Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Debir Achen
The Red Circle Inc.
66
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 06:42:00 -
[301] - Quote
Mechanic that will mitigate (but not eliminate) the issue:
At all times, the SCC attempts to maintain an escrow that is equal to the larger of: - largest single minimum buy order - total buy orders * margin trading %
As such, any single buy order can be covered. At this point, the SSC attempts to "correct" the amount in escrow. If it cannot, all buy orders are suspended (alternatively, buy orders are suspended, largest first, until the condition can be met).
To un-suspend the buy orders, the capsuleer must top up his/her wallet then authorise escrow payment on the "orders" page, plus a 2% tax on this amount.
Notes: - I apply this to minimum buy order rather than total, as total can be worked around by creating multiple single item orders. - This will ensure that a single buy order can always be completed. It won't prevent multi-item scams, nor manual removal of buy orders.
Given the facility for escrow management, the following additional features could be enabled: - deposit to escrow - manually adds cash to escrow above the minimum - withdraw from escrow - withdraw surplus cash from escrow - cancelled / expired buy orders would deposit to escrow rather than the wallet directly - suspend orders: suspends all buy orders. There is only a minimal fee to reactivate them if the escrow is above the minimum. Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature? |
Cardano Firesnake
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 08:40:00 -
[302] - Quote
I like the first option but if an order is cancelled by this way the taxes should be refund. |
Careby
Careby Exploration
99
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 13:32:00 -
[303] - Quote
Nimrodion wrote:In my opinion, the best way to deal with this issue is to simply hide the buy orders that can't be fulfilled with the current amount of ISK the buyer has in their wallet. The legitimate users of the Margin Trading technique would benefit from this change... Seems reasonable to me.
Nimrodion wrote:However, this change would render all margin trading scams impossible, as fail-able buy orders would no longer be visible on the market. As I believe EVE should remain a cold and dark place, an additional mechanic should be implemented to give scammers a way to continue practicing their craft, while also keeping the benefits for the legitimate traders. There will still be opportunities for similar scams. High minimum volume on a high-priced buy order for a rare item works, as do buy orders in inaccessible stations. Manipulation of the market history for a low-volume item by repeatedly selling to yourself will still be possible. It may be a little more work for the scammer, or a little bit riskier, but there will always be ways to fleece a sucker by using his own greed against him.
|
Magormor
Neon Incorporated
17
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 13:50:00 -
[304] - Quote
Everyone please +1
Thomas Hurt
Quote:Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet
This is by far the best idea in the whole thread. This is the best! @CCP Rise, this addresses 100% of the scamming issues. And best of all it covers keeping legitimate traders in business!
The only issue with this system is lets say I trade nightmares and have a buy order. 3 Quantity, 1 Min Buy Vol, @800mill
If I have 1200mill in my wallet and 1 gets bought, I'm down to 400mill. Then the 2 remaining get canceled and I loose out on my fees and taxes. Even though I tried to be a legitimate trader.
As opposed to canceling them, possibly just remove them from buy orders(more like hide them). As soon as wallet is large enough to fill the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' then the order is unhidden. |
Careby
Careby Exploration
99
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 14:41:00 -
[305] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:How about this:
Add an "fillableUnits" field to every order (how many he can actually buy with his current wallet), and a "minimum ISK required" field to each player (the amount needed to completely fill the largest margin order he has outstanding) I like the "fillableUnits" field for orders. I'm not crazy about the "minimum ISK required" field as I will explain...
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:Each time a player's wallet amount changes and he had < minimum ISK required either before or after the change, check his active margin buy orders and update the fillableUnits field to be the actual number of units he can buy with the current content of his wallet. There are so many things that change a player's wallet, that I think triggering all this processing every time there is a wallet change may be too resource-intensive. I think a better idea would be to use the margin/escrow balance as a pool of funds to cover any possible buy order. By so doing, "fillableUnits" would only need to be calculated when there is a change to the margin/escrow balance, or when a buy order is created, filled, or canceled. The way I envision it working is that the minimum margin/escrow balance would normally equal or exceed the amount needed to fill the player's single largest buy order (price x total quantity). In the event the escrow balance falls below this amount and wallet funds aren't available to adjust it, "fillableUnits" of buy orders would be adjusted so that no single buy order (price x fillableUnits) exceeds the margin/escrow.
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:If fillableUnits < minimum units required, display the order in red and do not let a player attempt to fill it.
If fillableUnits < units remaining in the order, display the order in yellow but let it be partially filled.
Send notifications to the buyer when orders go red or yellow. I'm not a fan of marking orders as it complicates the market for non-traders. I prefer hiding orders that are not fillable (fillableUnits=0), and showing only the fillable quantity for orders that are partially fillable.
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:Recompute the minimum ISK required as needed (for example: fillableUnits changes, or if a margin order is added, cancelled, changed or filled)
At first glance, since most players don't have margin buy orders outstanding, and most of the ones that do aren't playing fancy games and will have > minimum ISK required, this should minimize the cost of implementing the check. Rather than recomputing minimum ISK required, I would prefer recomputing minimum margin/escrow required, and doing one of two things based on available ISK. If there is enough ISK, adjust the margin/escrow balance, and set fillableUnits of each order to the total quantity of the order. If there is not enough ISK to meet the minimum margin/escrow rule, adjust fillableUnits of buy orders as necessary so that every one of them is fillable (any single order, not all at once).
I am aware that I have not addressed triggering the recalculation and adjustment of margin/escrow and buy order fillableUnits each time the wallet balance increases. I do not know enough about the back-end processing to know what is feasible and what would be crippling. There could be a player flag for "Low Escrow" that is set whenever the margin/escrow balance is low (and fillableUnits of one or more buy orders is below total quantity). If this flag is set, an increase in wallet balance could then trigger a readjustment of escrow.
By pooling margin/escrow among all buy orders, we could avoid the current situation of a low wallet balance causing some buy orders to fail even when there is plenty of ISK in escrow (but tied to other buy orders).
|
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
9
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 17:27:00 -
[306] - Quote
For reference: My opinions come as someone who has a good working knowledge of how the scam is performed and having had one of the more prolific margin scammers in EVE's main in my corp for several years. (Though he has moved on, he still remains in our public channel and helps our newbies out if they want to learn how to scam people)
I was going to make a big thought out post, but this is easier.
A) The UI already lies to the player through the API and siphons. This isn't any different. CCP needs to choose if it can or can't lie to the player.
B) Idiots with money who don't know the game mechanics get scammed. Most people notice something fishy is going on and ask questions and find out that its a scam.
C) Trying to say any type of scam using a game mechanic is or isn't legit is ridiculous. Every scam in some way abuses some in game mechanic to get done, whether its contracts, the market system (Either in minimum number per order or in margin trading), recruitment channels or just using local. The only example CCP has given us of a game mechanic being removed due to scamming is when the mechanic is ONLY used for scamming, as in the case of the open ended contract.
Hey CCP, you have several precidents for what you should do with market |
ArchAngel Jibril
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 20:40:00 -
[307] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Delete the margin trading skill. Problem solved. Ban players who are incapable of or unwilling to exercise a little due diligence when attempting to use the market. Problem solved.
I like how you attribute the fact that the game Interface is lying to you, to "lack of player dilligence". |
Lilliana Stelles
966
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 22:02:00 -
[308] - Quote
Remove the skill entirely and reimburse players who have it. Or Prevent the order from being cancelled, making wallets go into the negative if an order is filled.
Personally I'm just mad at the crazy prices appearing on random-items that players may or may not need at some point. Not a forum alt.-á |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
4365
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 22:37:00 -
[309] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Remove the skill entirely and reimburse players who have it. Or Prevent the order from being cancelled, making wallets go into the negative if an order is filled.
Personally I'm just mad at the crazy prices appearing on random-items that players may or may not need at some point.
So is it that you hate new traders and want to prevent them from making significant profits, or that you like seeing infinite fountains of magically created ISK?
If you don't like the prices, work to reduce demand or to increase supply.
ArchAngel Jibril wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Delete the margin trading skill. Problem solved. Ban players who are incapable of or unwilling to exercise a little due diligence when attempting to use the market. Problem solved. I like how you attribute the fact that the game Interface is lying to you, to "lack of player dilligence".
The game is telling you that there is an offer to buy X units of Y item at Z price. That is all it is telling you.
You are assuming that that means it's telling you that there will be an offer to buy X units of Y item at Z price when you want to sell to it.
Your assumption is the reason you think you're being lied to. Not checking your assumptions against reality is called "failure to exercise due diligence." "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
ArchAngel Jibril
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 00:33:00 -
[310] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:ArchAngel Jibril wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Delete the margin trading skill. Problem solved. Ban players who are incapable of or unwilling to exercise a little due diligence when attempting to use the market. Problem solved. I like how you attribute the fact that the game Interface is lying to you, to "lack of player dilligence". The game is telling you that there is an offer to buy X units of Y item at Z price. That is all it is telling you. You are assuming that that means it's telling you that there will be an offer to buy X units of Y item at Z price when you want to sell to it. Your assumption is the reason you think you're being lied to. Not checking your assumptions against reality is called "failure to exercise due diligence."
It seems to me that it is you that are completely ignorant of the basic premise of this whole discussion. So let me quote:
CCP Rise wrote:This isn't about scamming or whether or not it's okay for people to trick other people, which is obviously extremely EVE and we have no problem with. The issue here is that the client (via the market interface) is essentially lying to the player by showing an order which can't actually be filled. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
4366
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 00:51:00 -
[311] - Quote
ArchAngel Jibril wrote:RubyPorto wrote:The game is telling you that there is an offer to buy X units of Y item at Z price. That is all it is telling you.
You are assuming that that means it's telling you that there will be an offer to buy X units of Y item at Z price when you want to sell to it.
Your assumption is the reason you think you're being lied to. Not checking your assumptions against reality is called "failure to exercise due diligence." It seems to me that it is you that are completely ignorant of the basic premise of this whole discussion. So let me quote: CCP Rise wrote:This isn't about scamming or whether or not it's okay for people to trick other people, which is obviously extremely EVE and we have no problem with. The issue here is that the client (via the market interface) is essentially lying to the player by showing an order which can't actually be filled.
Show me where CCP Rise claimed to be infalliable. He's making the same assumption you're making. No matter who's making the assumption, the assumption does not match reality.
Of course, he's in a position to change reality to match his assumptions, but that invites the question of why CCP should start guaranteeing the availability of buy orders. "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
Reilly Duvolle
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
487
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 01:40:00 -
[312] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Show me where CCP Rise claimed to be infalliable. He's making the same assumption you're making. No matter who's making the assumption, the assumption does not match reality.
Of course, he's in a position to change reality to match his assumptions, but that invites the question of why CCP should start guaranteeing the availability of buy orders.
Brilliant. But why stop there? Why not have the game Interface changed in such a way that you cannot trust a single piece of information it gives you? Surely, that would satisfy the sort of hardcore player such as yourself. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
4366
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 03:44:00 -
[313] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Show me where CCP Rise claimed to be infalliable. He's making the same assumption you're making. No matter who's making the assumption, the assumption does not match reality.
Of course, he's in a position to change reality to match his assumptions, but that invites the question of why CCP should start guaranteeing the availability of buy orders.
Brilliant. But why stop there? Why not have the game Interface changed in such a way that you cannot trust a single piece of information it gives you? If the ability to grief/scam other players via a misinforming game interface is a good thing, why should it be confined to the trade window?
You can trust every piece of information the interface actually gives you. The problem is that many people think that it's giving them more information than it actually is (i.e. they make assumptions).
Quote:See that gate? It may or may not be bubbled. Its up to you to guess.
Yep, that's every nullsec gate before you jump through it. The game doesn't tell you. So if someone started posting "The game's lying to me; it let me jump through a gate into a bubble and I lost my ship when I assumed the gate wouldn't let me jump into a bubble" would you be here pushing for a "bubbled gate indicator" or a ban on bubbling gates? "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1205
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 05:30:00 -
[314] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote: Brilliant. But why stop there? Why not have the game Interface changed in such a way that you cannot trust a single piece of information it gives you? If the ability to grief/scam other players via a misinforming game interface is a good thing, why should it be confined to the trade window?
See that gate? It may or may not be bubbled. Its up to you to guess.
I see the Strawman Brigade has come to town again.. |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
164
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 05:39:00 -
[315] - Quote
Cant we get an updated CSM / CCP view by now? |
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
567
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 05:56:00 -
[316] - Quote
Nimrodion wrote:In my opinion, the best way to deal with this issue is to simply hide the buy orders that can't be fulfilled with the current amount of ISK the buyer has in their wallet. The legitimate users of the Margin Trading technique would benefit from this change...
I wanted to suggest almost the same thing. I believe there's no need to tweak features more than neccessary. Although I would like to point out that the entire point of MT skill is to be able to create orders that cannot be fulfilled entirely and immideately. Only those orders that cannot be fulfilled even at the minimum value set by the buy order creator should be hidden until at least a single minimal transaction is backed up and ready to be fulfilled. I am assuming that it's exactly what you mean, just think that a little clarification wouldn't hurt. |
Debir Achen
The Red Circle Inc.
66
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 06:24:00 -
[317] - Quote
I favour my suggestion of Trebor's (which is similar to a couple of others) as it: - doesn't require checking the wallet until an inbound buy transaction occurs - prevents people draining their own escrow of ISK - clarifies the escrow mechanics
(Careby touches on some of these issues also) Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature? |
Azelor Delaria
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
139
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 07:59:00 -
[318] - Quote
The issue you will see is the scams continuing to happen. If I leave enough ISK in my wallet to cover the buying, it doesn't stop me from quickly emptying my wallet after the item is bought. This is something that will need to be looked at, and I Don't see a simple way of fixing this issue. |
Reilly Duvolle
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
487
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 08:44:00 -
[319] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Yep, that's every nullsec gate before you jump through it. The game doesn't tell you. So if someone started posting "The game's lying to me; it let me jump through a gate into a bubble and I lost my ship when I assumed the gate wouldn't let me jump into a bubble" would you be here pushing for a "bubbled gate indicator" or a ban on bubbling gates?
Actually, the game equvalent to the misinforming tradewindow in this case would be that you a) couldnt see the bubble on D-scan, b) couldnt see it using probes, c) couldnt even see it from a perch above the gate. The only way to discover the bubble would be to warp directly into it, and suffer the consequenses doing so.
But, luckily enough, the issue here is not wheter or not CCP thinks the tradewindow in the context of buyorders are dysfunctional and should be changed. They DO, wheter you like it or not. The question in this thread is how, not if. |
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
568
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 09:20:00 -
[320] - Quote
Azelor Delaria wrote:The issue you will see is the scams continuing to happen. If I leave enough ISK in my wallet to cover the buying, it doesn't stop me from quickly emptying my wallet after the item is bought. This is something that will need to be looked at, and I Don't see a simple way of fixing this issue. For those kind of scams you don't even need to have MT skill and therefore they have little to do with the topic. As far as I can tell, the goal is not to prevent any market scams either. |
|
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
108
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 09:31:00 -
[321] - Quote
.Failure to pay your Trader bills blats your MT skill back to lvl 0. or .Remove the skill entirelly and re-imburse or
.Make escrow percentage based on standings* *Standing to corp which own the station at which the order is to be placed ( MT only allowed at npc owned stations ) failure to pay hits standings hard
e.g. escrow percentage = 3%* MT lvl * Standing min 0 max 95 |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
164
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 11:17:00 -
[322] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:.Failure to pay your Trader bills blats your MT skill back to lvl 0. or .Remove the skill entirely and re-reimburse or
.Make escrow percentage based on standings* *Standing to corp which own the station at which the order is to be placed ( MT only allowed at npc owned stations ) failure to pay hits standings hard
e.g. escrow percentage = 3%* MT lvl * Standing min 0 max 95
Aha, to point 1; so I can kill my competitor by stocking up and hitting his buys a few times a month. Nice to know. Killing his skill and standings (if you count 2 in)
To point 2; the leverage reached by margin trading should be general, not just High Sec, if you want to change it, make it for non-high sec, people then can take the risk for themselves. What would reach the goal; safe noobs.
Having standings influence your maximal Escrow is a very good idea. Lets do that. |
Uncle Gagarin
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 13:02:00 -
[323] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Why do we need buy orders to be guaranteed?
Because eve already has a market that is not guaranteed. You drop the item in space, let the other person pick it up and gift you the money. The purpose of the secure market is to give players who wish to expend taxes and broker fees a way of trading securely. You have contracts for guaranteed Trading.... You have Sell orders that are guaranteed... Why do you need buy orders guaranteed?
First off, why do you need SELL orders guaranteed then ? That is exactly same obligation to make business. To trade something.
Well, how that problem could be fixed:
1. I like idea of colored orders in market UI. It doesn't hurt legit traders but gives a kind of warning to less educated players.
2. Any idea of reducing or removing orders based on someone wallet status is bad. It will bring unnecessary complication to "life" of many peoples and even bigger to server administrators. I cant even imagine lag they will generate.
3. I assume that margin trading is necessary mechanics helping a lot ot ppl to drive their legit busined but at the same time it is abused. There is no risk on abuser side. At the moment someone will try to fulfill an order it is canceled and funds are returned to "buyer"/ All risk is on seller side. IMHO this is source of all problem - risk unbalance.
4. What if Margin trading will be kept as is (with addition of color in market UI). What if the mechanics behind that is enriched by adding risk for buyer ?
- If the order is fulfilled but buyer has no money to fully pay order gets frozen for let say 7 days.
- During that time buyer has to fulfill promise to buy items at given price.
- After that time, if buyer still doesn't pay order is canceled.
- Buyer get's nothing but pays all deposited ISK to seller.
- Seller keeps items he tried to sell.
BR, Uncle
|
Steadly Sol
Steadly Sprockets
2
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 13:13:00 -
[324] - Quote
the station in question should cover the margin of error in the order itself, since the seller cannot or will not do so.
this in turn means that the player is in debt to the station, with interest, since the station covered the market margin for the player.
no real difference from what ccp does to people they suspect but cannot prove sell isk or plex and subtract a couple of billion from those players accounts
meaning that the margin trader should keep the isk for the escrow, or face the wrath of the station.
legitimate scams should not revolve around the game lieing to players. (which is real heinous coding btw, egregiously terribad coding).
scamming someone because they are dumb, ignorant, wishfully thinking, drunk, and just taking advantage of someone is fine and dandy, and expected.
when I sell to the market I expect the market to treat me fairly because it says it does. i dont expect to sell 200mil of a product and get 15 mil.
that is just bad coding.
no if's and's or but's. |
Rhivre
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
617
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 13:17:00 -
[325] - Quote
You wont sell 200m of a product and get 15m.
You will sell 15m of a product and get 15m, or you will sell 0 of a product, and get 0.
the vast majority of margin scams jump out at you as much as "Free Beer" does.
If it is not a margin scam, and merely run out of isk, then the order below it is likely to be within a few isk of it. Worst case scenario, you have to create a sell order. Which, unless you have bought the items for one of those glaringly obvious margin scams, means you will get your profit. Fluffy Bunny Pic! |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
109
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 14:03:00 -
[326] - Quote
TheSmokingHertog wrote:Dav Varan wrote:.Failure to pay your Trader bills blats your MT skill back to lvl 0. or .Remove the skill entirely and re-reimburse or
.Make escrow percentage based on standings* *Standing to corp which own the station at which the order is to be placed ( MT only allowed at npc owned stations ) failure to pay hits standings hard
e.g. escrow percentage = 3%* MT lvl * Standing min 0 max 95 Aha, to point 1; so I can kill my competitor by stocking up and hitting his buys a few times a month. Nice to know. Killing his skill and standings (if you count 2 in) To point 2; the leverage reached by margin trading should be general, not just High Sec, if you want to change it, make it for non-high sec, people then can take the risk for themselves. What would reach the goal; safe noobs. Having standings influence your maximal Escrow is a very good idea. Lets do that.
point 1 you traders are always calling it pvp. You have no way of knowing if the order is covered or not , maybe you just end up giving them exactly what they need at a great price. + they can turn round and do exactly the same to you, careful who you mess with.
point 2 - There are npc stations in null and low sec too. Its not possible to use the mechanic at player owned stations due to corp standing being set by players no way to panalty , after thought maybe thats not really an issue though as peops ripping off station users can be corp kicked or whatever. sell at player owned staions at your own risk.
|
BadSeamus
Chaos Army
19
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 14:05:00 -
[327] - Quote
Don't cancel orders if there isn't enough cash on hand to back them, simply do not display them to any other user.
If I have ten orders, and enough cash to back only one (but any one) of them, all ten of my orders are returned in everyone else's market browser. The minute my one order gets hit, the 9 others disappear from the market, until I get my cash reserves up.
If I have enough cash to cover the five smallest orders, then only those five display to anyone else (I can see my own orders so I can cancel or edit them etc.) Orders that I do not have enough cash on hand to execute are highlighted in red to ME only.
Cant see a problem with this - but then Ive given it all of 2 minutes thought. Perhaps a real trader can tell me if it blocks any legitimate activity?
SK
|
Careby
Careby Exploration
99
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 14:06:00 -
[328] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:...Although I would like to point out that the entire point of MT skill is to be able to create orders that cannot be fulfilled entirely and immideately. Only those orders that cannot be fulfilled even at the minimum value set by the buy order creator should be hidden... I can't tell if you mean individual orders that can't be fulfilled, or a group of orders. It's true that the margin trading skill, as currently implemented, will allow you to create a single buy order that cannot be filled entirely and immediately. But that isn't of much use to me, and I have to think that's not it's intended purpose. I use it to be able to have more open orders than my available ISK will cover in total, knowing that not all the orders are likely to be executed in a limited period of time. I keep more than enough ISK on hand to make sure that any of my orders (but not all) can be filled immediately and completely, otherwise why would I enter that order? It isn't like I enjoy paying broker fees for failed orders. So the ideal improvement, in my opinion, would never show other players a greater quantity on one of my buy orders than I have the ISK to execute.
The changes being discussed here are not likely to affect my trading very much. I try to maintain adequate funds to prevent my orders from failing. Even if the changes reduce lost broker fees by making invalid orders invisible and impossible to execute, there isn't much to be gained from having invisible orders. But I think the improvement in trust that players might have in the market would be good for all traders, whether honest or scammer.
|
Careby
Careby Exploration
99
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 14:09:00 -
[329] - Quote
BadSeamus wrote:Don't cancel orders if there isn't enough cash on hand to back them, simply do not display them to any other user.
If I have ten orders, and enough cash to back only one (but any one) of them, all ten of my orders are returned in everyone else's market browser. The minute my one order gets hit, the 9 others disappear from the market, until I get my cash reserves up.
If I have enough cash to cover the five smallest orders, then only those five display to anyone else (I can see my own orders so I can cancel or edit them etc.) Orders that I do not have enough cash on hand to execute are highlighted in red to ME only.
Cant see a problem with this - but then Ive given it all of 2 minutes thought. Perhaps a real trader can tell me if it blocks any legitimate activity?
SK
2 minutes of thought was enough. I don't know what the qualifications are for "real trader," but I agree with everything you said.
|
Titus Balls
Stay Frosty.
72
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 14:32:00 -
[330] - Quote
Thread is now tl;dr for me to go find if this has been mentioned - but as part of changes to the trade UI - please allow for modification of quantity of an order too.
For example, I stick up 20 frigates in a station - a month later only two have sold, so I decide to I want to take 10 back and resell them in Jita to recoup some of the loss.
I should be able to take back some of my stock - of course loosing any brokers fee and taxes I have already paid. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |