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) |
RinnosukeETQW
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 08:55:00 -
[211] - Quote
While we're on the subject (I actually don't care about the margin scams BTW, let it stay really) please give us the option to turn margin trading on and off, I have orders I'd like to use the skill and orders I'd like to keep from the skill, I'd like the ability to pick and choose. |
Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
40
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 12:59:00 -
[212] - Quote
hmskrecik wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Another possibility is not canceling the order, but temporarily suspending it. The order would be reactivated automatically if and when funds become available. I think addresses it best. Not even need to issue reactivation penalty. Legit trader can find himself low on cash and so orders will be suspended (should be removed from the list or marked as such). Scammer can still scam but then he has to work on it, as opposed to almost effortless thing we have now.
This suggestion breaks the whole arbitrage trading profession. I know my market, meaning I know how fast items move. I set up buy orders accordingly. Most of the time these buy orders will never be fulfilled by one sale to them, but in parts.
I.e. a buy order for 10 Drakes sells me 1 Drake a day. My wallet could never cover the 10 Drakes as a single transaction, but it covers 1-2 Drakes/day. The 1 Drake I buy each day will be relisted for sale and typically sells in 1 day, covering the remaing 8-9 Drakes in buy orders (and other buy orders, too). This is espacially true with partially filled buy orders, as escrow is consumed first (which relieves your wallet) but as escrow is spent, the pressure on your wallet even becomes harder, as you now have to pay in full for the item you bought.
Stop thinking in 1 item buy/sell trades. Think in 150 different items, with different "paves", different profit rates, different escrow amounts EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager. |
Careby
Careby Exploration
88
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 12:59:00 -
[213] - Quote
I'm glad this is being looked at. I am not against scamming, but I also think market information should be clear, accurate, and reliable. The idea that players should know what's too good to be true ignores the fact that many times there are legitimate deals that should be too good to be true. If someone beats me to them, that's fair, but if they were a lie, then it's the market that lied to me and not the scammer. The market should never lie.
Most of the ways I can think of to improve the margin trading mechanic would add considerable server load. As a constant user of margin trading, I don't want to lose the benefits, but I would be willing to give up a little for the benefit of the market.
So my current thoughts are:
1. The margin trading skill/benefit should not apply to the first or only buy order placed. If you only have one order, there should be sufficient funds earmarked to cover it 100% (price times quantity). If you don't have enough ISK to cover the total quantity of one buy order, you should not be placing an order for that quantity.
2. If you have two or more active buy orders, your encumbered funds (escrow) should cover at least 100% of the most expensive one (price times quantity).
3. When a buy order fills, a calculation could occur which compares your escrow to your most expensive remaining buy order, and adjusts the escrow to cover it. If you do not have wallet funds available to add to your escrow, all unfillable orders would be suspended, and would no longer show up in the market.
4. Suspended orders could be shown in your orders list, and re-instated when your wallet balance increases enough to adjust your escrow, either automatically when another order is filled and the escrow calculation is performed, or possibly manually by right-clicking the suspended order.
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
143
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 14:05:00 -
[214] - Quote
IMO it should be left as it is. The fun of the eve market is that it approximates a rl market. There is a fundamental difference though - where as in eve you have access to what amounts to close to perfect knowledge, in RL things are substantially more fuzzy. The perfect knowledge problem results in an endless round of .01 games, which is tedious and not much fun (again imo). The "margin scam" adds uncertain to the market, making it more unpredictable and interesting. It is a balance to the perfect knowledge problem. If ccp feels that something must be done, because the UI appears to be lying - just add a pop up message - something like "hey dummy - if it looks too good to be true - it is." I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |
hmskrecik
TransMine Group German Information Network Alliance
137
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 14:34:00 -
[215] - Quote
Hel O'Ween wrote:hmskrecik wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Another possibility is not canceling the order, but temporarily suspending it. The order would be reactivated automatically if and when funds become available. I think addresses it best. Not even need to issue reactivation penalty. Legit trader can find himself low on cash and so orders will be suspended (should be removed from the list or marked as such). Scammer can still scam but then he has to work on it, as opposed to almost effortless thing we have now. This suggestion breaks the whole arbitrage trading profession. I know my market, meaning I know how fast items move. I set up buy orders accordingly. Most of the time these buy orders will never be fulfilled by one sale to them, but in parts. I.e. a buy order for 10 Drakes sells me 1 Drake a day. My wallet could never cover the 10 Drakes as a single transaction, but it covers 1-2 Drakes/day. The 1 Drake I buy each day will be relisted for sale and typically sells in 1 day, covering the remaing 8-9 Drakes in buy orders (and other buy orders, too). This is espacially true with partially filled buy orders, as escrow is consumed first ( which relieves your wallet) but as escrow is spent, the pressure on your wallet even becomes harder, as you now have to pay in full for the item you bought. Stop thinking in 1 item buy/sell trades. Think in 150 different items, with different "paves", different profit rates, different escrow amounts Please try to read and understand. If you set buy order for 10 Drakes with minimal purchase of 2 Drakes then by this proposal you need to have enough in the wallet to cover purchase of 2 Drakes. If you didn't have this money your order wouldn't work anyway, would it?
And the part with suspension I like is that when you actually don't have this money, your order goes inactive but when you get some back, order reactivates. Normal traders aren't hurt. |
hmskrecik
TransMine Group German Information Network Alliance
137
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 14:43:00 -
[216] - Quote
Or maybe simpler solution? Enforce full, 100% escrow for minimal purchase and apply Margin Trading for what is above? |
LittleTerror
Illuminated Foundation Trust
109
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 15:33:00 -
[217] - Quote
Electrique Wizard wrote:LittleTerror wrote:The market interface is not lying to anyone, if they had checked the price history they wouldn't be so bloody stupid... LMAO encouraging EVE players not to be stupid
As opposed to changing the game to carter for the stupid?
ah nvm then... |
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
261
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:08:00 -
[218] - Quote
Molic Blackbird wrote:Just going to add my voice to those that want better education of new players and not a change to a useful skill. I can not see any change that doesn't in some way nerf the effectiveness of the skill and any change doesn't fix the problem as market scams could still happen even if the skill is removed.
Concurring, especially the bolded part.
After reading the thread it looks like any changes done here would only make life more difficult for the legitimate users of the skill instead of curbing the malicious users. Actually implementing the change without breaking anything doesn't sound too easy either, so much trouble to fix such a small 'problem'.
So why change anything? I mean the skill itself is working fine, it does it's jobs exactly as advertised, no change needed. Without that skill I would not have been able to build up my little ammo shop to the expansive arms dealing empire that it is and it helps other entrepreneurs every day to build up their dreams.
All that really is required is maybe moving some info from the 'Price History' tab to the 'Market Data' tab and definitely add some educational sections about market on the NPE. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
2972
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:22:00 -
[219] - Quote
Two points that I want to re-emphasize:
1.) No change is needed if you inform players that Buy Orders are Not Guaranteed!!! All competent in game traders know this and operate under this assumption already. The new guy that isn't familiar with the mechanics behind the Margin Trade order incorrectly assumes that buy orders are guaranteed, especially since the vast majority of buy orders complete without fail. Education is what is truly needed, not a change in game mechanics.
2.) It seems absolutely ridiclous to me to spend computer overhead monitoring peoples wallets and continuously updating the market interface just to make the market idiot-proof. I'm sorry, I want that server load going to something that matters, not protecting incompetent and/or greedy wanna-be traders. As such, I see only one implementable solution that will protect these under-educated individuals. This has already been brought up before, but here's the gist:
Market Check Function wrote: The Market Check Function:
This tells our "broker" to verifies that enough funds exist to cover the minimum purchase of a buy order: -- To implement, right click on a buy order and click verify. -- If funds exist to complete a minimum buy amount, you are told everything is in order. -- If funds do not exist to complete a minimum buy order, the order is automatically canceled.
This should cost isk to use (like 50k isk to perform this check). Pro's:
Doesn't waste enormous amounts of my precious server time. It allows for players to police the market. It is an isk sink. Cons: It will effectively destroy margin trade scams. It doesn't cost enough... Really, it should cost 20m isk to perform this check!
I'd like to point out, that the market is pretty fine as is, and the proposed changes aren't about "keeping the interface honest". The interface is completely honest.: If it says there is a buy order there, and there is a buy order there. If you make a trade, it either goes through using the proposed terms of a buy/sell order, or the transaction fails and neither party loses out. Let's examine the behavior that brings up this discussion: 1.) People incorrectly assume buy orders are guaranteed. This means some more education is necessary.
2.) Traders simply want to eliminate/reduce their risks. By making buy orders guaranteed, a huge amount of the risk in trading goods is simply eliminated. Why would CCP want to do this, to an already low-risk, high profit profession? Hell NO.
I still have yet to hear anyone adequately answer: Why should buy orders be guaranteed? |
Feledain
The Scope Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:18:00 -
[220] - Quote
I dont trade much but oh well, my solution would be:
If a sale fails, singel item: The seller get whatever money there was to cover the order. The item is kept in limbo till either the buyer manages to get the money and complete the order (1 per day check if the isk are there) or 1 month has passed and the seller gets the item back + keeps the money. Multiple items: The seller sells the amount of items the buyer can back up and gets a pop up with the buyers name and the question if he wants to sell and wait till the money comes (up to 1 month) or want to keep the rest of his stuff. Either way the buy order is taken from the market for 1 day. And the buyer gets an Eve mail. Or the order stays, this would probably create some awareness that buy orders are not 100% secure.
It does not prevent margin trade scams, but maybe helps a bit. |
|
mama guru
Thundercats The Initiative.
163
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:18:00 -
[221] - Quote
I don't care how the UI looks aslong as we get rid of the 0.0001 isk wars and make trade botting harder somehow. ______
EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak. |
Careby
Careby Exploration
90
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:30:00 -
[222] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:...I still have yet to hear anyone adequately answer: Why should buy orders be guaranteed? For the same reason that sell orders are guaranteed? If fake orders are a "good thing" then why not let everyone put up orders for items for sale even if they don't have the items. After all, the order will just fail with no harm done, right? The only thing we lose is information about the true picture of the marketplace.
(And in case it wasn't obvious, that was intended to be sarcastic - not an actual suggestion.)
|
Luca Lure
Obertura
15
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:37:00 -
[223] - Quote
Destoya wrote:I'm all for the removal of the margin trading scam; I think something that appears to work in the market UI (selling a valuable item in the case of the scam) should work. Scams should in my opinion require some human error (ex selling 2 plex for 1 or w/e), not just not understanding how the orders work.
The error is, that you trade without knowledge, which is a mistake. Ask all the people who got into the stock market and lost money. They know you should inform yourself first.
If it aint broken, don't fix it. There is enough other stuff to fix. So please leave the market alone. It is working. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15694
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:18:00 -
[224] - Quote
Careby wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:...I still have yet to hear anyone adequately answer: Why should buy orders be guaranteed? For the same reason that sell orders are guaranteed? But they aren't, so why should buy orders?
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Careby
Careby Exploration
90
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:43:00 -
[225] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Careby wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:...I still have yet to hear anyone adequately answer: Why should buy orders be guaranteed? For the same reason that sell orders are guaranteed? But they aren't, so why should buy orders? Feel free to define "guaranteed" any way you want. Every market sell order has an item behind it, and if you are first in line and pay the ISK, you get the item. That's exactly the sort of "guarantee" I'd like to see for buy orders, i.e. if I am first in line and offer the item, I get the ISK. A buy order with no ISK behind it is useless, so why show it as a market order?
|
Rhivre
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
600
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:59:00 -
[226] - Quote
I understand the view, re the "guarantee", but....strictly as an end user, how do you know that when you sell to an order and it fails, what the reason is? |
NEONOVUS
Saablast Followers
504
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 20:11:00 -
[227] - Quote
Why not have it so that at V it is 24% of the buy order or minimum one payout whichever is greater and will constantly take from your wallet to make up the difference. If your wallet goes below the minimum the order is suspended/cancelled.
|
TheFourteenthTry
The 0rigin Illusion of Solitude
6
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 20:30:00 -
[228] - Quote
I have done a lot of Margin based trading in my years playing EVE. I am worried a lot about the effect of doing either of the options mentioned by CCP Rise. Having billions more ISK in your margin buys than in your wallet is a great way to have more potential hits, and either option could really effect how that is played/enjoyed by many honest EVE players (all 2 of them). It also gives EVE market places unique qualities and realism that just isn't found in others games.
Although I would like it fixed, I don't know if it is worth the effect it has on happy market traders. I think a much simpler solution would be to include est price (EVE wide est. average price seen in inventories) in the market bar next to the item. This would allow people to see what the item is selling for EVE wide. Yes, it would still be possible to effect the market prices of low volume worthless items, and continue to trick people into buying expensive crap. But this is EVE and the victims here are just trying to make an easy buck. If it seems to good to be true, then it is...
The lessons you learn in EVE are important, so I would argue that this issue is not really even a bug it is a feature. in the sandbox people have learned to use to con greedy idiots, which I have been on more occasions than I would like to admit
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15694
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 21:17:00 -
[229] - Quote
Careby wrote:Mag's wrote:Careby wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:...I still have yet to hear anyone adequately answer: Why should buy orders be guaranteed? For the same reason that sell orders are guaranteed? But they aren't, so why should buy orders? Feel free to define "guaranteed" any way you want. Every market sell order has an item behind it, and if you are first in line and pay the ISK, you get the item. That's exactly the sort of "guarantee" I'd like to see for buy orders, i.e. if I am first in line and offer the item, I get the ISK. A buy order with no ISK behind it is useless, so why show it as a market order? I define it as it is meant and sell orders are not guaranteed. Unless there is another definition of the word, in your world.
So the question remains, why should buy orders be guaranteed?
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1162
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 22:47:00 -
[230] - Quote
Posting again despite my better judgement to confirm that sell orders are not guaranteed. Someone else could buy the item before you do, the seller could also change the price or cancel the order. |
|
LittleTerror
Illuminated Foundation Trust
109
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 22:48:00 -
[231] - Quote
TheFourteenthTry wrote:I have done a lot of Margin based trading in my years playing EVE. I am worried a lot about the effect of doing either of the options mentioned by CCP Rise. Having billions more ISK in your margin buys than in your wallet is a great way to have more potential hits, and either option could really effect how that is played/enjoyed by many honest EVE players (all 2 of them). It also gives EVE market places unique qualities and realism that just isn't found in others games. Although I would like it fixed, I don't know if it is worth the effect it has on happy market traders. I think a much simpler solution would be to include est price (EVE wide est. average price seen in inventories) in the market bar next to the item. This would allow people to see what the item is selling for EVE wide. Yes, it would still be possible to effect the market prices of low volume worthless items, and continue to trick people into buying expensive crap. But this is EVE and the victims here are just trying to make an easy buck. If it seems to good to be true, then it is... The lessons you learn in EVE are important, so I would argue that this issue is not really even a bug it is a feature. in the sandbox people have learned to use to con greedy idiots, which I have been on more occasions than I would like to admit
This. |
Gabriel Darkefyre
Gradient Electus Matari
164
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 23:23:00 -
[232] - Quote
Could just work it as an Impound system
If an item is sold to an order where the buyer doesn't have the ISK to fully cover the cost, the buyer gets the percentage of the items cost from Escrow and as much funds as is available in the Sellers wallet as possible. The item is placed in the Buyers Impound and requires the remaining ISK to be paid to be released to the buyer.
If this occurs within a week of the sale, the seller gets the ISK and the Buyer gets the item. If not, the Seller gets the Item back and keeps the ISK already paid. Biomassing the Buyer would immediately return all impounded items to the seller.
Could even have it that if you have an item in Impound in a Station, you cannot raise any additional Buy orders that would affect that station until the Impound was cleared. Current orders would be unaffected but would keep going to impound and eating your Escrow if you still did not have enough to cover the Sale. |
Thoraemond
Far Ranger
152
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 23:45:00 -
[233] - Quote
A sensible market broker, taking his or her job seriously, would require that pilots maintain a balance in escrow at all times in relation to each of their orders, probably something like the larger of: (a) the percentage of the total order determined by the pilot's Margin Trading skill level, and (b) the amount needed to cover the minimum quantity.
Not too computationally-intensive, since it is checked only when a transaction is executed against the order. If a draw from the wallet fails to replenish the minimum escrow, the order is cancelled. This eliminates the utility of the Margin Trading skill for 1-unit buy orders, but it retains most of the utility of the skill, and I prefer this over eliminating the skill altogether.
When a pilot tries to sell more than the minimum units, and there is insufficient ISK in escrow+wallet to buy all those units (since only the minimum quantity is necessarily covered by escrow), all units that can be purchased with the available ISK should be sold.
P.S. Please no new colours or pilot-identifying information on the Market UI. Prefer no new addition, but if anything, perhaps a column showing how much can be purchased using the ISK in escrow, either: (a) the percentage of the whole order, or (b) the number of units. |
Abla Tive
State War Academy Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 01:45:00 -
[234] - Quote
How about this:
If there is not enough money to cover a buy order, *all* buy orders of that trader are colored red.
This color lasts for 3 months from the last time the trader got into that situation.
It would not completely remove the scam, but would make repeat executions more tedious. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
1585
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 01:49:00 -
[235] - Quote
I notice one thing immediately.
You simply state that it's a problem and move on, without really establishing that there really is a problem at all.
I do not view it as a failure of the UI. The tools and information exist already to establish to a fair degree of certainty whether something is a scam or not. It's not that the tools are inadequate, it's that people simply are not using them correctly.
And that's not something that has to be fixed. At all.
Changing Margin Trading runs 2 distinct risks. Firstly, damaging legitimate uses for the skill. I know several people (not myself, I am a poor marketeer) who rely on this skill as it currently exists for their industry and manufacturing, both buy and sell orders.
Secondly, it removes the assumption of necessary due diligence on the part of the players. Because the tools do exist to determine legitimacy of an order, it is the responsibility of the individual player to not spend their money foolishly.
Just because a subset of whiny, irresponsible, lazy or stupid players want to cede more of their own responsibilities to the computer doesn't mean it should be done. In fact it means the opposite. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Truth Quantico
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 03:14:00 -
[236] - Quote
Nil'kandra wrote:Ever since I saw that "Market Fine" was an option in your wallet log dropdown, I wondered why it was never implemented for this reason.
You can create a disincentive *and* an isk sink. If people just keep using new chars to get around negative wallet issues in doing this, then you just increased the margin needed to make a scam worth it, making a isk sink and an SP sink that hits the scammers only. People get scammed still because, let's face it, EVE is harsh at times.
Might want to push up the skill needs on the Margin Trade skill while you're at it. SP sink also would be a huge disincentive to scammers.
QFA.
Adding a completely new mechanic with market fines, station trading lockouts, and trader ratings would also work, but prohibitive fines for failed orders seems a simpler solution that could knock off 98% of scam occurrences. |
Iria Ahrens
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
95
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 03:32:00 -
[237] - Quote
Really this shouldn't be that hard to fix.
Make margin trading not apply towards the 5 most expensive buy orders. If at any time the the seller cannot cover the top 5 buy orders, then those orders are automatically cancelled, and the auto-canceling continues until there are at least 5 orders that can be covered.
Don't color code orders for margin trading, but color code trades with minimum orders above 1.
I see margin trading as something to allow us to have many orders that don't have to be fully covered. Mainly because they are unlikely to be filled all at once. Using margin trading for a very short list of orders is where most of the problems arise it seems. Because you disdained all my counsel, and my reproof you ignoredGÇö I, in my turn, will laugh at your doom; will mock when terror overtakes you; -- Ultimate Griefer's Handbook |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
4334
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 03:59:00 -
[238] - Quote
Truth Quantico wrote:QFA.
Adding a completely new mechanic with market fines, station trading lockouts, and trader ratings would also work, but prohibitive fines for failed orders seems a simpler solution that could knock off 98% of scam occurrences.
That would, in fact, affect 0% of Margin Scammers and significantly affect the ~99% of active traders who are not perfectly precognitive.
Here's how you margin scam with punitive failed order fines. 1) Make buy order on behalf of Corp wallet 1. 2) Empty Escrow as normal 3) Someone buys your overpriced stuff (at this point, the scam is over). 4) The mark tries to sell to the buy order. 5) The order fails, and the corp wallet goes negative with fines. 6) Repeat with Wallet 2, or start a new corp if you're out of wallets.
or: 1) Eat the fines. If they're high enough to actually discourage (ignoring the above workaround) scams, they'd be absolutely devastating to any normal beginning to intermediate trader. So the fines wouldn't be all that high.
There are a couple fundamental problems with trying to "fix" the Margin Trading scam by changing the Margin Trading skill: 1) The scam is over before anyone touches the buy order. 2) The scam does not require the Margin Trading skill to be viable. 3) The only people hurt by the many proposed changes are those who use the skill for reasons other than scamming. 4) There's no actual problem to fix. The market provides accurate information. The "problem" crops up when people make false assumptions about that information and draw inaccurate conclusions from those assumptions. They then complain about it rather than reworking their assumptions to match reality. "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 |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1841
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 04:14:00 -
[239] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:The market provides accurate information. The "problem" crops up when people make false assumptions about that information and draw inaccurate conclusions from those assumptions. They then complain about it rather than reworking their assumptions to match reality. I see the only problem as the game is pretty damn complex and there's no instruction manual. Adding the small bit of information to the UI 'buy orders are not guaranteed to be backed by the full amount of ISK' continues the current development trend of making EVE easier to understand and manipulate while maintaining mechanical complexity |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17501
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 05:20:00 -
[240] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:RubyPorto wrote:The market provides accurate information. The "problem" crops up when people make false assumptions about that information and draw inaccurate conclusions from those assumptions. They then complain about it rather than reworking their assumptions to match reality. I see the only problem as the game is pretty damn complex and there's no instruction manual. Adding the small bit of information to the UI 'buy orders are not guaranteed to be backed by the full amount of ISK' continues the current development trend of making EVE easier to understand and manipulate while maintaining mechanical complexity e: and cold dark harsh etc. if people ignore that piece of information, or don't factor it into their decisions, it's on their head Pretty much. Education is the issue here, not mechanics. To be really nice, the same warning text could also state that GÇ£Listed prices may not represent normal trade prices. For data on trade prices, please consult the trade history.GÇ¥ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
|
|
|
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 |