Setting Prices

I also suggested we look into other things that might help smooth the way for new players. In the past, we have had some controversy over price setting for ships...which on the surface doesn't look good but has been suggested as a way to avoid blocking the path for new ship builders from entering the field and not having to compete with players who have been building ships for years and have all the resources and systems already set up.

To open the discussion on this topic, I would like to point out that most of the raw materials and the T2 products have already been assigned a base price that is reflected in the prices paid by the Local Markets for these goods. Since most of these commodities are not available from the Local Markets, the price offered to sell these products for at PC Stock Markets must be less than this base price, if the Seller wishes to encourage PCs to buy them there. Also, the price offered to buy these products for at PC Stock Markets must be higher than those offered at Local Markets if the Buyer wishes to encourage PCs to sell them there.

This basically leaves ship modules and ships themselves. To calculate the price of these products for my business, Mooncrest Industries, I have, so far not taken into account the cost of the blueprints and Infrastructure. I now realise that this may mean that my prices are so low that they discourage PCs from starting up in the Shipbuilding Industry. There is not enough return to compensate for the cost of the blueprints that are needed, nor the investment in construction of the necessary infrastructure

With this in mind I am currently revising my prices. The big decision I will need to make is: how many ships should be sold to recover the price of the Blueprint? I have an idea that 20 would be a reasonable number, but I am open to suggestions. As far as infrastructure is concened, I can cost my own OSBs that just manufacture Ship modules and use the same number of ships to calculate the amount that should be added to the cost of manufacture per ship per class.

Having said all that, I am open to considering other suggestions.

When I was still making and selling ships and modules I wanted at least 50% of the nio and tin value to pay for everything else. That including BPs (reasearched or bougth), time spent to make it, SY, cheap materiels etc.
Simply making the total price 150% of nio and tin cost. 200% back when we only had one SY per player at ISB. Modules not needing nio or tin I just priced at the amount I felt I needed to make it worth the time I put into them, like 400m for a cl 17 PQ.

After mining I knew I could get better value off my nio an tin if I made ships and modules of it. These days I am just lazy and dump what I mine and dont need into Nio Tin Market.

I also think that modules and ships put up on GM can be priced higher than those that are made per order. As the buyer dont have to wait, while the seller dont know when it will be sold. But then you are risking that others claim the GM seller is trying to cheat the buyers, as prices stated on the forum for order is lower.


Thats just my experience and what was needed to make it interesting to be a seller for me.

Thanks for the response, Loke.

I will bear this in mind when re-evaluating my prices.

Dare I say the real issue not mentioned by Moon & Loke?

Sorry, bottom-line, player population size is way too small. We know why.

I realise that the current number of active PCs probably does not justify more than one dedicated shipbuilder, but I think we must prepare for a boost in PC numbers and surely there is a closet crafter out there who would like to become the second best shipbuilder in the Galaxy.

I realise that the current number of active PCs probably does not justify more than one dedicated shipbuilder, but I think we must prepare for a boost in PC numbers and surely there is a closet crafter out there who would like to become the second best shipbuilder in the Galaxy.

You could use that spreadsheet I sent you to figure costs out moon. But where to pitch an average T/N price is tricky. I guess you could cost it on your own sm buy price or it could be dynamic depending on what price you buy exotics at, at the time.

Thanks davh. I am using your spreadsheet, but, as you say the problems are where to pitch the n/t price and how much to add for investment cost recuperation.

From my standpoint I have recovered all my initial outlay, so I am happy with a 30% margin. on cost. If someone else wishes to come up with prices for modules and ships that they wish to charge, I will not be averse to matching them.

I realise that the current number of active PCs probably does not justify more than one dedicated shipbuilder, but I think we must prepare for a boost in PC numbers and surely there is a closet crafter out there who would like to become the second best shipbuilder in the Galaxy.

Currently moving from 3 to 4 SYs building gate mods ... ISB handling everything else.

I can, should the need arise, switch back to discount (90% of Moon's price) volume ship building.

The following inventory: http://forum.thespacegame.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3295&p=29408#p29408

... is meant for Moon and any PC willing to support (same prices) Moon in his shipbuilding efforts.

The following is my bps inventory: http://forum.thespacegame.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3295&p=29409#p29409

It would be nice to have a steady stream of new players.

Been away a long time and probably not coming back but here are my 2 cents which no one will want to hear...

The very fact that you are (were, since last reply looks to be Jan 2018) having a discussion about "proper" pricing is itself the problem.

As was said earlier, there aren't enough buyers to support an actual market. What you are really doing in this thread is called collusion. A real market will set a price all by itself, no discussion needed.

And this is the real hammer and it hurts because I had high hopes for this game a couple years ago. This game doesn't have a market because it's DEAD. Hate to say it, but that's the hard truth.

Stagnant development is the big killer, but another thing that drove me away when I played was the "core" of long-time players that could be discerned, over a bit of time, who were pulling the real political and economic strings. The game has enough depth that this is something that could be done. Intrigue! Which could have been a good thing! With a big enough base, lots of movers and shakers can make for an exciting galaxy! But as small as this game stayed, it only ever was just a clique. Too much attempt to control things from the sidelines from a few real players. And few new people want to sign on for that. RIP Ascent

Stagnant development is the big killer, but another thing that drove me away when I played was the "core" of long-time players that could be discerned, over a bit of time, who were pulling the real political and economic strings. The game has enough depth that this is something that could be done. Intrigue! Which could have been a good thing! With a big enough base, lots of movers and shakers can make for an exciting galaxy! But as small as this game stayed, it only ever was just a clique. Too much attempt to control things from the sidelines from a few real players. And few new people want to sign on for that.

I suspect you mean me. Those who stay, invest, and work to build something are not manipulating, but working, and it is natural and normal for them to be involved and working to guide things. The real world is the same. Those who sit on the sidelines and watch seldom do much. Those who are new to a company seldom become the CEO the first month. Such is life.

Glad to see you drop by, but not sure the benefit of you just dumping on us and then flying off. Feel free to stick around and help make things better. If you are not, don't pound on those who do.