It means that a direct refutation to the statement "Because the price
changes are so small, manipulation will not be significant," is,
"Because the price changes are so small, they won't have any effect of
the game, and therefore there is no point in including them."
I stand by the statement. IF manipulation is not effective BECAUSE the
price changes are so small, THEN neither are the price changes
significant in the game. IF manipulation is not effective FOR SOME
OTHER REASON, my statement does not apply.
> The fact that the price for wood can swing from 5-75 gold based on
> supply and demand will certainly have a significant impact on the
> game, but by no means does that mean that manipulation will be
> worthwhile.
The posting that "you aren't sure what it means, if anything," is in
direct response to a suggestion that markets would move BY A MAXIMUM OF
1 GOLD EVERY TEN TURNS. In that case, wood can't swing from 5-75 gold,
period.
If you aren't going to read the messages, it's not surprising that you
have trouble figuring out "what a posting means, if anything."
> Has no one on this list studied economics?
No, that is not the case. Some of us have indeed studied economics.
However economics bears only the faintest resemblance to the subject at
hand, which is game design.
David desJardins