What do you call a fair trade with a tax?

[DeletedUser]

In Elvenar there are currently four scenarios for trading that one must distinguish between:

1) Trading amongst discovered neighbours within your trader's range
2) Trading amongst undiscovered neighbours within your trader's range
3) Trading amongst members of your fellowship
4) Trading using the wholesaler​

In 1) and 3) there is no trader's fee/tax – so it is safe to state that a fair trade of the same tier good is at a ratio of 1:1.

As for 4)… It's more of a last resort option if you have no one to trade with and/or can't produce the unboosted goods yourself.

In 2) there is a trader's fee/tax of 50% added to the amount the seller demands in return for their offer which the buyer must pay. (ex. 100 planks for 100 marble + 50% tax = 100 planks for 150 marble)


There have been many threads within the forums discussing whether the tax is balanced, sensible, and what types of trades are fair amongst discovered neighbours, trades within fellowships, and the list goes on…


What I want to know from you through the poll above and the comments below is:

What do you call a fair trade amongst undiscovered neighbours?

Do you pay the tax yourself by lowering your demanded goods, have the buyer pay the tax, or do you split the tax evenly, or perhaps something else?


Thanks in advance for voting and/or leaving a comment!

P.S.: I fully agree that the choice can be situational based on how urgent one requires a good, but I want to know what you generally consider the fairer trade ratio and if you don't mind: why?

EDIT: My conclusion <- Click!

 

[DeletedUser]

We can't differentiate who picks up our trades between neighbours, discovered and undiscovered, and fellowship. If I was to put up a trade then I want a 1:1 trade with someone else, if I change the trade to make it more advantageous to an undiscovered neighbour how do I make sure only that neighbour picks up? We can't choose who takes our trades, but only whether we want to take the trades of our fellowship.

I think 50% is a lot particularly when starting out, if you are struggling for goods and only an undiscovered neighbour has what you need in order to upgrade or something else then it can be an agonising wait for something which might get taken by someone else before you can get the goods together for it.

I haven't voted as I don't like any of the choices, but don't know what I would want

 

[DeletedUser]

Effort on the part of the buyer can convert YOUR city from undiscovered (taxed) to discovered (untaxed).
The incentives are, and the tax burden therefore should be, entirely on the buyer.

 

[DeletedUser]

We can't differentiate who picks up our trades between neighbours, discovered and undiscovered, and fellowship. If I was to put up a trade then I want a 1:1 trade with someone else, if I change the trade to make it more advantageous to an undiscovered neighbour how do I make sure only that neighbour picks up? We can't choose who takes our trades, but only whether we want to take the trades of our fellowship.

That's a very good point indeed. If one were to post a trade where the seller is paying some or all of the tax then there is currently no possibility to ensure that trade is only accepted/seen by an undiscovered neighbour. I take it that you would prefer to offer a 1:1 trade instead and wait a little longer for either someone to discover you or to accumulate enough goods to pay for the tax as the buyer?

I think 50% is a lot particularly when starting out, if you are struggling for goods and only an undiscovered neighbour has what you need in order to upgrade or something else then it can be an agonising wait for something which might get taken by someone else before you can get the goods together for it.

In other words, you feel that as a buyer it's not entirely fair to pay the full tax because it is so high and therefore would like to see the tax reduced, correct?

If so, then the question that I see is: would you trade off the risk of giving a player who has discovered you a slight bargain by paying half the tax and thus reducing the tax to 25%, so that in return the same neighbour whom you may not have discovered yet yourself may do the same offer for you? It's a gamble - that's certain. Such relies completely on all/the majority of players viewing a split tax as generally a fair trade.

I completely understand your indecisiveness here - hence why I made this thread.

Effort on the part of the buyer can convert YOUR city from undiscovered (taxed) to discovered (untaxed).
The incentives are, and the tax burden therefore should should be, entirely on the buyer.

Another good point from a different perspective - great! However I must ask - what if the closest neighbour trading any of the goods you seek (or trading goods at all) is 10-12 provinces away? Can it be deemed fair if you must make all that effort just to eliminate the tax, which in turn would likely be a lot cheaper just to pay in the first place (at least for new players)?

