Talk:Commodities

Trade Routes

I'm skeptical that we should post good routes- its a bit of a spoiler, isn't it? Although, I suppose anyone using the wiki is looking for spoilers anyway, and it'll get people off the diamond run. Before fully populating it, though, I think we should do some discussion either here or on the forums. -Sovereign

I agree that this is something of a spoiler, and would rather have only well-known routes - i.e. routes between houses that should be 'public' in character.

- Wrathkin 13:31, 14 May 2008 (GMT)

The whole column is redundant with the Common Trade Routes page, so I'd say get rid of it.

Nodwick 13:40, 14 May 2008 (GMT)

Agreed. Plus, a lot of commodities have multiple good trade routes...

Sovereign 20:06, 27 May 2008 (GMT)

I suggest to use the Common Trade Routes column for attributes like contraband or perishable instead of putting those things in the name column.

0815fips 17:05, 27 Oct 2008 (GMT+1)

The routes are also going to change in 4.85. So these are redundant. I think people need to find their own routes. Otherwise we could be encouraging powertrading etc...

-Chovynz 15:17, 27 October 2008 (MDT)

If nobody declines my idea, i will do that this week. And I will try to add all linked commodities.

0815fips 12:33, 29 Oct 2008 (GMT+1)

Go for it. I have no problem with removing the routes. If someone seriously objects we can always undo. However..I would ask that anyone who DOES object to the removal of the commodity routes discuss and give us good reasons why they think it should be there. Currently the reasons for removing are 1)they will be changed in 4.85 and may continue to change in the future hence putting information that changes often make for redundant information, 2)having those particular routes on the wiki is a thing best "discovered for yourself". If you want a "walkthrough", chances are you are powertrading, which is something strongly discouraged at Discovery RP server. 3)there is already a trade page, as mentioned above. Use that.

-Chovynz 17:04, 30 October 2008 (MDT)

Recent Discussion

I've been looking at this page. I'm wondering if we could come up with a check list table. One column would be "perishable", one would be "rarity"?, and some others could be legal status in the various houses. This means that we could get rid of "Perishables" in the commodity name as well. Perhaps something like the below: (Note: There are two different options in the available from; There is people group and general area. There are also two different options shown in the Legal status columns. Y/N or ill/leg. Let me know which is better.)

"The LB/KU/BR/RH/GA columns are to show in what house each commodity is illegal. '*' Designates special conditions."

Commodity Name	Perishable	Rarity	Available From	LB	KU	BR	RH	GA
Alien Organisms	Highly	Common	Nowhere	N	N	N	N	N
Artifacts	Yes	V.Rare	Outcasts	Y	*	Y	Y	N
Cardamine	N	Common	LB, RH, BW	Y	N	*	Y	N
Basic Alloy	N	Common	Everywhere	N	N	N	N	N

Chovynz 18:50, 13 December 2008 (MST)

I like the Y/N because it's short.

0815fips ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 09:39, 2. August 2009 (UTC+2)

Mine-able Commodities

Currently the locations mine-able commodities can be found is out of date. I have contacted Dusty asking for an updated list, this may take a while though as he is currently under some fairly sever time restraints. Until then should we add a disclaimer to the locations saying they may be inaccurate? -Tazuras 01:28, 22 January 2010 (MST)

Corsair/outcast faction inclusion

So, do you think they should be on the table or not. State why, using concise logical arguments please.

The above unsigned entry was written by Tazuras (Talk | contribs) on 19:22, 4 March 2010

I think it could be useful for factions that can deal with Corsairs and Outcasts (--Moebus 10:20, 5 March 2010 (MST)).

Data validity

I notice that the commodities status reported on the chart are not consistent with the informations found on the Forum (Laws of Sirius). May I ask what informations have been used to fill the chart?