PDA

View Full Version : Stardust Refining or Stronghold Stardust Refinery building



Clawdius
02-18-2016, 11:09 AM
I've put a little thought into this in the promo stardust thread in General, but I'd like a place we can discuss just this idea without any other conversations coming between us and the meat of it, as it were.

There is a glut of low end stardust on the market, and I hope to reduce that congestion and provide more stability in the prices of dust (closer to the MSRP as it were) in the long run. My idea is as follows. At the core of it, we could refine stardust at a cost of 4 dust from the previous tier for 1 of the higher tier.

Having put some thought into it, I feel that this could be slotted into the Strongholds update, in the form of a portion of the stronghold we could repair, and if we actually wanted to get much use out of it, upgrade with gold. Potentially a real-time component could be added, so that refining 256 common dust into one promo dust or 4 legendary dust would take longer than refining 16 rare dust. This will limit the ability of a single person to produce enough dust to corner the market, as it were. The idea here is not so much to lower the cost of Legendary and Promo dust, as it is to allow a method for people to grind dust to unlock EAs and save their gold for buying new cards.

If it did result in higher prices on lower tiers of dust, as I imagine it would increase demand and pretty much have to reduce the supply and increase the price accordingly, it would benefit everyone. People who were new or had no interest in EA could sell all their stardust and make more profit, while those who wanted to EA cards could use a combination of dust refining and gold to get all of their promo dust and increase the accessibility of a feature that currently feels less satisfying than it should to some people.

I can only speak for myself, but the current state of affairs has me very seriously considering selling my AA cards, so that I can EA entire decks. I've already done so in some Frost Ring Arena decks (516 runs and counting, albeit counting much more slowly now that we have the campaign content). This means that my AA burn, under the current system, will languish forever unused if I hold onto them. I could sell them and have enough plat for a few drafts, but creating more desire among people to sell their AA can only drive down the price of AA cards if we increase supply significantly. The current system, for me, has resulted in less desire to use stardust and AA cards. The only two Promo dust I have used were to EA my AA pack raptors so they matched my 2 standard Pack Raptors. I used the dust I got from backdated rewards, and I got another in a chest spin.

But my idea is much more about reducing the overwhelming number of dust on the market, and hopefully increasing the price of dust, by giving us more options. For those who don't feel like fooling with the market at all, I would also like to see (if a stronghold feature, then the most basic building) anyone be able to reduce the quality of a tier of dust to gain 2 of the previous tier. These are just the numbers I've bounced off my brain that come out alright and I'd of course expect HXE to do their thing and finagle anything they felt was too lenient in them.

TL;DR: 4 lower tier dust -> 1 of the next tier dust. 1 of a higher tier dust -> 2 of the lower tier dust.

Turtlewing
02-18-2016, 04:02 PM
I don't necessarily object to the concept.

However, I think a glut of the more common dust and shortage of the rarer dust is probably intended. I mean that's, like, the definition of rarity in action.

Clawdius
02-18-2016, 07:08 PM
However, I think a glut of the more common dust and shortage of the rarer dust is probably intended. I mean that's, like, the definition of rarity in action.
Yes, MSRP on products being undercut by a quarter or an eighth by the second hand market.
That's the sign of a very healthy economy for a product.

But I'm glad you don't object, for what that is worth.

sukebe
02-18-2016, 07:59 PM
As I said in the post this idea was first shared in, I do not think the current state of stardust and EA's is all that bad. That being said I still really like this idea as it would do wonders for removing lower rarity stardust from circulation and give them a bit of a boost in value.

4 lower rarity dust for 1 higher rarity dust seems like a good number but I would hope if they did implement this idea (and I hope they do) that they make sure to do some good thorough research to make absolutely sure it is indeed the best #.

As long as dust (as a whole, from common to promo) ends up up either equally as valuable or preferably more valuable then I will be happy :-)

Turtlewing
02-19-2016, 09:27 AM
Yes, MSRP on products being undercut by a quarter or an eighth by the second hand market.
That's the sign of a very healthy economy for a product.

But I'm glad you don't object, for what that is worth.

Wow. That's a special kind of confused.

The economics behind pricing a product and pricing an economic instrument like stardust are very different (and a bit beyond my education to completely and accurately explain).

Broadly speaking, a product is priced at the point where the quantity you can economically produce will exactly meet demand at the price you're selling them for (though threading that needle involves a lot of guesswork outside of Econ-101-textbook-land). An economic instrument is priced based on what impact you want it to have on the economy.

Stardust, has no cost of production and its two goals are to act as a gold sink and to establish a class of "value added" cards. Neither of those necessarily requires the market price of all rarities of stardust to resemble the artificial shop price. In fact part of how stardust acts as a gold sink is likely by giving gold something to turn into if it gets too devalued (as buying power of gold decreases on the secondary market the gold price of stardust on said market increases until it hits the pressure valve of the shop prices and gold starts leaving the economy though said shop.) Since the actual value of stardust is driven by it's drop rate, the more common ones trading below the price cap is likly a sign that gold is not over-inflating, while the rarer ones trading at the shop price indicates that the shop is extracting some gold from the economy. So all and all probably a sign that the system is working as it's applying downward pressure on gold inflation but not exhausting it's capacity to do so.

But as I indicated earlier, none of that means a dust refining system can't also exist. The refining costs will juts have to be calibrated such that the impact on the rarity gradient for dust isn't detrimental which seems like a solvable problem.

Clawdius
02-19-2016, 01:40 PM
Wow. That's a special kind of confused.

The economics behind pricing a product and pricing an economic instrument like stardust are very different (and a bit beyond my education to completely and accurately explain).

Broadly speaking, a product is priced at the point where the quantity you can economically produce will exactly meet demand at the price you're selling them for (though threading that needle involves a lot of guesswork outside of Econ-101-textbook-land). An economic instrument is priced based on what impact you want it to have on the economy.

Stardust, has no cost of production and its two goals are to act as a gold sink and to establish a class of "value added" cards. Neither of those necessarily requires the market price of all rarities of stardust to resemble the artificial shop price. In fact part of how stardust acts as a gold sink is likely by giving gold something to turn into if it gets too devalued (as buying power of gold decreases on the secondary market the gold price of stardust on said market increases until it hits the pressure valve of the shop prices and gold starts leaving the economy though said shop.) Since the actual value of stardust is driven by it's drop rate, the more common ones trading below the price cap is likly a sign that gold is not over-inflating, while the rarer ones trading at the shop price indicates that the shop is extracting some gold from the economy. So all and all probably a sign that the system is working as it's applying downward pressure on gold inflation but not exhausting it's capacity to do so.
...
But as I indicated earlier, none of that means a dust refining system can't also exist. The refining costs will juts have to be calibrated such that the impact on the rarity gradient for dust isn't detrimental which seems like a solvable problem.

I'm well aware of economics, I just choose not to assume a can opener. I find a system that decrees that supply magically meets demand to run afoul of the real world. Like when we had literally tons of apples rotting in fields in Washington State, about 95 million dollars worth of apples that basic economics precepts assume won't exist.

But in Hex we have a system that can draw far closer to these magical ways of thinking, since there is no shipping cost etc. I'm not aware of having any confusion about this, other than the fact that there is literally so much common-rare stardust on the market that people find it tedious to even bother selling on the AH and opt to sell stacks of 100+ in trade chat.

Despite the fact that an in game economy has no need for shipping costs, packaging etc and can slot equations in quite nicely a problem with any game economy is that traditional economics aren't always applicable in a video game. This is worse in a single player game, because as the player you go around slaying people and potentially accumulating vast quantities of armor and weapons for sale. You tend to sell more armor and weapons in RPGs than the most dedicated blacksmith could create in the real world. This applies to some extent to an MMO, the main difference being that you ostensibly have a far larger market to meet demand so not everything sells for 1/10th the price you'd pay for it.

Don't bother replying so you can insult me some more, and thanks for your insight that my idea -can- exist, for whatever that's worth.