Interested to read more about what you all think.

EDIT:

I haven't voted as I don't like any of the choices, but don't know what I would want

Added an 'Undecided' option to the poll.

 

[DeletedUser]

Can it be deemed fair if you must make all that effort just to eliminate the tax, which in turn would likely be a lot cheaper just to pay in the first place (at least for new players)?

There are several reasons for exploring sectors:

• Relics (for your production boosts and your Ancient Wonder levels)
• Knowledge Points, which are tempting, but exploring too fast is a very dangerous trap
• Quest Benefits
• Visitation privileges (Coins and Supplies)
• Maybe you simply like combat
• Lower trading costs (discovering a city eliminates the 50% tax)
• Rune Shards once you've researched Ancient Wonders.

Most folks post at the default ratio, which provides Like Value for Like Value, and the distance tax only raises that to 2:3 which is still considerably cheaper than dealing with the Wholesaler at 1:5.

 

[DeletedUser]

@Katwijk

I certainly don't doubt there to be valid reasons for exploring sectors, as the many listed benefits you've posted prove. For a new player however, many of these benefits don't pay out until much later in the game or are simply too expensive to be of any real benefit at the current stage. For example, to complete the first chapter of the tech tree and continue onwards, quite a handful of goods are required. Just as Lisica mentioned, a 50% tax is quite a lot for someone just starting out with trading and goods production. By the time they accumulate enough goods to trade - the trade might be long gone.

Therefore I wonder whether it is fair to split the tax to even the playing field? Incentives to explore are all good and well, but perhaps I was just looking to trade a couple planks for some marble and not cross half the country to do so. Or perhaps it is only natural for one to have to 'fight' and compete to get what you want?

 

[DeletedUser]

There are several early quests that ask you to get a few relics of a particular type, scout a sectors that's at least 5 rings distant, and the like.

If folks routinely post trades that will balance their inventory, as compared to posting a trade that they NEED, then the market works pretty well.

I don't see any reason whatever for offering goods below my cost, because that just encourages somebody with TONS of goods to take the trade, and gain a few percent on the transaction, just because they have a sufficient inventory.

• I'd suggest that posting stuff BELOW the default Fair Trade value will actually work AGAINST what you're trying to accomplish.
• Because cheap trades will be snarfed up by the trading profiteers, and relisted ABOVE the default Fair Trade value.

 

[DeletedUser]

@Katwijk I agree with your opinion that a trade is fair if the ratio is 1:1 for the same value goods, and the incentives are there for a player to eliminate the tax through exploring provinces. Generally speaking I consider this a good concept of gameplay as it aims to encourage players to progress through the game and interact more with other players (ex. through the visitation bonuses you mentioned above).

Trading routinely is what I see as a bit of an issue at the moment, because it depends highly on the activity and progress of one's neighbourhood. One can of course argue that the option of joining a fellowship eliminates both the tax and should (assuming the fellowship is well chosen) increase trade opportunities immensely. Another argument is that player progression increases from day to day, so it's also a question of patience.

As of right now I can only come to one conclusion: there is no fair trade for a player who has to pay tax. One player always has at least the risk of losing out, whether the seller pays the tax, the buyer pays it, or the tax is split and someone grabs that trade for a bargain.

I do hope Innogames implements a few more changes involving the trade system (of which many good suggestions have been made and forwarded), because currently I view (fair) trading as very limited and exploitable.

 

[DeletedUser]

If I have a surplus of a boosted good and/or badly need a certain good and/or rely on neighbours for trading, I put them up at 3 stars, but I do not try to do the maths to figure out how much exactly the buyer is "saving" when they are paying tax. It depends very much on the situation, as when you are in a busy fellowship where trades move fast, this isn't necessary, whereas if you are in one where it's harder to shift goods and you need neighbour trades, you will find yourself doing this more often if you want to progress. I also buy things I do not need (yet) if I have the goods available, even if it involves trader fees when it's my own boosted goods. I will trade 1:1 on non boosted goods if I have a lot. Additionally, I buy a lot from the wholesaler actually. When I have too much gold or supplies, I usually spend the extra there. In an nutshell, I had to pick undecided It's probably mostly me paying the fees on non 1:1 trades now I think about it

 

[DeletedUser]

Additionally, I buy a lot from the wholesaler actually. When I have too much gold or supplies, I usually spend the extra there.

