EVE Search - The 1 isk trade order problem... with a potential solution

All Channels

Market Discussions

The 1 isk trade order problem... with a potential solution

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:11:00 - [91] Originally by: Hel O'Ween In a truely free market, I as a buyer, would have the right to decide from whom I buy my stuff. I would actually like to see two improvements (from a buyer's perspective) implemented in the market: - Let me decide from which order I get the goods. - Let me see who's selling the stuff. I might want to support that little newbie and pay a million more for a certain item. And I would rather not support our current war targets by buying stuff from them. This would introduce a political tool... The trade embargo. I kinda like the anonymous ability to sell items. Can you explain deeper why you'd want this? Not just the trade embargo/trade support. what other trade pro's/con's can this have? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:15:00 - [92] Originally by: Red Wid0w Yes the 0.01 isk issue is a total joke and could be trivially fixed by CCP (by just limiting changes to 1 per hour or whatever). Even with this change you propose, the 0.01 isk game would still exist. Originally by: Red Wid0w The hilarious thing is that all the people saying "market is working like it's supposed to" are cheating macro scum. All? thats false. Originally by: Red Wid0w In case you guys did not know... people use macros to play the 0.01 isk game while they are in work. Prove it. Originally by: Red Wid0w I sincerely pity anyone that sits in front of their PC clicking on market orders all day..... Would they keep doing it if they know they were competing against bots? Yes, People actually do this. Especially when billions of isk are invested. Yes, many people would keep doing if they where competing against bots. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:24:00 - [93] Originally by: Khrillian if you value time highly just post your sell orders at the lowest price you're willing to sell at and don't modify them. No, because traders want to make the largest profit available to them. Profits encourage supply. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:27:00 - [94] Originally by: Hel O'Ween Now, from a seller's point of view I'd sometimes also would like to be able to control to whom I sell. Taking my war targets example from above: Supplying replacement parts to my enemies so that they can reequip themselves right here instead of having to go to a 'neutral' place, might keep them longer around than I'd wish to. Whats to keep your war targets from using an alt to buy supplies? or using a friend to purchase it, from you anyways? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:28:00 - [95] Originally by: Ms Delerium - Market is already enough profitable while afk, you want to make it even easier to make isk?? Yes, more trade tools for traders. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:32:00 - [96] Originally by: Ms Delerium Finally, if limit time becomes much higher, like 12hours, it will be much worse. Taking above example, I would lead the market 5 seconds and the other dude for 11h 59m 55s and this would generate HUGE amount of hate mails and epic marketragequits No matter what time limit is set (1, 5, 10, 15, 30 mins, etc.) you can always beat the other guy, by simply having more orders then him. In your example. Just have your items split between 2 orders. And you will ALWAYS be ahead of the competitions order. The time limit has no other purpose than to keep the orders within a set speed the server can keep up with. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:44:00 - [97] Originally by: Tasko Pal It's worth noting that CCP is heavily pro-trader here. I'm glad. Originally by: Tasko Pal For example, automatic bidding means that an inactive trader can compete effectively in busy markets with someone that spends considerable more time online. I don't think CCP wants that. I disagree, this feature would allow people to manage many more trade orders then they could now. Using this feature would allow more traders to participate in many more markets/items than they could currently. Have you tried manually adjusting 300+ orders. Your looking at hours of just upding, and by the time you've gone through your list. Its time to update the first items on your list. So you are basicly stuck in an endless loop of updating just to have your items sell. I realize other traders solution to that is to focus on a few items. However the counter argument is don't put all your eggs in one basket. I believe if this autobidding tool where added you'd see more orders on the market. As well as more players training up skills such as Tycoon *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Hel O'Ween Academy of Truth	Posted - 2009.03.25 12:42:00 - [98] Originally by: Dasfry Originally by: Hel O'Ween In a truely free market, I as a buyer, would have the right to decide from whom I buy my stuff. I would actually like to see two improvements (from a buyer's perspective) implemented in the market: - Let me decide from which order I get the goods. - Let me see who's selling the stuff. I might want to support that little newbie and pay a million more for a certain item. And I would rather not support our current war targets by buying stuff from them. This would introduce a political tool... The trade embargo. I kinda like the anonymous ability to sell items. Can you explain deeper why you'd want this? Not just the trade embargo/trade support. what other trade pro's/con's can this have? Basically, I'm sick and tired of this 0,01 ISK game. Be assured, I would always buy from the 1000 ISK guy, not from the 999.99 ISK guy. And I'd rather buy from my corp mate or, in broader terms, from a 'blue guy', than from a neutral/red. And, yes, this would turn the market into another political tool. Quote: Whats to keep your war targets from using an alt to buy supplies? or using a friend to purchase it, from you anyways? As I explained earlier: if you feel the need to, you're already willing to figure out the alts (for ganking their freighters, for example). Besides, all those changes would be a "can", not a "must". If you as a trader don't bother, you could just continue to run your business like you do nowadays. -- EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager
Aviditas	Posted - 2009.03.25 16:43:00 - [99] Originally by: Caleb Ayrania In thread a a daytrader said this microbidding reflects real life trade, that is not entirely true because there are a few different types of trade time wise and price wise, and when you place an order w the broker he stacks them and trades in larger volumes, and he will never slow trade on the floor by microbidding, thats not at all how things work.. No one on the floor would over bid or underbid with such lame increments. The microbids could and would only exist in pretrade w the broker. You're paraphrasing me, and what you say is correct only as far as (some)investors are concerned. Daytraders do NOT work through brokers. We directly access the various markets we trade in.
YouGotRipped Ewigkeit	Posted - 2009.03.25 16:57:00 - [100] Edited by: YouGotRipped on 25/03/2009 17:05:26 Originally by: Hel O'Ween Basically, I'm sick and tired of this 0,01 ISK game. Be assured, I would always buy from the 1000 ISK guy, not from the 999.99 ISK guy. And I'd rather buy from my corp mate or, in broader terms, from a 'blue guy', than from a neutral/red. And, yes, this would turn the market into another political tool. I strongly doubt that CCP will want to change the way the market operates as it will negatively affect new players. However, they might be willing to improve the way the corp/alliance contract system works to allow partially fulfilling a contract (buying just 1 unit of the product for example). Quote: 1. Add advanced options to the current contract system to set the recycling efficiency level and the price per unit for the yielded raw materials. Thus when transferring ownership of mission loot you'd only have to fill in the recycling efficiency level and price per unit for trit, pye, iso, mex, etc making the production manager's verification job much easier. I find it laughable that in a game that revolves around PVP, the tools to take corporation/alliance warfare to market level are nonexistent. Black Sun Empire
Dzil Caldari TankSox Industries	Posted - 2009.03.25 17:42:00 - [101] Just throwing this out there: I think if you really wanted to curtail the popularity and perceived "unfair advantage" of people sitting in Jita trading and penny isking all day, you could modify the way order limits work to create a maximum number of orders you can enter/change in a given timeframe, based on your trade skills. So for example, if my trade skills allow 100 open orders, maybe that also limits me to 100 entered or changed orders per 24 hours.
Business Ethics	Posted - 2009.03.25 20:03:00 - [102] When I first started trading and looked over the trade skills I assumed that Daytrading allowed for more frequent updates of the orders. What a surprise! Anyway. I'm not in favor of any kind of automatic market updating as proposed here. Consistent with CCP's theme of "you gotta do it by hand" I don't think they want to change the mechanics either. Think of the frightful profit machines we could manage with such tools at our disposal. I juggle well over 2000 orders currently myself. Do we really need the ability to manage 10000 orders solo? Neither am interested in any co-pricing, price-sharing, or other mechanisms to make the processing of vaguely like-priced items "more equitable" as some here might describe it. I don't really care if some guy undercuts me so why change the "best price gets the deal" system to reward the lazy or the misinformed? The smart trader waits for the price to come to him.
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 20:58:00 - [103] Originally by: Business Ethics I juggle well over 2000 orders currently myself. If a single player can manage only approx 300... how in the amarr name are you able to manage 2000? how many alts are u using ? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dzil Caldari TankSox Industries	Posted - 2009.03.26 15:46:00 - [104] Originally by: Dasfry Originally by: Business Ethics I juggle well over 2000 orders currently myself. If a single player can manage only approx 300... how in the amarr name are you able to manage 2000? how many alts are u using ? I think it caps at 321 So that'd be at least 7 characters. Or 6 if he meant to say 1946. Which would nicely fit into 2 accounts, but would take forever to train up. Of course, 7 accounts on 7 different screens could actually be enough spreadsheets to produce a nergasm. If you could afford the 2 bil/month isk overhead, it might be worth it.
Lordofbones	Posted - 2009.03.26 17:30:00 - [105] Originally by: Kwint Sommer I would argue that, while annoying, .01'ing has an important place in the market. It allows small traders to make better margins than large traders (at least per unit of time spent managing the orders) which is important if you don't want veterans to hold a perpetual monopoly. Furthermore, an automated system like that would just add overhead and complexity to the database, both of which are likely to result in lag and crashes. The system, though annoying, is fine as is. The young traders can earn a good margin/high turnove playing .01 games and the wealthy veterans use their large cash reserves and superior knowledge of the market to make good profits without it. This I think? Small traders/new players can't move large enough volumes over distances to supply large orders and markets? They make their profit by selling their smaller lots at better prices locally, quickly...? You might wish you could make a better profit margin, I do, but options are limited if you try to trade for profit early in your career...? If you removed the ability to .1, small traders would just sell smaller lots, and instead of updating price on their orders, just offer a new lot at the next lowest price increment... when each order's price change limit was up, set it for the new lower price... If you make it a global timer on how much you can adjust all orders during a day, you hamstring the large traders more than a small trader, because big traders move more items and orders...? Sorry I'm new, I just don't think changing the system would be a good idea...
Lordofbones	Posted - 2009.03.26 17:33:00 - [106] Edited by: Lordofbones on 26/03/2009 17:34:40 blargle
Pirva	Posted - 2009.03.26 17:59:00 - [107] In short you would like a macro which works when you are offline or if you leave your char logged in? In even shorter language a bot. Dream on.
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.26 23:24:00 - [108] Originally by: Pirva In even shorter language a bot. There are a ton of features already in game that could be argued to be defined as a bot. Here let me give you an example. The weapon aimbot When you're flying a ship, you do not manually aim the guns. Rather you give your ship target and it AUTO AIMS for you. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.27 06:56:00 - [109] Originally by: YouGotRipped I strongly doubt that CCP will want to change the way the market operates Only CCP can answer that one. Although my impression is CCP would like to improve the game overall. Originally by: YouGotRipped ... as it will negatively affect new players. In reference to: How updating the market can negatively affect new players. I disagree, as long as the improvements are made with competitive fairness in mind. Although how you define what's competitively fair is arguable. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
small chimp	Posted - 2009.03.27 16:07:00 - [110] I really think that the op should be banished from this forum? There is nothing wrong with 0.01 isk warfare even if you say so! Tears of bears are so juicy!
Terrahh	Posted - 2009.03.27 16:42:00 - [111] Originally by: Dasfry Originally by: flakeys I however agree with the change to make updating orders time limited.Once every hour or so instead of what we have now.This is better for players like me who have less playtime and also for the big trade hubs where people are actually babysitting their orders and changing them way too frequently so the prices fluctuate more then they should.Especially for sale orders. The current time minimum between edits if 5 minutes. You say it happens way too frequently then they should be. which sounds subjective. My question to you is what objectionably defines how frequent they should be? Agreed. If you want to 'fix' .01ISKing, what you really want to fix is the bid modification window. Set it to a base of 24h, with the 1st window after 5 min for error correction. Cut that time in half for each skill level of Daytrading. Maxed out daytraders will still be able to make price adjustments every 45 minutes, but those corrections will need to be more aggressive if they want to maximize the exposure of their bids. Doing this would reduce the server load vs adding to it. Remote bid modification could be left attached to Daytrading skill, or a new skill could replace it. ie. Trade Networking or Telecommuting.
YouGotRipped Ewigkeit	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:49:00 - [112] Edited by: YouGotRipped on 27/03/2009 18:55:22 Originally by: Dasfry Originally by: YouGotRipped I strongly doubt that CCP will want to change the way the market operates Only CCP can answer that one. Although my impression is CCP would like to improve the game overall. Originally by: YouGotRipped ... as it will negatively affect new players. In reference to: How updating the market can negatively affect new players. I disagree, as long as the improvements are made with competitive fairness in mind. Although how you define what's competitively fair is arguable. Believe me when I saY that apart from market bots, the current system is fine as it is. New players compensate the lack of capital for diversifying their op by a heightened stamina and daytrading. 0.1 isk price adjusting is a normal result of high competition in a given market. One way to avoid it is to always match supply and demand by bundling suppliers, producers and consumers in self sufficient mega corporations / power blocks and operating changes in the contract system as I described somewhere above. The other one would be to shrink your profit margins and diversify. Black Sun Empire

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.