Variable market prices based on real time prices
Moderator: moderators
-
Guest
-
Guest
Interesting thought. Tell me, would you be more inclined to include the Raw Material LLC (NPC) in your calculation or exclude it?
I would think exclude, since it's an arbitrary value and infinite supply would warp the calculation anyway. However, without that as a constant presence in the calculation, there is the possibility that a market empties out (accidently or on purpose) and then you get an undefined value. Just pointing that out becaue I'd hate to one day see the message "Your value is outside the range. Please input a price between #ERR and #ERR."
Of course the other problem that comes up with a nearly-empty market is forcing it higher. Suppose the "fair" price for an item would be a nice round 1.00, and there are a few sellers around there establishing that price. Well if I'm a big enough seller it will take me a few transactions, but by using the upper 50% range (and buying lower) I can slowly but steadily move that price up as high as I want, lets say 6.00 even. I leave a lot of product there at 6, and now the system has helped me establish a floor around 3. The bottom range will shift a little lower as people make offers at 3, but it will never shift back anywhere near 1 if I keep enough stored at 6.
And then I also wonder if the whole idea is worth it. I've always been struck by the difference between "rules than prevent" and "rules that hinder." I tend to be against the latter. By definition they're not preventing the "crime", just making it more awkward. Meanwhile, you have unintended effects on outside "innocent" people being hindered in the process. Hopefully that effect is minor. But it tends to be that the people who exploit get so much benefit they'll put up with the hinderance anyway. While the innocent people just get annoyed by the rule.
Specifically, you're still letting the person who wants to unload goods at a very cheap price do so. Not 0.01 low, but low enough to be of huge benefit. And the extra cash moving can be fixed by an opposite transaction. If I wanted to transfer between main company A and temp cheat company B, I would have B sell its goods 50% below market price, and A snaps them up. Then to give the cash back, A sells something else 50% above market price, and B buys it.
It takes more transactions, but the effect is the same. So all that market-limiting coding doesn't prevent anything, it just makes it take slightly longer. Meanwhile, the rest of the market is subject to any and all side effects listed by myself and others in this thread.
Lastly, and this is I guess more of an outright question - what about contracts? Why would someone who wanted to dump off stuff cheaply go through the market at all?
I would think exclude, since it's an arbitrary value and infinite supply would warp the calculation anyway. However, without that as a constant presence in the calculation, there is the possibility that a market empties out (accidently or on purpose) and then you get an undefined value. Just pointing that out becaue I'd hate to one day see the message "Your value is outside the range. Please input a price between #ERR and #ERR."
Of course the other problem that comes up with a nearly-empty market is forcing it higher. Suppose the "fair" price for an item would be a nice round 1.00, and there are a few sellers around there establishing that price. Well if I'm a big enough seller it will take me a few transactions, but by using the upper 50% range (and buying lower) I can slowly but steadily move that price up as high as I want, lets say 6.00 even. I leave a lot of product there at 6, and now the system has helped me establish a floor around 3. The bottom range will shift a little lower as people make offers at 3, but it will never shift back anywhere near 1 if I keep enough stored at 6.
And then I also wonder if the whole idea is worth it. I've always been struck by the difference between "rules than prevent" and "rules that hinder." I tend to be against the latter. By definition they're not preventing the "crime", just making it more awkward. Meanwhile, you have unintended effects on outside "innocent" people being hindered in the process. Hopefully that effect is minor. But it tends to be that the people who exploit get so much benefit they'll put up with the hinderance anyway. While the innocent people just get annoyed by the rule.
Specifically, you're still letting the person who wants to unload goods at a very cheap price do so. Not 0.01 low, but low enough to be of huge benefit. And the extra cash moving can be fixed by an opposite transaction. If I wanted to transfer between main company A and temp cheat company B, I would have B sell its goods 50% below market price, and A snaps them up. Then to give the cash back, A sells something else 50% above market price, and B buys it.
It takes more transactions, but the effect is the same. So all that market-limiting coding doesn't prevent anything, it just makes it take slightly longer. Meanwhile, the rest of the market is subject to any and all side effects listed by myself and others in this thread.
Lastly, and this is I guess more of an outright question - what about contracts? Why would someone who wanted to dump off stuff cheaply go through the market at all?