Actually that's a very good point, I regularly buy dust from the wholesaler on Winyandor as there is no-one either in my FS or active neighbourhood who is producing yet. The cost from the wholesaler is 1:5 and the cost from an undiscovered neighbour is 1:1.5 (I think?), based on that then its cheaper to buy from an undiscovered neighbour than from the wholesaler.

I only put up trades at 1:1 as I don't see my need for a particular good to be more urgent than anyone else's and I can wait for what I want (or buy from the wholesaler as I produce a lot of all tier boosted goods).

Off topic - before anyone suggests it, yes I could join another FS who already produces dust but having been in a dictatorial FS I much prefer the laid back style of this one

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, the trader fee is definitely cheaper than the wholesaler, though some people put up trades that are more expensive than the wholesaler I think the main reason to put up 3 star trades when "desperate", is to allow undiscovered neighbours to buy your goods without making a loss, which, if you are having difficulty shifting your goods, will make your sales move faster - hopefully. I think it does depend a lot on how much you rely on neighbour trades as if you are in a fellowship with a good trade rate, there is no need, but if you are one with a less active trade or with an unbalanced ratio, your progression can be seriously impaired depending upon your play-style. It's an unfortunate side-effect that, if you feel compelled to put up 3-star trades to target undiscovered neighbours, people in your fellowship offering the same goods may feel like you are "pushing in front" of them, though I doubt that's generally the motivation.

 

[DeletedUser]

As a rule, I don't take or post trades at less then fair value ( 1:1 ).
On occasion, I could trade at less then fair value if it provide another benefit that would be lost otherwise, like completing a quest before moving to the next.
On that basis, I would encourage everyone to only produce their boosted goods and to get the others from trades. That would provide the best use of your resources and ensure that you don't lose on trades. The higher the boost the better the trade is for you.

 

[DeletedUser]

some people put up trades that are more expensive than the wholesaler

Actually, that's not possible. Posted trades are limited to LIKE VALUE ratios of 4:1 through 1:4, while the Wholesaler trades at 5:1.

Between ages, the LIKE VALUE ratio is 4:1, so if somebody is trading Marble for Magic Dust, the QUANTITIES could range from 64:1 through 1:64.

The distinction is that the Wholesaler ONLY offers your two non-boosted goods within each age, and doesn't allow you to trade goods across an age.

 

[DeletedUser415]

My opinion is the buyer should pay the tax. Why should I pay a tax for player that has not discovered my city? I expect to receive what I put up for trade.
Although I agree with Lisica that the 50% is high for new players starting out. Now that my city is more advanced it's not much of an issue.

 

[DeletedUser]

@Katwijk thanks for clearing that up. To be honest I hadn't done the maths, it just seemed to me that some zero star trades were ridiculously lopsided

 

[DeletedUser]

Actually, that's not possible. Posted trades are limited to LIKE VALUE ratios of 4:1 through 1:4, while the Wholesaler trades at 5:1.

Between ages, the LIKE VALUE ratio is 4:1, so if somebody is trading Marble for Magic Dust, the QUANTITIES could range from 64:1 through 1:64.

The distinction is that the Wholesaler ONLY offers your two non-boosted goods within each age, and doesn't allow you to trade goods across an age.

Actualy, for non discovered players, that trade ( 1:4 ) would show as 1:6 including the tax.

 

[DeletedUser219]

My opinion is the buyer should pay the tax. Why should I pay a tax for player that has not discovered my city? I expect to receive what I put up for trade.
Although I agree with Lisica that the 50% is high for new players starting out. Now that my city is more advanced it's not much of an issue.

It is not that he hasn't discovered your city, it's that you haven't discovered his.

