*sam* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 11:32 am	This is another advance warning.. based on recent discussions I am now starting work on the following, and will patch in the changes early next week: 1. Each bulk good only spawns in specific town(s) - fuel in TX, Car Parts in SF/TX, Food in SS/Elms, etc. 2. Increase the NPC-shop price differential between bulk goods. i.e. any town far from the production source will be much more expensive. Piracy levels on a distribution route will increase in pricing effect also. 3. Certain bulk goods are of course critical to gameplay so need special treatment:   a) Fuel - even when there's no fuel cans in the NPC market, you can still refill your tanks at a much higher cost. (I'll make it so you can refuel from cans in your lockup also)   b) Food/Water - your characters won't actually starve when there's none in town (or your lockup), but they will have to pay a much higher price. The main reasons for the above 3 items is to encourage and make viable bulk-good trade caravans. A secondary reason is to make player attacks on NPC traders more worthwhile.. I'll make food, water and fuel the main stuff they carry, but also sometimes weapons in their cargo. 4. Certain types of hardware will only spawn in certain towns: fire/oil-based weapons only in TX, etc. The common weapons such as MGs will spawn everywhere. The main reason for item 4 (and to some extent the other 3 items also) is to increase the differences between the towns
lordbam Posted Sep 11, 2009, 11:51 am	*sam* said:   a) Fuel - even when there's no fuel cans in the NPC market, you can still refill your tanks at a much higher cost. (I'll make it so you can refuel from cans in your lockup also) Maybe you should keep refilling a car in SS cheap to help noobs. Gascans should be expensive in SS.
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:09 pm	Yay! A year ago all I did was trade guns . The market now is fat and saturated ! Demand is good @ Bam - SS is a license to print money , thats why no one is leaving - Rental arrive fully fuelled - the overhead for an SS scout should be $1k minimum - running away from pirates for the scout skillcheck cost b****r all currently - intercity travel will be more profitable coz all goods are more valuable COCO
*Ayjona* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:22 pm	This is *absolutely* wonderful. I've been waiting for such a change for so long. A year back, me and Rhalp did a few caravan runs (him with three two axle lorries, me in a single Phoenix to protect him), and while we did succeed in getting all three lorries from SS to Elms to SS to GW to BL and all the way back to SS, it really didn't pay off well at all, in spite of us checking prices beforehand, and carrying the cargo that yielded the most profit per bulk. We concluded that while the mechanics made for wonderful trading opportunities, the in-game economy really did not support it. (We decided to publish our findings to you, Sam, but unfortunately, never did so. Perhaps that would have speeded up this change ) But now... I canna wait to see all those lorries rambling across the landscape! Sam, will the new NPC-shop price differential mean that us carrying bulk goods further and farther will net us greater rewards, once we do sell it? I guess that what I am asking is this: while this patch means there is an incentive to trade, out of necessity (spreading bulk gods across the continent, providing access to stuff not made in particular towns), will the rewards also be greater?
*sam* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:24 pm	Quote: Sam, will the new NPC-shop price differential mean that us carrying bulk goods further and farther will net us greater rewards, once we do sell it? Yes, definitely.
Serephe Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:24 pm	This means big things for the southern towns that lack food/water production.
*sam* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:30 pm	.. and for the northern towns that lack fuel production
Serephe Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:32 pm	*sam* said: .. and for the northern towns that lack fuel production Perhaps, though it affects them less -- they can simply use fuel tanks large enough to make a round trip. It's hard to find workers that can survive without food or water.
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 11, 2009, 12:59 pm	Serephe said: It's hard to find workers that can survive without food or water. (sry, had to ) COCO
Iffler Posted Sep 11, 2009, 3:02 pm	........and every single fuel can has immediately been bought.....
metrocube Posted Sep 11, 2009, 3:13 pm	Sam, Announcing this ahead of time was a terrible decision for these reasons: 1. The first person to see your announcement BOUGHT EVERY CAN OF GAS IN EVERY TOWN. Thousands of gas cans have vanished out of the economy. When you switch over to the new economy, congrats, you've just made him/her an instant billionaire.  So much for curtailing inflation. 2. By announcing this, you've removed every single gas can from circulation. Gas cans are now being horded. You've effectively killed the activities of any camp that cannot create its own fuel. You may as well make this change go live now . Otherwise there will be no bleeping gas cans. Also, give us a fuel tank calculator, please. If you're making integral fuel a more important consideration, give us the tools to accurately and easily calculate our fuel requirements.
*Ayjona* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 4:07 pm	metrocube said: You may as well make this change go live now . Otherwise there will be no bleeping gas cans. Or Sam can just have the towns produce additional fuel cans. And possibly limit the purchase of fuel cans until the change goes live, though I prefer to let the economy run amok, and limit it by in-game means instead. This does beg an important question, though: NPCs can be pirated, and piracy will be far more profitable, now that the bulk goods have increased value, and now that NPCs will carry weapons. However, player convoys are absolutely safe, thanks to the limited PvP. What do we do, if the need to regulate the economy against other players through force arises? The limited PvP possibilities take away one of our most important means of regulating the economy in-game: the possibility to simply ambush a player who buys up every single gas can, when he tries to transfer that gas to another town. In any part of the world where humans are made to starve and suffer from hording and monopolization of basic means for survival, there is always a risk that the have-nots will riot and revolt, and loot whatever they need to survive. The lack of free PvP prevents us from doing the same, in-game. When the basic goods were almost always available, we didn't need this freedom. Now that they might become severely limited, the limited PvP options suddenly become a hindrance in regulating the in-game economy. That's the problem with "magical defenses" (i.e., off-game limitations to in-game activities, such as PvP): once you start adding them, you have to add more in order to balance out the game.
Jety Posted Sep 11, 2009, 4:09 pm	Let's not forget that you can PvP even in Somerset if your camp is at war with their camp. And since almost everyone is a member of multiple camps....
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 11, 2009, 4:12 pm	well its an easy fix, just get all the fuel cans back from Caps as either he or COCO ( inside information ) has bought them, its how they operate . In all seriousness, whoever bought out the fuel has abused the situation, its as good as cheating as far as im concerned .... *edited* with a smiley
Jety Posted Sep 11, 2009, 4:24 pm	GREAT IDEA: In a town that is out of gas, you have to be able to fill tanks because otherwise the game breaks in fundamental ways. But why not make it so that you can't fill any tank fuller than 5 units. This will mean: - You're never not able to scout or race. The game doesn't break. - You can actually get stranded in a town if it has no gas and you don't have enough to travel. Great from a RP/game feel standpoint. To help support this, we will need to be able to loot 1 and 5 unit gas containers from scouts, pump out tanks in town etc. I dont think it will be 'sim fuel management'. I think it will have just the right 'oh my god every drop is precious' feel.
*Longo* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 5:14 pm	Although some of these changes will just be annoyances for me, I think they are good for the game. The one big negative I see of this however is everyone attacking traders now...
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 11, 2009, 5:16 pm	You wanted more pirate players Longo, you got it
*Longo* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 5:21 pm	*Grograt* said: You wanted more pirate players Longo, you got it  I never said that. I like there being only a few of us, to be honest.
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 6:22 pm	[quote=metrocube]1. The first person to see your announcement BOUGHT EVERY CAN OF GAS IN EVERY TOWN.[/quote] And this is different than when it goes live in what way? The first person to log in and see the announcement pop up would have the same ability... [quote]When you switch over to the new economy, congrats, you've just made him/her an instant billionaire. So much for curtailing inflation.[/quote] You're assuming that people will buy from "this person." [quote]2. By announcing this, you've removed every single gas can from circulation.[/quote] As of today. More will come... [quote]Gas cans are now being horded. You've effectively killed the activities of any camp that cannot create its own fuel.[/quote] Not really - you can still resize your tanks and just make sure you have enough for a round trip. JL
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 6:25 pm	*Ayjona* said: player convoys are absolutely safe, thanks to the limited PvP. What do we do, if the need to regulate the economy against other players through force arises? Get your camp owner to go to war and PvP them; don't buy from them - get your own circle of friends and buy from them only. Just thinking out loud.
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 11, 2009, 7:56 pm	yup missed out on the SS buy up. Willing to trade sars cans for ss cans...Always had a stockpile in sars to guard against buyouts there. P.S I think this is a terrible idea, but I am hopeful I am wrong. PPS Someone bought hundreds of food and water in Sars yet the price didn't even go up. That's irritating.
*sam* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 8:16 pm	Until the new system goes live, fuel cans will continue to be produced in all towns (simulated traders deliveries) so one person hoarding everything isn't such a problem. Quote: PPS Someone bought hundreds of food and water in Sars yet the price didn't even go up. That's irritating. But not as bad as if the price did go up, then you'd buy all the food and sell it back to town for a profit... and buy it again..
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 11, 2009, 8:18 pm	Great, so the food price in sars is now stuck at it's current (relatively) low level? Bah, let them eat cake....
*sam* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 8:19 pm	Quote: But why not make it so that you can't fill any tank fuller than 5 units. That could be good, yeah. Maybe a special dispensation in Somerset though as that's where low-resourced players are based. Maybe anything up to 15 units will fill in SS?
*sam* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 8:20 pm	Quote: Great, so the food price in sars is now stuck at it's current (relatively) low level? No, it will go up based on scarcity, but not immediately. That's too exploitable.
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 11, 2009, 9:02 pm	Ok good to know, thanks.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 11, 2009, 9:23 pm	Jety said: GREAT IDEA: In a town that is out of gas, you have to be able to fill tanks because otherwise the game breaks in fundamental ways. But why not make it so that you can't fill any tank fuller than 5 units. This will mean: - You're never not able to scout or race. The game doesn't break. - You can actually get stranded in a town if it has no gas and you don't have enough to travel. Great from a RP/game feel standpoint. To help support this, we will need to be able to loot 1 and 5 unit gas containers from scouts, pump out tanks in town etc. I dont think it will be 'sim fuel management'. I think it will have just the right 'oh my god every drop is precious' feel. Exactly! If we are adding value to the bulk commodities and regulating prices through more logical and accurate supply and demand practices then we need more options in handling those goods. The changes should show indirectly through the changes that the NPC pirates would make to accomodate the difference after the changeover. For example: larger gas tanks in pirate cars that can be emptied into our vehicle and into our portable fuel cans and the ability to loot fuel cans we find in the cargo area of pirate cars that we can then unload into our personal gang fuel storage tank in town or our vehicles. I always wondered how all those NPC pirate cars with their 2 & 3 size fuel tanks could do sooo much travelling and still make it back to their camps, all of which would be forming a giant ring around every city only 10 miles outside of town! I could even see bounties paid in fuel or other commodities instead of cash. Wouldn't a place like TX rather provide cheap, easy to replace fuel as payment instead of cold hard cash? The most abundant commodity of an area would become an obvious item for barter in that area. On top of that, with the prices going up as much as they probably will for the hard to get items, rewards for winning races and leagues could become 100 bulk fuel in SS or 100 bulk food in TX instead of a weapon and a chassis plus cash.
metrocube Posted Sep 11, 2009, 9:33 pm	[quote = Jimmy]As of today. More will come...[/quote] Jimmy, sir, you vastly overestimate my ability and willingness to log on to the website 50 times a day to check if there is any more gas and to purchase it before someone else does. Now that Sam has announced 'No More Gas Real Soon!' any gas that comes on to market is going to be immediately bought by whichever player happens to be logged on. It's like the Weather service saying "[color=blue]HURRICANE IS COMING![/color]" suddenly, there is a run on fuel, water, food, etc. Government reassurances do not stop people from hording. [quote]Not really - you can still resize your tanks and just make sure you have enough for a round trip.[/quote] But, not really back at you. How are we going to fuel the new cars at camp?
simonmaxhill Posted Sep 11, 2009, 9:47 pm	Holy crap this is exciting and cool. Holy crap are things going to get interesting in FL very quickly.
*Ninesticks* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 9:54 pm	Metro said: But, not really back at you. How are we going to fuel the new cars at camp? Run them back with a tanker/scout vehicle
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:12 pm	Guess we can't quote each other. metrocube said: Jimmy, sir, you vastly overestimate my ability and willingness to log on to the website 50 times a day to check if there is any more gas and to purchase it before someone else does. The "buy it as soon as it appears" thing is just an aspect of the game... Unless you ration it, there's no way around that. I could check 50 times a day and *just* miss it every time. Doesn't take away from gameplay (tm). Quote: Now that Sam has announced 'No More Gas Real Soon!' any gas that comes on to market is going to be immediately bought by whichever player happens to be logged on. It's like the Weather service saying "HURRICANE IS COMING!" suddenly, there is a run on fuel, water, food, etc. Government reassurances do not stop people from hording. I don't disagree, but it won't affect your gameplay at all - just cost a little more. There have been LOTS of moves toward it costing more to play... nine said: Quote: But, not really back at you. How are we going to fuel the new cars at camp? Run them back with a tanker/scout vehicle Exactly. I have some pickups that have 100 unit tanks for this purpose. My lorries all get 300 unit tanks. It's amazing how far you can go on that... This is really no different than we've had it so far... If you were in SS and wanted to go to Elms you had to allow for it. Camp just means you can't "refuel" from the NPC's while you're there. AL said: I always wondered how all those NPC pirate cars with their 2 & 3 size fuel tanks could do sooo much travelling and still make it back to their camps, They stash their fuel cans in caves, old buildings, etc. OR they have a 100 unit pickup that's just outside of the combat area.
Serephe Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:28 pm	Only problem I see with people buying up all the fuel now is that they may be able to make a large profit without actually moving it once the prices change. Perhaps the prices should reflect the amount of fuel stored in peoples lockups too? Though this is also exploitable in that people can keep the prices down by storing large amounts in Somerset, just to ruin trading. Game balance is hard.
darthspanky Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:37 pm	its really too bad some players play for their own benifit by buying up all the feul, those bastards should be nerfed for not playing like the rest of the carebear community and not sharing there stuff to all the wonderful players who would never do a thing like that. gimme a break i hope they buy it all up and hoard it sell it for huge profits and if they get pvpd they can hire me with all the profits. ill wack them feul whinners for ya
Serephe Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:43 pm	If whiners get whacked, then I guess I'll have my hands full playing whack the Spanky all day, huh buddy.
darthspanky Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:45 pm	i could never fight you oh wait i did in a tac but someone just got smoked really bad im just whinning hoping youll wack me lol
Serephe Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:50 pm	Nah I'd have to use lasers and lasers are boring. I'd rather whack a nice soft trader player.
darthspanky Posted Sep 11, 2009, 10:59 pm	i could insult ya try to make ya mad maybe then youll get me if not get used to the whinning muhahahahaha
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 11, 2009, 11:41 pm	Cant help but think Darth and Serephe have got their wires crossed ? COCO
Cade Posted Sep 12, 2009, 12:55 am	I disagree. A public announcement was made and someone took advantage to make a profit. Cheating would be if someone got inside information before Sam posted this.
metrocube Posted Sep 12, 2009, 1:11 am	*Ninesticks* said: Metro said: But, not really back at you. How are we going to fuel the new cars at camp? Run them back with a tanker/scout vehicle I hadn't thought of that. Thanks, nine!
*Tinker* Posted Sep 12, 2009, 2:35 am	*sam* said: 1. Each bulk good only spawns in specific town(s) - fuel in TX, Car Parts in SF/TX, Food in SS/Elms, etc. Sam are these spawning inside trader vehicles? If so wouldn't it be more fun if there was also the odd rare commodities of that town, because how much fun is it to loot fuel in TX where it's so common allready..... unless this is intended to make it hard, or prevent some kind of exploit? <insert vulcan ears> Logic dictates that goods travel both ways, so a trader squad will inevently have to come back to a town to make profits with cheap goods bought elsewheres
simonmaxhill Posted Sep 12, 2009, 2:55 am	Speaking of evil... wouldn't food sometimes spawn in FL, like, right after the gladiator events?
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 12, 2009, 3:38 am	Not even implemented yet and I CALLED IT. Sorry I know this will look really arrogant, but I don't care. I told ya('all) so. Joel Autobaun said: Crazy AL said: A small newb gang's requirements should be very manageable. All they will need at first is food and water of which I think they should get a starting stock of each that should hold them for a RL month as long as they don't recruit a whole bunch of gangers immediately. They won't have any cars needing repairs using rentals all the time so the starting cash they get should hold them easily. Here's another reason to encourage them to scout with other people FIRST. Some of the loot they might get will be CPs or scrap or EPs all that can go towards getting their buildings started and maintained. And those first loot cars should be broken down for parts instead of repaired in my opinion anyway. Takes more vehicles out of the market and adds to the money sink in the form of sinking assets instead of cash. I'm going to go back and respond to this, since the topic is still going. I could probably feed all PC Gangs each month with just one Lorry load(of course it would be a chore to get it all over Evan).  Even inactive ones. A lot of camp owners can make food and water, undercutting each other, etc.  Yes it could be "affordable" for players, but it would be a TIME SINK on top of a money sink.  I frankly wouldn't bother checking market prices and people are not going to pay enough for the Time, I know that right now, in all honesty.  Trust me I know about this stuff, I have barely commented on your other GOOD ideas, I don't know a heck of a lot about how a lot of these ideas would pan out.  I am not hauling food all over the place and making sure I am selling for lessthancaps or some bull####.  It's not worth my time.  It might be worth some min maxers time, but only if they make enough money.  Plus all the buyers have got to waste time trying to get a good deal and not get screwed by buying up hoarders who probably won't even make any food/water/whatever. Evan Wheat Pool or no go (pumpkin pool actually lol).  Seller's price protection and buyers price protection.  Yes it's just my opinion.  I don't know if Sam can code it so that gangs get their "share"(paid for of course) before the extra food/water is dumped on the market.  That would be cool.  Also if there is going to be a shortage...to offer a special bells and whistles WHOOP WHOOOP ALERT onthe town page that it needs food badly and the price is shot way up until the shortage/undersupply is filled.  That let's the hoarders have a little fun too.  Al least no one will really suffer for not paying attention.  Unless they run out of money, like how it is now.
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 12, 2009, 8:45 am	Care bear reactions. Reactionary. Quick to blame. Unable forsee or address the real ingame dilemmas Make personal attacks when ever possible Blame , blame, blame, Cry, cry, cry COCO
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 12, 2009, 10:10 am	Glow Plug said: *Grograt* said: well its an easy fix, just get all the fuel cans back from Caps as either he or COCO ( inside information ) has bought them, its how they operate  . In all seriousness, whoever bought out the fuel has abused the situation, its as good as cheating as far as im concerned .... *edited* with a smiley Yeah... I am Evil. I will feed my gangers with your children. I will quench my thirst with your blood. I will buy all fuel and I will sell it back for obscene profit. Then I kill you and get the fuel back. Can you see my head turning 360 degres? mu ha HA HA HAR HARRR ! Je veux votre bien et je l'aurais! Those infamous words.... 'See you on the road scag'     Day after day, day after day,     We stuck, nor breath nor motion;     As idle as a painted ship     Upon a painted ocean.     Water, water, everywhere,     And all the boards did shrink;     Water, water, everywhere,     Nor any drop to drink.
*Ayjona* Posted Sep 12, 2009, 3:25 pm	*jimmylogan* said: *Ayjona* said: player convoys are absolutely safe, thanks to the limited PvP. What do we do, if the need to regulate the economy against other players through force arises? Get your camp owner to go to war and PvP them; don't buy from them - get your own circle of friends and buy from them only. Just thinking out loud. Good ideas, all of these But all these are second-hand solutions, necessary only because the PvP is limited. In the end, having a fully dynamic and exploitable economy without free PvP, will ALWAYS pose problems, since the destitute and desperate cannot take matters into their own hands. And the possibility to actually go to war against another player over hoarding issues, should not be limited to camps only (if the option exists at all). While I certainly agree that camps should offer many material and social advantages, taking part in camps and the camper society of Evan should not be a requirement to make use of the actual mechanics of the game. Buying only from my own circle of friends is probably the best bet, when violence isn't a mechanical option. If If done on a large scale, it is an excellent way to protest against an uneven distribution of goods. Jety said: Let's not forget that you can PvP even in Somerset if your camp is at war with their camp. And since almost everyone is a member of multiple camps.... This is a temporary solution, an excuse for a more complex system, and only cold comfort, unfortunately. Me, I haven't taken part in camp business for a year, and while I certainly think camps are a great asset to Darkwind, I don't think they should be a requirement for resisting hoarding and reacting to economic monopolies. (Don't get me wrong: I think the possibility and ability to control the economy and hoard assets is a great gameplay aspect, as long as it can be counteracted and opposed in other ways. I'm strictly opposed to limiting the economy. But I do want a multitude of ways of affecting the economy and in-game assets, and the absence of the possibility of direct stealing creates a lack of balance.)
simonmaxhill Posted Sep 12, 2009, 6:15 pm	If we carry a weapon or good from one town to another and sell it to NPCs, will that good then become available to purchase by other players?
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 12, 2009, 6:43 pm	Quote: Day after day, day after day,     We stuck, nor breath nor motion;     As idle as a painted ship     Upon a painted ocean.     Water, water, everywhere,     And all the boards did shrink;     Water, water, everywhere,     Nor any drop to drink. *The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner* It sounds like a lot of us have dead albatross's hanging around our necks until the winds of change blow in!
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 12, 2009, 7:01 pm	*ISHOULDCOCO* said: Care bear reactions. Reactionary. Quick to blame. Unable forsee or address the real ingame dilemmas Make personal attacks when ever possible Blame , blame, blame, Cry, cry, cry COCO I don't care Coco, bring it. My point was they were discussing ways to facilitate travel in Evan and incentive to haul goods.  Now maybe SOME of that WILL occur (I believe by the same people that are already doing it).  Mostly, I think people will just trade/buy from you hoarders.
