| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
   |
Posted - 2009.07.18 01:23:00 -
[1]
Hello MD. Thought I wanted to go through this old issue once more, to explain why this topic is worth building support on.
ATM trade skills grant you a maximum of 305 orders when you reach level 5 tycoon. This is the absolute max level and max number of operating orders.
When anyone set up as a trader and wants to have different items sold to them for use in operations, and not for market and margin trading, then he needs to be able to show his price with his buy orders.
As an example if you wanted to setup a small service as a regional refiner specialist you would like the regional prices to be set according to your skills. In that you would want the market to reflect a lowest price. Note this example is when assuming that there is a low population and thus to slow support on couriers and general alternate population. Thus the refiner would need to buy and haul his stuff himself.
He would need to price at 3 ranges.
Station Range
Short Range (3-4 jumps)
Region Range
To reflect his supply and demand. Higher supply would drive his price down, he would need say 3 degrees of price.
1 Instant demand : Current resell price using current mineral sell prices
2 short term price estimate : This would be according to mineral trends 5 days avg
3 long term price estimate : This using 20 days avg
So now he needs 3 prices and volumes per range per item. This is already 9 orders per item.
As a refiner this would be something like VELdspar considering he is working empire space HUB.
If he wants to service all variants and all ore types this is now 9 per type times 6 variants including compressed, so 54 per ore type, and there is a total of 16 types. So we end up with a number of 864 active orders to reflect his refiner operation prices including supply and demand changes.
Here some will say well he should buy from market, but the fact remains there is a minimum need of 864 orders needed in region to have ANY trade of all ORE types. This to have any market equilibrium/fair price active. In fact the equilibrium will only develop if and when there is a factor of 5-10 times that operational in the region, to reflect competition and logistics factors. If we factor this up even further to around 20 times that we would effectively also reduce the motivations of microbidding wars.
Server loads then?
Well as far as I can tell servers dont care how many orders are in there, only load is generated on refreshing or filling orders. Thus there is plenty of reasons why CCP should see this as a potential help on server loads.
Barriers of Entrance?
There needs to be an advantage to traders with high skill levels!
Sure this is still there if the trade skills was instead used for escrow,tax,broker fee, and facility price advantages.
Since we have a natural limitation to outstanding orders in the form of our liquid isk, there is no need for a mechanisme limit like that on orders, since the only benefit is to monopolistic and protectionistic economy. This in turn is really simplifying the market trends and the reason so many items have no trade activity at all, and thus there is next to no development of a more interesting price difference between regions to warrent more and better hauling/logistics.
In short: I am rather sure the biggest change in EVE would come from fixing the market order limitation to either a serious boost (times 25-100) or removing the limitations all together (infinite orders back in EVE)
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Eiro
Minmatar
Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 03:38:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
the fact remains there is a minimum need of 864 orders needed in region to have ANY trade of all ORE types.
No, the minimum is 54, one per ore type. You WANT 864 to handle some byzantine multi-tier pricing scheme.
Quote:
This in turn is really simplifying the market trends and the reason so many items have no trade activity at all, and thus there is next to no development of a more interesting price difference between regions to warrent more and better hauling/logistics.
Having a limit on the number of orders means you have to pick and choose what markets you want to work in, not simply dabble in them all with low-ball buy orders that cost barely any ISK. Just like one ship fitting can't do it all, one character cannot
operate across the entire market at once, which creates interesting niches.
Also, your proposal would create many more "stale" orders that just sat there with no activity, in all markets. All these extra orders would nevertheless create more network traffic for anyone using the market = more bandwidth usage = slower performance for everyone.
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 03:49:00 -
[3]
Its called price normalizing, and it would potentially remove the super hub needs like Jita.
I am rather sure the load on servers would be less with the possibility of spreading out trade over more regions. Especially since wormholes have created a need for it.
OFC this whole topic is very counter to monopoly and cartel activity, so ideological difference could be an issue.
If you look at items like the Raw materials to Advanced materials its rather obvious that these items arent traded exactly to uphold a monopoly. If the option to place orders on such to spread out these items this would counter the current cornering and cartel mechanics at least a little.
Dead assets abound in EVE. The non billionaires are the ones suffering from this..
Actually it slows down economy so in reality the billionaires could benefit from liberal markets also, they would need to change strategies a bit though..
The protectionism and mercantilism atm is really not the most interesting enviroment from a game play perspective.. Its one of the reasons people tend to call the game internet space spreadsheet.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Agent Known
Apotheosis of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 07:14:00 -
[4]
I strongly disapprove of this because it would effectively toss out new traders entering the market. You could simply set multiple orders for basically every item on the market, making it extremely difficult for a fledgling trader to make even a single ISK.
I say just leave it as is, and use those 3 character slots. 
|
Ji Sama
Caldari
Tash-Murkon Prime Industries
Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 10:17:00 -
[5]
hehe.....
ur wrong we dont want this caleb :P
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 11:13:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Agent Known
I strongly disapprove of this because it would effectively toss out new traders entering the market. You could simply set multiple orders for basically every item on the market, making it extremely difficult for a fledgling trader to make even a single ISK.
I say just leave it as is, and use those 3 character slots.
Well with that your claiming that leaving the holes in the market for the new traders is reason not to change this.. How grand of you to leave the scraps and low profit leftovers to the noobs, and claim your doing it for their benefit.
The current state is protectionist and monopoly supportive, and this highly hurt new players, since everything valuable in current setting is covered/cornered by overshadowed and unsaturated markets..
This change is needed, but there are several established arguments why it should not be so. Liberal change to the market seem to be something getting a lot of opposition..
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Varo Jan
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 11:23:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Hello MD. Thought I wanted to go through this old issue once more, to explain why this topic is worth building support on.
It¦s not worth supporting. You¦ve built up an unnecessarily complicated example to justify your desire for infinite orders. Things are fine the way they are.
Quote:
There needs to be an advantage to traders with high skill levels!
Which is the richest profession? Trading.
Which profession requires the least skills? Trading
Which profession requires the least skill training time to operate effectively? Trading.
And you want yet more advantages? That¦s just greediness. I¦d suggest you keep quiet before you find the opposite happening - trading nerfs.
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 12:06:00 -
[8]
I dont support making the market more of a botters wet dream than it already is
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep.
I am always here.
Watching.
Waiting.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
it does get progressively longer.
|
Ariane VoxDei
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 12:54:00 -
[9]
Originally by: RedSplat
I dont support making the market more of a botters wet dream than it already is
This. /Thread
|
ofstrife
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 15:34:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Server loads then?
Well as far as I can tell servers dont care how many orders are in there, only load is generated on refreshing or filling orders. Thus there is plenty of reasons why CCP should see this as a potential help on server loads.
This is just wrong unfortunately. Sure, a database (technically) might not care how much stuff is in it at any one moment.
However, the server is going to be ridiculously slow when someone wants to update, add, remove, or even look at the orders. Each item can't have its own database for orders because that would be inefficient. Because of this, when someone wants to look at the market for any item, there are some mandatory sorts and selects to actually get the orders you want to view/modify/remove/etc.. If you're increasing the total number of orders on the market, you're going to be increasing the amount of time that the databases spend on each query for each order. And if you're increasing the time that the database has to spend on each query, you're slowing down the market.
On top of that, the bandwidth needed to actually send the increased number of orders is going to make the market seem even slower because you'll be transmitting even more data each time someone refreshes the market. Which, in addition to making the market even slower, makes it more expensive for CCP because bandwidth isn't free.
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 16:12:00 -
[11]
Quote:
However, the server is going to be ridiculously slow when someone wants to update, add, remove, or even look at the orders.
Pure speculation. Hence that's a flawed argument. CCP has always said that the bottleneck wasn't in the market.
Quote:
Because of this, when someone wants to look at the market for any item, there are some mandatory sorts and selects to actually get the orders you want to view/modify/remove/etc.. If you're increasing the total number of orders on the market, you're going to be increasing the amount of time that the databases spend on each query for each order. And if you're increasing the time that the database has to spend on each query, you're slowing down the market.
But just because that people have more orders available, doesn't mean they will use them. There's only so many orders that people are likely to make. So there'a a natural limit.
And remember that the database is really fast. Just because you are pulling out a potentially larger data set, doesn't mean it will increase the time it takes by anything measurable.
Quote:
On top of that, the bandwidth needed to actually send the increased number of orders is going to make the market seem even slower because you'll be transmitting even more data each time someone refreshes the market. Which, in addition to making the market even slower, makes it more expensive for CCP because bandwidth isn't free.
Seriously?!
Bandwidth isn't a bottleneck. Period.
|
ofstrife
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 17:26:00 -
[12]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Quote:
However, the server is going to be ridiculously slow when someone wants to update, add, remove, or even look at the orders.
Pure speculation. Hence that's a flawed argument. CCP has always said that the bottleneck wasn't in the market.
It's speculation based on my (admittedly somewhat limited) knowledge about how databases work. As far as I know, the more stuff you're sorting through in a database, the longer it'll take.
Then again, Cayleb's proposal could only double or triple the number of orders on the market, which isn't actually that bad. I retract "ridiculously" from my previous statement.
I would like to know where the bottleneck actually is.
Originally by: LaVista Vista
But just because that people have more orders available, doesn't mean they will use them. There's only so many orders that people are likely to make. So there'a a natural limit.
I agree with this to a degree, but there are a lot of people out there who currently use (probably) more than a thousand slots across multiple market alts - it will probably happen that some people will use thousands of orders on one character. Just look at Cayleb's example - expand that across multiple regions, and you're getting 2500+ orders for a single character. Or change the example to use ammo, and the scale gets much larger.
Originally by: LaVista Vista
And remember that the database is really fast. Just because you are pulling out a potentially larger data set, doesn't mean it will increase the time it takes by anything measurable.
Fair enough, I'm not used to thinking on the massive scale that the CCP database is running on.
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Seriously?!
Bandwidth isn't a bottleneck. Period.
I disagree. How long does it take the alliance rankings tab to load for you? Or the employment history of a person who's been employed at a lot of corporations? I don't think the lag from that is due to client processing. To me, it looks like a slow database query or transmitting a lot of information.
|
Drab Cane
Mining Emporium inc.
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 17:52:00 -
[13]
Caleb, interesting example. I can see the value in having different prices at different ranges. I tend to use two levels myself, region-wide and local. My station price would be competing with neighboring stations, and with neighboring systems anyway, so the local buy order is competitive with both current system and nearby systems.
The three-tier pricing seems impractical and unnecessary. Whichever buy order is the highest price at the regional level will be the one that buys and the rest will be ignored. I wouldn't want to waste the escrow (even at Margin Trading 5) on orders that will be ignored.
And adjusting all these orders based on 5 day and 20 day averages seems like a waste of time. Adjust the one regional order for the highest of the current-, 5- and 20-day prices, and be done.
With just three orders per variation of all ore types, you're easily within 300 orders, and you've cut your updating time by a third. Much more efficient.
But who is really going to go through this much trouble?
Originally by: LaVista Vista
But just because that people have more orders available, doesn't mean they will use them. There's only so many orders that people are likely to make. So there'a a natural limit.
How many people have actually hit the hard limit of 305? I think that is the real question. If its less than 5%* of the player population, I don't see CCP making any changes.
* (I just pulled this out of the air - I have no idea what makes up a 'significant' percentage in CCP's collective mind).
-----------------------------------------------
- Who Dares, Wins
|
Drab Cane
Mining Emporium inc.
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 18:05:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Well with that your claiming that leaving the holes in the market for the new traders is reason not to change this.. How grand of you to leave the scraps and low profit leftovers to the noobs, and claim your doing it for their benefit.
The current state is protectionist and monopoly supportive, and this highly hurt new players, since everything valuable in current setting is covered/cornered by overshadowed and unsaturated markets..
Caleb, I don't see how adding more order slots will change the "protectionist and monopoly supportive" behaviour of players.
If you're thinking that more competition will reduce prices game-wide, you're probably right. Imagine seeing the low margins in Jita spread game-wide. Is that what you're really after?
-----------------------------------------------
- Who Dares, Wins
|
Icy Milky
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 18:53:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Varo Jan
Which is the richest profession? Trading.
Which profession requires the least skills? Trading
Which profession requires the least skill training time to operate effectively? Trading.
And you want yet more advantages? That¦s just greediness. I¦d suggest you keep quiet before you find the opposite happening - trading nerfs.
trading is getting punches quite often imo... basically with every patch which change something useful to less useful, etc... one of latest hits is (based purely on rumors since I have not seen any official confirmation) banning of macro accounts... see that ridiculous price change in implant market.
The only other reason which I can imagine is summer holidays period... but can it be really so strong? maybe...
Trading sure need more love... maybe not infinite orders but more comfortable tools - UI (suprisingly)... but thats a bit off topic in this thread :)
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.19 02:59:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Drab Cane
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Well with that your claiming that leaving the holes in the market for the new traders is reason not to change this.. How grand of you to leave the scraps and low profit leftovers to the noobs, and claim your doing it for their benefit.
The current state is protectionist and monopoly supportive, and this highly hurt new players, since everything valuable in current setting is covered/cornered by overshadowed and unsaturated markets..
Caleb, I don't see how adding more order slots will change the "protectionist and monopoly supportive" behaviour of players.
If you're thinking that more competition will reduce prices game-wide, you're probably right. Imagine seeing the low margins in Jita spread game-wide. Is that what you're really after?
If I am not mistaken the prices in other regions would start to differ according to the local needs and populations. Also a factor would be WH entry shifting in and out of the regions, this would influx new goods and thus either shift prices up or down depending on supply and demand. This in turn would make these "chaotic" differences into a worthwhile hauling option, and thus help create more courier and hauling profs.
The margins are dependent on the number of local competitive players so margins might be low locally but the region to region difs could be rather considerable.
On the thing with managing this many orders it is the idea that you dont have to care about the limit and place your opertunity orders where there are "holes" or to huge margins in the market. The effect would mostly be a more fair price normalizing, hence less backorder 1 isk buying of junk.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Trebor Locke
Gallente
Round Table Enterprises
Leather Rose Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.19 19:11:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Originally by: Drab Cane
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Well with that your claiming that leaving the holes in the market for the new traders is reason not to change this.. How grand of you to leave the scraps and low profit leftovers to the noobs, and claim your doing it for their benefit.
The current state is protectionist and monopoly supportive, and this highly hurt new players, since everything valuable in current setting is covered/cornered by overshadowed and unsaturated markets..
Caleb, I don't see how adding more order slots will change the "protectionist and monopoly supportive" behaviour of players.
If you're thinking that more competition will reduce prices game-wide, you're probably right. Imagine seeing the low margins in Jita spread game-wide. Is that what you're really after?
If I am not mistaken the prices in other regions would start to differ according to the local needs and populations. Also a factor would be WH entry shifting in and out of the regions, this would influx new goods and thus either shift prices up or down depending on supply and demand. This in turn would make these "chaotic" differences into a worthwhile hauling option, and thus help create more courier and hauling profs.
The margins are dependent on the number of local competitive players so margins might be low locally but the region to region difs could be rather considerable.
On the thing with managing this many orders it is the idea that you dont have to care about the limit and place your opertunity orders where there are "holes" or to huge margins in the market. The effect would mostly be a more fair price normalizing, hence less backorder 1 isk buying of junk.
Price Normalization is something NO TRADER WANTS! It didn't work for Karl Marx, it didn't work for Soviet Russia. Stabalizing prices just simply is bad for everything. Technically, if you make enough ISK....you will have an infinite amount of trade slots. Why? Because you can just buy more accounts with ISK.
The idea behind the trade skills is that as you get experience, you can manage more trades. Just like in real life. A trader might focus on a few small things....and as he makes a profit on those he expands what he trades. This is perfictly fine.
You want the no limit simply because it lets you do multi-level-marketing...which by the way....also doesn't work as efficiently as many other systems of trade strategy.
Also, adding all those slots will NOT result in lower prices. It puts more ISK into the system overall and assists in speeding up INFLATION.
Anyway, that is all I currently have to say on the matter.
--------------
CEO of Round Table Enterprises
Chairman of the Leather Rose Syndicate
Your friendly economic management and trade orginization. |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.19 20:44:00 -
[18]
@Trebor..
You might want to read the "intention" of the feature suggested..
If you look at a lot of the "dead" markets regarding items, you will see why I am asking for this feature.
It makes little sense that so many items have no trade at all, it hints at above mentioned cornering and basic inside group economy. This protectionistic and monopolistic mindset is all good and fine if you want to work like that, but giving this strategy support from ccp side is WRONG. The limitation on orders serves no other purpose than the alt bias and the overpricing going on atm.
Generally I am getting a bit tired of the argument "just get an alt". This is a lame work around and I think its an inconvinience of players game activity.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Ji Sama
Caldari
Tash-Murkon Prime Industries
Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2009.07.19 20:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Ji Sama on 19/07/2009 20:55:48
so your just jealous that my trade toon has ALL trade skills maxed before you?
is that what im hearing you say caleb?
|
Selene D'Celeste
Caldari
The D'Celeste Trading Company
ISK Six
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 02:47:00 -
[20]
Sorry Caleb, but this isn't a very useful idea. I know we talked about trading before, but I assume you haven't had to manage more than 600 orders at once? If you did you'd quickly understand that the current skill limits are more than sufficient, and anyone with the time and dedication to have 3+ tycoon characters working on full -and- updating them fully deserves the benefits their market control gives them.
|
Bo'Tox
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 04:03:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ji Sama
hehe.....
ur wrong we dont want this caleb :P
Seconded, or thirded or whatever...
|
Agent Known
Apotheosis of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 04:04:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Originally by: Agent Known
I strongly disapprove of this because it would effectively toss out new traders entering the market. You could simply set multiple orders for basically every item on the market, making it extremely difficult for a fledgling trader to make even a single ISK.
I say just leave it as is, and use those 3 character slots.
Well with that your claiming that leaving the holes in the market for the new traders is reason not to change this.. How grand of you to leave the scraps and low profit leftovers to the noobs, and claim your doing it for their benefit.
The current state is protectionist and monopoly supportive, and this highly hurt new players, since everything valuable in current setting is covered/cornered by overshadowed and unsaturated markets..
This change is needed, but there are several established arguments why it should not be so. Liberal change to the market seem to be something getting a lot of opposition..
Just so you know, I've only just started dabbling in the market myself. I couldn't see using 300+ market orders at the same time without making it seem like I'm trying to control the entire market. Those with deep enough pockets (i.e large alliances) will be able to take complete control of the economy with unlimited orders.
|
Zamaranth Sesta
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 04:13:00 -
[23]
Forget the server load,
How about the human information groking load?
Its already difficult enough to quickly scan through items for sale and try to decide how many extra jumps would be worth paying that much less for.
Not everyone wants to trade in Jita.... many people would value the cost of taking 20 jumps or more round trip to jita worth 5 million or more. Non traders routinely turn down delivery missions that pay them well for shorter trips.often because its not their idea of fun and thats why they're here, to have fun. Its convenient for them to have items displayed by # of jumps sometimes but that would make for a lot more scrolling with more orders.
Already many people use orders to try to confuse buyers, with multiple orders close together to make it look like that's where the real market is in a thinly traded region.
There are all sorts of other strategies that would encourage a person to put dozens of orders up in a item they might want to control, on the buy side too.
Its good to have ~some~ opportunity cost per order to make things less tedious to scroll etc.
Remember, having FUN is the rule one...overwhelming data isn't fun to a great percentage players especially for non traders who must interface with the markets to get their stuff.
|
Trebor Locke
Gallente
Round Table Enterprises
Leather Rose Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 04:37:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Trebor Locke on 20/07/2009 04:39:16
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
@Trebor..
You might want to read the "intention" of the feature suggested..
If you look at a lot of the "dead" markets regarding items, you will see why I am asking for this feature.
It makes little sense that so many items have no trade at all, it hints at above mentioned cornering and basic inside group economy. This protectionistic and monopolistic mindset is all good and fine if you want to work like that, but giving this strategy support from ccp side is WRONG. The limitation on orders serves no other purpose than the alt bias and the overpricing going on atm.
Generally I am getting a bit tired of the argument "just get an alt". This is a lame work around and I think its an inconvinience of players game activity.
I'm going to preface this response with something that should be known. My corporation is a group of people which knows each other in real life. Most of us are economists by degree (some obtaining their Ph.D.) or people involved deeply in the connections of business.
This being said, your idea makes little to no economic sense.
You want to see more trade on items not being traded. You want to see live as opposed to dead markets. I'm sorry buddy but, it isn't happening. Why? Supply side economics rules in this game. Please read the works of Milton Friedman to understand where I am coming from.
Items not in demand simply wont be traded. You think that these 'dead' items (not markets as a market is all items inclusive to a region for this game...and I know you're not talking about that) are supported by giant monopolies and price manipulation. Please understand that this is a natural part of life in general. It just happens to show a lot more in EVE.
Someone who takes the time to trade a harder to find item or a less traded item to make a huge profit is someone to be admired. They let their ISK sit there and remain stale on an item that sells maybe once every 3 weeks. There is nothing wrong with this if NO ONE WANTS THE ITEM.
The hot and needed items will ALWAYS be traded and have higher prices than an item not needed.
The amount of orders someone is allowed to put up will not change this fact. Good traders don't want their ISK to sit around and do nothing....So those items wont have people trading them in the first place. Any difference would essentially be marginal as it would be offset by an increase in the rate of inflation.
If you really trade so much, just get an alt. I know you're sick of it but, there is really no point to your proposal. It wont work the way you want it because of how real economics work and it wont change because you'd have a flurry of ticked off traders who invested the time and money in getting the skills trained up to do their work.
--------------
CEO of Round Table Enterprises
Chairman of the Leather Rose Syndicate
Your friendly economic management and trade orginization. |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 10:09:00 -
[25]
@ Selene. I think I can say I have had something close to 3000 orders active in a market with less items then we have today. This is the number you have when you dont bother nursing orders and dont have to consider the limitation of escrow. If you want to reflect interest in most items and dont mind getting passive assets spread rather wide.
Since so many feel the infinite orders or even just more orders on the skills will change things why so opposed to it?
@Trebor.
What I am asking is for the opportunity to reflect my interes in servicing sellers needs. Thus liquidate their goods at prices that are within their sell range. If you take a look at some of the prices on some items you clearly would see what I am talking about. Not to rain on your credentials, but I have played this game since beta and your phds dont support your oppinion. There is not logical reason economically to limit the number of possible orders/demands individuals or corps can have. You see there is this thing called convinience and oppertunity cost, and if I am working say a wormhole and dont have very good skills in trade or refining, but mainly in mining and combat, then when I exit the wormhole with my "STUFF" I would like to not be inconvenienced by hauling stuff to long due to bad trader and refiner population. The buy orders and even sell orders saturation in market is so low its weird. I suspect this is mainly to players lazy on short term attitudes. This can only be helped by removing these shackles from the players that actually have patience and wont mind setting up services of this nature. Maybe if and when this limitation is removed, you and yours will be able to see in effect the phenomenon I am talking about..
The strategies possible with high diversification and price spreads using many orders are VERY different to the current possible methods. I am simply asking for this game feature back, so sellers and buyers alike have easier finding fair prices on all items, and so the regional differences will develop dynamically into a viable business for hauling things around more..
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Dennmoth Ferdier
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 15:18:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
What I am asking is for the opportunity to reflect my interes in servicing sellers needs. Thus liquidate their goods at prices that are within their sell range. If you take a look at some of the prices on some items you clearly would see what I am talking about. Not to rain on your credentials, but I have played this game since beta and your phds dont support your oppinion. There is not logical reason economically to limit the number of possible orders/demands individuals or corps can have. You see there is this thing called convinience and oppertunity cost, and if I am working say a wormhole and dont have very good skills in trade or refining, but mainly in mining and combat, then when I exit the wormhole with my "STUFF" I would like to not be inconvenienced by hauling stuff to long due to bad trader and refiner population. The buy orders and even sell orders saturation in market is so low its weird. I suspect this is mainly to players lazy on short term attitudes. This can only be helped by removing these shackles from the players that actually have patience and wont mind setting up services of this nature. Maybe if and when this limitation is removed, you and yours will be able to see in effect the phenomenon I am talking about..
The strategies possible with high diversification and price spreads using many orders are VERY different to the current possible methods. I am simply asking for this game feature back, so sellers and buyers alike have easier finding fair prices on all items, and so the regional differences will develop dynamically into a viable business for hauling things around more..
To me, this reads out to be just speculation how you see it would roll out, which could be horribly different from what obscurely might happen and even from what would most likely happen, if you compare the issues raised in the thread that oppose your original post.
You assume, that the major bottleneck preventing higher, more spread out market activity is the amount of orders you can use. Yet, only a minor, very minor group of people ever bother to buy those books that increase the amount of their orders past retail if even that. Even out of those who do, even a hugely lesser percent bother training Retail V and taking it to tycoon, and the remaining ridiculously low percent of all eve players, or even traders bother taking it to Tycoon V with even one toon, save alts.
I say the bottleneck lies elsewhere, in actuality, in the number of players. Eve universe is vast as a free game field compared to the amount of active players. It's because of this reason, market hubs have formed and live today. It is also why you have to haul your goods to the current extent. These hubs have formed in systems that have high player activity to begin with, like mission hubs and starter systems.
