| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sep'Shoni
Gallente
Carpe Diem inc.
   |
Posted - 2009.05.24 23:18:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Kitchie
I don't like the OP's idea at all. As things are now, you can battle with other traders without wiping out your profit margin. The 0.01 ISK game allows you to keep on top, if you're willing to put in the time and effort, and basically maintain the same price.
The only change I'd like to have is for the market to show who the buyers and sellers are and to allow you to buy/sell to a specific order, not for it to automatically go to whoever is at the top of the list. Doubt it will happen and not the end of the world if it doesn't...
Same here.
I'd like to be able to compete based on service, reliability, or other things than just price. Though I can't see any realistic way to implement the equivalent of providing pleasant service in Eve.
As long as price is the only means of competition there should be restrictions on how those prices are set.
Sep'Shoni
Mining ore and making stuff. Its not just a job, its an obsession. |
Sep'Shoni
Gallente
Carpe Diem inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.24 23:19:00 -
[32]
Originally by: small chimp
I agree. OP's idea would only benefit the customer. Also it would really quickly kill the profit magins thus making trading less profitable thus causing less competition.
Also 0.01 isk war is sometimes/usually works as a friendly market sharing when people want to share the market without affecting the price.
Also no-one forces you to trade in jita. There are many places that are much desireable and where your orders can sometimes go for hours before being undercut while margins and volumes are still good.
Hours? Find the right place and the right product and your price can hold for weeks.
Sep'Shoni
Mining ore and making stuff. Its not just a job, its an obsession. |
Vested Interest
|
Posted - 2009.05.24 23:47:00 -
[33]
The 0.01 game goes hand-in-hand with brokers forcing the current order to the current strike price. If CCP relaxes on either position everything goes mushy. As soon as customers can skip right past our efforts we'd lose our incentive to offer the best price possible.
That's what this is really about. There is no prize for having the 2nd best price.
|
Dzil
Caldari
Second Quadrant Ice Division
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 06:08:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Sep'Shoni
Originally by: Kitchie
I don't like the OP's idea at all. As things are now, you can battle with other traders without wiping out your profit margin. The 0.01 ISK game allows you to keep on top, if you're willing to put in the time and effort, and basically maintain the same price.
The only change I'd like to have is for the market to show who the buyers and sellers are and to allow you to buy/sell to a specific order, not for it to automatically go to whoever is at the top of the list. Doubt it will happen and not the end of the world if it doesn't...
Same here.
I'd like to be able to compete based on service, reliability, or other things than just price. Though I can't see any realistic way to implement the equivalent of providing pleasant service in Eve.
As long as price is the only means of competition there should be restrictions on how those prices are set.
There's plenty of ways to sell stuff based on service, reliability, or other things than just price:
Contracts
Sell Forums
Out of game sales venues (think there's an eve-expo starting, not sure how popular it is yet)
trade channels
local (ok, so these latter two have been flooded with failscams, but still)
The market is a straight broker system, and I would strongly prefer that not to change. I would instead recommend supporting more robust tools related to the above, which already support the type of trade which you seek.
------------------------------
In EVE, when someone undercuts you, they're a lemming.
When you undercut someone else, it's skill/effort/manipulation.
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 10:24:00 -
[35]
got tired of 0.01 before i even started. it's 4-6 digits for me.
|
Jotobar
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 11:28:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
got tired of 0.01 before i even started. it's 4-6 digits for me.
for markets you maintain an presence in I guess that's the individual solution. If noone else is doing it though you might have to make it pretty big.
|
Icy Milky
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 13:54:00 -
[37]
Why 0,01 ISK change?
1) because you basically do not lower your profit all - this is the only thing that matter
2) because you can modify your price by rolling of mouse wheel so I do not need to hit stupid keyboard
When I have competitor undercutting me by 0,01 I know that he is actually inteligent and that he is not ruining market for both of us. If he undercuts me more, then I think that he is stupid, but that does NOT change anything, I will undercut him by 0,01 anyway.
Why undercut by more then 0,01
1) by accident
2) when I have some specific goal to do it EXCEPT being on top.
|
Raguun
LDK
Kraftwerk.
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 14:11:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Raguun on 25/05/2009 14:11:45
Originally by: adriaans
nerf 1k isk/1mill isk undercutters instead...they're ruining great profit margins
0.01 isk is perfectly fine
this.
If I had more money I would recruit pirates to suicide such guys 
|
Jarod Leercap
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 15:34:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Treelox
Eve's "Market" works under a broker system, what you both hint or outright imply doing would stop it from being a best-price broker system.
True enough, but if you want to compare the brokerage system in EVE with that in the real world, you must allow for the fact that most brokers don't share the price of your pending orders with your competitors.
I won't argue that public pricing is a bad deviation from a typical brokerage system, but if one deviation can be made, why not another?
That said, maybe CCP should look at splitting the market. One side would be a true brokerage, where the public and participants could see deal history, but not active orders. The other side would be store-fronts, probably hosted by player corporations.
It'd make sense, but it would probably be harder on small operators. That might make it hard to retain new players in the game, which is also something CCP needs to keep an eye on.
Originally by: Treelox
If you think 0.01isk wars are "griefing" wait for the total market "griefing" I could wage if it wasn't. If you fail to see how much worse it could be, your are not thinking dark and ebil enough to realize how easy it would be to mess with people, if we could select exact orders that we sold and bought from.
I did not refer to penny wars as griefing. I also reflected on how changes could open the door to market manipulation and mused on possible (but clearly not complete) workarounds for some of them. I did not explicitly say so, but I clearly implied that any "solution" proposed in my message was incomplete, at best.
Originally by: Vested Interest
I've identified your error. If your research doesn't take into account what happens with the price after you log off, than it's a poor effort. I am in-game all day and you have to compete with me.
It isn't your margin if you aren't in-market to claim it. It's my margin. You didn't earn anything by identifying a markup and placing an order. The price doesn't stand still or wait for you to get a turn. Fairness simply doesn't come into the equation.
To state a clear position better so that you can understand it, a chimp banging on a keyboard can block someone whose done his or her research and staked a position from making a return. To explain your own position to you so that you can understand it, there is no margin above zero that can prevent a chimp banging on a keyboard from underselling a less continuous market participant by a trivial amount.
Frankly, if time spent drooling over the keyboard->win without regard to savvy, then "market PVP" is a bit broken. |
dr doooo
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 15:48:00 -
[40]
//NOT Signed & do NOT agree with op. As to the fact that ccp could have implemented this years ago, of course they could have, but they obviously discarded it as the bad idea that it is. A variation of this comes up every month, and I really can't be bothered to answer it again at length.
If the minimum increments are big enough to change things, the markets will stagnate, with resellers drifting away, and a few super rich having all the markets sown up. I am probably rich enough to be able to claim a few markets, but why bother, it would be as boring has hell. As it is now I don't play .01 games much, but I manage to do OK.
And to the person who wants to be able to buy from their Alliance/chat buddies on the market. Why? you can already buy from them through trade windows or contracts and save on brokers fees and sales tax.
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 16:30:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Icy Milky
2) because you can modify your price by rolling of mouse wheel so I do not need to hit stupid keyboard
That is so cool, I didn't know you could do this. Now I have an even greater incentive to lower my prices by a larger amount, because I know it makes you use the "stupid keyboard." Even beter, I think I'm just going to spin the mousewheel by a random amount so you actually have to think when entering prices. This is going to make 0.01 isk warfare so much more fun. I can't thank you enough.
|
sesanti
Minmatar
Universal Exports
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 16:40:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Icy Milky
2) because you can modify your price by rolling of mouse wheel so I do not need to hit stupid keyboard
That is so cool, I didn't know you could do this. Now I have an even greater incentive to lower my prices by a larger amount, because I know it makes you use the "stupid keyboard." Even beter, I think I'm just going to spin the mousewheel by a random amount so you actually have to think when entering prices. This is going to make 0.01 isk warfare so much more fun. I can't thank you enough.
That is so cool, keep lowering your prices by high amounts so after a few rounds I'll just buy you out and relist all your items for the original price - and making quite a profit, as you'd have guessed! This is going to make 0.01 isk warfare so much more fun. I can't thank you enough. |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 16:45:00 -
[43]
Originally by: sesanti
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Icy Milky
2) because you can modify your price by rolling of mouse wheel so I do not need to hit stupid keyboard
That is so cool, I didn't know you could do this. Now I have an even greater incentive to lower my prices by a larger amount, because I know it makes you use the "stupid keyboard." Even beter, I think I'm just going to spin the mousewheel by a random amount so you actually have to think when entering prices. This is going to make 0.01 isk warfare so much more fun. I can't thank you enough.
That is so cool, keep lowering your prices by high amounts so after a few rounds I'll just buy you out and relist all your items for the original price - and making quite a profit, as you'd have guessed! This is going to make 0.01 isk warfare so much more fun. I can't thank you enough.
Oh, noes!!! Don't fill my orders, whatever you do. Please don't throw me in that there briar patch. |
Vested Interest
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 17:49:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Jarod Leercap
To state a clear position better so that you can understand it, a chimp banging on a keyboard can block someone whose done his or her research and staked a position from making a return. To explain your own position to you so that you can understand it, there is no margin above zero that can prevent a chimp banging on a keyboard from underselling a less continuous market participant by a trivial amount.
Frankly, if time spent drooling over the keyboard->win without regard to savvy, then "market PVP" is a bit broken.
You've made your position quite clear: You want a win button for the market. You want to be able to walk away from your terminal and be guaranteed a piece of the pie.
You walked away. You lost your edge. You're gonna have to wait in line now, which comes when I run out of stock. Hope you did your math. Of course you'll come back in a little while and flip out about how the price dropped and then you'll do the lemming flop and we'll start it all over again.
fake edit: I wish they would implement Short Selling so I could just spoof a price and take your stuff when you do the flop.
|
Rudy Gnarl
Gallente
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 19:41:00 -
[45]
I was almost going to agree with the OP but after reading through most of the post and thinking about my own experience in the market I'm going to have to say that imho the market system in EVE is no where near broken and in fact works very well. As many people have pointed out the idea of a 1% of value increment would ruin profit margin especially for higher end goods.
I have been working with the market for about five months now and without spending loads of time in front of the computer I have bought and sold things in Jita successfully, but in general I stay away from Jita and the .01isk game doesn't seem to catch up to me at all. Even when it does, great, when I re=adjust by 1isk we and the other people playing the .01isk game keep our profit in tact while still competing and essentially taking turns at the top of the list.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 20:20:00 -
[46]
Quote:
fake edit: I wish they would implement Short Selling so I could just spoof a price and take your stuff when you do the flop.
Imagine if they implemented scalping 
Oh wait, in a certain odd way we got it already.
|
Biruni Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 21:15:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Icy Milky
2) because you can modify your price by rolling of mouse wheel so I do not need to hit stupid keyboard
Does anyone know how this can be done with a Logitech Marble Mouse trackball? |
Ms Delerium
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 00:16:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Ms Delerium on 26/05/2009 00:17:15
crashing 0.01iskers is the lolzzzz
for example:
You sell at 3,700,000.00
He sells at 3,699,999.99
You sell at 3,402,773.25
He sells at 3,402,773.24
aint he so cute? You can control HIS margins!!! this derivates into manipulation techniques, and buy his stuff at low price and reset ur orders at good price. Just add the moron to the buddy list so you can use this technique once he logs off.
problem is some of these nerds are 23/7 on, so they will win just because they got no life.
|
Sidicarus
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 09:47:00 -
[49]
First, I agree with the OP, I would love to see a minimum pricing increment of some type imposed.
However, I have developed my own tactic for dealing with 0.01 dorks.
After days of trying to sell a thousand or so T2 mod's in Dodixie and being undercut by 0.01 every 15 minutes, I said screw it. I know where my limit is, its about the same as yours. So I just started dropping the price 50k for every 0.01 cut they threw my way... If you want to race me to the bottom, be my guest. I am more them happy to make up PPU in sheer volume.
|
Icy Milky
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 10:15:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Icy Milky
2) because you can modify your price by rolling of mouse wheel so I do not need to hit stupid keyboard
That is so cool, I didn't know you could do this. Now I have an even greater incentive to lower my prices by a larger amount, because I know it makes you use the "stupid keyboard." Even beter, I think I'm just going to spin the mousewheel by a random amount so you actually have to think when entering prices. This is going to make 0.01 isk warfare so much more fun. I can't thank you enough.
well it actually does not change anything at all :) I always check competitors above me carefuly :) I actually do some sneaky numeric changes in my orders from time to time to make my competitors "happy" when they do not spot it :) ... I just do my trade carefuly and your fantastic idea will not work with dedicated cometitor...
sry to say that but -0,01 change is really the only clever way when there is some balance in competition. And as I said when you have other plans like manipulating your competitors, then you of course change by different value sure perfectly fine.
You will need to do a bit more trading mate before you will understand the psychology behind imo 
|
Portia Augustus
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 10:48:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Portia Augustus on 26/05/2009 10:49:59
If it wasn't 0.01 ISK, then it would be another [minimum] increment and folks would still be b*tching about being outbid or undercut. Welcome to the free market system. Deal with it.
|
Jotobar
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 11:14:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Vested Interest
You've made your position quite clear: You want a win button for the market. You want to be able to walk away from your terminal and be guaranteed a piece of the pie.
You made your mind up what you think of it without reading most of the thread.
An 3-4 digits market wouldn't be static. An 3-4 digits market wouldn't be static. An 3-4 digits market wouldn't be static.
It's hard to make an general statement but most products fluctuate with much more than that and many times per week. The active trader would follow these waves or manipulate them while the inactive trader is away and don't get a cut, that's your edge. Every time you made one of those decidions it would require some kindof inteligence behind them, which is, atleast to me, the goal of this.
As far as the original proposal is concerned I don't think it's a good idea to place so much focus on the real world version of "come first serve first" when the price is equal, if not too tricky to implement I think random filling would be better or something completly different.
|
Test Pilot57
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 11:16:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Test Pilot57 on 26/05/2009 11:16:21
The problem isnt the .01 isk price - unless the price is so far out that people wont pay it, it is stupid to not .01isk undercut.
Bots are the only problem with the system, if they actually tracked the humanly impossible update patterns and removed the isk from those accounts (and the real accounts they are acutally a front for) then atleast it would be human vs human and you could claim your slice of the pie when the other guy sleeps. On too many items there is no chance for a taste of pie ever, as the bots dont sleep - and dont seem to be being removed.
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 13:25:00 -
[54]
OK, here's a thought experiment for you guys and gals. At the moment there are 7 sell orders in Jita for trit at 4.17 isk, the lowest price in station. If you were designing the order-matching procedure, which order(s) should be filled first, and why?
|
Vested Interest
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 14:15:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Vested Interest on 26/05/2009 14:16:08
Originally by: Jotobar
You made your mind up what you think of it without reading most of the thread.
An 3-4 digits market wouldn't be static. An 3-4 digits market wouldn't be static. An 3-4 digits market wouldn't be static.
It's hard to make an general statement but most products fluctuate with much more than that and many times per week. The active trader would follow these waves or manipulate them while the inactive trader is away and don't get a cut, that's your edge. Every time you made one of those decidions it would require some kindof inteligence behind them, which is, atleast to me, the goal of this.
Nice backpedal.
Insulting the intelligence of your competition probably just feels natural when you keep losing money to them.
Originally by: Claire Voyant
OK, here's a thought experiment for you guys and gals. At the moment there are 7 sell orders in Jita for trit at 4.17 isk, the lowest price in station. If you were designing the order-matching procedure, which order(s) should be filled first, and why?
FIFO
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 15:56:00 -
[56]
This little topic keeps creeping up on us like a regular cold or other frustrating ailment..
I had a thought..
First : Why not remove the limitation of number of orders, or make it a lot bigger, so you could easier swarm the micro cutters with orders. They live on the fact that they can camp a market and abuse the time advantage. If just 2-3 traders in the same area could swarm him with orders of dif volumes his work efforts would need to increase a lot, and might force him to stop his activity.
Second : How about making the bid difference limited by skill. In a not to envasive manner. You can only undercut or outbid a current price at the same location if your skill is of a given level. So a price active of 100 isk per unit, would be possible to udercut at skill level 1 to say 95, and at skill level 5 to 99.5. The same would be the thing with ranges, so at level 1 and 1 jump away you would be the same as level 2, at 2 jumps the same as level 3, up to 5 jumps away you would have active level 6 and be free in the bid range to do the 0.01 bidding again.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Sir Elliot
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 16:17:00 -
[57]
20m to the first person that provides a tl;dr version, which will allow me to decide if reading the OP is worthwhile.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 16:51:00 -
[58]
I don't really think there is a "0.01 problem" and I think most solutions I've seen proposed for it would simply destroy the margins easily enjoyable today.
|
Dzil
Caldari
Second Quadrant Ice Division
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 18:46:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Sir Elliot
20m to the first person that provides a tl;dr version, which will allow me to decide if reading the OP is worthwhile.
He'll pay up, but I'm not condensing this on principle as it's advocating a cure for a problem that doesn't exist.
------------------------------
In EVE, when someone undercuts you, they're a lemming.
When you undercut someone else, it's skill/effort/manipulation.
|
Dzil
Caldari
Second Quadrant Ice Division
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 18:55:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
OK, here's a thought experiment for you guys and gals. At the moment there are 7 sell orders in Jita for trit at 4.17 isk, the lowest price in station. If you were designing the order-matching procedure, which order(s) should be filled first, and why?
I have to agree with FIFO. Which is accomplished today through the expiration date, except that folks can gambit on shorter duration orders to achieve priority. Which is fine really - if you think about the brokers' wishes, he'd be trying to get rid of those orders first in order to maximize the amount of product sold, and thus his fees and taxes.
------------------------------
In EVE, when someone undercuts you, they're a lemming.
When you undercut someone else, it's skill/effort/manipulation.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |