This topic contains 68 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  BigBear 10 years, 6 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #35034

    hobbesme
    Participant

    I voted for unrestricted free market. However, that is based on the desire for the free market to work in both the price-increasing & price-decreasing directions — which if I understand correctly is NOT how the free market works in practice.

    Ideally, as weapons are used more & more often, their prices increase — maybe with a limit, maybe without bounds; don’t know which is better — but as items get too expensive & players buy them less frequently for a period of time, their prices would decrease as well.

    HOWEVER, even with a perfectly-implemented free market scheme, prices for items would reach a high limit & vary slightly above & below this limit. This would occur because players would buy items until they are too expensive & the price would drop slightly until players would start buying again & the prices would increase until prices dropped again & the oscillation about some limit would be reached.

    But in the unlikely case that an item was NOT purchased for a reasonably sufficient time after reaching an upper limit, the price for the item would gradually decrease until purchasing increased.

    A realistic free market would definitely include some closed-loop control gain factors as well as some random variance factors. But with how often players fixate on certain weapons, it’s likely that items will always increase until some upper limit is railed.

    #35035

    DeVice
    Participant

    The problem with unrestricted free market is that it could be abused.

    Imagine player A and player B are competing for stats.
    Player A like the funky bomb, and use it a lot.
    Player B is bored of being funkylled by his enemy.
    He spends all his money on funkys, again and again.
    He logs in, spending no money at all, accumualting interest until he can buy more and make the price raise to stupid heights.
    Player A cannot buy his favourite weapon anymore, and his rank drops.
    Player B is a happy bitch.

    I don’t think allowing this would be fair.

    #35036

    cbx550f
    Participant

    @boy wrote:

    @cbx550f wrote:

    Let the PEOPLE WHO USE THEM determine the price, in the game. ๐Ÿ˜€

    (Yes, I voted “other” ;))

    well at least take a stab at guessing what the price would settle at, or why the heck vote? ๐Ÿ˜• The poll is to find out what YOU think!

    Well, I was being completely honest – I really don’t care what anything costs too much!. As long as something isn’t so overpriced that nobody uses it, or something is so underpriced as to make it the ONLY choice. I really like the idea of prices varying, as it adds quite a bit to the game.

    Example: Many many moons ago, when some dude named “SoupNazi” started playing, he was the “FunkNazi”! At that time, funkies hadn’t been used an awful lot, and when he burst onto the scene with a strategy that was different from “what everyone was doing”, it was AWESOME. I tried to jump on the bandwagon, but I really sucked with funkies (I have no idea why, but it’s taking me YEARS to get the hang of them lol), so I found other ways to (attempt to) succeed. We, as the “common players”, had gotten into a routine – “Do this and that, and you’ll do alright – then a new style changed that. If the market prices can cause that same sort of change more frequently, which I think they can, that will be fun. ๐Ÿ™‚

    Do I have to add a special option for you every time? ๐Ÿ˜›

    Yes.
    Well, changing a poll completely will work too, however. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    cbx

    (Good topics, btw, fun and productive discussions) ๐Ÿ˜€

    #35037

    Hiroyuki
    Participant

    As I see it, the free market theory would work here, because Scorched won’t really be affected by the “Tragedy of the commons” theory http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/162/3859/1243
    But there seems to be a slight misconception on how a free market works amongst some people (some people got it right though), so i will go into it more in detail.
    The prices will fluctuate, up and down, until they have reached the price-vs-effect level which people are willing to pay for, then they will stabilize, and imho, after some time with free market one can very well fix the prizes again, because in the ideal free market, the prices will stabilize…
    this is simple price/demand calculations…For example, the funkies, will rise to a quite high level – then fall a bit, because people stop buying it, but falling just enough to make a few people start buying it again. then the pricedrop will stop and we will have a sustainable price for the funkies.
    Though economic liberalism has trouble working out in the real world, it might very well work out in our scorched world.

    This is actually very interesting stuff ๐Ÿ˜‰ just wrote a term paper on this topic (not including funkies though ๐Ÿ˜› ) here at uni…

    Admin, can you please change my vote… i changed my mind… haha…. even though i like cheap funkies, i think it should be uncapped free market.

    #35038

    BOY
    Participant

    Sorry, i cannot change your vote, but we can note your change.

    @device wrote:

    The problem with unrestricted free market is that it could be abused.

    Imagine player A and player B are competing for stats.
    Player A like the funky bomb, and use it a lot.
    Player B is bored of being funkylled by his enemy.
    He spends all his money on funkys, again and again.
    He logs in, spending no money at all, accumualting interest until he can buy more and make the price raise to stupid heights.
    Player A cannot buy his favourite weapon anymore, and his rank drops.
    Player B is a happy bitch.

    I don’t think allowing this would be fair.

    Hmm, sounds kinda fair to me. If funky’s really are woth that much, that they can boost your rank, people wil continue to buy them, once they become so expensive that buying them begins to hurt your rank, they stop.

    1. Both Player A, and B will drop in rank.

    2. Player B should be feared and respected for going to such lengths just to screw up player A ๐Ÿ˜€

    #35039

    DeVice
    Participant

    Yeah i know my point was theoretical.