Because of this, a lot of goods are already moving in systems with decent to high degree market activity. The stuff that isn't, is under the scope as I understand.
I can see how you think that giving players infinite amount of orders will spread out the market activity, but what it'll do in my opinion, is create a horrible spam of orders, that will all eventually even out and form global high security space jita.
I see you to assume, and I quote "so the regional differences will develop dynamically into a viable business for hauling things around more"
I don't see how you would reach this conclusion. If everyone had infinite amount of market orders, they would just network out from the index point that is jita by definition of most traffic, and spread out everywhere unbound by restrictions. Even, even if it's just a small percent of hardcore dedicated traders.
Even if they took advantage of regional differences in the beginning, that percent of traders would simply compete with each other until everything has evened out and balanced (unmanipulated) to the same point everywhere (continuing)
------
Dare to challenge me? |
Dzil
Caldari
StrwBerry Pancakes
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 15:19:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Eiro
Having a limit on the number of orders means you have to pick and choose what markets you want to work in, not simply dabble in them all with low-ball buy orders that cost barely any ISK. Just like one ship fitting can't do it all, one character cannot
operate across the entire market at once, which creates interesting niches.
I wanted to reply in verbose, but this pretty well sums up my thoughts on the matter. Great reply.
----------------------
Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m for 7+ standings
---------------------- |
Dennmoth Ferdier
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 15:22:00 -
[28]
Effectively killing all purpose of hauling anything anywhere.
I forsee a market equilibrium of sorts, that serves no purpose.
At the current, eve space is like the new world was ages past. You can find your place, set up your shop, dominate it and make your own fortune with your own skill.
Mass activity of passive marketing, certain percent of the people competing at every possible item is nothing to wish for.
The elite would become supermen, the market would spread out, even out and kill all hope of profit for the young and effectively in my opinion, break eve.
As I see it, this is all about someone wanting to make even more money himself, and trying to justify it with round and obscure explanations why it'd be a good thing for everyone.
------
Dare to challenge me? |
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 15:29:00 -
[29]
As said before creating some barriers ensures that conditions for arbitrage will always exist somewhere at some time. |
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 17:33:00 -
[30]
Moved to Features and Ideas.
Zymurgist
Community Representative
CCP Hf, EVE Online
Contact us |
|
Nub Sauce
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 19:00:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Nub Sauce on 20/07/2009 19:38:23
This is one of those things that could potentially ruin the game.
Basically it would it allow those with the most money to have absolute control of the entire market. No checks, no balances, just absolute control.
While we're at it, perhaps they should add an ISK powered shield so that when you get hit. You'd have to lose all your ISK before you could even take damage. For most people, they'd never use it. But for those with 100s of billions... they would be invincible. = ruin game balance.
If there was no limit to orders then we'd have two terrible things happen.
1) The big time traders with all the money would rule the market. No new traders would make any real money and even older part time traders would cease to see any real benefit to trading. Mission running time, eh?
2) You'd have the extremely annoying Rtards flooding the market with millions of orders selling 1 tritanium or some such garbage. Clogging the whole market up and making everyone's day just that much worse.
Edit: Right now, at least it's possible to find a market item/area that hasn't been tapped yet and actually make some good money without having to devote your entire eve play time to marketing.
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 22:03:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Nub Sauce
Edited by: Nub Sauce on 20/07/2009 19:38:23
This is one of those things that could potentially ruin the game.
Basically it would it allow those with the most money to have absolute control of the entire market. No checks, no balances, just absolute control.
While we're at it, perhaps they should add an ISK powered shield so that when you get hit. You'd have to lose all your ISK before you could even take damage. For most people, they'd never use it. But for those with 100s of billions... they would be invincible. = ruin game balance.
If there was no limit to orders then we'd have two terrible things happen.
1) The big time traders with all the money would rule the market. No new traders would make any real money and even older part time traders would cease to see any real benefit to trading. Mission running time, eh?
2) You'd have the extremely annoying Rtards flooding the market with millions of orders selling 1 tritanium or some such garbage. Clogging the whole market up and making everyone's day just that much worse.
Edit: Right now, at least it's possible to find a market item/area that hasn't been tapped yet and actually make some good money without having to devote your entire eve play time to marketing.
Well 1 is basically already what is happening now, and also the nice protection of the "nontraded monopoly items", extremely relevant on moon stuff like dysprosium...
On abusive placed orders.. Hmm if we had infinite orders a limit to injections of orders per 15 minutes would be possible. Also with that a limitation of timeframes and ranges could be added to the office rental, so time range above 24 hours and ranges outside 2-3 jumps could be office only features. This would help population distribution a bit..
micro managing orders gameplay is what we have atm, with bigger order books we would see a permanent price level enter the game on more items and the differences in these prices would reflect peoples patience and their logistic price markups..
Fact is to few traders are active in game, this is VERY obvious if you look at how many items are not traded and have no supply or demand at all. This is not because these items arent spread its just that with the limit the assets are parked in hangars and not placed on market for "rotation".
This is slowing down item movement. Also if you look at how often in region difference in price develops to warrent any hauling, then you should notice how relevant the topic is.. Small piles simply arent traded with a high enough frequency.. especially those items that arent widely traded, and thus have little to no demand locally. We are living with Jita as the sole pricesetter, and even there some items arent traded even though their should have a value. Traders that would and should motivate these price developments cant be bothered because maintaining them simply isnt worth it with the current order limitation.. Thus the markets will never pick up and extremely low or extremely high prices is the result.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.07.20 22:54:00 -
[33]
Like in the real world, where a single company can trade every single good and service, in every quantity and style and color, at any place and time to any customer, with any currency. Right?
Think of Tycoon level V as being like Walmart. Yes, you can trade everything from bathroom towels to potato chips to motor oil. That's a lot, and it gives you an advantage, but it is a far cry from selling everything in the world.
Your "monopolist" argument is absurd, of course. That's exactly what you want -- one firm to rule them all, one firm to bind them, one firm to find them all and in the darkness bind them. Market niches create the possibility and incentive for people to specialize and trade with one another. Adapt or die.
-/ the fighting republicans /- |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 11:19:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Like in the real world, where a single company can trade every single good and service, in every quantity and style and color, at any place and time to any customer, with any currency. Right?
Think of Tycoon level V as being like Walmart. Yes, you can trade everything from bathroom towels to potato chips to motor oil. That's a lot, and it gives you an advantage, but it is a far cry from selling everything in the world.
Your "monopolist" argument is absurd, of course. That's exactly what you want -- one firm to rule them all, one firm to bind them, one firm to find them all and in the darkness bind them. Market niches create the possibility and incentive for people to specialize and trade with one another. Adapt or die.
The argument seem to be the same .. That if there was infinite orders again, then a few could cover and rule the entire market.. I would have tended to agree back when the limitation was first introduced. The limitation on coverage made sense to grant easier access to markets for new players. However as is rather easy to see taking a look at the market saturation and item trade coverage the trader population is simply to small to cover a dynamic market in EVE.
The items traded with any noticable frequency is only those that generally all players have interests in, the more specific niche items have next to no activity anywhere... This makes trade in these items so niche that they are either weirdly underpriced or extremely overpriced.
The price dynamic is suffering and the markets are stale and in actuallity borring in most items outside high volume items. Also even though the claim that this would benefit "tycoons" the fact of current market is that tycoons have even more market control then in a liberal one with infinite diversification option, and also manipulation is a pure numbers game and a great number of tycoons are taking extreme advantage from this..
I have happily played the game since 2003 and the orer nerf has not made me rage quit. I am doing quite fine in this enviroment, but I still feel the gameplay on market and industrialism would highly improve and benefit more players with the mentioned suggestion..
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 11:54:00 -
[35]
oh dear, no we dont need infinite orders.
This would lead to spammed and intransparent markets!
I've trained Tycoon V and this is enough, you have just to select trading items to the most profitable ones.
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 13:39:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Robert Caldera
oh dear, no we dont need infinite orders.
This would lead to spammed and intransparent markets!
I've trained Tycoon V and this is enough, you have just to select trading items to the most profitable ones.
Funny you claim exactly the opposite. Intransperent market prices is what we have now, with items not traded and extreme manipulation going on.
Infinite or at least extreme boost to number of outstanding orders would make this diversification possible with the low number of traders.
At least if you want to argue against this idea explain and use arguments.
Personally I find it rather annoyiing that so many items arent traded, since the profit then all goes to the same protectionistic groups, that have monopolized these areas. Again to repeat myself the dysprosium and similar items are the best examples of this current phenomenon.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 13:58:00 -
[37]
tbh, I dont understand your problem.
For me, spammed market = intransparent market.
What is intransparent now?
|
Khoda Khan
Minmatar
Zantiu-Braun Corporation
Zantiu-Braun Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 13:59:00 -
[38]
/not signed.
We have enough shuttles on the market for 8,888,888.88. Don't need an infinite number more. |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 14:15:00 -
[39]
Hmmm.
Last I checked many active orders and realized orders = efficient and fast market equilibrium..
The faster a market can respond and find a "real price" the better it is for gameplay as well as the game economy..
Just because there are abusive elements that dont mean a feature should be removed. WE still have a bounty system even though its sort of a joke that you can strip off your own bounties.
Finding a solution to the griefers and exploiters is not suposed to stop development of the game..
The shackles brought with market orders was a twin shackles solution. The escrow limitation is more then enough. Although I would personally like it if orders timed above 24 hours and ranges outside 3 jumps would necessitate an office hangar access.
The later limitation is to have daytraders open still for anyone, but limiting longer termed investements to bigger groups and thus promote more coop and pvp and less pve.
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 16:56:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
This makes trade in these items so niche that they are either weirdly underpriced or extremely overpriced.
Bingo!
Price disparities = opportunity for trade!
So what exactly is the problem?
-/ the fighting republicans /- |
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 16:58:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
The faster a market can respond and find a "real price" the better it is for gameplay as well as the game economy...
LOL, you fail at economics. If all prices were the same everywhere, why would anyone trade? Irregularities are what create the opportunity.
-/ the fighting republicans /- |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 17:14:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
So what exactly is the problem?
maybe that he probably wants to spam the market with scam orders
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 17:14:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
The faster a market can respond and find a "real price" the better it is for gameplay as well as the game economy...
LOL, you fail at economics. If all prices were the same everywhere, why would anyone trade? Irregularities are what create the opportunity.
Well the ad hominem approach aside..
The prices would not be the same in all regions, but more regions would actually have more items traded and not so many market holes and slow reacting markets..
This is still all about a fairly small amount of traders simulating a world size that is quite considerable, and without an opportunity to reflect this with more orders all traders will need to group in a small number of HUBS.. In short the only places the prices have any real dynamic and reacts even minutely towards a new equilibrium is in places like Jita..
Maybe taking a look at items outside your normal traded items will make people see the point. There are so many markets that might have potential to be opened but due to the opportunity cost and risk of losses in that these new markets wont develop, then no one tries opening them..
Might want to check buy price and value on a little thing like Arkenor raw ORE, that could show what this rant is all about..
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 22:41:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Might want to check buy price and value on a little thing like Arkenor raw ORE, that could show what this rant is all about..
So? Whats wrong with them?
|
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.07.21 23:09:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Might want to check buy price and value on a little thing like Arkenor raw ORE, that could show what this rant is all about..
Yes, please enlighten us. What is it about?
-/ the fighting republicans /- |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 12:07:00 -
[46]
Well its fairly simple really..
There are 3 variants of Arkenor. Why is only the normal one bought in Jita at something close to a "real" price?
The reason is that the potential volumes are to small to warrent initiating the market for the rarer variants. The traders wont "waste" their orders, thus no buy develops. Since there is no buy then no sellers will start bringing it to sell, and thus hoard it till they can either refine (even with minor loss) or resell in bulk somehow..
The result is small volumes arent being used and thus effectively slows the game economy. The contracts trade is meant for packages and for bulk. The SCC is shackled by the order limitation and passive assets, crassus hoarding and protectionistic and monopolistic economy is the result..
- Money is Love -
Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways.
Feed your Brain:
Innovation Thread |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 14:37:00 -
[47]
so because there is nobody willing to trade rarely used goods we should allow market spamming, is that right??
If you think the good is worth trading why dont you spend one of your valuable slots for that??
|
Cali Serrano
Baptism oF Fire
Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 15:24:00 -
[48]
I believe the market works just fine as is. Currently there is reason to haul things from region to region and I don't believe there is anyone with a monopoly on a single item. These low volume trade items you speak of are items NO ONE WANTS ... or at least rarely. An increase in available trade orders is not going to do anything but increase the discrepancy between items for sale and items sold, hence causing the problem you see to get worse while having negative aspects elsewhere. One of which could ( and probably would be to a degree ) of price equilibrium being reached between regions and less reason for trade. I'm going to say not a good idea.
Also to your arkonor arguement, it's mostly found in deep 0.0, it's bulky while it's refined minerals are not. To haul the raw product all the way into a market hub is not a very cost effective compared to the amount of refined minerals you can fit compared to raw ore. That's the reason you get so little. And the 'unreal' price you see for the variants is because not a lot makes it to the hub but some one has found a niche market of making money off the little that does. So in that regard, the market is actually representing what is going on very nicely I.E. supply and demand. There is no supply or demand for the arkonor variations in the market hubs themselves, that's why the prices are off.
|
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 18:04:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Robert Caldera
If you think the good is worth trading why dont you spend one of your valuable slots for that??
this
-/ the fighting republicans /- |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 07:58:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Originally by: Robert Caldera
If you think the good is worth trading why dont you spend one of your valuable slots for that??
this
Quite simple really..
Without infinite or at least a big increase in orders players are forced to either JUNK SELL, as in sell to any lame grief prices order as in a fraction of the value, or they are forced to recycle it, this destroys and increase the items price artificially and is bad for distribution mechanics, last to haul the item to a better venue to sell.
Looking in one of my current hangars I see 800+ different items, and this mainly loot and ammo. Lets say I wanted this handed of the loss I would sell this at with insta sell is way beyond 25-50% below avg. This is not acceptable to me so I would at least like the function of being able to set it up for sale at a good price for those that would take it off my hands, say 10-25% below avg value. Due note I am using avg and not outlying price differences.
With more orders this is exactly one of the things you would see develop a market saturated with many orders of different ranges and thus warranting way more opportune buy and sales.
Another important thing you would see with a huge number of orders is instead of the 0,01 isk wars opportune trims/buyups of current market levels would be seen. This would be a trade strategy based on market intel and future investments..
A freakish thing you see in current market is that BIGGER PILES have a markup in price. This is a rather market wise weird phenomenon, because sure the package of a specific huge volume could mean a price markup, but the loss on broker fees if the order times out is big, thus we are forced to do the server straining update game, instead of relying on rotating the universal supply in stockpiles.
On an end note I was around when there was infinite orders in EVE, and the market was easier to service even though population of traders was still an issue.. So its not like I havent got any background knowledge of this.. Back then it was possible to abuse mainly due to no need for escrow.. Now with escrow some limitation will make sure things are balanced.
Tycoon wannabe go here: SCC Lounge
Got Game? Peak a boo... |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |