Turbo Top 10

[Firetooth]

Curious though, I wonder where the food went.  He had a decent amount of net before, and it didnt really change that much to reflect an additional 4 bil food.  80 mil net is 80 mil net. 

Well, i did notice Snir's NW went up significantly soon after, plus that whole team has a fox.

Snir is a hero ;)

Give me a good argument for not closing the market theft hole Shadow.
I fail to see how it adds value and/or fairness to the game

I like the new market.  It allows you to shop around, to buy from an ally and not from a foe.
It also gives you an idea of someone's strength, they cant hide things on the market

Market theft is still very possible with the anonymous market, it just takes an extra step and its not spelled out for you.
Just open one tab with the scores, buy from the market, then go back to the scores page and compare with the old.  The guy with the added net is your new target.
No thanks.  I dont see the argument for anonymous market either

the net could only leave the person;s score display (leave's actual net value) when they log on next maybe? But that could be abused :o

[windhound]

Actually Shadow...  FAF, atleast at one point, had a fix inplace for market theft. 
Proceeds from the market just went to your bank.  Its brilliantly simple.

Now, I havnt played there in years so I dont know if its still inplace, but it was implemented. 
Unfortunately the FAF forum is seizureing at the moment, so I cant look up the old topic. 

No pull, allow price edits, anonymity, and display market based on criterion. EI, a couple of drag down boxes with "amount", "price", etc. That allows you to still use it for the purpose of ally work, because they can tell you the criteria you need to buy theirs, and it makes market theft much more difficult in that you have a harder time targeting specific people, but not impossible.

No pull is fine.  Allow price edits goes along with that.  I'm currently stuck with that batch of food I accidentally listed at 25/ea (everything else was at 16/ea), if I couldnt pull it I'd be sol.  As is I'm lose 250mil food.
I still dont get anonymity.  You havnt given a reason for it other than you prefer it.  If that's your -only- reason then so be it, but I was hoping there was a substantial objection to the open market.
Why use dropdown boxes when the current system does it so much more elegantly?
Markettheft is not hard with anonymity.  I just explained the simple, straitforward method of doing it.  Just watch for the net change.
I like the open market.  It works well.  It mimics a true market in that you get to choose who you buy from. 
It also allows for a clan market like FAF has.  The stuff is in the open here, but you can choose to only buy from clan members.

I've never seen a reseller strat used productively.  Please explain.
Also, if you know someone is using a resell strat, just dont buy from them?  (using our current open market, this is possible)
Presumably they're buying cheap and relisting to turn a profit.  If a good number of people use the market and constantly undercut the reseller, they wont sell anything.  I dont see the issue.

Anyways, Firetooth, Sticker is accusing Snir of working with Chris.  The statement implies Chris sent Snir the food he stole from me.
That's not heroish.  That's annoying.

[Shadow]

The faf market thing was that cash went to your bank but any overflow leaked into your account at about 10% per turn distribution, so market theft was still possible, but only on a time lag. That is still in place there. I have suggested we do the same here, it was shot down as being overcomplicated.

I really have no specific reason for disliking the open market other than how messy it looks I suppose. Either way, the market is not active enough overall to make a huge difference either way unless we completely change the game dynamic to work around defense, in which case people have incentive to buy troops from the market.

Reseller strat can be very effective, and on a fox here it would be amazing - you can make billions without using more than the first 200 turns out of protection if you keep buying and selling using camps. The problem here is that the required building setup leaves you wide open to leader attacks, so it is no good unless you re-invest your cash immediately. RWL doesn't really have race set up with a good enough merc bonus, though.

[Firetooth]

Why does everyone seem to think Snir and Feng paid Chris? Feng HATES mercs. He even killed a merc guild before. Plus I killed Chris. These things dont point towards feng.

[windhound]

Ah, yep.  The leaking bank, designed to stop cash hoarders.  Forgot about that

And eh.  Open market is a little messier, but with entries ordered by price and colored in blocks its easy to navigate

Still dont see reseller being terribly effective, atleast at RWL. 
Seems like a decent way to make cash on the side, but you cant really use it as a primary.  It wouldnt keep up with indy or leader.

And its not everyone Firetooth
Sticker was just saying what it looks like.  And your immediate reaction was that it was heroic.
I point out these two and you get defensive?

[Firetooth]

I'm not defensive.
Ok, maybe I am :-X
I wasn't calling it heroic. I was generally calling Snir a hero ;)

[Shadow]

Yeah, reseller won't work very well here until there is incentive to buy troops regularly. Which could be done in a number of ways, which is why I keep supporting and usggesting changes that give incentive to keep a good defense. But yeah, without changing the game ddynamic significantly, the troop market will never be active enough to run a strat on.

Another way to promote the market would be to impose taxes on large stockpiles of resources to encourage spending. I don't know. Some time I'll sit down and try to work out a balanced system to revitalise the market and maybe we could do it as a turbo theme.

[krazilec]

perhaps we could also slightly cut down the number of mercs you can buy so that people would be more influenced to buy from mrkt

[Shadow]

People don't buy much from mercs either. There really is no incentive for the people with cash (mages) to buy troops.

[krazilec]

People don't buy much from mercs either. There really is no incentive for the people with cash (mages) to buy troops.

then where do they get the troops they need when they solo?
*for their high nets

[Shadow]

They don't, most of a mage's net solo is food.

[krazilec]

They don't, most of a mage's net solo is food.

food (and money) that SHOULD be able to be taken via army attacks...

[windhound]

Yes.  Its called Sack
Though at the moment its kinda underpowered apparently, something to do with the new attack system

I've been making my troops lately, +-3k barracks makes enough troops for me to take land. 

[krazilec]

the current problem I see is that any decent mage makes it to the top easy.  they get loyalty after gathering land, then they just feast and repeat.  indy's can only attack them for land *improving their ratio*
meanwhile, if the indy has lots of money or food, they get stolen from

[Shadow]

Well, you can't steal food, but you're right, indy and mage are unbalanced. However, team indy is the most powerful strat in the game at the moment, and any group of indiers can make ridiculous amounts of net as long as they are supplied - 1 leader player and one indy working together can out produce any three mages.

The thing about RWL is that it really does promote teamwork, that's one aspect of the imbalance that I really like.

When sack is working properly, indiers can do significatn damage to mages, so as soon as that gets fixed you'll see a little more balance. A few other things have been propsed, such as modifying sack based on the defender's leader/;and ratio, a higher ratio translating into more stolen per sack so that leader players are really susceptible to sack while indiers are not. It was done for a turob round but not kept indefinitely. Maybe we can get that worked back in if we keep seeing this imbalance after sack is fixed.