In this week’s devlog Michi talks about the recent maintenance release and the database issues it brought to light.
You can find the full issue of the development log here.
2 Likes
Insane news, this fixes basically every major balance issue.
I hope so. And I also hope that we don’t see any run-away inflation or other serious problems. We are giving up the currency pegs.
An interesting consequence: Since we plan on adjusting the MMs independent of currency, we will most likely see that the currencies develop differently.
3 Likes
Dynamic MMs are very bold. I thought we’d only see MM bumps cause they are safer.
I really hope they work well.
1 Like
FX will be useful, wohoo
Worth mentioning would be that bfabs would need a retouch or other solution to keep them from skyrocketing.
(On another note about run-away inflation: Depending on how the MM changes and faction gov will be working it could cause a lot of the money sinks to be removed which should be kept in mind)
At the moment I’m not seeing any reason for potential runaway inflation. Happen if you increase the top market makers. Depending on how you make them dynamic, if they get hit too much they probably get nerfed at least that is my understanding.
Maybe molp can clarify, dynamic means if an ask mm gets hit too much the price will increase, if I bid mm gets hit too much its price will drop and vice versa?
It is not clear at all how that will impact inflation in the end. It will all depend on the implementation details.
Dynamic MM - Nice idea, but not feasible given certain market changes. Since the production cost can be calculated precisely, MM can determine a stable floor price and set its own price based on market volume.
Placing buy and sell orders must incur a cost, similar to the LM. How is the marketplace fee determined? Is it based on turnover (volume × price)—charged once—or is it a form of rent for standing listings (buy/sell orders)?
The fact that the exchange can be used as a free warehouse is a “wall-hack” and should be fixed in upcoming updates. When you use standard contracts, the goods don’t magically disappear from the warehouse.
I would start by removing all MM goods from the exchange and offering them locally on the planets instead and it might be interesting to slightly accelerate all production processes involving water in order to give a boost to those actually producing DW/RAT.
That will just lead to people leaving the CX in favor of direct contracts and the already low CX volume will fall further bringing even more people into internal markets or other direct contracts.
(see FX and Discord )
It is not free, but pretty cheap (lowstrife for example is paying over 100k / week)
My opinion: ask MMs should be gone and instead be managed and fed through the faction gov.
1 Like
Agreed, especially with point three. As much control in the players hands please!
Charging fees on order placement will discourage people from posting liquidity, and negatively impact market health as people listing items will be charged (and not those buying from them). This will discourage player trading, a core mechanic of the game.
I’m not a proponent of cx trading fees, but if they were to be implemented, they should be on executed trades only. Same with how the FX market works. This way both buyers and sellers pay a fair share, and its impact to cx liquidity is minimized.
About warehouse fees - raw ores and materials are so large\heavy compared to their absolute value, that renting warehouse space is NEVER worth it. Those large storage orders you see from me, and others, are entirely comprised of oxygen, nitrogen, metals. Items that have extremely low mass to value ratios. I have 3.1 million tons of metals, alloys, ores, minerals, fuel, gasses, liquids, and elements valued at $1 billion stored on the CX orderbooks. Most of that is listed at prices that people would actually buy, rather than $99999 prices. That’s an average absolute value of $322 per ton. Current CX storage costs are $0.44 per week, per ton. That’s about 1% of the value of the item every 2 months. And that’s on the average, many of the lowest value items are about 1% of the value every week or two.
If you eliminate the free cx storage, you will eliminate the ability of anyone to stockpile materials and lead to substantially greater oversupply\shortage swings on these items. Nobody will be able to build up a substantial buffer to ease the market cycles. This same concept applies, to a lesser degree, to all CX orders across all orderbooks. CX liquidity will get worse.
Warehouses, at the high end, had their fees raised recently. I think they are in a better place currently. I’m currently paying $220k\week for 550k of space.
3.1 million tons … 
low CX volume - then one should consider why that is the case.
And yes, for certain goods, a fee would cause small profits to drop to zero—especially when the goods still have to be transported to market using SF/FF. If a market-making method is found for the exchange, perhaps something similar should exist for GOV as well.
CX volume is actually up, substantially, over the last 2 years. By several multiples.
And if there will be a fee on CX trades I think there should also be one on costom contracts. Though the pure existence of a fee discourages trading, maybe not on a economic level but on a psychological.
A option would be that the station provides X free / very cheap storage for basic resources (elements, minerals, gases and liquids). Though having a certain storage that only takes these classes of material might be a bit complicated, both to code and to have another (seperate) inventory.