33 replies to this topic

[Kell Commander]

So I have all 3 Dragon variants available, and got through master in the pilot trees. So I decided to see how many c-bills I would get to sell my 5N so I can throw an XL engine in my Cataphract. Without selling equipment 1,104,139. I upgraded this thing to DHS but if i sell the chasis I don't even make back the 1.5 mil it cost? That doesn't seem right.

[Kobold]

It is a transaction cost. Any economist will tell you that you never get back transaction costs.

[OpCentar]

Selling prices are abysmal. Not worth selling anything unless you really need the bay space or have Mastered that particular variant.

[Jason1138]

why on earth would you get back 100% of what the chassis cost when you sold it? if you did, why would anyone ever buy more than 1 mech? you'd just sell the chassis and buy whatever mech you wanted to run the next match

[Kell Commander]

Kobold, on 21 November 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

It is a transaction cost. Any economist will tell you that you never get back transaction costs.

I understand this, however having the upgrade should make the chasis more valuable, and the whole mech (minus weapons) should be worth more than 1.1 mil WITHOUT the upgrade.

[Mu]

He's not talking about the base chassis cost, but rather that upgrades like DHS/endo don't reflect in the sale price. Which I agree is very lame, I mean that Jenner with everything should sell for more than 350k...

[Kell Commander]

Jason1138, on 21 November 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

why on earth would you get back 100% of what the chassis cost when you sold it? if you did, why would anyone ever buy more than 1 mech? you'd just sell the chassis and buy whatever mech you wanted to run the next match

100% back for the chasis would be 5 mil. I at least want the thing to be worth more than the cost of 1 upgrade.

Mu, on 21 November 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

He's not talking about the base chassis cost, but rather that upgrades like DHS/endo don't reflect in the sale price. Which I agree is very lame, I mean that Jenner with everything should sell for more than 350k...

Thank you for actually understanding what I am talking about.

[Hood]

I go to the car lot today and buy a 40k Lexus, drive it off the lot. Bring it back tomorrow and its only worth half.. yea this is not to far off.. the Kelly Blue book on my jenner said it was worth more but when you have a single buyer they can do what they want..

[TG Spoonman]

I agree. It's why I haven't upgraded my 2 Dragons I won't be using end game with anything more than EndoSteel, and even then I'm a little reluctant to sell now that I've hit master.

[Hood]

I have 16 mechs.. I dont sell anything.. you never know when its going to come back in style.

[TruePoindexter]

You always sell at a loss because:

• If you sold at full value then it would be worthwhile to buy mechs with MC and sell them for C-Bills
  
• Keep you grinding for C-Bills to keep you playing
  
• Slow progress of players

[Axeman1]

The upgrades are sidegrades or straight up hinderances from the virtual merchant's standpoint to have to reverse, so they shouldn't get you any more c-bills.

[p00k]

new car mech depreciation

[Kell Commander]

TruePoindexter, on 21 November 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

You always sell at a loss because:

• If you sold at full value then it would be worthwhile to buy mechs with MC and sell them for C-Bills
  
• Keep you grinding for C-Bills to keep you playing
  
• Slow progress of players

Ok I seriously understand the idea of selling at a loss. I did the math (because I got bored and only half the people posting here seem to understand I think it is TOO MUCH of a loss) and with all the equipment it is a 55% loss on selling back. My gripe here is I think a 40-45% loss would be a bit more fair/realistic.

Axeman1, on 21 November 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

The upgrades are sidegrades or straight up hinderances from the virtual merchant's standpoint to have to reverse, so they shouldn't get you any more c-bills.

If you are a car salesman and someone trades in a car with all options do you remove them and sell it stock? No, you charge more for options already installed. Why would that not apply to mech upgrades?

[Penance]

Would you pay the price of a new car for a used one? **** depreciated by half as soon as you took it off the lot.

Edited by Penance, 21 November 2012 - 12:37 PM.

[Webber]

The problem here is that you're not looking at the equipment costs. You have DHS which raise the value alone because, and correct me if I'm wrong, DHS cost more per unit. What you pay 1.5m C-Bills for is the conversion process. Think of converting your car from Petrol to Diesel; you still have to pay for gas, and some might think it isn't worth that much in the end.

Endo-Steel and FF Armor don't count, because the cost is so negligible.

What to do? Don't sell anything, and keep your variants to deal with different situations when you group up with others.

They need a brawler? "I have a Dragon for that!"

They need ranged support? "I have a Dragon for that!"

They need a scout hunter? "I have a Dragon for that, too!"

[TruePoindexter]

Kell Commander, on 21 November 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

Ok I seriously understand the idea of selling at a loss. I did the math (because I got bored and only half the people posting here seem to understand I think it is TOO MUCH of a loss) and with all the equipment it is a 55% loss on selling back. My gripe here is I think a 40-45% loss would be a bit more fair/realistic.

I don't necessarily disagree but because of point one - buying mechs with MC and selling for CBills - I doubt we'll ever go below a 50% loss. If it were 30% I probably would have bought an Atlas AS7-K and sold it immediately when OB began just to get a leg up.

[noobicus]

I think a lot of people are missing the point of the post - nobody is complaining about mechs depreciating in value.

People are just suggesting that mechs with upgrades have the trade-in reflect it. The example of the car trade-in you are referencing is flawed looking at this. If you have an upgraded vehicle and offer it to a car lot side by side with a basic version of the same car, your upgraded vehicle gets a higher value.

It isn't a new concept, and it isn't "omg game breaking c-bill/MC hax".... it is just common sense. That is what the OP is making in his argument - if he upgrades and puts on a ton of extra features to his mech, he should get more for that trade in than if he turned it in as a stock vehicle.

[Havyek]

I don't think that 'Mechs with upgrades should have a trade-in value increase until/unless a player driven market is available.

The game doesn't care that you've upgraded your Jenner to FF, Endo and DHS. It has no one to sell it to at a marked up price, it just sells stock Jenners.

[TruePoindexter]

noobicus, on 21 November 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

I think a lot of people are missing the point of the post - nobody is complaining about mechs depreciating in value. People are just suggesting that mechs with upgrades have the trade-in reflect it. The example of the car trade-in you are referencing is flawed looking at this. If you have an upgraded vehicle and offer it to a car lot side by side with a basic version of the same car, your upgraded vehicle gets a higher value. It isn't a new concept, and it isn't "omg game breaking c-bill/MC hax".... it is just common sense. That is what the OP is making in his argument - if he upgrades and puts on a ton of extra features to his mech, he should get more for that trade in than if he turned it in as a stock vehicle.

It will be an MC issue though. the FF/ES/DHS/XL costs are figured already into the C-Bill/MC costs. Also it's a game economy - an object of pure artifice. The real world need not apply.