    Good players can adapt to changing conditions anyway.

    #35040

    DireWolf
    Participant

    I like the price as is, if you buy funkies, you better use them well, if you dont, you will most likely be broke the rest of the game ๐Ÿ˜‰
    but to charge more? no…. that would change the fairness aspect of the game, a noob can come into a game and get a decent score with a couple funks, even against a seasoned player, but raising the price will make it harder for newer players to compete.
    although I do like the price variation idea, it would be cool, if the price for weapons like hogs, funks and DeathHeads started out very expensive in the early rounds and dropped as the game progressed.

    -Dire

    #35041

    BOY
    Participant

    Like cbx, I disagree that raising the price necessarily makes it harder for noobs to compete. They might also be tempted to screw up their ecomony faster if Funky’s are SEMI-affordable, rather than really hard to buy. In addition, a higher price might mean fewer funky attacks and therefore an easier time for the noobs.

    #35042

    NoMoreSteve
    Participant

    I voted for “no cap”.

    @device wrote:

    The problem with unrestricted free market is that it could be abused.

    Imagine player A and player B are competing for stats.
    Player A like the funky bomb, and use it a lot.
    Player B is bored of being funkylled by his enemy.
    He spends all his money on funkys, again and again.
    He logs in, spending no money at all, accumulating interest until he can buy more and make the price raise to stupid heights.
    Player A cannot buy his favorite weapon anymore, and his rank drops.
    Player B is a happy bitch.

    I don’t think allowing this would be fair.

    Sounds pretty fair to me. I was bored one late evening and did this on the beginners server. I had the price of frogs sky high. it did take quite a bit of time to not only buy the frogs, but to sell them back. But I can’t honestly say that I’d ever do something like that as a viable tactic.

    @device wrote:

    Player B is a happy bitch.

    *changes name to Player B*

    #35043

    NP-TheOutlaw
    Participant

    Dire, I never knew you were quite a pioneer of da-funk.
    – – –
    funky prices are way to cheapโ€ฆbut!!! only once youโ€™ve been a good lad and saved your money for 4-5 rounds. You can pretty much have 1 or 2 when ever the situation calls for it. & I think itโ€™s obvious that those that know how to manage their money donโ€™t really buy them too early.

    They are best for:
    killing someone with a shield
    Nailing a 2-fer
    Throwing a Hail-Mary when you know the whole round will be over in 1 shot.

    Most Iโ€™d pay for 2 would be 22,000K, but that just means I wouldnโ€™t buy them as often or until I had enough $$$$ in the bank (much like the current Bubble-Bust that happened when V40 was released)

    Iโ€™m sure everyone has noticed how many less bubbles go up these days. In my first series here (V39.2), it was quite the norm for most of the skilled players to raise 1 ForceShield on every round starting with the 5th or 6th round all the way to the 10th. And the funkage was the best way to combat so many bubbles in the room(u guys remember that series? ๐Ÿ˜ˆ with all those bubbles, it’s no wonder it was such a funk-fest). Now with less bubbles in the room, others methods can be used to kill your prey. & it seems they are used a tad bit less than before.

    btw, I voted for $20,000 / 2 funks just to be diff.
    like CB noted, I donโ€™t really pay attn to what things cost. I pretty much buy whatever I feel like using.

    happy hunting!

    #35044

    BOY
    Participant

    this is a tight race!

    *lobs hail mary*

    #35045

    Brain Damage
    Participant

    this is my reason to not remove the cap:

    i think it happened to everyone to join on later rounds and be mostly harmless due to high money accumulated by other players during the past rounds; removing the money limit would make not just 1 weapon, but lots of weapons (if you look at how the free market works it’s biassed to raise prices than ballance them) to raise up, making someone who joins late complete harmless.

    before saying that you can spectate/join next game i’d say that people doesn’t always have the time to wait 30 mins for a game to end just to play 1 or 2 rounds on the next.

    #35046

    BOY
    Participant

    that is only partly true, once the weapons have reached a true market value (after a while), all weapons will be as high as necessary. The players in the game longer will always have more money, but the money might not last as long. Their advantage is no better than before. The right balance between the prices will actually make more weapons a deadly choice than before. As the prices change so do the spending habbits.

    #35047

    BOY
    Participant

    @jinx wrote:

    yes they are very efficent but you have to now how to use them properly they are a lot of the times very hard to control especialy with high winds and hilly terrain
    i see manly ppl ebo with them or even take 2 or 3 funkies to kill someone

    i think they are priced ok at the moment

    just out of curiousity and im sure someone would be able to pull up stats but how many are fired and how many kill in ratio to one another?

    I never directly addressed this. I think that when you consider that the Funky bomb shoots 12 bombs not too much smaller than baby nukes (8 vs 11) and aims them for you, that it is effective because it simply is so easy to use. The DH is only one with higher kill ratio.

    The funny thing is, that Funkys are third in total kills, right between baby rollers, and missiles. That is how you know they are overused.

    Leap Frogs are third in kill ratio – GO FROGGERS!

    #35048

    DeVice
    Participant

    The fact that they are allready not-that-cheap make people try to not waste it.

    It could explain their kill ratio too, IMO.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 70 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.