 

[DeletedUser]

A few months since posting this thread, I've come to a conclusion:

Trading fairly is not about trading at a ratio equivalent to the value of the goods in question, but about moving goods from one player to the next while establishing and maintaining a healthy network of trade partners.​

In practice this requires a player to set a standard rate they aim to trade at, such as 1:1 in value. This is the most widely accepted rate as is evident throughout the forums and this thread. There's a bit more to a fair trade however, when taking into account factors such as fees, availability, demand, stock and resourcefulness.

1. The fees are simply those that occur when trading with undiscovered neighbours.
2. The availability of a good defines how easily it can be obtained by other players (neighbours or fellows). This is of course heavily dependant on the boosts, progress and activity of any such player.
3. The demand is defined by what you need yourself, as well as the needs of other players.
4. Stock is what I categorise as the amount of goods you have readily available yourself in your Main Hall.
5. Lastly but not least, the most important feat: Resourcefulness. This is your ability to cope with your given situations including:

• Planning ahead to ensure you have the correct number and type of resources in stock for research, negotiating or upgrading;
• Awareness of which neighbours and fellows are active, what their boosts are and how far they have progressed;
• Aiding new players to help them progress more quickly and become solid trade partners;
• Seeking out active neighbours offering what you require and discovering them quickly.

So how do these help define a fair trade?​

If a new neighbour has just entered the game and they have boosts for a good I require, then it's fair for me (being in chapter 4) to accept a trade that is not within the 1:1 ratio in value, but more expensive or carries a fee. Why? My goods production is far more advanced through relics and upgrades. I can compensate for the 'lost' 10-50 goods per trade very easily. As that neighbour progresses, the more the trade ratio should even out. That's up to you to ensure though! The advantage of having a further trade partner to add to your network should speak for itself.

So what about a player who is as advanced as I? Is it fair to accept a trade that is more beneficial to them or carries a fee? Yes, when taking into account availability, demand and stock. Should a specific good that you do not have in stock and is in high demand by other players be available by very few players, then it is fair to pay more for that specific good in such a situation. The reason is simply that the supplier will need to decrease their own progression in order to supply everyone demanding that specific good, or all other players will begin or continue to stall in their progression. Thus, if you want to continue to progress as a demanding player, you'll need to give an incentive. That is then deemed fair.

Now, what about accepting offers that are more beneficial to you as a player? Well, this is where it comes down to either the above scenario and you being the supplier, or your good will by returning the favour. Whether that respective player ends up accepting/getting your trade is another matter, but in the end that is a balanced form of trading. Offering goods cheaper than 1:1 is a great incentive to get others to engage into trading, that from my experience then become regular trade partners at the standard rate of 1:1 in value. The addition of more trading partners makes this fair, as you are gaining an advantage in the end that you didn't have before. You can also view it as an investment, but one of the best you can make in this game.

So is there a fair trade that includes a traders fee? Apart from the two mentioned above: no. Quite frankly because it's just a game mechanic to encourage players to discover each other and has nothing to do with the actual bargaining aspect amongst players. In other words: I tend to only use these as indications of which undiscovered neighbours are active and then decide on whether to make the effort of discovering them based on the distance, their offers, boosts and the current availability and demand of those goods in my current network of trade partners.

And how does resourcefulness fit in? Basically this is completely player defined and therefore relies entirely on how much effort you're willing to invest into the game in terms of "strategy". If you don't care or take the time to plan how you play the game, then it's only fair if you miss out on some of the best trades and potential trade partners. Life's hard, I know. Especially for those of us who have jobs...

 

[DeletedUser415]

It is not that he hasn't discovered your city, it's that you haven't discovered his.

In response to your post (quoting my post), your wrong.
Maybe skip trying to correct someone and stay to the topic of discussion. And to quote my previous post" I expect to receive what I put up for trade".
In simple terms I was posting in regards to being a seller not a buyer.
If I put a trade up and he/she hasn't discovered my city, but wants my goods, why should I pay an additional tax for them to benefit on my trade.

 

[DeletedUser]

Even with tax - it far outweighs the wholesaler. So tax by buyer on an originally equal trade is still a big win.