Philyn Posted Sep 12, 2009, 8:58 pm	Well my camp really got the short end of the stick on this deal. I can't get water or grow food and I am 2000 miles from the farmlands of the north. What about a new "Greenhouse" building in which I can bring in water and grow food. You could even sell seeds in the marketplace. I am all for additional items in the game. Another one would be a rare crystal needed to build lasers. You could break down 5 normals and get enough to build a heavy. Another item that would be neat would be a scope that you could attach to a weapon to get a range bonus or just rare weapons that have been upgraded to have additional attributes. Completely new weapons would be nice like a flaming oil ballastics weapon.
*goat starer* Posted Sep 12, 2009, 11:51 pm	Glow Plug said: I will return fire with my car canons anyways. but you won't... because when you are challenged you slink back under a rock.. because you have neither the gunners nor teh equipment to fight a protracted PVP war. shame really as I would love to see you try!
darthspanky Posted Sep 13, 2009, 12:03 am	you want a pvp hardcore war goat try asking me ill be more than happy to grieve you
*goat starer* Posted Sep 13, 2009, 9:25 pm	darthspanky said: you want a pvp hardcore war goat try asking me ill be more than happy to grieve you  well since mr enormous chicken wont come out to play... i accept your challenge darth!!! get yourself to shanty and lets knock 7 bells out of one another.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:53 am	OK, this stuff has all now gone live.. since the refuelling costs have generally increased a lot, I have also reduced gates fees by 50%. When a town has little or no fuel cans for sale, not only does the refuelling costs rise dramatically, but also you can't refuel any one vehicle above 5 units (or 10 in SS).
lordbam Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:59 am	luckily my lorry squad has just fueled up and is headed to Texan as we speak.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 12:21 pm	I see someone has filled the northern markets with fuel again..
Serephe Posted Sep 14, 2009, 12:28 pm	Heh, I wonder why? So much for taking money out of the economy, eh Sam?
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 12:31 pm	Heh yep. Well I know how much fuel was available the other day before the announcement so the profit from this won't run to more than 1 or 2 millions anyway; not a gamebreaker.
Serephe Posted Sep 14, 2009, 12:34 pm	Yeah I'll agree with that, though it still pissed me off a bit. Oh well. It's not like I'm helping things much with my massive amounts of scouting, anyway. If it makes you feel better though, I spent 60000 dollars refueling my 2 lorries.
metrocube Posted Sep 14, 2009, 1:54 pm	*sam* said: When a town has little or no fuel cans for sale, not only does the refuelling costs rise dramatically, but also you can't refuel any one vehicle above 5 units (or 10 in SS). It appears that refueling a car uses NPC stocks.  So, there will be 0 fuel in SS in about... oh, 5 hours.
Serephe Posted Sep 14, 2009, 1:55 pm	Curious why we can refuel to 10 in Somerset. It doesn't really help much, since I believe we need more than 10 to get to Elms or Gateway anyway?
betterlucky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 1:58 pm	I was assuming there would be NPC traders topping up (or depleting as appropriate) stocks from time to time depending on piracy levels. Does that actually happen?
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 14, 2009, 1:58 pm	How long does a vehicle take to rust, i have a few that may never move again Oh and i wish i could make 2 mil of the backs of everybody elose by a few clicks ...pah
metrocube Posted Sep 14, 2009, 2:37 pm	*sam* said: Heh yep. Well I know how much fuel was available the other day before the announcement so the profit from this won't run to more than 1 or 2 millions anyway; not a gamebreaker. Sam, The issue is not his profit. It's that you allowed a Rules Council member to use inside knowledge to react to your new rules before the rest of your player base could. That seems very unfair to me, and also to several others. In fact, it's all we've been talking about in the chat lobby all morning. I don't think you should allow Rules Council members to take advantage of new rules and new information before your playerbase has had time to react. Heck, I'm just a regular employee at my company, and I'm only allowed to trade in my company stock 8 weeks out of the entire year. If it had been someone without ** symbols around their name doing this, we'd still have yelled and shouted at that person, but there would not have been this sense of impropriety and unfairness.
*viKKing* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 2:44 pm	If only storage cost suggestion had not turned into the mess it was. Our happy customer would certainly have to pay a very expensive bill to store all this fuel...
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 14, 2009, 2:50 pm	I do want to emphasis that I would have reacted exactly the same way if I had read this before anyone else hey wait a minute! I did read this before anyone else ! COCO
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 2:54 pm	EDIT: never mind
*Ninesticks* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 3:20 pm	Ok I said this in the lobby and I'll say it here, I don't think Coco took advantage of his RC position - though Sam can check this to see when he bought all the fuel no doubt and cross-check it with the time of his post if he desires to. Not a gamebreaker no, but he deliberately made a million or two in game terms by taking advantage of a proposed change. Basically he was rewarded quite heftily for no risk at all. I personally find this abhorrent after all the increased costs that have been brought in to sort out the cash flow issues. I won't suggest for a moment that being a member of the RC should restrict a player's game choices, but I consider it unwise in the extreme to invite these accusations by doing it in the first place - all it has done is fatten Coco's bank balance probably at the cost of his personal reputation and possibly that of the RC's role (such that it has anyway). There was no RP reasoning behind the decision to buy up all the fuel, just a pure manipulation of the upcoming change beyond its intended purpose. Still I suppose it could be worse, he could be selling it on the player market for even more.
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 14, 2009, 3:29 pm	Thx, Nine This is the kind of reasonable and rational response I am happy to respond to. But after all the dogs abuse and threats in the lobby I am unreceptive. I Never intended to besmirch the reputation of the RC and have already resigned , Today at 2:43 pm COCO
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 14, 2009, 4:07 pm	Fuel Discovered in Tex Rumors of fuel deliveries abound
Crazy AL Posted Sep 14, 2009, 4:34 pm	When will the ability to siphon fuel from vehicles to our gang storage in towns become available?
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 14, 2009, 4:47 pm	Crazy AL said: When will the ability to siphon fuel from vehicles to our gang storage in towns become available? Doubt it ? Potential exploit  You should be allowed to transfer at Camp though COCO
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:01 pm	yep exploiters always find a way
Marrkos Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:06 pm	*ISHOULDCOCO* said: Crazy AL said: When will the ability to siphon fuel from vehicles to our gang storage in towns become available? Doubt it ? Potential exploit  COCO What's the exploit?
Jety Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:11 pm	Refuel, siphon, refuel, siphon, refuel, siphon.... free gas cans!
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:15 pm	or if limited to once every n hours then you could start using loot cars and milk them for gas COCO
Marrkos Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:25 pm	Jety said: Refuel, siphon, refuel, siphon, refuel, siphon.... free gas cans! How are they free?  You are paying to refuel the vehicle. Now, if the exploit is that it costs less to refuel than it does to buy cans from the NPC market, then that should be changed so there is parity between the two NPCs and thereby close that loophole. But, if fuel is going to be made more important than we should be able to collect/reclaim it from any source we have available, i.e. vehicles we own, vehicles we've looted (fuel as loot), gas tanks we are resizing, and other places I haven't thought of. EDIT: It also means that Fuel Cans need to be fraction-able, so that refueling my 2 unit tank from my Lockup doesn't use a complete can (8+ units).
Crazy AL Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:52 pm	Marrkos said: Jety said: Refuel, siphon, refuel, siphon, refuel, siphon.... free gas cans! How are they free?  You are paying to refuel the vehicle. Now, if the exploit is that it costs less to refuel than it does to buy cans from the NPC market, then that should be changed so there is parity between the two NPCs and thereby close that loophole. But, if fuel is going to be made more important than we should be able to collect/reclaim it from any source we have available, i.e. vehicles we own, vehicles we've looted (fuel as loot), gas tanks we are resizing, and other places I haven't thought of. EDIT: It also means that Fuel Cans need to be fraction-able, so that refueling my 2 unit tank from my Lockup doesn't use a complete can (8+ units). Absolutely! What would be the point of being able to refuel a looted car from the other cars you might leave only to bring it back to town and sell it AND the fuel back to Jakes or a player? If fuel is supposed to be more important, then I should be able to siphon fuel from tanks of looted cars in the field and in town. And the fuel can/units of fuel thing should definitely be coded to be consistent. If I bring a can, I should have 8 units of fuel that would be siphonable. A size 20 fuel tank should have 20 units of siphonable fuel. Perhaps fuel tanks need a bulk space of which 5% is the tank itself and 95% of it is the fuel that it holds so a 100 unit tank only has 95 units of fuel.
BWGunner Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:56 pm	At the point of creating fractional values for gas are we not at the point of being able to use it as currency?
Crazy AL Posted Sep 14, 2009, 5:58 pm	If fuel is life in Evan and as much as fuel costs, I would be baffled by a system that WOULDN'T use it as a form of currency. I got 100 units of fuel I will give you for that car cannon!
4saken Posted Sep 14, 2009, 6:02 pm	Quote: a) Fuel - even when there's no fuel cans in the NPC market, you can still refill your tanks at a much higher cost. (I'll make it so you can refuel from cans in your lockup also) I was in GW today and seemed to have no such option, though as I was on auto-refuel it may have already given me 5 gallons. Or is this ability only in SS?
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 6:30 pm	now see if you guys elected me to rc ya could have paid me a fee and i would have given you the inside info and when to buy the gas.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 6:40 pm	Quote: The issue is not his profit. It's that you allowed a Rules Council member to use inside knowledge to react to your new rules before the rest of your player base could. That seems very unfair to me, and also to several others. In fact, it's all we've been talking about in the chat lobby all morning. It would be very unfair, if it was true. But it's not true. The RC were no more aware of when this was going to be announced than anyone else. If there really had been insider trading happening, the RC member in question would have bought the fuel before the announcement.
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 6:51 pm	i dont think coco should resign even if the accusation was true havent you ever heard of a corrupt politician with inside info let the voters decide next election. ya got my vote coco
metrocube Posted Sep 14, 2009, 7:20 pm	*sam* said: When a town has little or no fuel cans for sale, not only does the refuelling costs rise dramatically, but also you can't refuel any one vehicle above 5 units (or 10 in SS). Sam, can you clarify what this means? If I have a vehicle with a 15 unit tank in Sarsfield and it is currently at 10 units full, which of these options is correct? a. I can refuel for another 5 units to bring it to 15 units. b. I cannot refuel the vehicle until it has less than 5 units of fuel.
*viKKing* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 7:46 pm	metrocube said: If I have a vehicle with a 15 unit tank in Sarsfield and it is currently at 10 units full, which of these options is correct? a. I can refuel for another 5 units to bring it to 15 units. b. I cannot refuel the vehicle until it has less than 5 units of fuel. I would say (a).
Jety Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:06 pm	The correct answer is B. "I cannot refuel the vehicle until it has less than 5 units of fuel." [edit] You have to understand intent here. Because this is a cars with guns game, you can't have true out-of-fuel situations because it would just break everything. So even when a town is completely dry, you still get 5 unit of fuel which is presumably enough to keep on scouting and racing. An alternative which would have the same effect would be to say that cars can conduct races and scouts of less than 10 miles while "running on vapors". Ie, you can scout short distances with less than 1 unit of fuel in your car. Then you wouldn't need the 5 unit freebie, and basic game mechanics wouldn't break either.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:40 pm	Jety is correct, and the suggestion is a good one too. In fact, racing already works this way but making short-distance scouts free from fuel requirements would make good sense, and would allow us to remove the '5 units even when there is non available' rule.
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:41 pm	Ok, I'm confused now. If I want to take a Box Van and 2 apaches to GW to do a trade run, do I need to have a fuel tank large enough to get me to GW and back to SS or will I be able to refill my tanks from the npc market in GW? I am fine with money sinks, but this fuel thing seems to have gone too far. How the heck are we supposed to do anything without fuel? I am ok with the farther you are from Texan, the more you pay the NPC market, but there HAS to be fuel available for everyone to use, or what is the point of doing anything besides town events?
Jety Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:46 pm	That depends entirely on whether or not GW NPCs have fuel for sale. (Or whether a player has fuel for sale, for that matter). If they do, then you can refuel like normal. If some jerk has bought out GW's fuel, or if traders haven't been making it through to resupply the town, and no players have any fuel for sale either, then you can potentially get stranded in GW without enough fuel to get back.
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:49 pm	Jety said: That depends entirely on whether or not GW NPCs have fuel for sale. If they do, then you can refuel like normal. If some jerk has bought out GW's fuel, or if traders haven't been making it through to resupply the town, then you can potentially get stranded in GW without enough fuel to get back. Anyone want to buy a Lorry and/or box van? They seem to be useless to the game now. No town has NPC fuel available. Good intention on the change Sam, but imo it has F'ed up the game outside of town events.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:50 pm	There is a plentiful supply of fuel in Texan. The gameplay that I'm trying to stimulate is where players start to set up businesses bringing it north and selling it in the marketplace or direct to the NPC shops. Maybe other players set up businesses acting as bodyguards for them! As always, I don't claim to be omnipotent or to have necessarily gotten it right straight away, so if you'll bear with me that's the way I'm trying to go.. .. we may need to reduce the amount of fuel needed for travel, for example. But I'm not going to "leave it broken" so don't panic.
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:53 pm	i dont really care because i always had large stocks of feul and im not selling, maybe you will be prepaired for the next thing that comes along if you give it some thought of what could be made to have shortages and pre stock it. or just hunt traders and steal there fuel, or make a lorryb run or pay a vet to make a run for you if you cant get a lorry and get yer own gas thats yer problem not the communitys as jd says quit yer bitchin beside once i sub running out of gas isnt gunna matter that much anyway you all are gunna have much bigger problems.
Jety Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:53 pm	It looks like hoarding/gouging could be a real concern. You may want to nip it in the bud, with exponential growth on the cost of storing fuel, so that beyond a couple hundred cans it becomes prohibitively expensive to sit on it.
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:54 pm	*sam* said: As always, I don't claim to be omnipotent or to have necessarily gotten it right straight away, so if you'll bear with me that's the way I'm trying to go.. .. we may need to reduce the amount of fuel needed for travel, for example. But I'm not going to "leave it broken" so don't panic. Sorry for the whining rant Sam. Just got started doing travels with BV and Lorries and now they are going to sit in my garage gathering dust. IMO, fuel is way too important to playing the game to leave it up to players to provide it to the masses.
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 8:57 pm	Why not limit the amount of fuel one can store in their lockup? It WOULD be a dangerously explosive event if somehow it ever went off! Limit it to, say 150 units of fuel in a personal lockup INCLUDING what you have hidden in your cars! Fuel is the ONE commodity that we cannot do without for between town travel. I have mission runners that I can now do nothing with after they make another run. As it stands now since I cant refuel them to their 22 unit tank capacity. Some people make their money scouting.. they are paying OUT the NOSE in gate fees for bringing in their loot. THIS I can understand, it's dangerous out there and the towns folk might want to make a buck from the one keeping the town safe. I make the majority of my game cash by running missions between towns..... If I cannot refuel up to my capacity in my mission runners and am required to buy fuel from 5000/10000 per can, I am going to go bankrupt in very short order!..... I estimate that I will have no cash in one month real time because of my overhead costs. (NO, I am not one of the multi-millionaires!) SO, a limit on the amount of fuel you can have in ANY town lockup might be the logical move to allow others to buy NPC market fuel when/if they need it AND allow the higher prices to rise and fall with the economic winds as players run fuel from cheaper areas (Tx) to the northern fuel starved areas. I'd like to continue running missions but at this time it has become impossible without paying 50,000$ for fuel to run a 15,000$ mission.
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:00 pm	doesnt cost anything to store it at a camp or just open a feul factory at yer camp instead of another building make yer own gas.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:02 pm	*JD_Basher* said: snip. . what he said exactly
*viKKing* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:24 pm	There is definitively a need to cap the maximum of items (any kind, including fuel) one can buy at once anytime. Without creating an artificial rule, what about limiting this to the amount of free bulk one owns in his vehicles? There could even be some kind of expensive containers (or tanks) to be filled as well. Such ones could be manufactured from lot of car scraps. We would match the lock-up and market regulation we need, wouldn't we?
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:26 pm	I have temporarily removed the rule that stops you filling your tanks if the NPCs have none to sell. This is a temporary measure until we have time to figure out a suitable solution. There's several possibilities, including: 1. Reducing fuel usage for travel 2. Globally reducing fuel prices 3. Making NPCs routinely carry a few cans around with them
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:29 pm	Quote: SO, a limit on the amount of fuel you can have in ANY town lockup might be the logical move to allow others to buy NPC market fuel when/if they need it AND allow the higher prices to rise and fall with the economic winds as players run fuel from cheaper areas (Tx) to the northern fuel starved areas. Just an addendum here..... The limit I was talking about is the amount a gang can buy from the NPC market!.... ANYONE can stockpile goods in any amount! AND pay the lockup fees!... The LIMIT would be applied to any gang that has OVER 150 fuel units in town..... THEN they cannot buy from the NPC market. I was NOT asking for a limit on the amount of fuel a gang could stockpile.... Just in case the piracy does take their share, the price should rise accordingly. and a profit could be made by selling BACK to the NPC market if need be.
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:35 pm	lol dont do it sam keep it the way you made it its your game you get to decide how we play it. i remember someone bitching about not being allowed to hunt higfh fame treaders becvause thjere are none to hunt lol, when the poor feul starved players whine boo hoo i have no feul whaaa you cave in hmmm. ok whinners yer adventures in carebear land can continue now as normal. what you think this game is a post apoclyiptic game or something
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:38 pm	darth: I said temporarily! This isn't caving in, it's merely stopping the game from being unplayable while we iron out some kinks. I fully intend to reinstate the 'can't refuel' rule when ready..
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:41 pm	darthspanky said: doesnt cost anything to store it at a camp or just open a feul factory at yer camp instead of another building make yer own gas. Fuel costs lockup space spanky........ EVEN in camp! You know as well as I do you cant open a fuel factory without the oilwells and production facilities. Most camps don't have those unless close to TX! If you can be constructive here as we know you can be..... then be silent please and stop spamming the forums with inane (not insane) rantings.......
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:48 pm	sorry i wasnt trying to be disrepectful to yopu sam i was being sarcastic, i think its actually funny to listen tio em they knew this was comming and didnt perpare.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 9:50 pm	It's alright darth, no offence taken. I have a thick skin
Philyn Posted Sep 14, 2009, 10:00 pm	I am not sure if you are planning on limiting the amount of fuel in a lockup but 150 is not enough. If I have 150 units I want to transport in a lorry this would leave no fuel to refuel other cars in that town.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 10:06 pm	Quote: I am not sure if you are planning on limiting the amount of fuel in a lockup but 150 is not enough. My personal opinion is that limiting lockup size and limiting the amount of fuel you're allowed to buy are both to be avoided (not just because they seem unrealistic). I want fuel to be an important consideration and for it to be at times rare and for that to create problems. It is through this kind of in-game tension that we can improve general strategic gameplay, promote more diverse play-styles, and promote more multiplayer consortiums.
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 10:08 pm	you could always use a lorry as a storage area for feul and still have 150 units in yer lockup, jd, maybe the ability to make a feul factory can be implemented at all camps, yeah in ss you would only produce a fraction of what you could make in texan but at least it would make you reevaluate what you make at camp if traveling is that important in the long run it would pay for itself.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 14, 2009, 10:11 pm	*sam* said: I have temporarily removed the rule that stops you filling your tanks if the NPCs have none to sell. This is a temporary measure until we have time to figure out a suitable solution. There's several possibilities, including: 1. Reducing fuel usage for travel 2. Globally reducing fuel prices 3. Making NPCs routinely carry a few cans around with them I believe the whole bulk goods discussion thread that elicited so much input had a lot of information in the thread. I don't believe all of the systems are in place yet that would make bulk goods the valuable commodities they could be. Increasing the price of fuel preceding the ability to gather it in the various ways I suggested is the opposite order this should have occurred. Return the price of fuel to what it was before and implement the ability to siphon fuel from any car or fuel can both in town and in the field. Provide a gang storage tank for gangs in town to store their bulk fuel and put siphoned fuel into as well as refuel their cars with in town. Keep track of the amount of units of fuel whether it is in a tank, in a fuel can or in the gang storage tank in town. Create an 8 unit fuel can that shows up in the loot screen on scouts and add the ability to siphon fuel from car tanks as well as loot fuel cans from any NPC gangs that are defeated. Keep the amount of fuel in towns essentially in the thousands of units as the towns themselves would run transports to get fuel to keep the town alive and make it purchasable by players. Any Fuel Guilds that are willing to make the trip down to TX to get fuel would probably be willing to sell their fuel to players at a signficant mark up to make it worth their while. Once all the above things are in place, THEN make the changes to the cost of the fuel dependant upon what town you purchase it from. Essentially the cost for fuel in SS should take into account all of the costs associated with getting the fuel to SS, plus a huge mark up in price by the town supplier for the the player who wants to purchase it from the town thus depleting the towns supply. Now, a PLAYER who brings all that fuel up should incur the same approximate costs and still be able to sell their fuel at a good profit and undercut the town's price at the same time. There's no way any town would allow themselves to run out of fuel. Everything would grind to a halt. If there aren't enough players transporting fuel that the town can purchase from, then businesses would work together to do it themselves. All these changes going in now doesn't mean that society wouldn't put a structure into place to deal with the changes after the fact. It's either been like this (from a citizen of Evan's perspective) or its been like how it was before. Either way society would put systems into place to deal with whichever what it's going to be now.
*sam* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 10:16 pm	There's truth in a lot of what you say, AL. But what I'm currently trying to do is separate the player-managed economy from the "behind-the-scenes simulation" of the NPC-economy. The game economy has always been designed on the "behind-the-scenes" model and I think a better game economy could be produced by removing it and putting everything more directly in the control of players.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 14, 2009, 10:42 pm	Ultimately as DW's population grows I think that is a great idea, Sam. The only thing I worry about is that the number of people who actually like doing commodities trading and transport of goods for fun might not be enough to actually support the economy for the rest of the players who just want to buy the stuff they need without paying too much.
*Longo* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:00 pm	Sam, unless you are gonna change the name of the game to Fuelwind, this gas thing needs to be fixed. Its getting a bit out of hand. I should be able to horde as much gas as I want and travel/scout whenever I want. Theres been a ton of changes/suggestions lately that really require the micromanagement of our gangs, which isnt a good thing... my favorite game of all time is quickly becoming a nuisance. Im afraid that if I take a week off of "working" in darkwind that I wont have any gas, 1/2 my buzzers will have been stolen by some new game mechanism, my camp burned to the ground, all my guys dying from some disease added while I was gone, and lockups reduced to shacks in town, not covering any of my gear and all of it falling victim to acid rain. What ever happened to driving the cars and having fun?
betterlucky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:00 pm	I like the NPCs carrying a fuel can or two idea, think of it as siphoning their tanks dry instead if that helps. Though the ability to decant those cans into a gang storage tank to allow for fractional use is a must too. Once you have that, maybe even remove direct refuelling of cars, players instead have to buy cans to top up their gang's tank to fuel their cars instead. That way you can also safely allow players to move fuel back from their vehicles to the gang's tank too. I can see where Sam is going with the player run fuel market, but I just can't imagine all those NPC trader gangs just sitting on their hands and not taking advantage of this though. Surely the odd shipment would be made by them and added to the market (or removed in Texan)? I'm not suggesting simulating an npc transport network, just suggesting that a player only one seems odd. You'd just need to randomly drop in to (or out of) the market from time to time (maybe biased by in-game factors).
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:06 pm	longo i know how ya feel but try to think of it as a opportunity i know you can adapt you have ever other time a new change was implemented maybe a new type of npc gang can be created? delivery services or a new form of trader that can be hunted knowing they will have some feul? possibly a roaming gang?
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:11 pm	Quote: The game economy has always been designed on the "behind-the-scenes" model and I think a better game economy could be produced by removing it and putting everything more directly in the control of players. Be VERY careful here Sam...... A Player controlled economy assumes that all players WILL stay for a long time which has not been the norm. Some kind of NPC break in the supply is recommended but NOT a requirement in the game longevity. If you make it a complete player based economy, you risk losing control of the entire economic base BECAUSE of a widespread player loss due to inactivity. THIS inactivity will result more Player losses due to no re-subs and no new players interested in playing because they are losing more than gained when they first start out. IMHO, it is best to keep the NPC base as is and try the eco changes slowly with more fractions instead of whole numbers involved in the final calculations.
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:17 pm	Quote: my camp burned to the ground Speaking of that!................ My camp, Rogues Road got "hit" by NPC's BECAUSE I could not get my combat cars to camp...... I know this is like the post-apocalyptic vision but I had 4 very well armed cars within 80 miles of camp before I got the message AND the fuel nerf went into effect. ALL my buildings were damaged AND it said I lost a car also!
Iffler Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:22 pm	I understand and approve of the desired end result, I just think it was introduced rather clumsily. As it looks right now, the players with the more developed scouts and experience stand to profit most (as is correct and proper), and newer player can aspire to being able to one day run fuel convoys from Texan withour being in total fear of losing everything. The question is whether or not the curve between those 2 stages is realistic and achievable (or percieved to be so), and if not, is there a requirement for a stepping stone (elm?) that is actually attractive and something to aspire to.
darthspanky Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:37 pm	i like it because it makes the game harder i understand newer players will be hit harder but you can still get better scouting and im sure players like goat will offer feul at cheaper prices its what they like to do, or try hitting a trader convoy from time to time for feul?
Dundar Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:45 pm	With the higher fuel costs did anyone take into account, again, the added cost to do courier missions? Now I can not even take any goods from SS to ELMs without incurring a loss. To go to ELMs to SS it costs 2800 dollars in fuel in SS and then the 200 gate fee so now no mission for under 3000 dollars is even remotely profitable. Add in some minor damage that you might have to fix to the car and now the vast majority of the couriers you will do at a loss. This bulk good change was to make things more realistic, and if that is so, then the payments to do courier missions should reflect the higher costs. I am glad to see the gate fees go down, but unless the fuel problem gets sorted out by players moving fuel most courier missions will be done at a loss, if not a substantial one.
*General Mayhem* Posted Sep 14, 2009, 11:57 pm	Perhaps hero points could also be used to get fuel at a reduced cost or free up to a certain amount, even if the town is "dry"? This would encourage players to scout and kill some of those bountied Pirates that are starving the towns of goods. Likewise, the bad boys amoung us could get fuel from the more lawless places when they waste the odd trader / bounty hunter.
*Tinker* Posted Sep 15, 2009, 12:19 am	getting fuel in scouts, 2 possibilities to help example you go out with two 10 FT (fuel tank) cars in a scout (both are filled to 5 each) 1. in the loot screen you refill from the other cars, now your both full once back in town you transfer all (what's left) of that gas to a lorry, or a personal fuel dump. and/or 2. in the loot screen fuel appears in the form of plastic bags full of the precious commodity in varying bulks --- Also, there are things like re-sizing your fuel tanks to 8, 16, 24 etc that match what a current fuel can will give you so you will be more efficient, less wasteful and more environmentally correct :P also i don't think it's a good idea to let the player community alone handle the transporting of fuel, to many risks, what if a fuel hauler goes on vacation for a month? i'm sure there will be a riot, just not enough people playing the game at the moment imo. my 2 cents.
*goat starer* Posted Sep 15, 2009, 12:31 am	for me this is the first really even handed measure we have had... it allows people to get a benefit from being long standing (better scouts.. more ability to trade) whilst not precluding people from breaking into the traders group... lorries will never be beyond the reach of most players... nor will decent escort vehicles.... in fact for the more casual player this is probably a godsend. I cant spare crews to go escorting lorries all over the place because most of them are tied up in combat crews that are always out. If i scouted less frequently i could be using my redundant gangers to do escort duties. far as i can see this probably wont create a widening gulf between rich and poor and that is the big economic problem from where i am sitting.. And Darth.... if i ever get an overwhelming urge to send a lorry halfway across Evan i will fill it with fuel and give it all away just to live up to your expectations
darthspanky Posted Sep 15, 2009, 12:34 am	hehe ya got to get it there first thats why they love ya.
Dealer Red 2 Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:07 am	I don't think this is fair at all. It completely precludes newer players from breaking into the convoy business as they will never have any fuel! Only long standing players who are well established will be in a position to have and trade in fuel. I think a fair mod to this system would be to have Somerset as a fuel producing town as well. Since this is where the death sports started it would make sense that there would be an abundance of fuel there. I can't see a bunch of people sitting around after the solar apocalypse saying "Hmmmm, fuel is so hard to come by maybe we should waste it having races and vehicle combat matches, instead of trading for supplies with our neighbors." This would allow new players to start running traders as well. I had just finally gotten going with a box van, and was having a blast, when these rules changed. I lost the load I was waiting to deliver because I didn't have any fuel in my truck and would not have made it in the time allotted. This change smacks to me of rewarding the old boys club. while weeding out the newbies.
The Orange Mage Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:19 am	yeah this leaves a real bad taste in my mouth. all of my gang's travels are suspended until further notice.
4saken Posted Sep 15, 2009, 7:07 am	*JD_Basher* said: Limit it to, say 150 units of fuel in a personal lockup INCLUDING what you have hidden in your cars! Umm... my lorry has a 250 unit fuel tank just by itself. Anyway as for myself I agree that the was this was implemented was less than ideal but I'll roll with it just like pretty much everything else. I'm working on bringing in fuel as we speak, tho it will take me a little to get up to speed and figure things out. The main problem I foresee is hoarding. Also as has been mentioned having fuel be a 100% player-driven economy is risky. Even so I like the idea of the changes. It opens up alot of possibilities. And yes, fuel cans at the very least should show up as loot now.
Serephe Posted Sep 15, 2009, 7:13 am	Hoarding wouldn't be a problem if we weren't so rich. Remove money from the game!
wounded Posted Sep 15, 2009, 7:50 am	Dundar said: I am glad to see the gate fees go down, but unless the fuel problem gets sorted out by players moving fuel most courier missions will be done at a loss, if not a substantial one. I would not worry about this right now. Sam is working things out and courier mission fees are a relatively simple issue to fix once the balance for everything else is sorted out. To what JD said about the gate fees and towns wanting to profit from the scouting squads. I would actually see it completely the other way around. The towns would more likely give a reduction in gate-fees for the people who scout around the town and make the area safer and take higher fees from the travelers coming in from other towns. Also, town heroes could get reduced gate fees. What comes to fuel, I really like the siphoning ideas. We really need a way to "unfuel" the cars in our garage for the times when the fuel is scarce to gather all of the valuable fuel in the lorries that can go out and fetch some fuel from Texan. If this is implemented with the ideas that help eliminate the new 5 unit fueling rule, there should be no exploits either.
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Sep 15, 2009, 9:20 am	*JD_Basher* said: Quote: SO, a limit on the amount of fuel you can have in ANY town lockup might be the logical move to allow others to buy NPC market fuel when/if they need it AND allow the higher prices to rise and fall with the economic winds as players run fuel from cheaper areas (Tx) to the northern fuel starved areas. Just an addendum here..... The limit I was talking about is the amount a gang can buy from the NPC market!.... ANYONE can stockpile goods in any amount! AND pay the lockup fees!... The LIMIT would be applied to any gang that has OVER 150 fuel units in town..... THEN they cannot buy from the NPC market. I was NOT asking for a limit on the amount of fuel a gang could stockpile.... Just in case the piracy does take their share, the price should rise accordingly. and a profit could be made by selling BACK to the NPC market if need be. 4saken and wounded..... read this again please.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 15, 2009, 11:10 am	Just a small point, what about gangs who never want to be traders , who cant stay alive longer than five turns running a boxvan because they are jinxed, own lorries but never use them due to the fact they are not courier based.... what about MEEE lol
Serephe Posted Sep 15, 2009, 11:11 am	*Grograt* said: Just a small point, what about gangs who never want to be traders , who cant stay alive longer than five turns running a boxvan because they are jinxed, own lorries but never use them due to the fact they are not courier based.... what about MEEE lol Buy fuel off the trader players.
*sam* Posted Sep 15, 2009, 1:25 pm	NPC vehicles will now tend to pack in cans of fuel when they have space to spare. (This is potentially a big increase in scouting profits too, since fuel is so valuable).
Serephe Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:11 pm	*sam* said: NPC vehicles will now tend to pack in cans of fuel when they have space to spare. (This is potentially a big increase in scouting profits too, since fuel is so valuable). Be careful Sam. I'm at over 800k in profits already. :P
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:13 pm	*sam* said: NPC vehicles will now tend to pack in cans of fuel when they have space to spare. (This is potentially a big increase in scouting profits too, since fuel is so valuable). ++ STOP ++ Sales of FTs , HFTs and CRs hit an all time low  ++STOP++ COCO
*Tinker* Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:28 pm	Get that windy! get that windy!....BOOM!!!!.. damit!@!!! hope Boxers are loaded
*sam* Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:28 pm	Sere said: Be careful Sam. I'm at over 800k in profits already. Sam's Mantra said: Everything is tweakable.. I can easily modify resale value of vehicles etc.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:30 pm	*sam* said: Sere said: Be careful Sam. I'm at over 800k in profits already. Sam's Mantra said: Everything is tweakable.. I can easily modify resale value of vehicles etc. Be careful sam  serephe lives on here nerf his sales only
Serephe Posted Sep 15, 2009, 2:55 pm	*Grograt* said: Be careful sam  serephe lives on here nerf his sales only  Sam's Mantra said: Everything is tweakable.. OH FUDGE!
Fealty Lost Posted Sep 15, 2009, 5:26 pm	The bad guys carry gas cans????!!!!! Julie "The Horror" Baca calls her second in command to the office. "I want 5 Apaches refitted with HFTs by next week. See if we can get another 4 HFOJs and slap those in also. Break out the V-8s...we're going to make some big booms! I love the smell of burning scum-bags in the morning...it smells like...VICTORY!" Wonder how many I can get to explode in one scout?
4saken Posted Sep 15, 2009, 6:24 pm	Also while we're fixing things and everyone has been focusing on fuel there are major problems with food shortages down South. I had to pay over $20k just this week in bribes to keep my Texan crew going. Apparently Texan didn't have any food or water! If the market is 100% player run they are only going to run the most profitable stuff. Food and water, even when non-existent, only seem to pull about $3-400 per unit. Compare to people selling $5000 gas cans. We need some NPC action. There are traders after all...
*sam* Posted Sep 15, 2009, 6:58 pm	Quote: If the market is 100% player run they are only going to run the most profitable stuff. When travelling from SS/Elms to TX, food/water are the most profitable goods. With fuel on the return journey.
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 15, 2009, 7:42 pm	Just though I'd take this opportunity to plug my camp which MAKES food/water within 600 miles of both badlands AND Sars. I sell it for a buck and you can currently sell it for over 300. all I ask is for some fuel cans.
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Sep 15, 2009, 8:21 pm	Quote: I sell it for a buck and you can currently sell it for over 300. all I ask is for some fuel cans. That's not exactly selling it for a buck, then, is it?
Joel Autobaun Posted Sep 15, 2009, 8:36 pm	Yup. 1 Buck. Fuel, parts, etc are always welcome by camp owners as we all know.
Stevello Posted Sep 16, 2009, 12:04 am	@ 3k+ a pop on refuels plus gate fees, how is a new gamer suppose to do small courier missions for any kind of profit? My windy 2 that I run from Somerset to Elms to try and raise scouting and make some money, no longer makes money... Shouldn't the cost of delivering mail or other goods go up when the the cost of fuel has gone up 10X?
*sam* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 12:10 am	How much are you losing Stevello, and how much did you used to profit?
4saken Posted Sep 16, 2009, 2:47 am	Also in regards to siphoning your own fuel tanks, I'm sure you know that if you resize a fuel tank you lose all the fuel in it. When it cost like $57 a unit that was no biggie but at close to $1000 a unit that makes a big difference. Also I have been travelling carrying fuel and I lose it the farther I go, even though I start with more than enough fuel to make the trip. It's using fuel from my cans instead of my tank somehow.
Cold Steel Posted Sep 16, 2009, 7:41 am	I made just a courier mission for SS to Elms using 80 bulk mission of mail. Mission fee was 2700, fuelling cost were 3300 and gate fee was 250. So I lost in that travelling 850. Usually the profit was for me 1000-3000. If there is a ambush and the car takes damage the profit lowers or goes to negative... Now I'm losing money even travelling...
Groove Champion Posted Sep 16, 2009, 9:06 am	GO SAM!
*sam* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 9:39 am	Quote: Also in regards to siphoning your own fuel tanks, I'm sure you know that if you resize a fuel tank you lose all the fuel in it. I have just fixed that. Quote: When it cost like $57 a unit that was no biggie but at close to $1000 a unit that makes a big difference. I'm not sure whether by 'unit' you mean fueltank unit or full cans? $57 seems like the former and $1000 the latter. Prices have certainly not risen by a factor of 20. (In fact, in SS, the price is pretty close to double what it was last week, no more than that).
*Ninesticks* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:27 am	Cold Steel said: I made just a courier mission for SS to Elms using 80 bulk mission of mail. Mission fee was 2700, fuelling cost were 3300 and gate fee was 250. So I lost in that travelling 850. Usually the profit was for me 1000-3000. If there is a ambush and the car takes damage the profit lowers or goes to negative... Now I'm losing money even travelling... I'm interested, is your primary purpose in doing that making money or training up a scout? I am not saying you don't have a point, but I would like to know.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:27 am	Cold Steel said: I made just a courier mission for SS to Elms using 80 bulk mission of mail. Mission fee was 2700, fuelling cost were 3300 and gate fee was 250. So I lost in that travelling 850. Usually the profit was for me 1000-3000. If there is a ambush and the car takes damage the profit lowers or goes to negative... Now I'm losing money even travelling...  the only benefit gained from running missions in vehicles under #100 bulk now, is increase in skills. More often than not the run will cost you money ( even with a semi decent package 3k+ ) i am still running them for scout training, but i can see a new player having major difficulty keeping this up. *EDIT* nine you read my mind hee hee
*sam* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:31 am	I want to be careful modifying mission prices, but in general what would be the best resolution: increasing low-bulk mission prices? increasing short-distance mission prices?
*viKKing* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:37 am	*sam* said: I want to be careful modifying mission prices, but in general what would be the best resolution: increasing low-bulk mission prices? increasing short-distance mission prices? While you are working on it, may I suggest applying a "piracy activity" factor for the destination of the mission? a dangerous mission due to the presence of pirates should be more rewarding.
*sam* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:56 am	Quote: While you are working on it, may I suggest applying a "piracy activity" factor for the destination of the mission? a dangerous mission due to the presence of pirates should be more rewarding. That's already included
*Tinker* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:56 am	what about based on fuel prices? but i guess the problem is lorries exploiting higher priced low bulk advertized missions and making a fist-full of $$$? how about raising the prices, but limiting the small bulk missions to 3 per vehicle?? i know seems artificiall
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 16, 2009, 11:11 am	Or have a ' Bulk Haulage ' and ' Courier Delivery ' sections, only vehicles under a certain bulk can take courier missions,
*sam* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 11:15 am	I forgot the 2.5x price factor when you refill your tank and the town stocks are very low. This is probably why you're all reporting losses on courier missions..?
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 16, 2009, 11:18 am	*sam* said: I forgot the 2.5x price factor when you refill your tank and the town stocks are very low. This is probably why you're all reporting losses on courier missions..? That would be it then, as we have not had fuel cans in SS for a few days
Whiskey Posted Sep 16, 2009, 1:12 pm	*Grograt* said: Or have a ' Bulk Haulage ' and ' Courier Delivery ' sections, only vehicles under a certain bulk can take courier missions, That is very similar to something I was thinking of.  In the "real" world, you see big trucks, trains, ships, etc hauling cargo because they use less fuel per unit of weight hauled.  Smaller couriers tend to operate on routes where the total tonnage hauled is too small to justify a bigger carrier.  And the price per unit of weight is much higher for these small couriers just so they can make a profit. Where the existing DW system breaks down is that there are no low usage routes in Evan.  If you had a bunch of high value, 10- bulk missions, it would make sense for a lorry operator to just haul all of them to increase profits. Leave the existing items as they are.  Add a new type of item. Call it a "Special Delivery" or something.  These would all be less than 100 bulk missions, fee per unit of bulk would be 2 or 3 times higher that regular missions (the smaller the package the higher the diffierential), maybe with a reduced time allowed to complete the mission, and the shipper requires that it be shipped discreetly by a small courier vehicle. As a game play justification, although you would still pick these missions up at the tavern, the shipper is having you deliver the cargo to a specific person/house/business, etc rather than just unloading at a generic cargo drop.
4saken Posted Sep 16, 2009, 4:23 pm	*sam* said: Quote: Also in regards to siphoning your own fuel tanks, I'm sure you know that if you resize a fuel tank you lose all the fuel in it. I have just fixed that. Superb. *sam* said: I'm not sure whether by 'unit' you mean fueltank unit or full cans? $57 seems like the former and $1000 the latter. Prices have certainly not risen by a factor of 20. I did mean per unit, but it's much lower now, currently $238 per unit. I wasn't paying close attention because I usually auto-refuel but I have heard many reports of $1000/unit and pretty sure I have seen $900/unit myself. As for on-demand courier missions I was thinking on those the other day. Maybe limit them to one mission per vehicle or per town. Since it spawns multiple choices you can pick the largest mission you can carry, be it 20 bulk or 1500 bulk, as suits you. The smaller missions would pay much better per bulk and the larger better overall, so guys with only small vehicles can still at least make decent money and the guys with the lorries can still make haul lorry hauls without simply taking the small ones, too. TKWPrime said: Leave the existing items as they are.  Add a new type of item. As a game play justification, although you would still pick these missions up at the tavern, the shipper is having you deliver the cargo to a specific person/house/business, etc rather than just unloading at a generic cargo drop. I really like this idea. A short range mission would 1) pay much better 2) have a short travel distance (say, 100 miles total standard covers anything) 3) probably be under 200 bulk, or maybe even under, say, 60 and 4) give you a chance for one encounter.
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 4:55 pm	4saken said: As for on-demand courier missions I was thinking on those the other day. Maybe limit them to one mission per vehicle or per town. Why? Since they're "on demand" the ones I take have nothing to do with the ones you take. If we give it the same parameters we'll both get randomized "stuff."
*Tinker* Posted Sep 16, 2009, 5:25 pm	4saken said: be it 20 bulk or 1500 bulk, as suits you. The smaller missions would pay much better per bulk and the larger better overall, so guys with only small vehicles can still at least make decent money and the guys with the lorries can still make haul lorry hauls without simply taking the small ones, too. That sounds like a great idea, some much bigger juicy hauls for lorries, and if they have space they can fit a smaller one in between, assuming all the big ones don't get all grabbed up, then it's back to robing the smaller vehicles traders
Dundar Posted Sep 16, 2009, 6:18 pm	Still seeing a problem with supply and demand pricing. There is fuel in Elmsfield available and it is going for about 1500 a can. The problem is there is no fuel available in Somerset but you can only sell it for 1200 a can. There is no incentive to buy what fuel there is in ELMs and sell it in Somerset. It has been this way for days and hasn't changed.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 16, 2009, 6:51 pm	I can attest to the fuel situation in the Elms/SS example that Dundar gave. As for the smaller bulk missions with higher prices: I run BPUs between SS/ELMs, SS/GW, GW/BL pretty much non-stop using the advertised missions. I have added a portion my current financial report for comparison/evaluation. As you can read I have made $242,552 in advertised courier missions either by taking the largest advertised mission payout choice that matches my available cargo size in MOST cases. Some times the smaller bulk choices actually pay better on a $/Bulk unit ratio and so I will take from 2 to 5 of the smaller missions with the last one usually being a Mail mission that makes up the rest of the available bulk once I take the smaller ones. My BPUs are auto-refuelled when they enter town and have an available bulk of 165-175. WEEKLY FINANCIAL REPORT Prizes + Mission Fees 242552 Tyres, Ammunition, Fuel 21104 Repairs, Mechanic Fees, Garage + Lockup Fees 268460 Town Gate Fees 44400 As you can read, the size of the missions that I am taking and the volume of of transports is making it a profit making venture. The Repairs section includes the various scouts that I do as well as transport missions to move goods that don't involve couriers. I do these missions both to train scouts AND to make money and they seem to be doing just that very nicely. When I was running regular pickups on the same routes in comparison to now, I don't believe I would be having the same success due to the smaller size missions I would be forced to take. Hope this helps.
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 16, 2009, 6:57 pm	Crazy AL said: I can attest to the fuel situation in the Elms/SS example that Dundar gave. As for the smaller bulk missions with higher prices: I run BPUs between SS/ELMs, SS/GW, GW/BL pretty much non-stop using the advertised missions. I have added a portion my current financial report for comparison/evaluation. As you can read I have made $242,552 in advertised courier missions either by taking the largest advertised mission payout choice that matches my available cargo size in MOST cases. Some times the smaller bulk choices actually pay better on a $/Bulk unit ratio and so I will take from 2 to 5 of the smaller missions with the last one usually being a Mail mission that makes up the rest of the available bulk once I take the smaller ones. My BPUs are auto-refuelled when they enter town and have an available bulk of 165-175. WEEKLY FINANCIAL REPORT Prizes + Mission Fees 242552 Tyres, Ammunition, Fuel 21104 Repairs, Mechanic Fees, Garage + Lockup Fees 268460 Town Gate Fees 44400 As you can read, the size of the missions that I am taking and the volume of of transports is making it a profit making venture. The Repairs section includes the various scouts that I do as well as transport missions to move goods that don't involve couriers. I do these missions both to train scouts AND to make money and they seem to be doing just that very nicely. When I was running regular pickups on the same routes in comparison to now, I don't believe I would be having the same success due to the smaller size missions I would be forced to take. Hope this helps. It would be interesting to know your actual cargo running numbers, because overall, you have lost $91,412.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 16, 2009, 7:06 pm	The Repairs, Mech, Garage + Lockup fees is a combination that includes many more cars than are just doing the transport missions and should not be included when attempting to determine whether the missions are actually profitable or not. My transport cars take damage mostly from going over dunes and bottoming out on the front or sides and it's 5 points of armor max in the large majority of cases. I have been running these missions for over a month and I have not lost a car. I have had a couple of more expensive repair bills when dealing with ambushes or a flipped car. I have 5L V12 that is currently unrepairable in town and I will need to get it to camp some way and so that is a more extensive repair process that will obviously cost more money than is typical.
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 16, 2009, 10:22 pm	Dundar said: Still seeing a problem with supply and demand pricing. There is fuel in Elmsfield available and it is going for about 1500 a can. The problem is there is no fuel available in Somerset but you can only sell it for 1200 a can. There is no incentive to buy what fuel there is in ELMs and sell it in Somerset. Yes there. Caps just sold at least 10 units at 1600 today st SS This is a critical area ad I am gobsmacked that no one is buying tis stuff up now ( I have  a Fatwa at moment , so staying home) Current  lowest price for available fuel is $1699 , this will rise closer to $2k/can  I strongly suspect - unless a rules change lands COCO
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 17, 2009, 4:20 am	ISHOULDCOCO said: Dundar said: Still seeing a problem with supply and demand pricing. There is fuel in Elmsfield available and it is going for about 1500 a can. The problem is there is no fuel available in Somerset but you can only sell it for 1200 a can. There is no incentive to buy what fuel there is in ELMs and sell it in Somerset. Yes there. Caps just sold at least 10 units at 1600 today st SS This is a critical area ad I am gobsmacked that no one is buying tis stuff up now ( I have  a Fatwa at moment , so staying home) Current  lowest price for available fuel is $1699 , this will rise closer to $2k/can  I strongly suspect - unless a rules change lands COCO It was me that bought 13 at $1600 each. Bought them because it avaraged        only $200 per unit as opposed to the $240 per unit price to buy from SS NPC market. Have suspended all travels as it would take almost $15,000 to refill the tank on my box van. Lost money even doing smaller bulk travels. $2000 mail mission and almost $3500 to refill fuel plus gate fees on top of that. I hope something changes as this has "broken" a major part of the game...at least for me.
simonmaxhill Posted Sep 17, 2009, 7:14 am	I think the solution to the current problem is to get trucks running fuel from Texan and elsewhere into SS. That'd lower fuel prices and make short runs in small cars in the GWELMSS area profitable. The problem I see right now is that there's no money to be made on the return trip to Texan/Sars/FL. The only goods that are made in SS/Elms are Food/water and the sell price in those very distance towns barely covers the fuel costs to take it there. Jack up food/water prices in those places as the fuel price was suddenly jacked up, and eventually (hopefully) people will start carrying food/water out and fuel back. In response to the notion of artificial limits on lorry cargo - right now there is already a cap on the number of missions you can carry, and it's basically impossible to fill a lorry full of mission from advertising. You can make a decent sum of money by using up all your missions filling up a lorry, but the 27k in fuel it takes to drive a lorry+escorts to Elms from SS means you profit about 10k if you don't get shot at. The real money right now is in combination cargo/escort missions. Or at least, that's where my money is coming from.
Serephe Posted Sep 17, 2009, 7:18 am	My money comes from scouting sales. Running a fuel lorry from Texan with Ninesticks currently. Will see how that turns out.
*sam* Posted Sep 17, 2009, 8:02 am	Quote: I hope something changes as this has "broken" a major part of the game...at least for me. I'll reduce the price multiplier from 2.5x to 1.5x when you refill in a town that has no fuel stock. Let me know how that looks. I'm loathe to fully roll back these fuel changes, as I think there's definitely potential for a more interesting trade economy to develop. If you started managing your own stocks of lockup fuel in the various towns, you should be able to avoid even these 1.5x fees?
simonmaxhill Posted Sep 17, 2009, 8:21 am	Dear Sam, Please don't roll em back. They're a step in the totally right direction. They do need some tweaking and adjustment, but I think they're a very good and very exciting idea for the game. simon max hill El Presidente, Unofficial Rules Council
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 17, 2009, 8:26 am	Catch 22 ... great film.... higher fuel ( great concept that really needs to work ) crucify s majority of courier missions ( increase courier mission pay outs ) defeats the purpose of increased fuel prices. Main reason for new members running couriers under bulk # 100, new players this is there life line. pulling in 2-3 k per run ( ss - elms ) would allow them to keep scouting vehicles running and train up gangers at same time. Main reason for established players ( notice not using the word VET ) running same type of mission, Scout training. Im running these little missions at a loss, but its a loss i can handle ( unless the fuel shortage causes a major hike ) i consider the benefit of training up the mission runners in scout skill to out weigh the costs. problem, as usual its the gap between being established and attempting to get a foot hold in the game. The price of mission fees needs to rise for the new player, or we risk that side of the start up ( all the wilderness training etc ) to be lost. this is a major stepping stone into the wider experience of boxy travel and larger vehicles, without the first few attempts at running your 4l voyager, across sand to get the mail package there on time, how else will a player get this experience, not through scouting ( complete different kettle of chicken livers ) Increase courier mission pay outs for the newer player. BUT then you will still have the established player that rely s on this income also. I dunno
4saken Posted Sep 17, 2009, 9:03 am	*jimmylogan* said: 4saken said: As for on-demand courier missions I was thinking on those the other day. Maybe limit them to one mission per vehicle or per town. Why? Since they're "on demand" the ones I take have nothing to do with the ones you take. If we give it the same parameters we'll both get randomized "stuff." The idea is to have one mission of a variable size. If you have a smaller car, you take the smaller cargo and if a larger vehicle like a lorry you take the larger ones. The idea is to prevent you from taking the current (350max) large ones and all the small ones meant for small couriers. You can do one or the other but not both. Under the current system, you can do both, so the vet gets stuff that was made with a higher profit margin as well. Ah well, I guess it doesn't really matter.
4saken Posted Sep 17, 2009, 9:16 am	FYI: SS currently has 7000 units of water avail at $35 each GW is completely out of water but is only paying $90 That's a $55 gross profit on each 5 bulk. 1000 bulk = $11k (Not counting 5% fee and gas cost) Meanwhile they'll pay me $40k to haul the same amount of mail. This is just the stuff that spawns daily, not the "good stuff".
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 17, 2009, 9:38 am	*sam* said: I'll reduce the price multiplier from 2.5x to 1.5x when you refill in a town that has no fuel stock. Let me know how that looks. I'm loathe to fully roll back these fuel changes, as I think there's definitely potential for a more interesting trade economy to develop. If you started managing your own stocks of lockup fuel in the various towns, you should be able to avoid even these 1.5x fees? Cost of fuel in SS went from 240 per unit (not per fuel can) to $114. This is much more manageable. I think fuel costs can, and should, go up after a supply line is in place, but who knows how long that will take and the catch 22 of making sure fuel in Texan is cheap enough for it to be worth players setting up the supply line. What if fuel could be produced in Badlands? That would cut the distance in half that players would have to transport it, plus the journey is a lot safer. Of course then would players be able to/need to take oil from Texan to BL. In the horrible "real world" america brings oil all the way from the other side of the world and refines it here. No america/oil comments please. Could be another money making opp for more established players. I know for myself, never being past BL before, I would feel more comfortable hauling fuel from BL to SS rather than all the way from Texan. I do have a guy on way to BL heading to Texan. Who knows if he will get there though with Shantyville pirate activity being "totally out of control".  Sam, Any chance of the large storage tank in towns or being able to determine the number of cans that you use to refuel or even a 4 unit tank? That would help with the lose from having a portion of a gas can being dumped on the ground when refueling from stock. Don't have any idea of the time involved in coding that kind of change though. I do agree that the trade economy could be more exciting, for those that want to do it, but with fuel required to do anything it makes it more challenging to implement without crippling everything.
*Marc5iver* marcg@comcast.net Posted Sep 17, 2009, 9:48 am	Here is some intereting data on fuel I just checked. Assuming a fuel can is 8 units of fuel: SS *Buying fuel from NPC to refill tanks = $114 per unit *Cheapest fuel cans on PC market $1000 = $125 per unit, this was a great price before roll back. Elm *Buying fuel from NPC to refill tanks = $92 per unit *Buying fuel cans from NPC market $1090 = $136 per unit The thing I wanted to point out is how much cheaper fuel is in Elm and that the prices don't currently make it sensible to have a stock of fuel cans. Was gas always cheaper in Elm? Never noticed before.
