Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Arthor Dark
Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:06:00 -
[1]
Implement a range to buy/sell orders.
For example:
There are buy orders of: A) 105k (10k range) B) 110k (5k range) C) 95k (8k range)
You place a buy order at 100k with a range of 10k.
As a result any sell order for the highest buy order of 110k would get split evenly between the highest buy order and any buyer within range: A, B and you, but not C, because C's range only goes to 103k.
If there is a sale of one unit, then it is randomly sold to any one in range, and similarly for odd quantities - the remainder is randomed.
The range is not visible to others.
And similarly for sell orders.
Would this work?
|
Monty Kvaran
Caldari Consolidated Sprocket
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:10:00 -
[2]
Personally I think they should have buy/sell orders work on a dutch auction format, you put in the max/min you are willing to pay, the system then prices your order slightly above the next best order, and will automatically adjust your order to keep it on top till the max/min is reached. (Like how Ebay bidding works) It should remain possible to place an order at a specific price as well... . |
Midas Man
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:26:00 -
[3]
LOL this old topic.
If you cannot Trade don't. Similar to if you cannot fight don't PvP. Why should anyone be given a MONOPOLY in any market? They Shouldn't So if you place an buy order at 1000isk why can i not place a buy order for 1000.01 ISK. There is nothing stopping you from Placing a Buy order for 1000.02 ISK.
So go back to WOW with there ebay style bidding/buy out. Or sell in Eve through contracts but FFS leave the perfectly functioning market alone.
If someone plays more they get an advantage if you dont like it DON'T PLAY MMO's. If Competing with others in Market, Battle or other gaming activities is a problem for you. BUY An XBOX PS3 or some such and play alone with games designed for that and leave MMO's to people who understand the consept of competing with other humanbeings
|
Arthor Dark
Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:35:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Midas Man LOL this old topic.
If you cannot Trade don't. Similar to if you cannot fight don't PvP. Why should anyone be given a MONOPOLY in any market? They Shouldn't So if you place an buy order at 1000isk why can i not place a buy order for 1000.01 ISK. There is nothing stopping you from Placing a Buy order for 1000.02 ISK.
So go back to WOW with there ebay style bidding/buy out. Or sell in Eve through contracts but FFS leave the perfectly functioning market alone.
If someone plays more they get an advantage if you dont like it DON'T PLAY MMO's. If Competing with others in Market, Battle or other gaming activities is a problem for you. BUY An XBOX PS3 or some such and play alone with games designed for that and leave MMO's to people who understand the consept of competing with other humanbeings
No, I can compete just fine, and I do very well for the few hundred orders that I have up and update reguarly.
The problem is the sheer drudgery of it all.
How dumb can the brokers in this game be, so as to not get some of the action for their clients on an order that is just a mere 0.01isk off?
|
Robacz
Essence Trade Essence Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:48:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Arthor Dark Implement a range to buy/sell orders.
For example:
There are buy orders of: A) 105k (10k range) B) 110k (5k range) C) 95k (8k range)
You place a buy order at 100k with a range of 10k.
As a result any sell order for the highest buy order of 110k would get split evenly between the highest buy order and any buyer within range: A, B and you, but not C, because C's range only goes to 103k.
If there is a sale of one unit, then it is randomly sold to any one in range, and similarly for odd quantities - the remainder is randomed.
The range is not visible to others.
And similarly for sell orders.
Would this work?
It would make market very nontransparent, becouse you would not know what you are selling/buying for until you sold/bought the item.
Anyways, there is simple solution to 0.01 cutting: cut them back!
|
Arthor Dark
Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:54:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Robacz
It would make market very nontransparent, becouse you would not know what you are selling/buying for until you sold/bought the item.
Anyways, there is simple solution to 0.01 cutting: cut them back!
You'd know exactly, because you set the buy / sell orders. The unit will be bought for 100k and up to 110k with a 10k range, or whatever range you put it. If you want to sell at 100k exactly, put a range of 0isk. Similarly for sell orders.
Everyone has an idea of at what point they would stop selling / buying, why get to that point after 100s of updates? The brokers should be smart enough to get some of the units for the client when the prices are close enough (as set by the client.)
|
Brisco Smiley
Peppermint Bay Trading Company
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:58:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Midas Man So if you place an buy order at 1000isk why can i not place a buy order for 1000.01 ISK. There is nothing stopping you from Placing a Buy order for 1000.02 ISK.
Then I will modify my buy order to 2000 isk. That's how I roll. What?
|
Midas Man
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 16:10:00 -
[8]
So you tell a broker to sell for 100isk I then pay him to sell for 99.99Isk
not so dumb he has made 2x the broker fee and is also making his customers happier by offering a cheaper price. A broker has to satisfy both sellers and buyers. If buyer are unhappy he would be a dumb broker.
Yes you would set the Range but how would a customer know how much there shiney new product will cost apart from between 100k and 110k?
As for bordom, ever tried mining, I find it utterly dull but do it from time to time for minerals and to increase Isk flow. The Answer to this comment is if you find Trading dull go and do something you find interesting this is a game so if your not enjoying it thats your fault.
This is an open market if you offer your goods cheap you will get sales. There is also 1000's of other people wanting to do exactly the same. either compete or die but no matter what you suggest there will always be competion. If you want a game with no competition go play a single player game and leave MMO's to those that enjoy that kind of competition
|
Midas Man
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 16:11:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Brisco Smiley
Originally by: Midas Man So if you place an buy order at 1000isk why can i not place a buy order for 1000.01 ISK. There is nothing stopping you from Placing a Buy order for 1000.02 ISK.
Then I will modify my buy order to 2000 isk. That's how I roll. What?
Fantastic, someone who understands trading but i will then move my order to 2000.01 assuming i can sell for a profit at that price and so it continues....
|
Arthor Dark
Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 16:26:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Midas Man
Yes you would set the Range but how would a customer know how much there shiney new product will cost apart from between 100k and 110k?
A customer selling an item (to a buy order) would have the item sold at the highest buy order price. A customer buying an item (from a sell order) would buy the item at the lowest sell order price. The ranges of the highest buy order and the lowest sell order are not used.
Originally by: Midas Man
As for bordom, ever tried mining, I find it utterly dull but do it from time to time for minerals and to increase Isk flow. The Answer to this comment is if you find Trading dull go and do something you find interesting this is a game so if your not enjoying it thats your fault.
This is an open market if you offer your goods cheap you will get sales. There is also 1000's of other people wanting to do exactly the same. either compete or die but no matter what you suggest there will always be competion. If you want a game with no competition go play a single player game and leave MMO's to those that enjoy that kind of competition
I don't see how having ranges would eliminate competition, it would merely take away the meaningless 0.01isk game which serves little purpose. Having ranges would also eliminate those very brief monopolies that the latest 0.01isk gamer has, and instead spread the sales over a broad base of those who would be very willing (and able) to pay the extra 0.01-0.03isk yet unable either due to the "5min no update rule" or just frustration of having to dictate to the broker every 5 minutes that 0.01isk is no big deal.
If someone wants to obtain a monopoly, then they would have to raise or lower the price by a significant amount so as to surpass the ranges of other buyers / sellers.
|
|
Midas Man
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 16:36:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Arthor Dark
I don't see how having ranges would eliminate competition, it would merely take away the meaningless 0.01isk game which serves little purpose. Having ranges would also eliminate those very brief monopolies that the latest 0.01isk gamer has, and instead spread the sales over a broad base of those who would be very willing (and able) to pay the extra 0.01-0.03isk yet unable either due to the "5min no update rule" or just frustration of having to dictate to the broker every 5 minutes that 0.01isk is no big deal.
If someone wants to obtain a monopoly, then they would have to raise or lower the price by a significant amount so as to surpass the ranges of other buyers / sellers.
And Hence the 0.01 Isk game, As a trader i want maximise profit by undercutting by .01Isk i keep my profit margin high. If I was undercut by 1000Isk i would still make profit trading so i would undercut you by a further 0.01 ISK as i want to maximise profit. so i see no reason to drop by large amounts unless i am trying to clear excess stock.
But think your suggestion through.
Now i may stay highest buy order for 2 mins (just an example. In that time i buy 5 Items so i put them on sale for x Isk. 5 mins later someone else has been on top for a few mins and also got 5 so put them on at x - 0.01 Isk.
Now in your senario we both have a buy order (And it will be for a very similar range) The broker of the same 10 minutes period has the same 10 items and sells 5 to me and 5 to you.
Can you see a difference - Apart from the wasted coding time that could have been to fix a "real" problem.
|
Benvie
Benvie Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 16:42:00 -
[12]
If empire suicide ganking doesn't need to be fixed then neither does 0.01 price changing.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 16:48:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Benvie If empire suicide ganking doesn't need to be fixed then neither does 0.01 price changing.
Empire suicide ganking does need to be fixed, insurance needs to stop being payed out when concord is involved.
But that has nothing to do with .01 pricing, which should also get fixed.
That said, the first change ccp is going to implement is changing the order modification window. They've said that's what they are looking at doing.
All these suggestions of using a range are quite silly and it's been explained over and over why it doesn't work... yet we constantly have new people suggesting it.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Benvie
Benvie Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 17:07:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Shadarle Empire suicide ganking does need to be fixed, insurance needs to stop being payed out when concord is involved.
That was my point. =D I suppose I was a bit roundabout in saying it though. I don't buy the argument that just because things are the way they are not doesn't mean they can't still be fixed, but a lot of people say that about both 0.01 undercutting and suicide ganking.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 17:23:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Benvie
Originally by: Shadarle Empire suicide ganking does need to be fixed, insurance needs to stop being payed out when concord is involved.
That was my point. =D I suppose I was a bit roundabout in saying it though. I don't buy the argument that just because things are the way they are not doesn't mean they can't still be fixed, but a lot of people say that about both 0.01 undercutting and suicide ganking.
I totally agree that just because things have always been a way doesn't mean they can't be made better. I get quite annoyed with people who play mmorpg's and then never want change. Mmorpg's are all about change. Trading is all about change as well. Good traders profit from change, bad traders don't.
The market aspects of the game have need a lot of fixing and updating and have gotten almost none. It's about time we got a dev with a singular focus on the markets imo. Enough people are heavy traders to warrant it imo.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Arthor Dark
Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:05:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Midas Man
Now i may stay highest buy order for 2 mins (just an example. In that time i buy 5 Items so i put them on sale for x Isk. 5 mins later someone else has been on top for a few mins and also got 5 so put them on at x - 0.01 Isk.
Now in your senario we both have a buy order (And it will be for a very similar range) The broker of the same 10 minutes period has the same 10 items and sells 5 to me and 5 to you.
Can you see a difference - Apart from the wasted coding time that could have been to fix a "real" problem.
The difference is that there would be no need to constantly update by 0.01isk. And yes, it would be the same end result, minus the hassle.
Improving aspects of the game, and yes, this is a game, to make it more pleasant for the players by having a marketplace that responds correctly to the trader's intentions (i.e. sell / buy the items for a price around X, as opposed to assuming that the trader wants exactly X) is hardly a wasted effort. That should be CCP's goal number one - player satisfaction.
And how much code are we talking about here anyways? I'm not asking for ship models, or any artistic undertaking what so ever. Just add another input field, some logic and a random function. Nothing that can't be done by a smart programmer in less than a couple of hours.
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:14:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: Benvie
Originally by: Shadarle Empire suicide ganking does need to be fixed, insurance needs to stop being payed out when concord is involved.
That was my point. =D I suppose I was a bit roundabout in saying it though. I don't buy the argument that just because things are the way they are not doesn't mean they can't still be fixed, but a lot of people say that about both 0.01 undercutting and suicide ganking.
I totally agree that just because things have always been a way doesn't mean they can't be made better. I get quite annoyed with people who play mmorpg's and then never want change. Mmorpg's are all about change. Trading is all about change as well. Good traders profit from change, bad traders don't.
The market aspects of the game have need a lot of fixing and updating and have gotten almost none. It's about time we got a dev with a singular focus on the markets imo. Enough people are heavy traders to warrant it imo.
While I'm a heavy trader, I don't control nearly the amount of isk that you and some of your richer counterparts do, so maybe I'm a bit naive to the whole situation. But I can see without the slightest bit of hesitation or equivocation that I can find no reason why the .01 undercutting non-issue needs to be fixed. I find them as annoying as the next person, but since their utilizing valid game mechanics, and performing a trading strategy that they find necessary to make their money, who are we as fellow traders to spur on the change to ruin what they do.
If the change is to alleviate lag problems (such as updating lag which can get a bit bad) then I can understand that, but if its to solely eliminate the .01 undercutting by traders, I don't find that reasonable at all. If its ended, they'll just go to the next lowest amount, and the cycle will never end, so I just cant see the point of going down this slippery slope.
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:22:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Arthor Dark
Originally by: Midas Man
Now i may stay highest buy order for 2 mins (just an example. In that time i buy 5 Items so i put them on sale for x Isk. 5 mins later someone else has been on top for a few mins and also got 5 so put them on at x - 0.01 Isk.
Now in your senario we both have a buy order (And it will be for a very similar range) The broker of the same 10 minutes period has the same 10 items and sells 5 to me and 5 to you.
Can you see a difference - Apart from the wasted coding time that could have been to fix a "real" problem.
The difference is that there would be no need to constantly update by 0.01isk. And yes, it would be the same end result, minus the hassle.
Improving aspects of the game, and yes, this is a game, to make it more pleasant for the players by having a marketplace that responds correctly to the trader's intentions (i.e. sell / buy the items for a price around X, as opposed to assuming that the trader wants exactly X) is hardly a wasted effort. That should be CCP's goal number one - player satisfaction.
And how much code are we talking about here anyways? I'm not asking for ship models, or any artistic undertaking what so ever. Just add another input field, some logic and a random function. Nothing that can't be done by a smart programmer in less than a couple of hours.
As I trader, I don't want items at a price around anything. I want items at the price I set my buy order to, and I don't want other traders being able to share the items I buy because of some silly range system being put into the game. Not only would some people end up buying items at a greater price than they want, but others would end up getting their items at a lower price than others within the "range", so once that occurs, you'll have another round of complaints and asking for a fix. The range system will not add to player satisfaction, but instead add to dissatisfaction, as a population of traders will complain that another part is getting their items at a cheaper price while they are getting screwed due to the range system, which is why the idea is fundamentally flawed and economically flawed at the same time.
I want capitalism, not communism, and I dont want my competitors being able to share items or get a better price due to some system being implemented to alleviate and fix a problem which is just a farce being perpetuated by people who cant fathom why people would spend hours on end undercutting and overbidding by .01 isk, when its really simple: they want to make as much money as possible, just like we do. Just because they go about it a different way does not mean change should be implemented to make every trader do the same thing, thats just silly.
|
Brisco Smiley
Peppermint Bay Trading Company
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:35:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Midas Man
Originally by: Brisco Smiley Then I will modify my buy order to 2000 isk. That's how I roll. What?
Fantastic, someone who understands trading but i will then move my order to 2000.01 assuming i can sell for a profit at that price and so it continues....
May you enjoy all the items I bought at 1k and sold to you at 2k.
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:40:00 -
[20]
I have a solution (which pains me to say) to the "problem" of .01 undercutting. Just make modification of your orders cost a fee based on the value of the items being traded. That way, if someone was trading say minerals or small ammo, the cost of modification would negate the profits from trading the items, while for more expensive gear, the modification fee would eliminate the near constant .01 undercutting by costing those undercutters more money for each time they undercut by the small amount.
A problem I see with this is the fact that the fee may in fact spur on more .01 undercutting because people will want to save the margins they have due to having to come out of the pocket with much more isk due to each modification. It may lower the amount of total modifications, but may result in .01 isk changes becoming a greater proportion of the total modifications.
|
|
Robacz
Essence Trade Essence Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:42:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Robacz on 15/01/2008 18:42:32
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: Benvie
Originally by: Shadarle Empire suicide ganking does need to be fixed, insurance needs to stop being payed out when concord is involved.
That was my point. =D I suppose I was a bit roundabout in saying it though. I don't buy the argument that just because things are the way they are not doesn't mean they can't still be fixed, but a lot of people say that about both 0.01 undercutting and suicide ganking.
I totally agree that just because things have always been a way doesn't mean they can't be made better. I get quite annoyed with people who play mmorpg's and then never want change. Mmorpg's are all about change. Trading is all about change as well. Good traders profit from change, bad traders don't.
The market aspects of the game have need a lot of fixing and updating and have gotten almost none. It's about time we got a dev with a singular focus on the markets imo. Enough people are heavy traders to warrant it imo.
I agree that changes are required and game should evolve, but changes requested only to make game easier for someone and nerf someone else are not good. And thats what I feel when I read all these threads. People do not want to improve the game, they want to make it easier for them (or harder for others).
I hate market campers as much as most of other people around, but I don't want to change game just to make it easier for me to beat them. After all - they give it a lot more time than I do. Besdies, strategies how to fight camper were discussed here many times - they exist.
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:48:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Robacz Edited by: Robacz on 15/01/2008 18:42:32
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: Benvie
Originally by: Shadarle Empire suicide ganking does need to be fixed, insurance needs to stop being payed out when concord is involved.
That was my point. =D I suppose I was a bit roundabout in saying it though. I don't buy the argument that just because things are the way they are not doesn't mean they can't still be fixed, but a lot of people say that about both 0.01 undercutting and suicide ganking.
I totally agree that just because things have always been a way doesn't mean they can't be made better. I get quite annoyed with people who play mmorpg's and then never want change. Mmorpg's are all about change. Trading is all about change as well. Good traders profit from change, bad traders don't.
The market aspects of the game have need a lot of fixing and updating and have gotten almost none. It's about time we got a dev with a singular focus on the markets imo. Enough people are heavy traders to warrant it imo.
I agree that changes are required and game should evolve, but changes requested only to make game easier for someone and nerf someone else are not good. And thats what I feel when I read all these threads. People do not want to improve the game, they want to make it easier for them (or harder for others).
I hate market campers as much as most of other people around, but I don't want to change game just to make it easier for me to beat them. After all - they give it a lot more time than I do. Besdies, strategies how to fight camper were discussed here many times - they exist.
Thank you so much for being one of the few reasonable people who have spoke in this thread. Your view exemplifies mine perfectly, and I just wish more traders realized the simple fact that nerfs and changes to benefit one group while purposely hurting another is not good for the game and not the kind of change we should be pushing for as consumers.
|
Popperr
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:48:00 -
[23]
0.01 isnt a price change, it's a variation on the same price, since no one ever went broke over a couple of hundred isk. even a brand new player doesn't count below the hundred thousands.
The market interface is weak from this point of view, granted you have to buy the lowest priced good, but you should buy everything within the lowest good bracket. Goods should be traded on a value of the full, and in fairness the only real trade is when you are trading on these values. Without 0.01 traders could trade much more aggressively and with much less market watching, all of which is a healthier situation.
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:52:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Popperr 0.01 isnt a price change, it's a variation on the same price, since no one ever went broke over a couple of hundred isk. even a brand new player doesn't count below the hundred thousands.
The market interface is weak from this point of view, granted you have to buy the lowest priced good, but you should buy everything within the lowest good bracket. Goods should be traded on a value of the full, and in fairness the only real trade is when you are trading on these values. Without 0.01 traders could trade much more aggressively and with much less market watching, all of which is a healthier situation.
I find this contradiction a bit funny. You want people to be able to trade more aggressively, while at the same time not watching the market as much? Last time I checked, the person who does the most research and watches the changes in the market most of time gets and rightfully deserves the most profit, not the person who wants the money thrown at them while they do nothing. If they want that, invest in some stocks or bonds, but leave trading as it and reward those who want to spend their time and sanity watching the market for every little change in the price of goods they trade. From what I gather, people want the values for goods to revert to fractional instead of decimal values (such as the stock market before the 90s), or even going as far as taking away the decimal values as a whole, which would open up a another can of worms with items whose total value is heavily leveraged to decimals, such as lowend minerals and small ammo.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 18:58:00 -
[25]
Reducing tedium is a good change for all involved. If someone wants to go out of their way to increase their own tedium that is their choice.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 19:07:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Giovanni F on 15/01/2008 19:08:20
Originally by: Shadarle Reducing tedium is a good change for all involved. If someone wants to go out of their way to increase their own tedium that is their choice.
I don't see how .01 adds any more tedium than changing the system would. You have the choice to either watch the market every so often and update your orders, watch it constantly and make more money, or do nothing except complain and ask for a change to make your EVE life easier while inhibiting someone elses. .01 undercutters don't make me watch the market anymore than if they undercut by a different amount, so the sheer premise that .01 undercutting makes you pay attention to the game more (which I fail to see how thats a problem, considering you should be paying attention to the game when you're playing the thing) is just silly.
You have the choice of either spending a few more minutes in a 23 hour game day updating your orders, spending a few hours doing the same (which you don't have to do to combat .01 undercutting), or finding something else to do to ease the tedium. Nobody is forcing you to sit in one place to trade, so I don't see how looking at the market screen a few more times each day is such a killer to your enjoyability of the game Shadarle.
|
Relyen
Caldari Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 19:16:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Giovanni F ...stuff...
I would think it's more the tedium of doing that with 50+ market orders.
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 19:26:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Relyen
Originally by: Giovanni F ...stuff...
I would think it's more the tedium of doing that with 50+ market orders.
And would the tedium be alleviated if these changes were implemented and the .01 undercutters just moved to the next lowest amount? I think not, which is why I find the argument flawed, as if the mere spectre of .01 is causing the problem, which is really quite laughable. Why should those who put more time into the game be punished while those who don't have things changed to benefit them? That makes no sense whatsoever and is against the spirit of free market competition.
|
Tasko Pal
Heron Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 19:47:00 -
[29]
One thing to keep in mind is that you aren't required to buy the lowest priced seller (though you do have to sell to the highest priced buyer). I usually skip over 0.01 undercutters (or fill them last when I'm buying in volume).
|
Giovanni F
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 19:51:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Arthor Dark
Originally by: Giovanni F
Originally by: Relyen
Originally by: Giovanni F ...stuff...
I would think it's more the tedium of doing that with 50+ market orders.
And would the tedium be alleviated if these changes were implemented and the .01 undercutters just moved to the next lowest amount? I think not, which is why I find the argument flawed, as if the mere spectre of .01 is causing the problem, which is really quite laughable. Why should those who put more time into the game be punished while those who don't have things changed to benefit them? That makes no sense whatsoever and is against the spirit of free market competition.
I guess what I am asking, is the basic automation of my intentions with regard to my market strategy. Presently, you can't have a basic intention of trying to buy an item and saying to the broker, "Look, if someone is willing to pay 0.01isk more, and there is a seller, then fine, just try to buy it as well at that price." It's not a secret, or hardly a complex market strategy to buy or sell at 0.01isk more or less - it doesn't change the general price of the buy / sell orders.
So, instead, the people who are rewarded are not those who know their market well and who have a certain understanding of how much more or less they can price their items, but those who are playing this 'pass the ball' game, where the person with the ball gets to buy / sell.
There is absolutely no strategy involved in a 0.01isk game. To say otherwise, is to admit that a market bot is the smartest and most shrewed trader in the game.
Well, from what I've read, people make it seem that its so complex and so destructive to their gameplay to have to watch the market and change their orders in response to the competition changing theirs, which is purely laughable. I cannot possibly agree with the notion that the market should be automated, and that the brokers should be able to discern whether you want to automatically raise or lower your price. If you want the game to do that for you, guess what they have? Bots. The same thing people complain about is what you just said you want the game to do for you, so the hypocrisy is just seething throughout your post. You can't complain about what you see as bots changing their orders by .01 isk every 5 minutes and then want the brokers on the market to do the same for you buy keeping your bid price in check with any movements by your competitors.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |