problem
so fix one, breaks more type of thing
so unless you have a good solution that doesn't create any more problem, i don't think dev will take this seriously

[fossil wave]

I understand this principle, but unless the planner team intentionally made the economic system a simulation of the Mutual Economic Confederation, they should know that the current strategy would render the in-game exchange virtually useless.

[muted abyss]

Havnt looked through your other example yet. But based on a quick read through your calculations ignore the opportunity for increased profit, your current method does not take much time investment, meaning you can do it, AND mine yourself

[muted abyss]

Also what’s the average amount of bow/stern cannons a player needs per ship? Say it’s 8 on average meaning 2 people decided to run all 8 as 16x3s. Vs the carronades might average needing 80 for both sides of ship, so higher initial demand + increased usage/breaking= more sold even if profit per unit is lower. And a lot of players consider pirate versions the top tier and these a stepping stone

[long lake]

What are you even saying man? Sell your canons for what you want, the market will decide if it’s worth to buy or not. What’s a reasonable profit? That will differ for everyone, some won’t care, some will sell cheap for a quick sale, some will undercut. I don’t really give two shits how you source your materials, I just know that I’m going to buy the cheapest option of the guns I want.

[muted abyss]

That’s how they enjoy playing, a lot of people play this as pve only, or as an auction house trading sim. Personally I enjoy games that people can only trade if they want while other players only care about pvp, as then it gives both groups an impact on the other players without forcing the pvp only players to trade and vice versa. Let everyone focus on what they want to focus on

[fossil wave]

I just want to minimize my losses. Less loss means lower costs, and lower costs allow me to lower prices – it's that simple logic.

Also, I've stopped actively selling large quantities of side-attack stocks. Someone's dumping them at a loss, okay, you win.

[fossil wave]

You have absolutely no basic economics knowledge, so don't reply me again. Since you only care about the lowest price and not where it comes from, the lowest price you see will never be the real lowest price.