*Tinker* Posted Sep 17, 2009, 10:17 am	Marc5iver said: Elm *Buying fuel from NPC to refill tanks = $92 per unit *Buying fuel cans from NPC market $1090 = $136 per unit I'm guessing it is because they have a large stock of fuel cans, so they are charging less to refuel your tanks
Serephe Posted Sep 17, 2009, 10:18 am	*Tinker* said: Marc5iver said: Elm *Buying fuel from NPC to refill tanks = $92 per unit *Buying fuel cans from NPC market $1090 = $136 per unit I'm guessing it is because they have a large stock of fuel cans, so they are charging less to refuel your tanks This is correct.
*Tinker* Posted Sep 17, 2009, 10:41 am	I just did a quick calculation, nothing very precise my lorry has a 300 bulk tank, and can hold 130 fuel cans a 300 tank will get me from TX->BL then i need to fill my fuel tank with my own stocks, so subtract 38 cans and arrive in SS now i need to refill my tank again, another 38 cans, that will give me about 800+ miles, that will get me as far as BL if i'm lucky then another 38 cans to get to TX so in the end i can only drop-off 16 fuel cans in SS! (130-38-38-38) and make about $12k net + plus what ever i can profit from carrying food and water back to TX Something aint right here edit: it's escorted by one 5L buzzer the lorry is 8L, and has 4 CC and 20 reloads plus 5 HCR reloads for the escort so i guess i could fit 2 lasers in my buzzer, drop 3 CCs and and fit a another 50 cans, but that's getting really risky
metrocube Posted Sep 17, 2009, 10:58 am	*Tinker* said: I just did a quick calculation, nothing very precise That's about right. It costs about 8-10 fuel cans to transport 1 fuel can from TX to Somerset in a lorry. It's even higher in a boxvan. Quote: Something aint right here Sam will more than likely have to adjust the fuel consumption rate to make this more appealing.  At the moment, it makes no sense to truck fuel from Texan to SS.
wounded Posted Sep 17, 2009, 11:24 am	Do you really need 20 reloads on one stint of the trip, e.g. TX-BL? Also, 4CCs? I know it's rough out there and I have no personal experience in hauling stuff for long distances, but it sounds like a lot for a cargo vehicle. Making huge profit against tough competition should not be easy. If it's possible to do the same trip using more fuel efficient escorts, less space for ammo (resupply is available at every stop), using smaller guns on the primary cargo carrier and still avoid losses, then the price on the final market (SS) will be dominated by traders doing so, at least in the long run. Of course we are going through considerable changes in the system so the prices and expenses are not necessarily reasonable now. I'm just asking if this is the only way to do the hauling or if it can be done with higher profit margins? Of course if Metrocube's estimate about spending 8-10 cans of fuel to transport one is correct, then the price of fuel in SS should be astronomical.
Serephe Posted Sep 17, 2009, 11:29 am	The lorry I'm currently running from Texan to Somerset is completely unarmed and carries 198 bulk fuel units. Of course, I'm lucky enough to be escorted by 3 Buzzers and 4 other lorries. And an Osprey which I damn near ran over leaving SV.
Iffler Posted Sep 17, 2009, 9:58 pm	So the money sink that is currently stopping my scout training and early trading efforts in it's tracks, is actually designed to curb the earnings of a few vets?
*viKKing* Posted Sep 17, 2009, 10:03 pm	Iffler said: So the money sink that is currently stopping my scout training and early trading efforts in it's tracks, is actually designed to curb the earnings of a few vets? No this is an effort to complete change the economic aspect of the game. It will bring more player control and opportunities, although it may seem a bit tough at first sight.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 18, 2009, 6:04 am	*sam* said: Quote: Also in regards to siphoning your own fuel tanks, I'm sure you know that if you resize a fuel tank you lose all the fuel in it. I have just fixed that. Quote: When it cost like $57 a unit that was no biggie but at close to $1000 a unit that makes a big difference. I'm not sure whether by 'unit' you mean fueltank unit or full cans? $57 seems like the former and $1000 the latter. Prices have certainly not risen by a factor of 20. (In fact, in SS, the price is pretty close to double what it was last week, no more than that). I just want to be sure about this... If I resize a tank from 5 units (litres) to 10 litres, I WILL still have 5 litres of fuel in the 10 litre tank when I am done. Also, if I resize a tank from 20 litres to 5 litres, I will get 15 units of fuel back in my lockup?
*sam* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 12:13 pm	Yeah, I think reducing fuel consumption is probably the best approach. I can't increase the price difference between TX and SS any further than it already is..
*sam* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 12:14 pm	Quote: I just want to be sure about this... If I resize a tank from 5 units (litres) to 10 litres, I WILL still have 5 litres of fuel in the 10 litre tank when I am done. yes Quote: Also, if I resize a tank from 20 litres to 5 litres, I will get 15 units of fuel back in my lockup? currently, no.
*sam* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 12:34 pm	sam said: Yeah, I think reducing fuel consumption is probably the best approach. I can't increase the price difference between TX and SS any further than it already is.. OK, I have just tweaked consumption figures. Please let me know what you think. This is a sensible thing to tweak rather than costs, since it won't affect the trade-supply dynamic that I'm trying to create. I also gave a special bonus for big vehicles carrying large amounts of stuff.
wounded Posted Sep 18, 2009, 12:54 pm	It seems that the range of SUVs has pretty much doubled. Two unit tank has now a range of 45 miles.
*sam* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 1:40 pm	Quote: It seems that the range of SUVs has pretty much doubled. Two unit tank has now a range of 45 miles. Does that seem reasonable? Again - I see reducing consumption as a way of making it economically viable to do journeys without upsetting the delicate (and still not quite right) balance of trade across the towns.
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 2:12 pm	I think it's okay. It allows for a little further travel on smaller tanks but doesn't affect the larger convoys in a negative way either. I would also point out that this makes it a little easier to explain in RP terms why the pirates can go around with 2 unit tanks and a can or three of fuel.
Crazy AL Posted Sep 18, 2009, 5:34 pm	*jimmylogan* said: I think it's okay. It allows for a little further travel on smaller tanks but doesn't affect the larger convoys in a negative way either. I would also point out that this makes it a little easier to explain in RP terms why the pirates can go around with 2 unit tanks and a can or three of fuel. True and it makes sense! Understandably a scout car would have a smaller tank since it's focus is on defense (armor), offense (weapons) and driver/gunner space for fighting. Any spare cargo space is taken up by ammunition and then leftover space is for a can a fuel for a longer scout. A two unit (gallon) tank on my buzzer is good for 32 miles round trip which would put a 2 unit tank around 2 gallons with a MPG of 16, pretty close to what a heavy SUV like that would get for gas mileage doing 30mph with highway (not stop & go) driving.
Marrkos Posted Sep 18, 2009, 5:40 pm	Crazy AL said: A two unit (gallon) tank on my buzzer is good for 32 miles round trip which would put a 2 unit tank around 2 gallons with a MPG of 16, pretty close to what a heavy SUV like that would get for gas mileage doing 30mph with highway (not stop & go) driving. Except a 2 unit tank is actually 5 litres (2.5 litres/unit) which is approximately 1 US Gallon.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 18, 2009, 5:55 pm	SAM you going to be changing the distance per unit of fuel again, or am i safe to resize ( my mechanics hate me ) my tanks again ?
Crazy AL Posted Sep 18, 2009, 6:07 pm	Marrkos said: Crazy AL said: A two unit (gallon) tank on my buzzer is good for 32 miles round trip which would put a 2 unit tank around 2 gallons with a MPG of 16, pretty close to what a heavy SUV like that would get for gas mileage doing 30mph with highway (not stop & go) driving. Except a 2 unit tank is actually 5 litres (2.5 litres/unit) which is approximately 1 US Gallon. The unit size is actually defined somewhere? Is that in the wiki? If a 2 unit tank is only 1 gallon, we must be driving Hybrids with that kind of gas mileage! Who'd have thunk that after the solar event, everyone would be going green!?
Marrkos Posted Sep 18, 2009, 6:15 pm	Crazy AL said: The unit size is actually defined somewhere? When you build a vehicle, on the Other tab/page: Quote: Each unit in a fueltank stores 2.5 litres of fuel; minimum size is 2 units
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 6:17 pm	Al - no smog pumps or mufflers to slow us down... Headers and straight pipes for all! Marrkos - he meant unit defined as in how many litres or gallons. Gro - just leave 'em alone for the time being.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Sep 18, 2009, 6:59 pm	*jimmylogan* said: Gro - just leave 'em alone for the time being. Ok boss, just wanted to make even more space in those ickle weenie voyagers  though it dont really matter as there arnt any missions to put in em anyways
Marrkos Posted Sep 18, 2009, 7:09 pm	*jimmylogan* said: Marrkos - he meant unit defined as in how many litres or gallons. Pardon? He equated a 2 unit tank to a 2 gallon tank.  I just pointed out that 1 unit doesn't equal 1 gallon (or even 1 litre).
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 18, 2009, 7:12 pm	Marrkos said: Crazy AL said: The unit size is actually defined somewhere? When you build a vehicle, on the Other tab/page: Quote: Each unit in a fueltank stores 2.5 litres of fuel; minimum size is 2 units I thought you were telling him where he could define the total unit size of the tank, not the amount per unit. My bad.
4saken Posted Sep 21, 2009, 5:29 am	Ok, we need gas to have gas that's presumably cheaper than filling our tanks. What about food and water? If you are a town that is out of food and water, what happens if you have food and water in your lockup? Is that used first?
wounded Posted Sep 21, 2009, 6:43 am	4saken said: What about food and water? If you are a town that is out of food and water, what happens if you have food and water in your lockup? Is that used first? Yes, you don't pay for upkeep if you have your own food and water.
Procyon Posted Sep 23, 2009, 8:28 pm	Just an observation of a potential unintended consequence of the higher gas mileage. Not complaining, just observing: Personally, I feel the increase gas mileage has made my scout vehicle builds a little more powerful. My 2xGat Windy2's no longer make sense running 3LR. Going to move them over to 3.2LV8's as the 5 extra space is cheap now. This makes the 3LR only really useful to me now on cars that can't take a V8, which are pretty rare (flash for instance.) My 2xHMG, GG side, LR rear V8 Apaches get to upgrade to a MR rear, since they don't need the tank anymore. Basically, I no longer have much of a tradeoff of tank size vs. extra reload/rocket/Larger engine. The tank size to get out to 50 mi is so small now that it's not much of a concern in the build.
*jimmylogan* Posted Sep 23, 2009, 8:35 pm	Interesting observation procyon112 - I always use the minimum tank size for my scouting vehicles and use a dedicated fuel vehicle when I travel, so the only thing I've noticed is further scouting distances. IOW - I didn't use big tanks before to get more miles, I just scouting the maximum I could.
Serephe Posted Sep 23, 2009, 8:41 pm	Personally, I never scout beyond 15 miles anyway.
metrocube Posted Sep 23, 2009, 9:16 pm	Serephe said: Personally, I never scout beyond 15 miles anyway. Ditto.  I've never used tank sizes larger than 2 or 3 on my scout cars.  If I needed to extend range, I would add a fuel transport.
Serephe Posted Sep 23, 2009, 10:13 pm	I just use the LHC to create a wormhole to teleport my vehicles around.