Quote:
Originally Posted by ibol
I find your analysis intriguing!
Also, it makes me want to further refine the economics.
You make me want to write a separate program to analyze the economics further..
It is true that I designed the commodities to have a progression from least to most expensive. I can't really envision a time when boxes would be more expensive than anti-matter. but, I could understand some greater fluctuation between commodities closer in relative price...
The first update cycle is nearly complete, so we will have to wait and see what happens in the future.
|
Good to hear my timing was on target. I didn't want this to get into the first "bug fix" release, but hoped maybe the next "added features" version.
Re: "I can't really envision a time when boxes would be more expensive than anti-matter." The issue is not "more expensive". The issue is "more profitable". It's not what the buy/sell price is at, it's what the differential is at. People lose track of the fact that a price differential of 10% on commodities is the NOT same in terms of profitability at a price tens of dollars as at a price of thousands of dollars. A "buy/sell" or "profitability" differential of 10% on $10 is only $1, while 10% of %1000 is $100. So if you are applying the same percentage across the board, things tend to stay the same. But "supply and demand" is not an "across the board" static adjustment. A 1% differential in $1000, is +$10. A 1000% differential in $10 is +$100. THAT is a supply/demand difference. It takes less of a difference on high value commodities to have a large impact on profitability.
So, to my mind, what is needed is a way to apply some "supply/demand" with a logic behind it. Now for a bit of theory:
Space stations are expensive and require trade if they aren't just going to be the equivalent of a yacht: "a hole in the water[/space] into which you pour money". All the consumables have to be imported. That means air and water (recycling is never 100% efficient and there is always some "leakage"; apparently this is being ignored or "hand waved away" as a given non-issue), food, and raw materials for any manufacturing. And luxury items and entertainment for inhabitants. To pay for this, there has to be something for the station to export in order to maintain some sort of "balance of trade". And where are those resources (of both import and export types) going to come from? Planets and asteroids. With the possibility (assuming the correct technology exists) of some "mining" of stellar bodies for exotic elements and gases. There has to be enough present in a sector to make building a station feasible. (The game may assume all of that, but it isn't obvious in the market forces at play.)
That's the premise. A station has some resources for export, (which should be based upon the resource population of the sector) and everything else has to be imported. Commodities should be associated with particular celestial bodies: planets, asteroids, stars, etc. Everything available in the sector is exported through the station. If there are multiple bodies of the same type in a sector, then that commodity will be plentiful and relatively cheap to export. But an important function will also be the temporary storage of transit trade goods bound to other destinations. (I assume this function is abstracted into the market price fluctuations.)
The resource population of a sector should establish certain commodity baselines for that sector. If, for instance, there is more than one asteroid belt, then there are not going to be shortages of "raw ore" (except possibly for a very short term) and price fluctuations are going to be minimal. If there are none, then there are not going to be surpluses (except possibly for a very short term), and it is more likely to have shortages and wide fluctuations in price.
Certain resources should be necessary for the manufacture of certain finished goods, like Stim-Ware or Microchips. Again, if they aren't present in the sector, it's unlikely they will be manufactured there. If a sector is surrounded by other sectors with the same resource, it may be more profitable to specialize in processing the raw material into an intermediate commodity than for each resource rich sector to process their own.
All of these are factors that should be obvious without even needing to see the commodities board. The player may need to work out the commodity to resource association, but it should be possible. (If it is there now, it's not discernible.)
Ideally each race would require food associated with a particular type of planet. Multiple types of planets make the sector attractive to those races they can support. If there aren't any, they wouldn't establish a permanent presence except possibly for scientific purposes, in which case they would likely be pretty sparse and restrictive as to available resources for export as their function isn't really "trade". (But they would likely be good consumers of luxury and entertainment goods, depending upon how frequently their sector is visited.)
Which brings up another point: frequency of transit. Ports do not have equal numbers of visits. Like in real estate, it's all about location, location, location! Some are better located than others and get more traffic. High traffic area are more likely to have minor price fluctuations but rarely major ones. Poorly trafficked sectors are much more likely to have wild swings between rare visits as exports pile up and imports get scarcer. Distance also plays a role in both expense of shipping and frequency of transits. "Home worlds" are going to have more traffic than remote colonies. The use of "worm holes" to create short-cuts will make certain sectors more advantagous than others to increasing trade.
The size of a commodity in terms of the amount of cargo space it takes up is also a factor. Small volume but high value items are every trader's dream cargo. But most have to settle for mixed loads. The intrinsic value of a large commodity like "heavy equipment" might be low at the point of manufacture, but high at the destination. But the shear size of the commodity makes fewer able to be transported at a time. That also has a tendency to push the selling price up at the destination that NEEDS that equipment while traders want more profit on the smaller number of units they can fit on board. In fact, some ships (like the "assault scout" or "stealth runner") might not even have enough room to load that commodity in combination with anything else. In which case, they may have to settle for a less profitable load. And why should all ports have an infinite quantity of all commodities available at any time? Only bulk carrier ships today are likely to have only one commodity in their holds.
The nature of those transiting also come into play. Sigurns are traders, so they will tend to bring down prices. Tentaculons are scientists, so they tend to not be trading except in "data". But all races should have some sort of trade they are engaged in, as they all have a "balance of trade" issue.
Just some thoughts.
-Dubious-
Re: AI Economy
Hybrid Mode
