✦ GC FORUM Galactic Conquest
Sign in
Back to the Game
Forum Index › General Discussion › Ore prices

Ore prices

Started by Blazed · 03/08/2015 · 05:18 PM · 13 replies · 0 reads
B BlazedOP
OP 03/08/2015 · 05:18 PM
This is kinda directed at the Admins and if they`ve thought about it or will think about it.....Ore is such a rare product and something really only low planet empire can get on a regular basis. It`s still the best way to make a quick $100mil when starting a new empire. Shouldnt the cost of ore be increased to $20,000 max per unit? I know I`d gladly pay that to get some and I`m sure others wouldn`t mind it either.
Y yourmasterlo
04/09/2015 · 03:50 PM
I wouldn`t say 100k I mean a decent (smallish) c3 is 100k land explored. And a great one is 150k explored if you only hold 1200 land barrens. I`d be willing to CSP at 150 (cluster or planet) and either way it would count as 125 planets...
E EvilBaa
04/08/2015 · 07:05 PM
http://www.poll-maker.com/poll378057x8858469e-14

Heres a simple poll
D DarthCaedus
04/08/2015 · 06:45 PM
yes doubling price isnt enough more than 50 thousand is to high though
E EvilBaa
04/08/2015 · 06:38 PM
The people tht cry about gordos r the ones that dont take time to dig and make thm.... also i think for ore to be a viable income it would have to be greater then 20k i think 40k would be suitable or atleast worth a try
B BlazedOP
04/08/2015 · 10:54 AM
you all want mineral generation based on land, now exploration based on land, but also a land cap......smh

Nothing wrong with buying gordos from people. If you think it`s an unfair advantage that people can afford that then do some digging and make your own to even the odds. You don`t have to "pay to win" just put some effort in doing it for free.
So now that everything is based on how much land you have, everyone will be gunning for 200k land... there`s still no ore to buy. Lets not get way off topic here. I think if the cost of ore was doubled we see more of it on the market...Goods was raised $1 and that market instantly filled up. It`s just a thought of something we could try without completely changing the aspect of the game and wondering what EE and BW think of it.
A Ankaar
04/08/2015 · 09:38 AM
Id rather have a fair game than one in which Stephen makes more money

buying gordos is straight up Pay to Win gaming.
If we aren`t going to put a cap on land size, then I definitely feel there should be some sort of penalty, such as the reduced exploration ability. It makes absolute sense
D DarthCaedus
04/08/2015 · 06:37 AM
im going buy gordos soon
T TheBlueKnight
04/08/2015 · 06:37 AM
Its empires that buy paid for gordo that keep this game alive, you think stephen is getting allot of advertising dollars for a game with 40 players?
S Stargaters
04/08/2015 · 05:24 AM
Land-based exploration only makes sense. Endless planet gordoing is ridiculously unbalanced and hugely unfair.
E EvilBaa
03/08/2015 · 11:45 PM
Exploring based on land would kill the game... and stephens income.. i for one would quit playing and thats 200$ a month Stephen would lose out on
A Ankaar
03/08/2015 · 10:02 PM
I see the merits of raising it, but I also must bring up those guys with 1 massive land planet. They can drop borders and ore hunt all they want when in dp, and easily border back up before they leave.

I already believe the massive land planets to be op in that they far outclass a newer player, and always will, and that they become super difficult to take because exploring borders is so easy.

Say theyre pop, and they drop pop to hunt at low pr - I`m looking at people like duckduck. Theyd have no problem keeping a great income just by exploring and selling ore when depopped.

I think the exploration rate should be dependent on a players total land, not total planet count.
D DarthCaedus
03/08/2015 · 06:19 PM
100000 hmmm maybe not 40 000 max
A ArrLand
03/08/2015 · 05:24 PM
must be easy to change. I would say max 100,000 would be even better.

Reply

⚠
You must sign in before you can reply.
Sign in to the game and come back — the forum uses your game account.