EVE Search - Fixing the .01 isk war problem

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Fixing the .01 isk war problem

» 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)
wallenbergaren	Posted - 2009.07.22 12:59:00 - [1] .01 isk wars are out of control in my opinion. When you undercut someone's margin by so little you're not actually lowering your margin to get more sales, you're just working around a broken game mechanic. Rewarding people for being online isn't a bad thing but when you often get undercut faster than you're allowed to update your orders then there's something that needs fixing. The only way you stop people from doing it is one of the following: Make it pointless to undercut by insignificant amounts Make it unattractive to constantly update orders For example, you could make people repay the entire broker's fee whenever they update an order, but that would probably have a very negative effect on trading. A good solution would, in my opinion be, making it pointless to update orders with insignificant amounts of isk. If you're not actually willing to pay more for an item then you shouldn't get your orders filled more easily. My suggestion would be that all orders within a certain price range of the lowest / highest order would all be in a pool from which people buy / sell. The width of that price range would have to be proportional to the margin on the item in question. So, if three traders all have buy orders within the same price range then someone who goes to sell that item in a station would randomly sell to anyone of those three traders. Only orders large enough to buy / sell all the items the player wants should be applicable, so if someone wants to buy 10 T2 cargo expanders and someone has a sell order for only 5 of them, he should be excluded, so as to favour orders of larger quantities. That was all
el caido School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.07.22 13:57:00 - [2] The daily 'market is broken' thread ... huzzah. Originally by: wallenbergaren The only way you stop people from doing it is one of the following: Make it pointless to undercut by insignificant amounts Make it unattractive to constantly update orders Or don't shop in market hubs. Crazy idea, I know. While I don't disagree with you, wallen, I don't see this changing anytime soon. Ultimately, this is market PVP at its "finest". Personally, I think the choice should exist to buy from whichever order you want. If you want to buy the item that is 1500 ISK and not 1499.99 ISK at the same station, you should be able to ... whether due to stupidity or resentment.
wallenbergaren	Posted - 2009.07.22 14:57:00 - [3] Edited by: wallenbergaren on 22/07/2009 14:58:44 But you can't buy from whichever order you want! If you choose one of the less attractive orders you pay the price listed in that order, but the sale always goes to the most attractive one. That is why .01 isk undercutting is so effective: if you have the best price you ALWAYS get the sale I'm not against competitive pricing in market hubs, I just think the form it currently takes is less than ideal because people don't actually compete with price when they undercut with .01 isk No I don't have to trade in market hubs, but that's no reason to not be constructive about fixing the issue =) unless people want to debate that it even is an issue, but I don't think anyone enjoys the silly .01 wars, but people have to do them.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.22 15:01:00 - [4] there is no issue. If you are trading in hubs where hundreds of other people do the same sit there and watch your orders.
Sun Clausewitz	Posted - 2009.07.22 15:29:00 - [5] I want to be able to pick and choose too... just to spite the people who put up the stupid prices in the system Pick Three: Caldari/PVP/Solo/Success
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.22 15:54:00 - [6] there is no reason for being able choosing particular orders.
Cebraio	Posted - 2009.07.22 16:39:00 - [7] Originally by: Sun Clausewitz I want to be able to pick and choose too... just to spite the people who put up the stupid prices in the system Do I miss something? You can choose a higher order on the detailed order list. I do that sometimes to support people who got their orders undercut. Meaning I loose some ISK, but DILLIGAF? ;) To moderators: I hit "report" instead of "quote" on Clausewitz' post earlier. Sorrey!
el caido School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.07.22 17:05:00 - [8] Originally by: wallenbergaren But you can't buy from whichever order you want! I know this ... I was suggesting it as a better proposal than your own. Originally by: Cebraio Do I miss something? You can choose a higher order on the detailed order list. I do that sometimes to support people who got their orders undercut. Meaning I loose some ISK, but DILLIGAF? ;) Yes, you missed something. If the orders are in the same station, your automatically buy from the cheapest seller, regardless of which order you select to buy from.
Cebraio	Posted - 2009.07.22 17:13:00 - [9] Edited by: Cebraio on 22/07/2009 17:14:40 Originally by: el caidoo Originally by: Cebraio Do I miss something? You can choose a higher order on the detailed order list. I do that sometimes to support people who got their orders undercut. Meaning I loose some ISK, but DILLIGAF? ;) Yes, you missed something. If the orders are in the same station, your automatically buy from the cheapest seller, regardless of which order you select to buy from. Okay then. I didn't notice that. I'd like to be able to get the order I chose, because it would allow people like me/us to support little higher orders.
BenjaminBarker	Posted - 2009.07.22 18:12:00 - [10] Originally by: Cebraio Edited by: Cebraio on 22/07/2009 17:14:40 Originally by: el caidoo Originally by: Cebraio Do I miss something? You can choose a higher order on the detailed order list. I do that sometimes to support people who got their orders undercut. Meaning I loose some ISK, but DILLIGAF? ;) Yes, you missed something. If the orders are in the same station, your automatically buy from the cheapest seller, regardless of which order you select to buy from. Okay then. I didn't notice that. I'd like to be able to get the order I chose, because it would allow people like me/us to support little higher orders. Last I checked it not only purchases from the cheaper of the orders, it pays the amount you selected. So if you select that 1500 unit instead of the 1499.99 unit, you pay 1500 to the guy who 'undercut'. I'd like to see a minimum price 'resolution' for orders: 0.01: .01 - 100 0.1: 101 - 1000 1: 1001 - 10000 10: 10001 - 100000 100: 100,001 - 1,000,000 etc... For low price items like Trit, there is no change, but for anything over 10 isk, the minimum price movement is 0.10%. Trit has a very healthy market competition with an average minimum price movement of 0.25%, so this would bring a reasonable and proven minimum markup to all the other areas of the market, and encourage healthy competition.
wallenbergaren	Posted - 2009.07.22 18:30:00 - [11] Price resolution is also a fine solution The point is that if you want to get more orders filled then you should have to lower your margin. Babysitting orders has nothing to do with economics or trading
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.22 18:40:00 - [12] There was a good thread on this issue here.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.22 18:56:00 - [13] Originally by: wallenbergaren A good solution would, in my opinion be, making it pointless to update orders with insignificant amounts of isk. If you're not actually willing to pay more for an item then you shouldn't get your orders filled more easily. My suggestion would be that all orders within a certain price range of the lowest / highest order would all be in a pool from which people buy / sell. The width of that price range would have to be proportional to the margin on the item in question. So, if three traders all have buy orders within the same price range then someone who goes to sell that item in a station would randomly sell to anyone of those three traders. Why I should pay more because you are too lazy to update your orders? Especially when that "insignificant" 0.01 isk is a 2-3% shift in the price of a item, like for tritanium?
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.22 19:02:00 - [14] Originally by: BenjaminBarker Originally by: Cebraio Edited by: Cebraio on 22/07/2009 17:14:40 Originally by: el caidoo Originally by: Cebraio Do I miss something? You can choose a higher order on the detailed order list. I do that sometimes to support people who got their orders undercut. Meaning I loose some ISK, but DILLIGAF? ;) Yes, you missed something. If the orders are in the same station, your automatically buy from the cheapest seller, regardless of which order you select to buy from. Okay then. I didn't notice that. I'd like to be able to get the order I chose, because it would allow people like me/us to support little higher orders. Last I checked it not only purchases from the cheaper of the orders, it pays the amount you selected. So if you select that 1500 unit instead of the 1499.99 unit, you pay 1500 to the guy who 'undercut'. I'd like to see a minimum price 'resolution' for orders: 0.01: .01 - 100 0.1: 101 - 1000 1: 1001 - 10000 10: 10001 - 100000 100: 100,001 - 1,000,000 etc... For low price items like Trit, there is no change, but for anything over 10 isk, the minimum price movement is 0.10%. Trit has a very healthy market competition with an average minimum price movement of 0.25%, so this would bring a reasonable and proven minimum markup to all the other areas of the market, and encourage healthy competition. Who decide the range? Buy order? Sell order? Highest buy? Highest sell? Lowest? I can force the price of tritanium placing a sell order of one unit at 1.000.000 so that it can be changed only by 100 isk increments? I can unlock an item placing a buy order at 1 isk allowing 0.01 isk changes? You can't use the market prices, they are open to manipulation. You can't use Dev pre-set prices, it will be another kind of market manipulation.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.22 19:13:00 - [15] Edited by: Regat Kozovv on 22/07/2009 19:15:51 Originally by: Venkul Mul Who decide the range? Buy order? Sell order? Highest buy? Highest sell? Lowest? I can force the price of tritanium placing a sell order of one unit at 1.000.000 so that it can be changed only by 100 isk increments? I can unlock an item placing a buy order at 1 isk allowing 0.01 isk changes? You could use a percentage formula based on the average buy/sell prices of the total volume of all items in the region. say, 1-2%. You can calculate the average based on say, one or two standard deviations from the mean price, so that you'll eliminate outrageous prices, like that one unit at 1 billion ISK.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.22 19:21:00 - [16] Edited by: Whitehound on 22/07/2009 19:23:41 I have no problem with 0.01 ISK increases because I counter them with the same method. If it does not stop then I change to 1, 5, and 10 ISK steps, and so on, only to drive the price more quickly. Sometimes I manage to drive a price beyond than for what an item is worth in another region. If I am still being challenged then I trade the item manually, thereby making a quick and small profit, and get rid of the competing order. People will raise one another no matter what price steps are allowed. Some just do not seem to target a price other than the prices of their competitors. This is a problem. It would be nice if the game mechanics would force people to use larger steps so that the prices change more rapidly, requiring people to think more of the value of an item, and to increase the time span before a price can be changed again. -- "Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast." - Ace Rimmer
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.22 19:28:00 - [17] Why not just add a minimum increment in changes to market orders, say 1%? Or make it 6% and add a skill that reduces it by 1% per level.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.22 19:33:00 - [18] Originally by: EdwardNardella Why not just add a minimum increment in changes to market orders, say 1%? Or make it 6% and add a skill that reduces it by 1% per level. Great idea! /signed -- "Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast." - Ace Rimmer
Zamaranth Sesta	Posted - 2009.07.22 20:54:00 - [19] Longer wait times would only help power players more who were obsessive enough to play multiple accounts . Being outbid by .01 or 1000isk really isn't materially different in million dollar plus items. I'm not sure it really tightens the market that much...and variable bid levels based on different price amounts would just tax the servers a little more and make things slightly slower with more room for glitches. Playing a trader is like being a person in the market pits, and just like combat you need to be there to participate or you need to hope for the market to move through your price. If you want to buy something to use and arent' playing a trader you can always pay the Sell price.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.22 21:38:00 - [20] do you guys really want to calculate the 1% value of min. raise/cut value for each fcking order?? Even if you do, there would be always someone cut your price, especially on market hubs where hundreds of people trade.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.22 21:45:00 - [21] Originally by: Robert Caldera do you guys really want to calculate the 1% value of min. raise/cut value for each fcking order?? Yes, yes I do. I have no problems with people cutting me or someone else on price. That's the way it's supposed to work. But being able to outbid someone by .01 ISK on a multi million item is not met by any risk-taking of the bidder, it only rewards those who sit in front of their PCs all day. Having a percentage-based increment largely fixes this issue. Unfortunately it does mean that traders will no longer be able to suck up items simply by having the market screen open and matching everyone elses orders. They'll have to determine if they can afford it or not, and will require some analysis, thinking, and forethought on their part.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.23 04:59:00 - [22] Just a bit of clarification as some people don't seem to get it exactly what I am saying. To change your own order the change must be 1% not necessarily undercut the next guy by 1%. And if you cant calculate 1% of ANY number then you dont belong in a trade hub lol. Just move the decimal point...
Future Mutant Republic Military School	Posted - 2009.07.23 05:19:00 - [23] My proposal is a fine paid in isk for every thread created about the 1 iskers... Trading=pvp Its the way it is, either use it to your advantage or move your items to a less populated system Your stuff iz mine through actions
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 06:39:00 - [24] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Edited by: Regat Kozovv on 22/07/2009 19:15:51 Originally by: Venkul Mul Who decide the range? Buy order? Sell order? Highest buy? Highest sell? Lowest? I can force the price of tritanium placing a sell order of one unit at 1.000.000 so that it can be changed only by 100 isk increments? I can unlock an item placing a buy order at 1 isk allowing 0.01 isk changes? You could use a percentage formula based on the average buy/sell prices of the total volume of all items in the region. say, 1-2%. You can calculate the average based on say, one or two standard deviations from the mean price, so that you'll eliminate outrageous prices, like that one unit at 1 billion ISK. and it should do that calculation every time you try to change an order Oh yea, market is too fast. BTW: 1 with 6 zero following is 1 million. And still to easy to manipulate, especially for items hovering around the point where the price change increment change. Note too that it would require that every time I input a new buy/sell order I should be informed of the minimum price change I can do, especially if that value is determinate by some kind of function like you suggest and not deducible with a glance to the current market situation. So another way to slow further the forum. Still against.
Ron Wesson	Posted - 2009.07.23 07:41:00 - [25] Originally by: wallenbergaren .01 isk wars are out of control in my opinion. When you undercut someone's margin by so little you're not actually lowering your margin to get more sales, you're just working around a broken game mechanic. Rewarding people for being online isn't a bad thing but when you often get undercut faster than you're allowed to update your orders then there's something that needs fixing. The only way you stop people from doing it is one of the following: Make it pointless to undercut by insignificant amounts Make it unattractive to constantly update orders For example, you could make people repay the entire broker's fee whenever they update an order, but that would probably have a very negative effect on trading. A good solution would, in my opinion be, making it pointless to update orders with insignificant amounts of isk. If you're not actually willing to pay more for an item then you shouldn't get your orders filled more easily. My suggestion would be that all orders within a certain price range of the lowest / highest order would all be in a pool from which people buy / sell. The width of that price range would have to be proportional to the margin on the item in question. So, if three traders all have buy orders within the same price range then someone who goes to sell that item in a station would randomly sell to anyone of those three traders. Only orders large enough to buy / sell all the items the player wants should be applicable, so if someone wants to buy 10 T2 cargo expanders and someone has a sell order for only 5 of them, he should be excluded, so as to favour orders of larger quantities. That was all You are creating a pseudo-problem, without trying to understand the concept of market pvp. The EVE market as it is currently, is working well. The rules of supply/demand apply and it's highly competitive. Just because you can't get the item you want, at the price you want, doesn't mean that something needs fixin'. To change the world you need to change yourself...
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.23 08:10:00 - [26] Edited by: Whitehound on 23/07/2009 08:14:35 Originally by: Zamaranth Sesta Longer wait times would only help power players more who were obsessive enough to play multiple accounts. That is dumb argument. The only thing that helps people with multiple accounts are the multiple accounts. If they are willing to pay for their accounts and put multiple orders with multiple characters on the same item then so be it. In addition to the topic do I want to be able to sell in high volumes. This will help to loosen up the competition. -- "Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast." - Ace Rimmer
ninjaholic Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.07.23 08:18:00 - [27] Originally by: wallenbergaren Babysitting orders has nothing to do with economics or trading Erm what? This isn't eBay man, this is if-you're-not-watching-I'm-gonna-undercut-you market PVP. CCP won't change the market, it's really, really, REALLY good. >>> SUPPORT EVE's OWN IN-GAME FIGHT RECORD TOOL! <<<
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.23 08:24:00 - [28] Originally by: ninjaholic CCP won't change the market I hope so, I wouldn't like more competition from people who dont even have time for watching their crap, there is enough in hubs.
wallenbergaren	Posted - 2009.07.23 11:00:00 - [29] Originally by: Ron Wesson You are creating a pseudo-problem, without trying to understand the concept of market pvp. The EVE market as it is currently, is working well. The rules of supply/demand apply and it's highly competitive. Just because you can't get the item you want, at the price you want, doesn't mean that something needs fixin'. To change the world you need to change yourself... I can deal with the mechanics and do just fine trading but that doesn't mean that the mechanics are great. .01 isk undercutting doesn't have anything to do with supply and demand, or any other part of economics.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.23 12:28:00 - [30] Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Take a look at these two buy orders. One of them is an order from a brainless, price-chasing robot. Stupidity rules the market.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.23 12:40:00 - [31] whats wrong with them??
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.23 12:50:00 - [32] Edited by: Whitehound on 23/07/2009 12:51:27 Either you have no experience or you did not look at the quantities. Instead of paying 25.03 could he have stayed below 25.00 and still got his buy order of 40,000 items filled. Now does he offer 0.03 ISK more per item only to get his hands on a batch of 50,000 items. With a bit of experience would you realize that this is hardly going to happen and that you will have to wait a long time until it does. So you may as well stay under the 25.0 and get your 40,000 items for cheaper. The next price he would needed to beat is 22.0 ISK btw. It is this need to go over all offers no matter what quantities people are asking. It is so dumb and stupid.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.23 12:59:00 - [33] you assume the orders are from the same player?
Ydyp Ieva Caldari Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:03:00 - [34] Originally by: wallenbergaren Edited by: wallenbergaren on 22/07/2009 14:58:44 But you can't buy from whichever order you want! If you choose one of the less attractive orders you pay the price listed in that order, but the sale always goes to the most attractive one. That is why .01 isk undercutting is so effective: if you have the best price you ALWAYS get the sale Well this is a bigger problem then the 0.01 isk wars if you ask me. At least if I choose the order that is more expensive (which is unlikely though if they are in the same station) then the guy put it on more expensive should get the isk I paid for it (minus taxes).
SwordKnight	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:07:00 - [35] Its not just the ISK 0.1 problem, unless your in one of the large trade hubs then you will find that people will buy a more expensive product localy than flying a number of jumps to get it. The down side to this is that people can "view" products that are on the market many many jumps away.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:09:00 - [36] I sense a great deal of fear, and the nature of it only serves to confirm my suspicions. The notion of having a percentage minimum/maximum price increase is not to stop others from being able to undercut/outbid one another, but to prevent traders who simply match prices by .01 ISK from being able to avoid all risk. As White pointed out earlier, being able to increment by a meaningless amount results in no risk by those who are simply matching the price. .01 will get you the item, but have a negligible effect on the bottom line. (Note: This does not hold true for certain markets, such as a Tritanium) Again, this does not prevent others from simply outbidding someone. But it does force those who do (and ones self in turn) to think more carefully about their prices, as even a 1% increment can amount to meaningful cash. I disagree with the notion that the market is PvP at it's finest, because all it rewards is time, not risk or skill. No doubt those who stand to lose the most by this (and are making themselves vocal in this thread) are those who fill their orders mealy by the fact that they have the most time to play. I'm not sympathetic to this. While I agree that players need to be logged in to play, what's going on in the market is not "playing". I could write a script to do what's being done; simply hitting the up arrow by .01 is not gaming.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:16:00 - [37] Originally by: Robert Caldera you assume the orders are from the same player? No. It would be a waste of orders. The region also does not span over 10 systems.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:18:00 - [38] Originally by: Regat Kozovv The notion of having a percentage minimum/maximum price increase is not to stop others from being able to undercut/outbid one another, but to prevent traders who simply match prices by .01 ISK from being able to avoid all risk. why should one not be able to sell for an nearly equal price as you? are you better than others?
Ydyp Ieva Caldari Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:19:00 - [39] Originally by: SwordKnight Its not just the ISK 0.1 problem, unless your in one of the large trade hubs then you will find that people will buy a more expensive product localy than flying a number of jumps to get it. The down side to this is that people can "view" products that are on the market many many jumps away. Even limiting it even more won't help as long as there is a site like eve-central.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:20:00 - [40] Originally by: Robert Caldera Originally by: Regat Kozovv The notion of having a percentage minimum/maximum price increase is not to stop others from being able to undercut/outbid one another, but to prevent traders who simply match prices by .01 ISK from being able to avoid all risk. why should one not be able to sell for an nearly equal price as you? are you better than others? I put the answer in bold for you.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:23:00 - [41] Edited by: Robert Caldera on 23/07/2009 13:24:22 so, the question still there. If you want to sell an item for 100 ISK, why should one not be able to sell for nearly much? 99.99?? Percentual update spans mean blocking out people from selling items over/under certain ISK amounts, so the first who places an order reserves that price for him alone. No good, for items with narrow margins. Hence, if you dont take the risk for selling items for a price, why should others take a risk of selling that item 1000 ISK below instead just 0.01 ISK??
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:38:00 - [42] Originally by: Robert Caldera so, the question still there. If you want to sell an item for 100 ISK, why should one not be able to sell for nearly much? 99.99?? Percentual update spans mean blocking out people from selling items over/under certain ISK amounts, so the first who places an order reserves that price for him alone. No good, for items with narrow margins. Good question. But that assumes that all orders are trading closer to their margins. I don't know of any items, short of trit, that trade with margins in the cents. (I frequently cite 1% as a margin; for trit this is .04 ISK, and even that may be too much. I suspect of this were to be implemented, Trit may require it's own percentage, or perhaps none at all, being that it's such a special case.) For the rest of the items in EVE, I have yet to see anything that sells in volume close to 1%. Meta 4 items may be the closest, but this is still between 5-10%. Meta 3 items and below can have profit margins anywhere from 50-1000%. If you know of something that frequently trades around 1%, then do let me know, as that should be excluded from any market calculation. For everything else, I think 1% is a fine increment, 2% may even work as well. (I believe someone mentioned making it skill based, and I don't think that's a bad idea.) I remember from our previous conversation that there were concerns that the spread between buy and sell orders would close too quickly (especially if the notion of an autoupdater were implemented.) I think there are a few things that preclude this: - Traders adjust to the market to buy and sell what makes them the most profit. If competition in a particular item is high and profit margins become too squeezed, then traders will seek out other, more profitable items, easing competitive pressure. - Price imbalances exist between regions, leaving higher margins for people willing to research and transport. (This is a key point I think because it means that professional traders will still benefit from the increased time they take for market research.) - The market is ever changing due to wars, population shifts, game balance changes, etc. This creates turbulence in the market. Prices are always moving up and down due to a variety of external factors. For these reasons I do not think that the role of the full-time station trader will be going away anytime soon. The rules still apply in that those who watch the market and have a good knowledge of the risks they can take will be able to use that time to get the jump on those who do not invest the same effort. But it will force everyone to compete on price, and I only see that as a good thing.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.23 13:58:00 - [43] Edited by: Whitehound on 23/07/2009 14:00:22 I suggest to introduce a skill called High Volume Trading, which indirectly sets the volume into a relation with the price to control the price margins. Simply put, the more you want to trade the smaller the margin for a change gets. Those who only trade in small volumes are then not allowed to compete in the same way (i.e. 0.01 ISK steps) as those who trade in large volumes. Their smaller volumes is not as meaning full to the economy than the larger volumes and therefore will their influence on the price development be reduced. This will reduce the 0.01 ISK price war a bit, but not make it impossible. Those who want to compete in very small price steps then need to bring a lot of money or items to the market, and need to train this skill.
Ydyp Ieva Caldari Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2009.07.23 15:00:00 - [44] Making a % based increase or decrease in prices for offers isn't a good idea and would create even more lag on the market (isn't the fastest to load anyway). And wouldn't realy solve the problem with those isk wars. As a lot of people just want to sell their loot they get and it doesn't matter what price they get for it. Now they just want to get the most out of it and will undercut the lowest price with 0.01 isk, if the % is in place. They still will undercut. But this problem also gets spread over to mass selling. If you ask me the real problem with those mass selling undercuttings is the existing trade hubs. Why should I pay more for an item when I can get a cheaper one with just as much effort put in (time for travelling/looking)? Even if it is 0.01 is cheaper. Now for this there isn't a small solution. But there are a few that could be found I'm sure. One of those that I would suggest is taking the same approach as research/industry slots. Give each station a set amount of slots that can be rent. Now make it so that you can only put up a bigger number of items on sale when you have such a slot. Now this would make it so that trading hubs would disappear because there won't be enough slots in Jita to support the number of sellers there are at this moment (same for the other trading hubs). I agree this solution would bring a lot of pain in the short run cause everyone will want to get a slot in one of those current trading hubs. But in the long run this will solve itself as people will have to spread out over other systems. Now after this is spread the buyer will look at the prices and check what sale is closest to them and he still is willing to make the number of jumps. For example: a module cost 100 isk and is 5 jumps out, but another selling the same module for 99.99 isk (undercut with 0.01 isk) but is 20 jumps out. I wouldn't make the extra 15 jumps just for 0.01 isk win, and I'm sure there are a lot more as me. The suggestion would also help increase the validation of the trader and courier professions. As they can only benefit of a more spread out market instead of those major trading hubs.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.23 15:26:00 - [45] Originally by: Ydyp Ieva Stuff I can't speak to performance issues, only gameplay ones. Whether any of these proposed changes will cause issues server-side is for CCP to decide. I don't expect, nor do I think it preferable, to remove ISK wars to begin with. After all, it's a competitive market, and should remain as such. What I any many others believe though, is that a .01 increase on a high margin item is not competitive, and only rewards those who have the time to sit there and watch the market. That's not to say watching the market is a bad thing, or that is should be punished. But competition should exist on price and knowledge of what items are worth, not the amount of time on one's hands, especially for a game. As for the limited sell slots, I think this punishes the market for a non-problem. The existence of trade hubs is not a problem in my opinion, and I think they're beneficial to all whether you're trading in massive quantities or just looking to liquidate some stuff. It's true that people will also pay more for an item that's closer, and the face that items must be transported, thereby creating this convenience charge, is one of the aspects that makes trading in this game so great. So if you see an item that's cheaper elsewhere, by all means you should get it, but you have to decide if it's worth it to fly the extra 20 jumps for the decrease in price. Sometimes it might be, sometimes, maybe not. That's something for every individual to decide, but I don't think (and pardon me if I'm misinterpreting you) buyers/sellers should be forced to match prices with those half way across the region. If anything, it's those imbalances that relieves competitive pressure in the market hubs, otherwise prices for items would definitely hover very close to their margins all of the time, as some people fear would happen with this proposed change.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2009.07.23 16:21:00 - [46] Originally by: Venkul Mul Especially when that "insignificant" 0.01 isk is a 2-3% shift in the price of a item, like for tritanium? your math skills blow for .01 isk to be a 2 or 3% change in price trit would have to be selling for .33 to .50 isk per unit.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.07.23 16:54:00 - [47] just cut them by 10%, most willl give up after few times.But if its market bot just make price profitable to buy him out, or dump your stored goods on him. You will be amazed how many times it works.
Aaron Mirrorsaver R.E.C.O.N. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.07.23 17:18:00 - [48] even if u changed it so they couldnt modify the cents. .01 they can drop it by one whole number which is still insignificant. the only thing that would work is if you put a timer on it. cant modify orders for 1 hr for example.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:15:00 - [49] Originally by: Regat Kozovv I sense a great deal of fear, and the nature of it only serves to confirm my suspicions. The notion of having a percentage minimum/maximum price increase is not to stop others from being able to undercut/outbid one another, but to prevent traders who simply match prices by .01 ISK from being able to avoid all risk. As White pointed out earlier, being able to increment by a meaningless amount results in no risk by those who are simply matching the price. .01 will get you the item, but have a negligible effect on the bottom line. (Note: This does not hold true for certain markets, such as a Tritanium) Again, this does not prevent others from simply outbidding someone. But it does force those who do (and ones self in turn) to think more carefully about their prices, as even a 1% increment can amount to meaningful cash. I disagree with the notion that the market is PvP at it's finest, because all it rewards is time, not risk or skill. No doubt those who stand to lose the most by this (and are making themselves vocal in this thread) are those who fill their orders mealy by the fact that they have the most time to play. I'm not sympathetic to this. While I agree that players need to be logged in to play, what's going on in the market is not "playing". I could write a script to do what's being done; simply hitting the up arrow by .01 is not gaming. Perfect score. Wrong on all account. I never play 0.01 games as my orders sit waiting for buyers for days and even weeks. What I fear is that most players are thoughtless. A large percentage of the traders will always underbid/overbid other orders, even if they are placed 10 systems away. So a percentage system will result in people slashing away to their prices. You hope they will think before doing that, instead a big percentage will do it blindly and depress the market for all players, reducing trade gains to pitiful values for all players, while asking "why I am not becoming richer?" and founding the failed trading attempts doing missions and selling GTC. Then I am fully convinced that the proposed mechanics will slow the market and have effects even on the general server performance. BTW: Longer times to change orders mean very little if the trader with max slots can put a new order 0.01 isk under yours. He don't even need more accounts, only more trade slosts and enough stuff to sell.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:18:00 - [50] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Originally by: Robert Caldera Originally by: Regat Kozovv The notion of having a percentage minimum/maximum price increase is not to stop others from being able to undercut/outbid one another, but to prevent traders who simply match prices by .01 ISK from being able to avoid all risk. why should one not be able to sell for an nearly equal price as you? are you better than others? I put the answer in bold for you. It has exactly your same risk. so you are avoiding all risk but don't want other people doing the same?
Uronksur Suth Sankkasen Mining Conglomerate Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:25:00 - [51] Originally by: Whitehound Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Take a look at these two buy orders. One of them is an order from a brainless, price-chasing robot. Stupidity rules the market. lol, precisely.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:33:00 - [52] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Originally by: Robert Caldera so, the question still there. If you want to sell an item for 100 ISK, why should one not be able to sell for nearly much? 99.99?? Percentual update spans mean blocking out people from selling items over/under certain ISK amounts, so the first who places an order reserves that price for him alone. No good, for items with narrow margins. Good question. But that assumes that all orders are trading closer to their margins. I don't know of any items, short of trit, that trade with margins in the cents. (I frequently cite 1% as a margin; for trit this is .04 ISK, and even that may be too much. I suspect of this were to be implemented, Trit may require it's own percentage, or perhaps none at all, being that it's such a special case.) Looking Kador prices (I am there currently) Isogen, 50.00 isk 1%=0.5 too much for something where the difference between the highest meaningful buy order and lowest sell order is 1 isk Megacyte 4790.00 isk 1%=47.9 too much for something where the difference between the highest meaningful buy order and lowest sell order is 200 isk Mexallon 34.00 isk 1%=0.34 too much for something where the difference between the highest meaningful buy order and lowest sell order is -.10 isk (yes, negative) Nocxium 61.90 isk 1%= 0.62 too much for something where the difference between the highest meaningful buy order and lowest sell order is 0.90 isk Pyerite 3.90 isk 1%= 0.39 too much for something where the difference between the highest meaningful buy order and lowest sell order is 200 isk Zydrine 1790.00 isk 1%= 17.9 too much for something where the difference between the highest meaningful buy order and lowest sell order is -11 isk It seem almost all the minerals are special cases. Don't want to spend time checking, but I am sure that it will be true for most ores too. A lot of moon minerals. Some gases. And so on. How many "special cases" should be created?
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:39:00 - [53] Originally by: Ydyp Ieva Now for this there isn't a small solution. But there are a few that could be found I'm sure. One of those that I would suggest is taking the same approach as research/industry slots. Give each station a set amount of slots that can be rent. Now make it so that you can only put up a bigger number of items on sale when you have such a slot. Now this would make it so that trading hubs would disappear because there won't be enough slots in Jita to support the number of sellers there are at this moment (same for the other trading hubs). I agree this solution would bring a lot of pain in the short run cause everyone will want to get a slot in one of those current trading hubs. But in the long run this will solve itself as people will have to spread out over other systems. Now after this is spread the buyer will look at the prices and check what sale is closest to them and he still is willing to make the number of jumps. For example: a module cost 100 isk and is 5 jumps out, but another selling the same module for 99.99 isk (undercut with 0.01 isk) but is 20 jumps out. I wouldn't make the extra 15 jumps just for 0.01 isk win, and I'm sure there are a lot more as me. The suggestion would also help increase the validation of the trader and courier professions. As they can only benefit of a more spread out market instead of those major trading hubs. 1) systems with 14+ stations will be the new trading hubs; 2) first renter, lock as many slot as possible, screw the others; 3) awful.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:43:00 - [54] Originally by: Regat Kozovv What I any many others believe though, is that a .01 increase on a high margin item is not competitive, and only rewards those who have the time to sit there and watch the market. What you and some other people feel is that the system should be changed because you sell high margin items and don't care or don't realize that your idea will screw those who trade low margin items. Fully allowed campaigning something that help you in EVE, but don't hope to find much people agreeing. And the four cats agreeing with you here aren't "many" with any stretch of imagination.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.23 19:53:00 - [55] Originally by: Ehranavaar Originally by: Venkul Mul Especially when that "insignificant" 0.01 isk is a 2-3% shift in the price of a item, like for tritanium? your math skills blow for .01 isk to be a 2 or 3% change in price trit would have to be selling for .33 to .50 isk per unit. Good hit, teach me not to type in haste.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.23 22:02:00 - [56] Originally by: Venkul Mul What you and some other people feel is that the system should be changed because you sell high margin items and don't care or don't realize that your idea will screw those who trade low margin items. I complete agree that this should not apply to the mineral market, as your example above showed. .01 may mean squat for modules, but it matters a ton for raw materials, and I can see clearly where any sort of forced increment over .01 would ruin one's ability to compete in the market. If you're asking how many "special cases" we need, then based on your research, I'd say just one: Materials. (Possibly Ammo.) The 'finished goods' market in EVE, modules, ships, etc, is completely different. .01 ISK means nothing if you're moving thousands of units that cost hundreds of thousands or millions of ISK each. And it means that instead of quickly determining where everyone's actual margin is, the inventories of those who do not have time to sit on the market 23/7 are held stagnant by those who can, by simply matching the prices of any order that appears. This is only exasperated by the fact that the market computer simply picks the cheapest seller, without fail. Who bears the risk? The person setting their price and continually moving their orders trying to avoid the guy chasing him with that penny. The originator can respond by incrementing by a penny as well, and we can have an**rcise in futility going back and forth determining who's order is on top by who was online last. You can move your order by a larger amount, but no one has to guess where your limit might be, they can simply pick whatever yours is. If the percentage needs to be smaller, say .05%, then so be it. I don't pretend to have a single all-powerful figure that will work for everything. (Hell, if EVE was really good, we've have percentages varying between different item groups that changed in response to market conditions...and the more I think about that, the more I like it since the data is already there....hmmm....must get back to that later.) What if the margins do close? You can be sure they will. Yes, that means that the easy ISK faucet will go away for some. Does that mean that 125mm Railgun Is will now have a margin of 1 ISK? Not likely. Here's why: - Traders adjust to the market to buy and sell what makes them the most profit. If competition in a particular item is high and profit margins become too squeezed, then traders will seek out other, more profitable items, easing competitive pressure. - Price imbalances exist between regions, leaving higher margins for people willing to research and transport. (This is a key point I think because it means that professional traders will still benefit from the increased time they take for market research.) - The market is ever changing due to wars, population shifts, game balance changes, etc. This creates turbulence in the market. Prices are always moving up and down due to a variety of external factors. No one is going to trade long in an item that makes 1 ISK if that, for every sold in small amounts. Furthermore, with the exception of Jita and a few trade hubs, prices for items are all over the place. It's this last point that really makes me wonder, as there's plenty of ISK to be found for those who are doing the research, like the ones spending all day on the market should be doing. I don't see though how outbidding/purchasing every order that comes along by .01 ISK for high end items should be seen as preferable. If you're afraid that it will damage low-margin items, then by all means we should find a way to make that**mpt. But I do not think the rest of the market should be left how it is as a result.
Nub Sauce	Posted - 2009.07.23 22:39:00 - [57] Make the minimum change 1% - problem solved.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.24 01:38:00 - [58] WOW people just don't seem to be getting what my proposed change is. The 1% increment has absolutely NOTHING to do with any of the orders or prices on the market except the very order you are altering. This could not possibly introduce lag into the market.
Ydyp Ieva Caldari Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2009.07.24 06:44:00 - [59] Originally by: EdwardNardella WOW people just don't seem to be getting what my proposed change is. The 1% increment has absolutely NOTHING to do with any of the orders or prices on the market except the very order you are altering. This could not possibly introduce lag into the market. But doesn't solve the problem that others put orders up with 0.01 undercutting you.
Taua Roqa Minmatar Planet Roqa	Posted - 2009.07.24 07:12:00 - [60] all these 'solutions' are worse than the problem.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.24 07:41:00 - [61] Originally by: Taua Roqa all these 'solutions' are worse than the problem. No.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.24 08:26:00 - [62] Edited by: Venkul Mul on 24/07/2009 08:32:14 Originally by: Regat Kozovv If you're asking how many "special cases" we need, then based on your research, I'd say just one: Materials. (Possibly Ammo.) So one way or another you want to nerf my salvage buy orders? Tons of modules buy orders with a price in the hundred of isk? Some implant buy order (again with a price in the hundred of isk)? You are repeating again and again the same error. There are plenty of items in game where a 1% difference in price will eat the margin and they aren't limited to a single class of items. My example was about minerals because they are the most blatant, but open the market in any region and start looking what are the buy orders for modules commonly dropped by NPC. I repeat: you want a change that will help trades buying and selling high margin items but that will damage people treating low margin items. I don't see any good reason to nerf a playstile because you want yours boosted. Originally by: Regat Kozovv The 'finished goods' market in EVE, modules, ships, etc, is completely different. .01 ISK means nothing if you're moving thousands of units that cost hundreds of thousands or millions of ISK each. Your constant, repeated fallacy. The items costing "hundreds of thousands or millions of ISK each" sold in market are a fraction of all the items sold. Most T2 modules go for under 3 millions, most T1 meta 0-3 go for less than 1 hundred thousand and still a % increase will eat the profit unless it is so small that it will be indistinguishable from 0.01 isk increments.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.24 14:52:00 - [63] Originally by: Venkul Mul I repeat: you want a change that will help trades buying and selling high margin items but that will damage people treating low margin items. No. And despite my best efforts to point out on numerous occasions (not to mention my requests to you to show me where it wouldn't work, as you have done) a blanket 1% change across the board would indeed, as you say, break low-end trading. Yes, I want high-end margin trading to be improved. But there's no reason why it should be at the expense of other types of trades. Any solution should take into consideration that there are markets in EVE that already work well and should not be impacted. Your consistent, repeated fallacy is that you see every proposed change as a threat, and it need not be. You cannot hold back the progress of others just because you yourself feel you're in a comfortable spot. (I'm trying to determine how one would calculate a minimum bid increment for high-margin items while keeping low-margin trading intact. This would be a percentage that would be calculated based on the standard deviation of the buy and sell orders for an item. The idea would be to keep the percentage low or non existant for things like trit, salvage, etc, and higher for others. If I figure out a formula that works for all items, I'll post it in a new thread. I have no desire to break or hinder low-margin trading. But high-margin items need an improvement. No market in the real world would let you outbid people by a penny on something that costs a ridiculous amount. There's no reason why it should be allowed here.)
Vyktor Abyss Gallente The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.24 15:00:00 - [64] Forgive my ignorance but don't you get charged a small fee already every time you change an order? If thats the case then there is no issue. If not then yeah, make them pay a fee for changing an order.
wallenbergaren	Posted - 2009.07.24 21:20:00 - [65] Originally by: Regat Kozovv (I'm trying to determine how one would calculate a minimum bid increment for high-margin items while keeping low-margin trading intact. This would be a percentage that would be calculated based on the standard deviation of the buy and sell orders for an item. The idea would be to keep the percentage low or non existant for things like trit, salvage, etc, and higher for others. If I figure out a formula that works for all items, I'll post it in a new thread. Well, just like you said Make it to be a % of the item's margin Vyktor: you pay a broker fee to cover how much you raised your price (tends to be very low). For sell orders you pay 100 isk
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.24 21:40:00 - [66] Originally by: wallenbergaren Well, just like you said Make it to be a % of the item's margin That works for some, but as Venkul pointed out, a flat "one-size-fits-all" percentage will either break low-margin trading, set the percentage too low and it will make a negligible impact on the high-margin goods we're looking to fix. This has been a pretty intense debate so far, and while I'm not keen to see it drop, there's been some serious issues raised that would need to be addressed less a solution break more things than it fixes. I need to dust off my old statistics books and figure out the best way to calculate that minimium percentage based on the average margins for each item. Using the standard deviation seems to be the best way to go about it, but I want to be able to prove first that a forumla can work that would make a meaningful impact on items such as modules, but not interfere with items such as raw materials, salvage, etc. However that percentage is calculated, it seems to me that should the value come out to be around 1% or lower, it might be best to set it to 0 completely.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.25 15:55:00 - [67] Well if 1% wont work make it a sliding scale. <100 .01% <1000 .1% <10000 1% That scale is just used to illustrate my idea and not an actual implementation.
COMMANDER KATHRYN Gallente DEATHFUNK Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.26 02:39:00 - [68] Why not just make it so that price changes can only be made once every 24hrs per order
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.26 02:55:00 - [69] Originally by: COMMANDER KATHRYN Why not just make it so that price changes can only be made once every 24hrs per order That's so crazy it could work!
Komi Toran	Posted - 2009.07.26 03:16:00 - [70] Originally by: Regat Kozovv I have no desire to break or hinder low-margin trading. But high-margin items need an improvement. No market in the real world would let you outbid people by a penny on something that costs a ridiculous amount. There's no reason why it should be allowed here.) Indeed. I once saw this car dealer that tried to outbid the competition by a penny. Man, the market kept coming around and changing his signs back to their original prices. After repeated offenses, the market finally called the police, and the car dealer was hauled away for not adhering to the 1% rule, first observed by Adam Smith. No, any market in the free world will let you try to sell whatever the heck you want for under a penny. This is crazy. I've seen people argue that game should be more like reality, and I've seen people argue that games should not be more like reality. However, you're arguing that the game should resemble some fictional reality, perhaps one containing unicorns, that makes me think you don't get out much.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.26 07:25:00 - [71] Originally by: Komi Toran Originally by: Regat Kozovv I have no desire to break or hinder low-margin trading. But high-margin items need an improvement. No market in the real world would let you outbid people by a penny on something that costs a ridiculous amount. There's no reason why it should be allowed here.) Indeed. I once saw this car dealer that tried to outbid the competition by a penny. Man, the market kept coming around and changing his signs back to their original prices. After repeated offenses, the market finally called the police, and the car dealer was hauled away for not adhering to the 1% rule, first observed by Adam Smith. No, any market in the free world will let you try to sell whatever the heck you want for under a penny. This is crazy. I've seen people argue that game should be more like reality, and I've seen people argue that games should not be more like reality. However, you're arguing that the game should resemble some fictional reality, perhaps one containing unicorns, that makes me think you don't get out much. Your analogy is not accurate. An auction would be a more accurate analogy. Most auctions will have a minimum bid increment, this is so the following does not happen: [auction start] opening bit $1 000 000 000 Participant A bids $1 500 000 000 Participant B bids $1 500 000 000 .01 A $1 750 000 000 000 B $1 750 000 000 000 .01 A [utters bis bid which is promptly out done by B] eventually A give up not due to being unable to pay the amount B is offering but is out of breath and nearing a heart attack where as B has a larger lung volume (like Phelps) While that is a fair playing field the arms used are not those that are intended instead of the bidder with more economic might winning the one with bigger lungs does. Not only does A loose but also the person holding the auction. This is because his item was not sold at market value, market value would be the maximum a person trading would be willing to pay. But we never found out what A was willing to pay because he gave up. No bidder opens with their highest possible bid because he does not want to pay above the market value. And the main reason a bidder should make his maximum bid is when it is one increment higher than the current bid. NOT to drive away someone who bids a cent higher than him. It is an unbalanced tactic and it should not be allowed. Just like it is not allowed in a real life auction. I DO agree that a >1% limit on order changes is the right solution to this unbalance. But I DO believe that a sliding scale is a viable solution.
Komi Toran	Posted - 2009.07.26 08:50:00 - [72] If you want an auction, go play with contracts, which has a category called, strangely enough, "auction." The market is not an auction house. The market is a... well... MARKET. It says so right on the button! When I open up the window, I don't see the word "auction" anywhere there. I see the term "market." Tell me, what term do you use besides "market" to describe places where people advertise and sell goods and services in competition with one another, that doesn't make you confused and have you search for a number plate? Unless you care to point out where the market actually is in Eve. You know, the market which is not the market.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:18:00 - [73] Originally by: Komi Toran If you want an auction, go play with contracts, which has a category called, strangely enough, "auction." The market is not an auction house. The market is a... well... MARKET. It says so right on the button! When I open up the window, I don't see the word "auction" anywhere there. I see the term "market." Tell me, what term do you use besides "market" to describe places where people advertise and sell goods and services in competition with one another, that doesn't make you confused and have you search for a number plate? Unless you care to point out where the market actually is in Eve. You know, the market which is not the market. I don't really know how to respond to this. Your short sightedness is overwhelming. Your inability to see how the functions of the market are similar to the functions of a public auction are more disturbing than anything else.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:26:00 - [74] Originally by: COMMANDER KATHRYN Why not just make it so that price changes can only be made once every 24hrs per order And have people fighting over an item worth millions of ISK in 0.01 ISK steps in intervals of 24h? Hell, no. --
Komi Toran	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:35:00 - [75] Originally by: EdwardNardella I don't really know how to respond to this. Your short sightedness is overwhelming. Your inability to see how the functions of the market are similar to the functions of a public auction are more disturbing than anything else. Yeah, I know. It's really difficult to respond to pesky things like facts and logic when you have none. Tell you what, I'll direct you to study up on spot trading in commodities markets, as Eve's system functions much the same way (which makes sense, as a Raven is a Raven no matter who built it). Maybe you'll find someone else with a hole in their head arguing that those are really auction houses, and people can't be allowed the freedom to set prices for their own goods. Who knows, between all the half-baked ideas, you might be able to scrounge up enough crumbs to fake a cake.
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:38:00 - [76] Simple fix: Once per day order adjustments.
Rogerano Minmatar Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:55:00 - [77] There is no 0.01 ISK problem. What we have here is an almost completely free-market situation as far as I can tell. Once you start introducing stupid restrictions you may end up buggering the best (fact!111!!) market system available in a modern MMO. --- Not happy with something in EVE? An emo whine will doubtless help your cause.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.27 04:39:00 - [78] Changing an order valued at one mil ISK by .01 ISK is an action that costs a nominal amount yet gives great rewards (more sales or purchases). Basically the equivalent of a button that bumps your order to the top of the list at virtually no cost. A businesses success should be determined not by how often its traders can click the win button but how efficient their operation is and how much they can push their margins. How they can afford to pay more for their buy orders than their competitors and charge less on their sell orders on their competitors not how fast their traders can click the win button. A win button (.01 ISK change in order price) prevents the market functioning as a true free market one driven by only (and completely by supply and demand). The laws of supply and demand are not being allowed to function unfettered in EVE. Instead of making reasonable changes to their sell and buy orders traders are making .01 ISK changes more frequently than their competition because the tactic works. Traders use this instead of their bigger wallets, cheaper production and better purchase/sale, prices than their competitors. This is not a free market, it is governed by which traders are more responsive with their win button pressing not by purely by supply and demand. The supply (sale) price is not controlled by production/procurement costs or but by win button R.O.F.
Komi Toran	Posted - 2009.07.27 06:11:00 - [79] Originally by: EdwardNardella This is not a free market, it is governed by which traders are more responsive with their win button pressing not by purely by supply and demand. The supply (sale) price is not controlled by production/procurement costs or but by win button R.O.F. EPIC FAIL! Whaaaaa! Whaaaaa! People who are more responsive to changes in the market make more money! Whaaaa! Whaaaa! This would never happen in real life! Whaaaa! Whaaaaa! The fact is, the 0.01 isk war DOES respond very well to supply and demand issues. If demand outstrips supply, there won't be enough 0.01 isk cuts to drive the price down. If supply outstrips demand, there will be more sellers on the market driving the price down. The extent to which supply is out of synch with demand determines the rate of change in the price. It's a magnificent system. Since I don't like babysitting my orders, I choose to sell and build only those items where demand exceeds supply. Of course, I cheat by actually studying the market, as opposed to the correct way of dealing with this, which is to whine on the forums and demand that people stop performing better than me.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.27 06:19:00 - [80] Originally by: Komi Toran The market is not an auction house. It may say "market" in the window, but that does not necessary make it one. The major difference is that people do not have the freedom to buy from any supplier on the market, nor can they sell to any one they choose. All orders, regardless of whatever manual price you set, will be sold to the highest bid or lowest seller, regardless. This is one of the most misunderstood aspects of the game. So when you have that sell order for 500, and another one for 499.99, people will be forced to buy from the 499.99, regardless of if the buyer clicked on the order for 500 or entered 500 ISK. This means that the inventory of whoever logged on last to stick that penny up there will move their inventory, regardless of all other factors. Because the best order always wins the station, the market is very much indeed an auction house, and every buy/sell order a bid. The only thing you can change is move to another auction, a station, to find conditions that are more advantageous. But to say that the EVE market is totally open and free is false.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.07.27 06:25:00 - [81] Originally by: Komi Toran The fact is, the 0.01 isk war DOES respond very well to supply and demand issues. If demand outstrips supply, there won't be enough 0.01 isk cuts to drive the price down. When demand outstrips supply, prices go up. Originally by: Komi Toran If supply outstrips demand, there will be more sellers on the market driving the price down. This is true, but it doesn't move fast enough. There is not enough downward pressure from competitors as no one wants to take any more of a hit to their margins as they have to. So they lower their price only as much as necessary, which is .01 ISK. Because the winning order will gather all orders until the inventory is extinguished, there is no reason to lower prices any more to meet whatever demand there is. Prices will go down eventually, but at a glacial pace.
Komi Toran	Posted - 2009.07.27 06:59:00 - [82] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Prices will go down eventually, but at a glacial pace. I'm sorry, you seem to not know that there is another tab in the market window that shows the price history of items. I know that you are unaware of this, as you would not for a second believe that price changes are "glacial" in speed in Eve if you have ever bothered to use that. And thank you for clarifying that "When demand outstrips supply, prices go up." It's nice to know that you can reason that conclusion from the statement "If demand outstrips supply, there won't be enough 0.01 isk cuts to drive the price down." I'm very impressed. I'll put a gold star on the board for you, and you can clean the erasers after class! As for your other issues regarding the deficiencies in the market mechanic, I agree that it would be nice to buy items from other sellers besides just the lowest. Personally, I'd like to also see who I'm buying from before I buy. But, these issues exist, as far as I'm aware, because CCP wants to make RMT more difficult. That is, there is actually a valid reason for the mechanic, as opposed to the arguments presented here for doing away with 0.01 isk wars.
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.27 07:45:00 - [83] There are two types of people: 1) Those that think that a market is a place where old women try to sell potatoes and salad. 2) Those that think that a market is not an actual place but rather a concept where demand and offer determine a price. The market in eve is not an auction house. It's closer to stock exchange (someone mentioned commodities market). The market would not be "more free" if you could select who's orders you prefer to buy. The ability to differentiate between offerings on another base then the price asked is actually considered a barrier. But hey I'm not an economist and never actually read Adam Smith or David Ricardo. I did read a book by JosT Carlos Jarillo though. It was about strategies for using markets (the ones with barriers).
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.27 09:52:00 - [84] Originally by: Komi Toran EPIC FAIL! Whaaaaa! Whaaaaa! People who are more responsive to changes in the market make more money! Whaaaa! Whaaaa! This would never happen in real life! Whaaaa! Whaaaaa! I would have hoped to read an intelligent counterpoint to my calling a .01 ISK change in price an unbalanced win button.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.27 10:25:00 - [85] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Originally by: Venkul Mul I repeat: you want a change that will help trades buying and selling high margin items but that will damage people treating low margin items. No. And despite my best efforts to point out on numerous occasions (not to mention my requests to you to show me where it wouldn't work, as you have done) a blanket 1% change across the board would indeed, as you say, break low-end trading. Yes, I want high-end margin trading to be improved. But there's no reason why it should be at the expense of other types of trades. Any solution should take into consideration that there are markets in EVE that already work well and should not be impacted. Your consistent, repeated fallacy is that you see every proposed change as a threat, and it need not be. You cannot hold back the progress of others just because you yourself feel you're in a comfortable spot. (I'm trying to determine how one would calculate a minimum bid increment for high-margin items while keeping low-margin trading intact. This would be a percentage that would be calculated based on the standard deviation of the buy and sell orders for an item. The idea would be to keep the percentage low or non existant for things like trit, salvage, etc, and higher for others. If I figure out a formula that works for all items, I'll post it in a new thread. I have no desire to break or hinder low-margin trading. But high-margin items need an improvement. No market in the real world would let you outbid people by a penny on something that costs a ridiculous amount. There's no reason why it should be allowed here.) So how many hundred exceptions? All minerals, all ores, all salvage, all modules with order under a specific amount, all ammunitions, drones under a specific amount, all trade items, resold rig BPO, resold skillbooks, T2 building materials, moon minerals. Practically what will not be on the exception list would be: - ships (but not most T1 frigates); - some (but not all) of the T2 items (small drones for example would be probably in the exception list); - some implant; - and most of the stuff that can be sold only on contracts. And then you are surprised if I find your idea counter-productive and aimed only to a small number of players while at the same time it risk to slow the market down (checking all the items to see if they are on the exception list and calculating your standard deviation every time yu try to change a order) and bug prone. In my opinion it will not make the market better for the average user and risk to make it worse for most of the users.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.27 10:34:00 - [86] Originally by: wallenbergaren Originally by: Regat Kozovv (I'm trying to determine how one would calculate a minimum bid increment for high-margin items while keeping low-margin trading intact. This would be a percentage that would be calculated based on the standard deviation of the buy and sell orders for an item. The idea would be to keep the percentage low or non existant for things like trit, salvage, etc, and higher for others. If I figure out a formula that works for all items, I'll post it in a new thread. Well, just like you said Make it to be a % of the item's margin Vyktor: you pay a broker fee to cover how much you raised your price (tends to be very low). For sell orders you pay 100 isk Wow, great a " % of the item's margin". And how CCP can evaluate that? Market margin is not some kind of hard coded value, it is dependant from a lot of calculations and opinions (not facts, opinions and evaluations). Nothing that work well for a automatic system of calculations.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.27 11:00:00 - [87] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Originally by: Komi Toran The market is not an auction house. It may say "market" in the window, but that does not necessary make it one. The major difference is that people do not have the freedom to buy from any supplier on the market, nor can they sell to any one they choose. All orders, regardless of whatever manual price you set, will be sold to the highest bid or lowest seller, regardless. This is one of the most misunderstood aspects of the game. Again, contracts. Originally by: Regat Kozovv So when you have that sell order for 500, and another one for 499.99, people will be forced to buy from the 499.99, regardless of if the buyer clicked on the order for 500 or entered 500 ISK. This means that the inventory of whoever logged on last to stick that penny up there will move their inventory, regardless of all other factors. Because the best order always wins the station, the market is very much indeed an auction house, and every buy/sell order a bid. The only thing you can change is move to another auction, a station, to find conditions that are more advantageous. But to say that the EVE market is totally open and free is false. In the EVE market we always pass thorough brokers (we pay them BTW). So we put a order to the broker for the sum we want to spend and he (being a efficient broker) buy from the lowest offer in the market and sell to us at the price we are willing to pay. Note that that is exactly how the EVE market work. We never buy directly from a sell order, we always put up a buy order with a immediate duration. Simply to avoid a lot of needless clicking when we select on a sell order we bypass all the windows requiring to set up a buy order but the EVE program follow exactly the same procedure. Note that all the above is not something borne in my head, but it was explained by a Dev in his posts several years ago.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 11:56:00 - [88] Originally by: Komi Toran EPIC FAIL! Whaaaaa! Whaaaaa! People who are more responsive to changes in the market make more money! Whaaaa! Whaaaa! This would never happen in real life! Whaaaa! Whaaaaa! If you ever had a point then I think it was that you are being childish and selfish. If the market turns people into morons then it does need a change. A game needs to support intelligence and not stupidity. --
Komi Toran	Posted - 2009.07.27 12:44:00 - [89] Originally by: EdwardNardella I would have hoped to read an intelligent counterpoint to my calling a .01 ISK change in price an unbalanced win button. Calling the 0.01 ISK change an unbalanced win button is the same as calling activating a gun on a ship an unbalanced win button. Heck, the weapon is worse, as you only need to press it once, and you'll eventually blow up your opponent. Of course, that is assuming, as is your assertion about the 0.01 isk change, that your opponent sits there like a rock. It's a strange assumption for you to make, however, as the complaint seems to be that people are interacting with the game too much. Ah well, I don't expect much intellectual rigor from the market = auction crowd. Originally by: Whitehound Originally by: Komi Toran EPIC FAIL! Whaaaaa! Whaaaaa! People who are more responsive to changes in the market make more money! Whaaaa! Whaaaa! This would never happen in real life! Whaaaa! Whaaaaa! If you ever had a point then I think it was that you are being childish and selfish. If the market turns people into morons then it does need a change. A game needs to support intelligence and not stupidity. Unfortunately, I don't see how changing the market will solve your mental deficiencies. I think the problem is that you believe a computer game is the proper way to gain an education. Trust me, you shouldn't have dropped out of school when you were 12. Go back and get your GED at least.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 14:05:00 - [90] Originally by: wallenbergaren .01 isk wars are out of control in my opinion. Q.E.D. --
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.27 16:15:00 - [91] Edited by: Dex Timor on 27/07/2009 16:31:29 Edited by: Dex Timor on 27/07/2009 16:30:33 Originally by: Whitehound ... If the market turns people into morons then it does need a change. A game needs to support intelligence and not stupidity. The market doesn't turn people into morons. The market reflects people's attitudes toward ISK and competition. And while Komi is a bit harsh on you, you do need to read a bit about market theory. The .01 ISK race exists because people are impatient and want to have either their goods or their ISK "now !!!". Profit margins next to worthless exist whenever there are to many offers for the existing demand. 1) If you are in a .01 ISK race you may realise that for your product, the current market place is not worth your time and stop selling your product, selling it at another place or just cutting prices even harsher and live with low margins. 2) If you feel that the margins are to low compared to average past pricing, then check what the trade volumes are. Are they regular or cyclic ? Are they indicating that current bids will sell out in 10 / 20 / 30 / 40 ... days ? Are you patient enough to wait until this happens and your order sells at a better price ? Can you manipulate the market in your favour ? Should you move to a market more favourable to your products ? Should you switch products ? Do yourself a favour, don't bother with .01 ISK race competitors. You wouldn't try to sell every meta 0 item for profit either. I heard low-sec markets can be profitable on some goods. I heard the barriers to enter low-sec market keeps competition relatively low. But if people prefer almost no barriers on their market, let them deal with more competition. As I said in my last post, I never read Adam Smith but I had market theory in school and I read some other book(s). (Indeed, I read the Lord of the Rings) edit: I'd like to illustrate my case. I lived in Gulfonodi, Molden Heath for some time. When it was time to train the skill "Torpedoes" I could only find it on sale in low-sec for (20 millions ?). So I took my shuttle, went to low-sec bought 21 skill-books, set one to train and brought 20 back to Gulfonodi. That system is a mission hub, so I set my 20 skillbooks on sale for 21 millions each and they sold within a month and paid for the one I had bought for myself. Now the thing is: 6 jumps from Gulfonodi is Rens in Heimatar (Minmatar market hub). I didn't know that I could have bought my skillbook for zero risk at the same price over there. But apparently the people that bought my market orders either ignored the same fact or just didn't want to fly 6 jumps to save 1 million ISK. What can't be denied though is the fact that I had no competitiom within 6 high-sec jumps or 3 low-sec jumps. Had I tried the same in Jita, I think I would have had much more competition and much lower prices.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 17:36:00 - [92] Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 17:38:49 Originally by: Dex Timor ... The market mechanics are pathetic, and perhaps even addictive. You know it, Komi knows it, you just have not realized it yet. If people start getting personal then they have run out of arguments. It starts showing a compulsive behaviour. At this point nothing more can be said, which some will not fight with whatever comes to their mind. It has parallels to gambling addiction. There is nothing constructive in this discussion any longer. --
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.27 19:13:00 - [93] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 17:38:49 Originally by: Dex Timor ... The market mechanics are pathetic, and perhaps even addictive. You know it, Komi knows it, you just have not realized it yet. If people start getting personal then they have run out of arguments. It starts showing a compulsive behaviour. At this point nothing more can be said, which some will not fight with whatever comes to their mind. It has parallels to gambling addiction. There is nothing constructive in this discussion any longer. I think of my last post as very constructive. I do understand that you wish for more personalized offerings, lowering competition on pure price. I do understand that people (myself included) hope that the WIS expansion (walking in stations) will allow us to create personalized shops. Besides the options I already mentioned in my last (very constructive) post, you have other markets with more barriers and hence less competition on pure price. I'm thinking of the contract system. Since there are items that you can't sell on the market (rigged ships, bundles of related or unrelated items, faction ships), there indeed is a possibility to personalise your sale offers. Somebody with a background in economy, please tell these people that I'm not totally wrong and not totally unconstructive. Direct quote from wikipedia: Mechanisms of markets In economics, a market that runs under laissez-faire policies is a free market. It is "free" in the sense that the government makes no attempt to intervene through taxes, subsidies, minimum wages, price ceilings, etc. Market prices may be distorted by a seller or sellers with monopoly power, or a buyer with monopsony power. Such price distortions can have an adverse effect on market participant's welfare and reduce the efficiency of market outcomes. Also, the level of organization or negotiation power of buyers, markedly affects the functioning of the market. In other words, the .01 isk race is part of the free market. You won't get rid of it. If you don't like .01 isk races you have to go to either free markets with less impatient participants or go to markets with barriers that keep the impatient out.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 19:44:00 - [94] There is no free market here. If it was then I could trade with whomever I want. This is not possible as you know. It is always the one with the currently best order who gets to make the deal, which is why people fight so hard and with the smallest steps possible. Can you not see this at all? Where is this freedom? --
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.27 19:53:00 - [95] Direct quote from wikipedia: Mechanisms of markets In economics, a market that runs under laissez-faire policies is a free market. It is "free" in the sense that the government makes no attempt to intervene through taxes, subsidies, minimum wages, price ceilings, etc. Market prices may be distorted by a seller or sellers with monopoly power, or a buyer with monopsony power. Such price distortions can have an adverse effect on market participant's welfare and reduce the efficiency of market outcomes. Also, the level of organization or negotiation power of buyers, markedly affects the functioning of the market. You don't read my posts, do you ?
Willmahh	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:12:00 - [96] i have no problem with .01 war...it is a reward for effort. the only mechanic that i think would seriously alter .01ing would be this: The Modify option changes to a % dropdown with the minimum change being 10% (down/up to 5% with skill) keep the timers the same. The only way to alter this modify limit is to cancelt he order and pay new broker fees. but then again, why should a 5-year-old mechanic change to accomodate wowbears?
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:41:00 - [97] Originally by: Willmahh but then again, why should a 5-year-old mechanic change to accomodate wowbears? Because five years ago the developers did not foresee this problem.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:55:00 - [98] Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 21:03:59 Originally by: Dex Timor You don't read my posts, do you ? And where does your quote address the freedom of a buyer? Did you read and understand my post?! --
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:57:00 - [99] Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 21:00:37 Originally by: EdwardNardella Originally by: Willmahh but then again, why should a 5-year-old mechanic change to accomodate wowbears? Because five years ago the developers did not foresee this problem. And because hubs like Jita have become so crowded that even when there is no direct ISK war still many people put up orders that alone the number of people is enough to spark an ISK war. Everyone is trying to get their stuff through the eye of a needle with people pushing their "carts" in form of 0.01 ISK steps through it. --
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.27 21:26:00 - [100] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 21:03:59 Originally by: Dex Timor You don't read my posts, do you ? And where does your quote address the freedom of a buyer? Did you read and understand my post?! The "freedom" of the buyer is a market barrier. It exists in eve. 1) you want to buy from a specific person: use the forum, the contract system or in station trading. 2) you want to buy specific items which are not exactly the same as any other item (example would be a Raven with some specific rigs): use the forum, the contract system or in station trading. note: I use the terms market, free market, barrier in an economic sense. I also suggested possibilities to got to places where the local market offers such barriers as to improve your profitability. Was I that unclear in my posts ?
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.27 21:45:00 - [101] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 21:00:37 Originally by: EdwardNardella Originally by: Willmahh but then again, why should a 5-year-old mechanic change to accomodate wowbears? Because five years ago the developers did not foresee this problem. And because hubs like Jita have become so crowded that even when there is no direct ISK war still many people put up orders that alone the number of people is enough to spark an ISK war. Everyone is trying to get their stuff through the eye of a needle with people pushing their "carts" in form of 0.01 ISK steps through it. See, you grasped what it is about. Jita is crowded. More offers and more demand with little barriers make the market efficient in a sense that price corrections are frequent. Price has to adjust to find the equilibrium at which sales happen, even if the increments are as small as 0.01 ISK. The size of the increments is at the discretion of the users of the market. So again. Buy cheap, sell with profit. If it's not possible to do so in Jita, you have to leave that market. If the cost of leaving that market place is to high for you to pay (market exit barriers), you will have to live with low profit margins. It's your call and not the game designers. You do understand only part of how a market works and it is not your fault. It's economy, and part of economy is behavioural science. Behaviours can be outright stupid, such is life. Eve's market just reflects the way people think. The .01 isk race is done by people that are impatient and not interested in looking for other business opportunities. Do yourself a favour and use markets where you can sell at a profit without impatient competitors. You really are an intelligent and nice person. Do you have to use Jita as a market hub (example: you are a producer and therefore bound by production facilities and corp standings) ? If not, leave the place to those that accept low-profitability and stupid tactics. Good luck in your endeavours.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.27 21:47:00 - [102] Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 21:51:21 Originally by: Dex Timor The "freedom" of the buyer is a market barrier. You are trying to fool yourself when you believe that a barrier is freedom. And do not patronize me. Thank you. --
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.28 07:41:00 - [103] Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 07:41:51 After having seen how some people react in this discussion do I suggest a completely different change. Let us remove the cost for a price change and the 5-minute delay completely. People who are obsessed with checking their orders every 5 minutes can then fight each other much faster. Instead of taking away their "ammunition" do we give them more as this ends wars, too. --
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.07.28 07:50:00 - [104] raise order modification to 1h or even higher and make them train tycoon V if they wish to keep market pvp'ing with mutiple orders for the same item - trader, a profession you'd actually have to skill for probably takes a lot of stress off the server, too - putting the gist back into logistics
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.28 19:22:00 - [105] Originally by: Roemy Schneider raise order modification to 1h or even higher ... probably takes a lot of stress off the server, too Excellent proposal. I wouldn't go as far as imposing tycoon V, but yeah you need skills to prevent to many trader alts.
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.28 22:12:00 - [106] The 1 hour limit could have multiple effects, either just slowing down the market or making traders give more consideration to their price changes. I suspect the latter may happen.
Sith LordX	Posted - 2009.07.28 22:32:00 - [107] Edited by: Sith LordX on 28/07/2009 22:36:21 Edited by: Sith LordX on 28/07/2009 22:34:41 The trade game is all about who has the better skills, higher standing, and more isk. One day you can undercut your competition. There is nothing wrong with trade. You just don't have the stomach to deal with it. Then don't trade. I can sit here all day changing orders and take over the whole region if I really wanted to. Load up on energy drinks and make hundreds of mills in one day. Because I have the isk to do so and the skills to do so. And because I just can! Some people get to work at home or play games in a job like me. So we can just sit in a station all day wile your not playing the game and just totally undercut you and take away your profits cus we can. Why? Cus the players control the market. They are built by people. Nothing is seeded in the game. Maybe before you start trolling about how broken you think trade is. You should understand the market isn't controlled by CCP its controlled by the players. Stupid people can get you more isk. Cus they give you a say a ship for 50% below average. = 50% profit. Trade is complicated, but if you know the trade roots, have alot of isk, and the skills. You can be a billionair. Trade is a great way to make isk. The best way in the game. Because its controlled by the players through supply and demand. CCP can't do anything about it. Only maybe put better skills in so you can under cut even more through volume. And get discounts. XD If you don't like doing the .01 game then don't trade at a trading hub theres a idea or don't trade that item at all. Trade what makes you profit. Don't fight people who have better skills then you do. Thats why advanced trade skills state that at a elite level you can undercut people. :D Sounds like its working to me. Only shows the skills are working as intended.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.28 23:20:00 - [108] Originally by: Sith LordX The trade game is all about who has the better skills, higher standing, and more isk. Or maybe, just maybe, it is about who has more accounts and alts in Jita. Whose alt are you? --
EdwardNardella Caldari Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.29 01:28:00 - [109] .01 ISK win button is not really balanced. Beat me with a margin affecting amount of ISK. I have still not read a descent explanation about how a .01 ISK price change is balanced and fair.
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.29 08:39:00 - [110] Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 08:39:44 Originally by: EdwardNardella .01 ISK win button is not really balanced. Beat me with a margin affecting amount of ISK. I have still not read a descent explanation about how a .01 ISK price change is balanced and fair. Well, it is balanced and fair because everyone has theoretically the same chance. I say theoretically because everyone can develop the same obsessive behaviour, which is needed to sell items through this system. Sith LordX here has just created more threads in which he points out other flaws of this system. So he, too, has problems with it but is only too proud to admit it or whatever. What it does is to promote stupid behaviour when a market gets too crowded. It fails to handle many orders properly, when for an MMO it should. The market in Jita is being spammed just like local is. The local channel is not unfair or unbalanced either. It is only almost unusable. --
Sith LordX	Posted - 2009.07.29 08:58:00 - [111] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 08:39:44 Originally by: EdwardNardella .01 ISK win button is not really balanced. Beat me with a margin affecting amount of ISK. I have still not read a descent explanation about how a .01 ISK price change is balanced and fair. Well, it is balanced and fair because everyone has theoretically the same chance. I say theoretically because everyone can develop the same obsessive behaviour, which is needed to sell items through this system. Sith LordX here has just created more threads in which he points out other flaws of this system. So he, too, has problems with it but is only too proud to admit it or whatever. What it does is to promote stupid behaviour when a market gets too crowded. It fails to handle many orders properly, when for an MMO it should. The market in Jita is being spammed just like local is. The local channel is not unfair or unbalanced either. It is only almost unusable. Not once did I ever complain about the trade system itself. All I said was it should have better management options was all like sorting folders just because one big folder is daunting. And more trade perfessions such as hauling in and out contraband from lowsec into highsec for example. I never complained about the .01 wars, hell I use them all the time to win at trade.
Rawbin Hood Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.07.29 10:08:00 - [112] start a new hub??? this been said ◄Brutor► The Movement Because the human race can do better as a whole (despite these forums, they don't count)
Whitehound	Posted - 2009.07.29 10:39:00 - [113] Originally by: Rawbin Hood start a new hub??? this been said There are other hubs like Dodixie, Rems and Amarr, but it needs a major hub in EVE just like countries need a capital city. With 0.01 ISK wars is Jita however more like a zombie infested capital rather than a healthy economical centre. You cannot really trade there unless you sell it with a loss with which you pay all those who sit with multiple accounts and alts in that station, or have multiple accounts and alts yourself. --
wallenbergaren	Posted - 2009.07.29 10:43:00 - [114] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 07:41:51 After having seen how some people react in this discussion do I suggest a completely different change. Let us remove the cost for a price change and the 5-minute delay completely. People who are obsessed with checking their orders every 5 minutes can then fight each other much faster. Instead of taking away their "ammunition" do we give them more as this ends wars, too. Great reductio ad absurdum All the arguments that have so far been proposed in favour of .01 isk undercutting would still be valid in your proposed scenario, but I'm sure most people would realize that such a market design would be idiotic at best
Dex Timor Forza Di Colpo	Posted - 2009.07.29 16:29:00 - [115] Originally by: EdwardNardella .01 ISK win button is not really balanced. Beat me with a margin affecting amount of ISK. I have still not read a descent explanation about how a .01 ISK price change is balanced and fair. The thing is: The market is not fair because it is a free market (free of barriers, except for the "playtime" and skill barrier). You want fairtrade ?
Caleb Ayrania Gallente TarNec New Eden Retail Federation	Posted - 2009.07.29 17:06:00 - [116] Hmm some interesting suggestions in this thread really imho.. I would like a combo of some of these.. 1 or 30 min hour modification limitation. This with no cost to modification. Thus making these your perma orders. Infinite orders back. Now with the modification benefit adding new orders is done with isk sink and thus is a barrier to entry. New skills. Boost broker fees and tax reduction, based still upon npc corp or faction standing. Range and time limitation. Base this on either skills or access to office space, preferably both. 3 days at skill level 1 with a +1 to this skill with access to an office. Ranges above 2 jumps would require access to office space. Nerf trader bots. The modification limitation is already something that might limit automation. Another feature would be the office thing, since renting office space will eventually need a calculation on profit vs expenditures. Since you would esssentially force John Doe into corps or one man corps, this would essentially make them a bit easier to spot.. and report them by players.. Tycoon wannabe go here: SCC Lounge Got Game? Peak a boo...
Danger Boi Minmatar	Posted - 2009.07.31 07:51:00 - [117] I trade across three regions. I split my time between missioning and monitoring my orders. I am fairly new to the trade game, with only 100 million or so in escrow. Even though I don't sit on top of my buy and sell orders 24/7, I still manage to buy and sell. Amazing, eh? When I am missioning, I can only monitor my orders in that region ( I do not yet have alts set up in each region). So sometimes a day goes by and suddenly my orders are not moving in the regions I am not in. So someone else is getting their orders sold or filled. This is also pretty amazing, isn't it? The market isn't broken. I have no complaints.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.