Reasons for mass increase in FC cost
#1
ss_sparky66
Posted 10 December 2008 - 14:10
1- High level players are selling their buffs so not to waste their samina, hence they collect alot of credits so they in turn are selling their credits for FC's and to turn them around fast as to not become a target in the PvP area's they are one uping each other in order to get rid of credits fast. (For example I posted for 2803 credits to buy two FC's a couple hours ago. At the time I was the high credit per FC placement. A hour or two later they still have not sold and the FC's are going for more than 3k credits.)
2- Not enough gold sink. Not alot of extra's around to spend credits on ie Potions, ectra games etc...
3- Due to only being able to deposit in certain area's players will carry around alot of credits until they can find a banking area, if they become a taget in the PvP area they naturally will try and exchange them for FC's.
#2
Posted 10 December 2008 - 14:19
#3
Posted 10 December 2008 - 15:09
#4
ss_thesprog
Posted 10 December 2008 - 17:04
Also we have alot of folks waiting for rewards. I'm sitting on 61 FC due personally. Many have a couple hundred in the loop. If those arrived we'd see the marketplace looosen up. Somethings got to give or folks will likely look for new games. Perhaps even avoiding HCS games altogether. And I certainly don't want to see that happen.
#5
ss_rosebud124
Posted 10 December 2008 - 17:20
#6
ss_sparky66
Posted 10 December 2008 - 19:33
#7
ss_greenblaze
Posted 11 December 2008 - 00:35
#8
ss_ejames2100
Posted 11 December 2008 - 11:19
We need a credit sink
#9
ss_thesprog
Posted 11 December 2008 - 13:42
brand new gam. the original price dont mean anything. the way the comunity is fc are worth 2000c that is why it is going up. and it will go up again and again and again, forever and ever until the game is cancled in 2015. hcs doesnt and for there sake shouldnt want to keep the prices low. im sure they like us enough to want it attainable, but if they keep prices low than they lose money and this= no game to play. the only good way to combat inflation is to sink credits but honestly than you couldnt buy fc anyway cus you wouldnt have any credits so why even discuss it. just save up and buy fc. someday you will make more credits per hunt. and there will be many people hundreds of levels below you that will keep the price at an attainable amout for you.
Common misconception. Higher FC(FSP) prices are good for HCS. I see this theory all the time in threads here and on FS. How do you figure? Higher FC prices are good for the seller of FC's within the game. That benifit is to the owner of the FC. That is not COWS but the player who bought the crystal. Think of it in terms of forging for example.
A player buys 40 FC for $5. COWS gets the 5 spot. Now the player wants to forge 5X an item. Cost 10 FC plus 5000 credits lets say. At present market prices he only needs to spend 2 crystals to get approximately 6000 crystals. Thus for 12 crystals he FF'd the item. If a crystal bought 1000 credits he would have required 15 total FC spent to FF the item.
Inflating the credits required for an FC does not benifit COWS. It hurts them. There are points in the game that can be adjusted to help sell more FC. The obvious is to lower the amout of credits dropped by each creature. This is obvious. Especially with credits needing to be spent on repairs as you burn stami. Credit sinks like potions would be another.
A quick thought or 2 about the game. Took me about 10 levels to realize the game dynamics were set up to allow you enough credits to forge items. Secondly that forging is absolutely necessary for 1 hit/suicide strategies. If you take the present 20-30% repair costs per kill you still have lots of remaining credits to keep to buy FC's and forge items. COWS made 2 significant changes since the game started. Changing the "formula" on repair costs being 1. Second was adding the class buff for healing HP. Thus allowing players to go from constantly buying stims to virtually non existant. This has created a "glut" of credits. And therefore a steep rise in the cost of FC's. As credits have limited uses at the moment.
As long as the cost of FC's is fixed from HCS to the consumer inflation hurts COWS not help them. If we took 1000=1FC formula on day one and applied it to the price for 40 FC from COWS and the result was a cost of $15 for 40 crystals I'm betting inflation would not be so popular in some quarters here.
#10
ss_rosebud124
Posted 11 December 2008 - 13:58
[
Here is your question
Common misconception. Higher FC(FSP) prices are good for HCS. I see this theory all the time in threads here and on FS. How do you figure?
here is the answer
If you take the present 20-30% repair costs per kill you still have lots of remaining credits to keep to buy FC's and forge items.
:
(edit) i will elaborate a little. if i can buy fc for the credit i get on a hunt than i dont need to donate. if i use the fc to upgrade or any other thing that removes them from the game than the price goes up. eventualy i will need to donate cus the price is so high that i cant buy them any more with credits.
#11
ss_nath
Posted 11 December 2008 - 15:50
#12
ss_thesprog
Posted 11 December 2008 - 16:31
[
Here is your question
Common misconception. Higher FC(FSP) prices are good for HCS. I see this theory all the time in threads here and on FS. How do you figure?
here is the answer
If you take the present 20-30% repair costs per kill you still have lots of remaining credits to keep to buy FC's and forge items.
:
(edit) i will elaborate a little. if i can buy fc for the credit i get on a hunt than i dont need to donate. if i use the fc to upgrade or any other thing that removes them from the game than the price goes up. eventualy i will need to donate cus the price is so high that i cant buy them any more with credits.
Respectfully you need to seperate the transactions between players and the transactions between a player and COWS. As in my example forging is a transaction between a player and COWS. The player buying FC's has a savings by the escalation of credits offered to buy a FC. A net saving to the player who payed cash for his/her FC's. As per my example in a previous comment. This is because the cost is fixed from COWS to the player at a set rate on both the purchase and the forging costs to the player.
On the other hand the value of an FC traded player to player is a function of supply and demand within the marketplace between players. Until those FC's are consumed in a player versus COWS transaction they are not removed from the game. Then even the forging has the residual value of the gains on the item which has been forged. This is inpart the present cost in FC's to forge at the present market rate. Approximately 12 FC total now versus a 15 FC total on day 1 to forge approxamately. This is the checks and balances the exists with costs associated with FC consumption being fixed. Thus it is fair to say that dependent on the disposition of the gear at time of sale there could be a net gain during an individual transaction. But this becomes fluid as a plus/minus because of the new value created to the purchaser of the forged item. If you've ever done accounting and understand credits and debits and the function of balance sheeets you can appreciate the net position being zero. This is because you do not have amortization/depreciation as you would in real life on "capitol items. As long as; 1)costs remain fixed for a function or task; 2) the item is not removed from the game; 3) the items value does not drop to zero: 4) the net effect on the balance sheet will remain 1 FC=1000 credits as per the fixed base cost of $5= 25FC. This is bacause of fixed cost versus inflation combined with total loses of all previous owners of the item reflected as a net gain to the present owner of the item = 0. In other words you could say that the end user pays 1 FC for an item. There would be a net lose from the original user to the end user of 14 FC and a gain to the new user of 14FC based on the set fixed price of 1000 credits= 1 FC used on the bench mark set by cows on day one. Combined with $5=40Fc being fixed. This is a function of assets versus liabilities on a Balance Sheet versus the function of a Cash Flow statment. The keys being fixed costs, the item never being destoyed or reaching 0 value and no unrecoverable amortization/depreciation combined with costs per kill versus credits per kill always remaining a net positive number.
Accounting can be very different from economics interms of function as it relates to market view.
Your comments above are a function of cashflow. Not the balance sheet. And the costs associated with repairs ect. can only be a net of less than 0 for a true credit sink if fixed costs are raised or credits per drop reach a net negative outcome. This would not be a function of the "marketplace" we are discussing here on a player versus player transaction. But rather the adjustment of costs and reward that are presently fixed/semi-fixed as set by COWS.
Until you get true credit sinks into the game that consume 100% of an item purchased inflation within this game hurts COWS.
#13
ss_ohnoes
Posted 11 December 2008 - 17:58
#14
Posted 11 December 2008 - 18:38
#15
ss_rosebud124
Posted 12 December 2008 - 19:15
[
Here is your question
Common misconception. Higher FC(FSP) prices are good for HCS. I see this theory all the time in threads here and on FS. How do you figure?
here is the answer
If you take the present 20-30% repair costs per kill you still have lots of remaining credits to keep to buy FC's and forge items.
:
(edit) i will elaborate a little. if i can buy fc for the credit i get on a hunt than i dont need to donate. if i use the fc to upgrade or any other thing that removes them from the game than the price goes up. eventualy i will need to donate cus the price is so high that i cant buy them any more with credits.
Respectfully you need to seperate the transactions between players and the transactions between a player and COWS. As in my example forging is a transaction between a player and COWS. The player buying FC's has a savings by the escalation of credits offered to buy a FC. A net saving to the player who payed cash for his/her FC's. As per my example in a previous comment. This is because the cost is fixed from COWS to the player at a set rate on both the purchase and the forging costs to the player.
On the other hand the value of an FC traded player to player is a function of supply and demand within the marketplace between players. Until those FC's are consumed in a player versus COWS transaction they are not removed from the game. Then even the forging has the residual value of the gains on the item which has been forged. This is inpart the present cost in FC's to forge at the present market rate. Approximately 12 FC total now versus a 15 FC total on day 1 to forge approxamately. This is the checks and balances the exists with costs associated with FC consumption being fixed. Thus it is fair to say that dependent on the disposition of the gear at time of sale there could be a net gain during an individual transaction. But this becomes fluid as a plus/minus because of the new value created to the purchaser of the forged item. If you've ever done accounting and understand credits and debits and the function of balance sheeets you can appreciate the net position being zero. This is because you do not have amortization/depreciation as you would in real life on "capitol items. As long as; 1)costs remain fixed for a function or task; 2) the item is not removed from the game; 3) the items value does not drop to zero: 4) the net effect on the balance sheet will remain 1 FC=1000 credits as per the fixed base cost of $5= 25FC. This is bacause of fixed cost versus inflation combined with total loses of all previous owners of the item reflected as a net gain to the present owner of the item = 0. In other words you could say that the end user pays 1 FC for an item. There would be a net lose from the original user to the end user of 14 FC and a gain to the new user of 14FC based on the set fixed price of 1000 credits= 1 FC used on the bench mark set by cows on day one. Combined with $5=40Fc being fixed. This is a function of assets versus liabilities on a Balance Sheet versus the function of a Cash Flow statment. The keys being fixed costs, the item never being destoyed or reaching 0 value and no unrecoverable amortization/depreciation combined with costs per kill versus credits per kill always remaining a net positive number.
Accounting can be very different from economics interms of function as it relates to market view.
Your comments above are a function of cashflow. Not the balance sheet. And the costs associated with repairs ect. can only be a net of less than 0 for a true credit sink if fixed costs are raised or credits per drop reach a net negative outcome. This would not be a function of the "marketplace" we are discussing here on a player versus player transaction. But rather the adjustment of costs and reward that are presently fixed/semi-fixed as set by COWS.
Until you get true credit sinks into the game that consume 100% of an item purchased inflation within this game hurts COWS.
ummmm.... did you just agree with me
the price will go up and down over and over based on the availability of credits. but they will never be as low as they were in the begining and the average price over time will stedily go up cus of the increased amount of gold a person makes from hunting. unless hcs acts as a banker and sells them at a fixed rate forever. if they did act as a banker in that wya than eventualy it would be so easy for me to get fc i would never donate accept if hcs was going banrupt which they would.
ps. if i didnt understand what you said than my rebut is nananabooboo stic your head in doodoo
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

