Salvages price getting crazy!

[Snakebit]

I'd be interested in seeing what affect raising the buy in on Hero Packs and Winter Packs would be. I assume it would raise the last 5 on Winters and ATO's more and put downward pressure on purples. I wonder how the proportions would settle out. Or would people buy fewer ATO's and Winters and raise the price? Would it be sink enough to curb inflation? 

 

50m  inf Hero Packs...Engage. 

[MunkiLord]

I recently spent a billion on packs and haven't bothered listing them, so I'm all for this idea.

[Yomo Kimyata]

1 hour ago, cejmp said:

I'd be interested in seeing what affect raising the buy in on Hero Packs and Winter Packs would be. I assume it would raise the last 5 on Winters and ATO's more and put downward pressure on purples. I wonder how the proportions would settle out. Or would people buy fewer ATO's and Winters and raise the price? Would it be sink enough to curb inflation? 

 

50m  inf Hero Packs...Engage. 

It’s hard for me to judge the net demand for ATOs.  On the one hand, you can use them a lot earlier in your build.  On the other hand, I don’t feel like every build is using them.  I keep meaning to get around to using them en masse, but end up slotting Kinetic Combat and Entropic Chaos and Basilisks Gaze instead.  YMMV.  If they doubled in price I’d continue to trade them but I find the higher ticket items are more difficult to flip in size.

[Hopeling]

2 hours ago, cejmp said:

I'd be interested in seeing what affect raising the buy in on Hero Packs and Winter Packs would be. I assume it would raise the last 5 on Winters and ATO's more and put downward pressure on purples.

It obviously would raise prices on ATOs, but I don't see how it could reduce the price of purples. Supply would decrease slightly (Super Packs contain significant numbers of merits, which can be used to buy purples), and demand would increase because ATOs become less viable as replacements. Similarly, the supply of catalysts, boosters, converters, and unslotters would decrease, leading to a rise in prices.

 

The price of Super Packs partially acts as a control on inflation: if prices rise, Super Packs become more profitable, so more people open them, which destroys inf and increases supply until prices fall again. Right now, prices are such that Super Packs are barely profitable, if at all; unless this is just coincidence, it suggests that the control is fairly effective. Raising the price amounts to relaxing this control, allowing prices to rise until Super Packs are once again profitable.

[Yomo Kimyata]

9 minutes ago, Hopeling said:

Right now, prices are such that Super Packs are barely profitable, if at all; unless this is just coincidence, it suggests that the control is fairly effective. Raising the price amounts to relaxing this control, allowing prices to rise until Super Packs are once again profitable.

Im not sure I agree that they are barely profitable.  I’ve spent a few billion on these and I can pretty consistently net 25% profits.  That said, it’s not my favorite way to make inf by a long shot.  Too much micromanagement.

[Hopeling]

Right, that's about what I'm seeing too: 25%ish profit on average, but requiring a great deal of micromanagement, and either a high tolerance for risk or pockets deep enough to work in large volumes where it balances out. At current margins, lots of players seem to find it not worthwhile, as seen in eg this thread. If prices rose significantly, that calculus would change.

[Mr. Vee]

Just to be clear...because of a ~100k price jump in rare salvage peeps are now advocating for a huge price increase in packs to increase influence sinks and thereby help stave off a hyperinflation that hasn't shown any other signs of coming and is specifically guarded against by multiple quasi-hard-caps, including the price of those very packs? God I love forums.

[Snakebit]

2 hours ago, Veelectric Boogaloo said:

Just to be clear...because of a ~100k price jump in rare salvage peeps are now advocating for a huge price increase in packs to increase influence sinks and thereby help stave off a hyperinflation that hasn't shown any other signs of coming and is specifically guarded against by multiple quasi-hard-caps, including the price of those very packs? God I love forums.

Juat to be clear, no. It was a thought.

[Mansome]

Not sure I am following this, I thought the super packs where hard coded as a minimum 10,000,000. Why would anyone pay more for this? Unless you are talking about the contents of the pack.

[MunkiLord]

29 minutes ago, Mansome said:

Not sure I am following this, I thought the super packs where hard coded as a minimum 10,000,000. Why would anyone pay more for this? Unless you are talking about the contents of the pack.

Typo or they felt like it. 

[Hopeling]

1 hour ago, Mansome said:

Not sure I am following this, I thought the super packs where hard coded as a minimum 10,000,000. Why would anyone pay more for this? Unless you are talking about the contents of the pack.

They are, but that code could be changed in a future patch. cejmp proposed raising that price from 10m to a higher number as a way to take more influence out of the economy, hopefully reducing inflation.

[Robotech_Master]

1 hour ago, Hopeling said:

They are, but that code could be changed in a future patch. cejmp proposed raising that price from 10m to a higher number as a way to take more influence out of the economy, hopefully reducing inflation.

But that would lead to inflation of ATO prices, as the supply fell off from fewer people buying the packs, and marking them up higher on the market to make back more of what they put into the packs.

[Bopper]

Increasing super pack prices would not result in decreased prices of salvage, in fact it would likely increase it.

 

An example of this is the Winter Packs, which cost 25 mil as opposed to the Super Packs which cost 10 mil. Despite winter IOs not necessarily being superior to ATOs, they sell for approximately 2.5 times more (roughly 20 mil vs. 8 mil, last I checked). This is due to the fact it costs more to acquire winter IOs, which will lead to higher listings to make up the cost of the Winter pack and also less supply of winter IOs due to winter packs being too rich for most people's blood.

 

By increasing the cost of super packs, you will decrease the supply of salvage (as less ppl buy super packs, since they're less profitable), and this increase the price of the salvage (again, lower supply with equal demand, and also to make up the cost of purchasing super packs).

 

Honestly, super packs and seeded items are what's keeping the market as deflated as it is. If you price salvage too high, people will stop buying it, and instead will buy super packs. It all balances out.

[Ukase]

Some of you are just ...puzzling with your expressed thoughts. You blame the farmer - because they make influence by playing their characters?

Suppose....just suppose...they played actual content the same way, outside of AE. They'd still make influence by playing their characters. And guess what - all of you who play your characters can make that same influence. 

 

The game does need something else to spend influence on, to absorb the humongous billions many of us have stashed on our alts, in our email and in bids on AH on things that don't exist in game. But to blame it on anything other than the game itself is just....puzzling.