If players knew there is a possibility of the order not being filled when they sell the item to it they would buy overpriced items with conscience of the risk. This is not like a double isk scam. New market players have no means to understand the risk other than other locals screaming Margin Trading scam to the contracts that show up.

In other words, ppl who fall for Margin Trading scams are trusting solely on the game mechanics, wich fails to deliever proper information to them.

Yes, they are able to understand the risk. It's called learning about market trading in EVE before you dump hundreds of millions of PLEX cash into a scam. The Margin Trading scam is probably the single most talked about scam in EVE right now. New players could simply type "scam" into a forum search and find posts about it. Before getting into trading, they could go to the forums and create a post asking about trading-related scams, and they would certainly receive numerous replies detailing the Margin Trading scam, how it works, and how to detect/avoid it. This alone is a far better antidote than anything mechanical that you could introduce to the game, because not only is it effective in that superior "teach a man to fish" way, but it doesn't impose unfair limitations on a skill that enormous numbers of traders use legitimately to do their business.

Yes, they are able to understand the risk. It's called learning about market trading in EVE before you dump hundreds of millions of PLEX cash into a scam. The Margin Trading scam is probably the single most talked about scam in EVE right now. New players could simply type "scam" into a forum search and find posts about it. Before getting into trading, they could go to the forums and create a post asking about trading-related scams, and they would certainly receive numerous replies detailing the Margin Trading scam, how it works, and how to detect/avoid it. This alone is a far better antidote than anything mechanical that you could introduce to the game, because not only is it effective in that superior "teach a man to fish" way, but it doesn't impose unfair limitations on a skill that enormous numbers of traders use legitimately to do their business.

What limitation to legitimate marketers would be imposed if the orders without ISK (or escrowed margin account) to back up a minimum purchase were removed?

The Buyer isn't mad because his order was going to fail the next time someone tried it anyways, in the current iteration.

How can you tell a forum poster is not lying about something just like a in-game player is? You can't.

A nerf is a nerf. Not only do I think it's unfair in and of itself, but even a supposedly "small" nerf just opens the door for more later on.

Easy. Cross-check the information you've been given with forum posts about the same topic. Also, this is a moot point because we both know that the Margin Trading scam has been detailed truthfully on these forums in an exhaustive manner countless times.

Part of the way that EVE has always educated new players is through the forum community. It is a massive resource. To treat it like it doesn't exist just because it's not embedded in the game is ridiculous.

Fallacies like 'Slippery Slope' are a poor substitute for an actual fix to a broken UI.

You've shown a remarkable need to use fallacies in this thread, as well as others. So let's not go there.

As far as the UI being broken, it isn't. It shows an order and as NO ORDER is ever guaranteed, nothing shown is false.

Again, there is a simple fix. I as well as Gizznitt Malikite and others, have shown how to fix the actual problem here. The problem is not with the UI, it's with pilots assuming that an order is guaranteed. One of your ideas in this regard, is to find a way of making this a fact. A way of making a buy order guaranteed. I think that is bad for the game and so far no one has come up with a reason why this should be the case. Even when asked simple questions, you cannot answer them.

There is a far more simple way, one that you have ignored. But why choose the easy route, when you could look to break the game in other ways? Amiright?

You are entitled to your opinion, no one is denying that, regardless of how ineffectual it is.

Fallacies like 'Slippery Slope' are a poor substitute for an actual fix to a broken UI.

The community is an awesome resource. Ppl who resort to cooperation in EvE tend to be much more sucessful than solo players. Nonetheless the game can't oblige someone to depend on someon else to be sucessful. The name of the game is Everyone vs. Everyone. A player should have the means to face everyone else as a competitor if he wants to. The game must either make it clear for everyone it is possible for some buy orders to fail or change the way this mechanic works to be competitive.

What you're arguing is that a person retains some sort of ownership over a buy order, and must be guaranteed permission to successfully fill it, just because he/she noticed its existence. That's not how the market has ever worked, nor does the market ever purport to work that way.

nefarious reasons

Yet another complainer, resting on the assumption that those who disagree must only do so for nefarious reasons. You're an imbecile.

You are voluntarily misinterpreting me... And before you write that I want to penalize "the vast majority":
- I never even suggested to remove the margin trading skill... I'm skilling in trade in order to use it in the near future!
- A negative wallet balance wouldn't hurt in ANY way honest traders. On the contrary, it would help them by completing a transaction that would have failed (Keep in mind that when a honest trader place a margin trading order, it is because he/she feel the need to acquire the goods for any reason);
- It would be way more realistic;
- Inexperienced honest traders would be protected.

It's already been explained several times why a negative balance isn't a remotely useful solution. And even if it were, the chances that CCP would actually implement it are nil, so even arguing about it any further with you is pointless.

...
There are several problems with this solution, the biggest of which is that it puts unwanted pressure on legitimate up-and-coming market traders who need to be able to leverage the ISK they have. There is also some advanced market gameplay around putting up very large buy orders which you can't technically cover, but which also will never realistically get filled. If you guys have feelings either way about this solution please share.
...

Thanks!

I don't think this is really a problem. What would happen if you just removed that whole margin trading? How much stress would that really put on "up-and-coming market traders"? Do you really need this so called "advanced market gameplay"?

I would vote for just removing the root cause of that issue. Remove the margin trading. I can't see how that would hurt the game a lot. I admit that i am not a trader though. I bet that this scamming via margin trading made a lot of folks quit already since there is no explicit indication whatsoever that the buy order might be fake.

Actually, it would hurt high-level traders quite a lot for reasons already outlined in this thread.



Margin Trading isn't the root cause. Also, you admit your own ignorance and then you suggest removing a whole skill from the game. Not a good look.

Dont cancel the orders that cant cover a minimum quantity buy, "pause" them, meaning they are not showed in the market interface until the wallet has enough money to cover a minimum quantity buy again, then they are shown again
This way no false information is displayed on the market and the legitimate traders dont lose any functionality at all

That's one of the best ideas so far!

Dont cancel the orders that cant cover a minimum quantity buy, "pause" them, meaning they are not showed in the market interface until the wallet has enough money to cover a minimum quantity buy again, then they are shown again
This way no false information is displayed on the market and the legitimate traders dont lose any functionality at all

Bump