| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Barakach
   |
Posted - 2011.07.22 17:38:00 -
[61]
I like someone's idea of color coding the order.
It would be a corner case, but if someone has a order where the min volume times the unit price is greater than the buyer's wallet, then color it red. |
Faith Clothos
|
Posted - 2011.07.22 18:40:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Barakach
I like someone's idea of color coding the order.
It would be a corner case, but if someone has a order where the min volume times the unit price is greater than the buyer's wallet, then color it red.
This would actually solve all problems with the skill.
|
Tellariana
|
Posted - 2011.07.22 20:15:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Faith Clothos
Originally by: Barakach
I like someone's idea of color coding the order.
It would be a corner case, but if someone has a order where the min volume times the unit price is greater than the buyer's wallet, then color it red.
This would actually solve all problems with the skill.
Not really. Mineral/ore buy orders outside of Jita would be a good example of totally legitimate use of margin trading on min volume buy orders. Besides, there are many ways to leverage margin trading for market pvp. This is only the most obvious one. |
da go
|
Posted - 2011.07.22 23:22:00 -
[64]
Such a color coding requires access to the wallets of the players and to the wallets of the corporations. Reading the regional market table, which is small and surely heavily cached, each time someone refreshes the market view is already tasking the servers. If they were to join both the players and the corporations tables and do some computations on top of it, the servers would die.
Besides it will only make the scam marginally less profitable, but not prevent it from happening in a slightly different form.
---
I don't know! I don't know why I did it, I don't know why I enjoyed it, and I don't know why I'll do it again!
Bart Simpson. |
Tiarella Rose
|
Posted - 2011.07.22 23:25:00 -
[65]
If your margined order fails to settle, then you should lose your margin to the person attempting to fill the order.
IRL there are consequences to placing orders you can't cover. Eve should at least be as harsh.
|
da go
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 00:44:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Tiarella Rose
If your margined order fails to settle, then you should lose your margin to the person attempting to fill the order.
IRL there are consequences to placing orders you can't cover. Eve should at least be as harsh.
Once again: this is irrelevant. Even if they did this (as someone suggested as a possible solution) all the scammer would need to do is an extra step so that the margin is fully used up to one of his alts. When the mark tries to sell the margin is already gone so there's nothing to lose.
---
I don't know! I don't know why I did it, I don't know why I enjoyed it, and I don't know why I'll do it again!
Bart Simpson. |
Thoraemond
Minmatar
Far Ranger
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 19:29:00 -
[67]
Originally by: da go
The consequences are that the buyer does not get the modules he was trying to buy and he loses the broker fee.
I mean, of course, that there is no consequence attached to false orders that is not also attached to honest orders; i.e., there is no consequence attached to the dishonest behaviour.
Originally by: Thoraemond
A claim that there is no other way to implement Margin Trading that would remain useful to honest traders is either ill considered or disingenuous [list excised, see above].
Originally by: da go
The first, I hope they did it and advertise it to you personally, so I could scam you [...].
It seems quite unlikely that you would scam me personally. Keep in mind that I have not been victim to the current Margin Trading scam. While I'm not infallible, I have generally avoided scams in EVE, and I intend to be no more gullible in the future.
However, I take your broader point. I suppose it might help more to require that the ISK to buy the minimum quantity must be maintained in escrow until the order is fulfilled, drawing from the relevant wallet after each transaction, and cancelling the order if the draw fails.
Originally by: da go
The second option is exactly how it works now.
Could have been clearer, sorry: The Broker could use up all the ISK posted to escrow by the Buyer to buy as many units as possible, ignoring minimum quantities, from the Seller before cancelling the remainder of the order.
Originally by: da go
The third option will remove one of the important uses for traders and severely limit the others.
I think you overstate the impact of this option. I have made extensive use of Margin Trading, and while there would be some impact, it would not be drastic. There might be some further trading styles that I haven't bothered with that might feel more impact, but I doubt that "remove one and severely limit the others" is a fair overall characterization. If you suggest specifics to help me reconsider, I'll do so.
Originally by: da go
One of [the three options] would actually reduce the skill viability for traders. Also "make it a bit less useful for scamming" is a reason not to change them.
Obviously reducing the utility of the skill is not the same as eliminating its utility. The skill would retain most of its utility.
This is opinion territory, but I think that making the skill a bit less useful for scamming is a good reason to change it. This would make related scamming a bit less easy (which I consider good) without outright eliminating scamming (it seems we agree that scamming is fine in New Eden). I.e., it would shift the balance a bit, in a good direction.
Originally by: da go
Originally by: Thoraemond
Scams are a reasonable part of life in EVE, but there's no need leave weak game mechanics like this in place to make scamming unnecessarily easy.
If it's easy, go do it. Also mechanisms for scamming are not weak, they are just that: usable for scamming.
My concern is not that scams exist, but that some are too easy, and this one directly relies on a mechanic that could be improved. Just because something is easy doesn't mean everyone wants to do it. Mining's easy, too, and I'm not interested in doing that either.
Originally by: da go
What I hope is that enough people whine for this that they actually implement a change the whiners love, only to soon realize that if [the whiner] are not careful the new improved mechanic actually makes [the whiner] lose more.
Sounds good to me, as long as the new mechanic enriches the game experience. This scam being so easy has dumbed down the experience.
I don't support whining. I prefer changes to be oriented toward well-reasoned improvement.
|
Zeta Zhul
Caldari
Preemptive Paranoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:34:00 -
[68]
Or, as an alternative that I'm just putting out there just in case nobody has mentioned it so far, the players involved could use their better judgement and simply not engage in the silly behavior that makes them so vulnerable to this scam.
On the other hand I have to say; thank you! Because I've made a lot of isk putting up sell orders to people frantically buying stuff to fill these scam buy orders.
|
Maya Ranger
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 10:18:00 -
[69]
I totally agree, there needs to be some kind balance here, I tried to sell my old ship today on my main and it said the same thing.... I mean.. what am I suposto spam Local now? seriously...
Allow us to be hinted off just a drop.
-1 day limit
-SLIGHTLY diferent color from normal orders, maybe like a different green shade
-Think of something that will warn us but only just a drop, cos nerfing will tick people off.
and how bout that cloud lag during some missions? 
|
Zelda Wei
Caldari
New Horizon Trade Exchange
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 10:27:00 -
[70]
The only people that fall for this are the terminally stupid, some people simply cannot be helped, it is the market equivalent of a fail fit.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 15:22:00 -
[71]
So essentially the op tried to rip off someone by selling him massive amounts of overpriced items and then got scammed himself and now complains about things being unfair?
Funny.
|
Peek'A'Boo
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 03:53:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Gnulpie
So essentially the op tried to rip off someone by selling him massive amounts of overpriced items and then got scammed himself and now complains about things being unfair?
Funny.
You should probably read the whole thread. Not exactly. The OP either fulfilled a sell order or contract from a scammer who majorly inflated the price of a commodity often overlooked. The same scammer lured the OP in by posting a buy order on the marketplace with an even higher price for the overlooked commodity to coax the OP to make the purchase. The scammer's buy order was however only on the margin for %24 of the total value of the buy order, and the scammer left their wallet low or empty to NOT fulfill the buy order and kept the buy order at a minimum quantity over or near the quantity of the original contract or sell order. So when the unsuspecting OP attempted to sell the goods they were automatically sold to the next cheapest vendor or not at all as the scammer's buy order would be cancelled by the broker, in this case the marketplace as there wasn't enough funds beyond the initial 24% depost in escrow and the scammers wallet to cover the cost of the buy order.
The OP like many capsuleers was simply trying to make a quick profit.
|
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 07:25:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Peek'A'Boo
Originally by: Gnulpie
So essentially the op tried to rip off someone by selling him massive amounts of overpriced items and then got scammed himself and now complains about things being unfair?
Funny.
You should probably read the whole thread. Not exactly. The OP either fulfilled a sell order or contract from a scammer who majorly inflated the price of a commodity often overlooked.
That's just a restatement of Gnulpie's point. The OP saw a guy who (he thought) was willing to pay way way too much, he went to exploit it, and the OP got ripped off instead. After getting so ripped off, the OP finds religion and seeks to banish the evil of ripping people off from the town.
Most scams rely on their victim's greed to work, and this is no different, as it relies on people scanning the market, seeing a buy order, and having the victims go "aha, a hugely inflated buy order. This guy is soooo dumb, I'm going to make soooo much money off him. . . "
|
Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 08:00:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 30/07/2011 08:00:26
edit: Emperor Cheney already made my point 
|
flakeys
The Great cornholio's
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 10:19:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
having the victims go "aha, a hugely inflated buy order. This guy is soooo dumb, I'm going to make soooo much money off him. . . "
This , please repost it in every other margin thread.
|
Barakach
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 15:44:00 -
[76]
I saw quite a few posts about how MT is useless because you need money to back your orders anyway.
Wrong.
Orders tend to have irregular bursts. I only have 1.8bil in orders and I already see this. Each item type tends to get one sell every few weeks. If I was stuck just using what money I have, I would have to have a bunch of buy orders for 30k each.
Most of the time, my orders only trickle in. But what about when someone sells 500k units? Well, I just lost out on a large order because I didn't have a 1mil buy order to cover that sale.
What I need is the ability to place a bunch of 1mil unit buy orders and spread them around over lots of item types. Yes, I won't have enough money to back all the sales, but I don't need to back all of them because they never sell all at once. |
Barakach
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 16:05:00 -
[77]
Originally by: da go
Such a color coding requires access to the wallets of the players and to the wallets of the corporations. Reading the regional market table, which is small and surely heavily cached, each time someone refreshes the market view is already tasking the servers. If they were to join both the players and the corporations tables and do some computations on top of it, the servers would die.
Besides it will only make the scam marginally less profitable, but not prevent it from happening in a slightly different form.
It would cause more load *if* they had to check everyone's wallets.
They could use a push style approach, to update the regional cache. Instead of having the regional cache being a central server being forced to pull updates from other servers about a player's wallet, instead have the server that manages the player's wallet push changes to the other server's local cache.
This way it takes more of the load off the market server from having to constantly pull wallet info, even if nothing changed
We can take that further by reducing push events with a simple filter. You take each order and calculate the min value. So you have a buy order for 100 items at 10mil each with a min volume of 50. The player server just says, min order of 50 times 10mil each is 500mil. Do this with all orders. Whenever there's a wallet change, the server checks to see which orders would be affected by this.
Player have 501mil and buy something for 1 mil. Filters sees it needs to be below 500mil, so ignores it. The player than makes another purchase and is now a 499mil. This breaks the threshold, so the player server pushes the change out to the market server.
Nearly all of the extra work would be put on the servers that manage the player's wallet, instead of adding extra load to the market. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |