| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
M'Bac
   |
Posted - 2008.08.12 13:42:00 -
[1]
Bestower prices in The Forge
....or is it a concerted effort to annoy sweatshop/ macro haulers?
|
Lubimchik
Power Seed Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:18:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: M'Bac
Bestower prices in The Forge
....or is it a concerted effort to annoy sweatshop/ macro haulers?
lmao... Hmm that makes me wonder!
|
Nido Gentz
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:22:00 -
[3]
Has any volume gone off at those insane prices? I'm at work or I'd check myself.
|
EBANK Ricdic
Eve-Tech Savings n Loans
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:33:00 -
[4]
Interestingly it has. It looks like people are buying out all the stock and then having their 200m or 500m units as lowest price.
Foolish individuals aren't checking the price when purchasing and as such are buying these items at the insane rates seen here.
It's actually smart on the trader/scammer's part (depending on what you would call such a person) but I doubt it has anything to do with macro miners, just people who aren't taking the time to check the price before purchasing. Jita has a habit of doing that as people always expect it to be fully stocked and set at the cheapest price.
|
Lubimchik
Power Seed Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:36:00 -
[5]
Yeah I still have a 20m isk shuttle from a few months back that happened to break me of the not checking habit.
So this gold plated shuttle I purchased kind of sits in my hanger collecting dust like a nice car in a garage.
|
Snasty
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:38:00 -
[6]
Originally by: EBANK Ricdic
It's actually smart on the trader/scammer's part (depending on what you would call such a person)
Does anyone consider this sort of market "adjusting" a scam?
|
Vhaluus
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:42:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Snasty
Originally by: EBANK Ricdic
It's actually smart on the trader/scammer's part (depending on what you would call such a person)
Does anyone consider this sort of market "adjusting" a scam?
the people who bought them probably did. me personally? nope.
|
Ulecese
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:44:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Ulecese on 12/08/2008 14:45:04
Originally by: Snasty
Originally by: EBANK Ricdic
It's actually smart on the trader/scammer's part (depending on what you would call such a person)
Does anyone consider this sort of market "adjusting" a scam?
tbh there is little difference between this and buying up a particular item at a heavily used station then relisting it at a higher price. This situation is overkill though 
|
Snasty
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 14:51:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ulecese
Edited by: Ulecese on 12/08/2008 14:45:04
Originally by: Snasty
Originally by: EBANK Ricdic
It's actually smart on the trader/scammer's part (depending on what you would call such a person)
Does anyone consider this sort of market "adjusting" a scam?
tbh there is little difference between this and buying up a particular item at a heavily used station then relisting it at a higher price. This situation is overkill though
Well I'm glad that the general view is that this is fair game, albeit a bit over the top, as I have done rather well out of it.
|
Ricdics
Corporate Placement Holding
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:05:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Snasty
[Well I'm glad that the general view is that this is fair game, albeit a bit over the top, as I have done rather well out of it.
Screenshots of wallet transactions or it never happened  |
No Maz
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:08:00 -
[11]
It's been happening with a lot of Industrial Ships all over the place for some time now.
I assume cos its harder to restock these ships like you could with items and even smaller ships like frigs.
However, I am interested of a manufacturer or someone could come and dump a whole load of them and make a killig - is that possible?
|
Snasty
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:14:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Ricdics
Originally by: Snasty
[Well I'm glad that the general view is that this is fair game, albeit a bit over the top, as I have done rather well out of it.
Screenshots of wallet transactions or it never happened
I fear I have given you the wrong impression, I did not create this situation, I have just jumped on and off the bandwagon and made a nice few million here and there, but NOT the 240mill per ship maddness.
|
Rho'varo
Diversified Operational Services
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:18:00 -
[13]
Who foresees Bestowers arriving by the truckload on the evening train?
Features & Ideas: Winding Up Learning Skills |
Snasty
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:31:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Rho'varo
Who foresees Bestowers arriving by the truckload on the evening train?
Indeed, 12 have just pulled in on the first wagon. Time for me to move on I think, fun over, its going to get messy now.
|
Ricdics
Corporate Placement Holding
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:34:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Rho'varo
Who foresees Bestowers arriving by the truckload on the evening train?
Well you can see the mass purchase made 1 day before the manipulation, 544 units compared to the average closer to 70 units a day. Would have taken a small chunk of capital (approx 170m) however a single sale has made a return on investment.
Ships are probably the best things to manipulate in this way as they have a far longer build time than modules. Plus, the guy doesn't need to sell those 500 units to make his profit, he can just reprocess them. Prices are that tight in Jita that he will likely get about 280k back for every item purchased at 300k meaning a net loss on that 170m of about 20m however those sales pushes him up to at least a 400% return on investment over a 48 hour period |
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:37:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Ricdics
Originally by: Rho'varo
Who foresees Bestowers arriving by the truckload on the evening train?
Well you can see the mass purchase made 1 day before the manipulation, 544 units compared to the average closer to 70 units a day. Would have taken a small chunk of capital (approx 170m) however a single sale has made a return on investment.
Ships are probably the best things to manipulate in this way as they have a far longer build time than modules. Plus, the guy doesn't need to sell those 500 units to make his profit, he can just reprocess them. Prices are that tight in Jita that he will likely get about 280k back for every item purchased at 300k meaning a net loss on that 170m of about 20m however those sales pushes him up to at least a 400% return on investment over a 48 hour period
Manipulation on my T1 ships?
It's more common than you think
Honestly though, it's much easier to sustain this type of manipulation on long build time ships and in secondary hubs. Margins are pretty thin just about everywhere and it's pretty easy to take advantage of this. |
Ricdics
Corporate Placement Holding
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 15:42:00 -
[17]
That's the point. These bestowers take what? 3 hours to produce per bpo. At this point chances are a pile of people have bought 9 bestower bpo's each and have them producing like crazy.
However by the time they have a decent stockpile up they will find the price has stabilised and their unresearched production jobs need to be sold for a loss whilst the market manipulator has reprocessed his bestowers and manipulated the badger.
As said above it's incredibly easy to do something like this and there's no instant resolution to the problem. The guy has made the most of that, now that everyone is on the bandwagon he will switch to another stock whilst laughing his arse off when tomorrow there are 2000 bestowers for sale below build cost. |
Rho'varo
Diversified Operational Services
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 16:09:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Ricdics
That's the point. These Bestowers take what? 3 hours to produce per BPO.
Just an un-researched thought, but maybe it should take some time to reprocess things? E.g., 10% of the time it takes to build the thing. RP-wise it does seem a bit unlikely that if a pilot so chooses, he or she can magically transmute a huge mixed pile of goods to their constituent "elements" instantaneously (or, if in Jita, perhaps within several minutes).
Features & Ideas: Winding Up Learning Skills |
CornerStoner
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 16:17:00 -
[19]
Lazy, rich, or uninformed...whatevaaaa.
I routinely purchase T1 items/ships and haul them to a region that is ôout of stockö. 300% to 400% margins are common. Granted, I only buy a small inventory compared to this fellow, but it works! 30 min of high-sec hauling and on to my next item/region. If the haul is too far or margins wont support the time for the haul I just research a 'lil more and find something, somewhere, that will.
|
oogs
Gallente
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 16:27:00 -
[20]
lol, the same thing is happening with iteron Mk IIIs.
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 16:58:00 -
[21]
Originally by: oogs
lol, the same thing is happening with iteron Mk IIIs.
Why Mark III is an odd choice.
I usually did the Mark IV since its the most used industrial for new industrial alts before the last big push for Indy V which is what.. 20 odd days. The first big leap for most new indy toons. |
Letrange
Minmatar
Chaosstorm Corporation
Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 18:10:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
Originally by: oogs
lol, the same thing is happening with iteron Mk IIIs.
Why Mark III is an odd choice.
I usually did the Mark IV since its the most used industrial for new industrial alts before the last big push for Indy V which is what.. 20 odd days. The first big leap for most new indy toons.
Personally I go from III straight to V. I like my haulers to have a tractor beam and a salvager. But I could see the logic in the purely larger IV.
|
Nido Gentz
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 19:08:00 -
[23]
FWIW, I went from a Mark III to Mark V as well.
I wonder if this is a viable business to just continue to rotate the T1 ships you are manipulating and make a killing from the few fools that overpay. Reprocess, rinse, repeat...
|
Clair Bear
Coalition of Nations
Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 04:40:00 -
[24]
Or it could be RMT farmers transfering ISK from their trial accounts. They buy the 'scam' priced bestower from an ISK buyer, ISK buyer gets the money. No muss, no fuss, nobody's the wiser. Hell of a lot easier than jetting megacyte for the ISK buyers to sell to their buy orders.
Pretty savvy move if it's a manipulator though. Hope he/she gets around to megathrons right around the time I get a batch done. 
|
Sicil Fioet
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 08:38:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Clair Bear
Or it could be RMT farmers transfering ISK from their trial accounts. They buy the 'scam' priced bestower from an ISK buyer, ISK buyer gets the money. No muss, no fuss, nobody's the wiser. Hell of a lot easier than jetting megacyte for the ISK buyers to sell to their buy orders.
Pretty savvy move if it's a manipulator though. Hope he/she gets around to megathrons right around the time I get a batch done.
This is too high risk for farmers to do it around Jita area. And if they were transferring ISK those haulers would be flying off the shelves now. It is just someone preying on the unsuspecting buyer with developing attention deficit.
As far as if this is a scam or not, it is not a scam as much as setting up Ravens for 400 mil ISK and selling them as Navy Ravens is not a scam.
|
Ricdics
Corporate Placement Holding
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 09:17:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Sicil Fioet
As far as if this is a scam or not, it is not a scam as much as setting up Ravens for 400 mil ISK and selling them as Navy Ravens is not a scam.
I wouldn't agree. Selling a Raven faked as a Caldari Navy Raven I would consider a scam. It is intentionally trying to trick a person into selling a product that isn't the one advertised.
If you are selling a Raven advertised as a Raven but at a 300% premium you aren't necessarily misleading people. You are selling a product at a price that is right for you. The buyer has the option to purchase or not purchase.
It would come down to ones opinion on whether or not doing this would constitute a scam.
Insured Research and Production Services
Queues |
Rho'varo
Diversified Operational Services
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 15:25:00 -
[27]
There's obviously a substantial grey area that ranges from what almost everyone might agree is a scam to what only a few people consider scams (and others might consider "sharp dealing" or just clever marketing). Then there is a second grey area that covers the morality of scamming: some people think that there should be no scams allowed ever, and others think that scams are the best thing since the invention of the warp scrambler.
In my mind, a scam is one person taking positive action to trick someone else into making a mistake that benefits the first person. (I realise others might have different definitions.)
So if someone buys up all the Bestowers in a region with the intention that their 400 million ISK unit might be mistaken (however foolishly or however drunkenly) for a 400 thousand ISK unit, they are trying to operate a scam. I differentiate this from someone trying to price gouge by, for example, buying out the region and bumping the price by 300%. This latter action is not reliant on the victim making a simple decimal-place reading mistake. Perhaps buying a Bestower marked up 300% is a failure of judgement or business acumen, but it doesn't have the same flavour of "trick" to me.
Personally, I think scamming is unethical and I avoid it, but I recognise that it is an important part of the game and I wouldn't want to see scams go.
What I don't like is spam: let the scammers have their scams, but please take away their spamming powers!
Features & Ideas: Winding Up Learning Skills |
Clair Bear
Coalition of Nations
Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 15:54:00 -
[28]
Please note my use of quoted 'scam' -- while this practice is undoubtedly making use of people not counting zeroes (much like many bogus contract 'scams') it is hardly in the same league as cleverly crafted contracts with links to goods other than the ones being sold.
I'm going to go with manipulation on this one in retrospect. Hats off to the clever guy or girl that pulled this off.
p.s. I'm in the itty III pilot club myself.
|
Absimi Liard
Gallente
Confederate Miners Union of Eve
space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:38:00 -
[29]
I'm with Clair Bear.
I don't think this was a scam. I think it's just a very well done market manipulation.
I would take my hat off to honor the bright lad or lass who came up with it by the way. I seriously admire this sort of thing, especially when it's hitting the customer in their wallet.
(Nothing I love more than seeing someone Epic Win at market pvp, unless it's the idea of financing pirates.)
-abs
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:47:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Absimi Liard
unless it's the idea of financing pirates.
Well there is something infinitely satisfying in getting popped in low sec. Researching the corp that popped you, buying out every single possible item of real use, remarking it up and then paying for a merc corp to harrass them.
Ahhh the things you do when you have far to much isk to spend at times. |
Lexander Morinex
Caldari
LDD Investments
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 18:10:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 13/08/2008 18:11:23
I would classify this as a scam.
It is unlikely for me to believe that anybody (besides a person who bought an account or had a very rich friend) would be completely ignorant of the price of an Industrial ship of this type. They certainly would not expect to pay hundreds of millions. This isn't a case of exploiting ignorance (which is often what is done when pricing things between markets), but of playing on the fact that somebody quickly looked at a number and failed to recognize what they were paying. That to me has all the hallmarks of a scam.
I tend to be in the category of people that believe that scams are bad for games. I have the bad luck to have to deal with a professional con artist on a semi-regular basis (he is the father of my stepson). The worst part of dealing with this guy is the knowledge that you can't strike a deal with him. He simply won't keep his side of the bargain. He changes his stories whenever trapped, plays on the specific weaknesses of individuals, and treats people in terms of how he can take advantage of them. The only weapon we have against him is the threat of violent force and the power of the government to throw him in jail. It is a bad business.
I have watched the harm this person has caused for several years now. Credit ratings ruined, people left destitute and homeless. Scamming may be legal in the game. It may even be in the spirit of the game, but I also believe it harms the game. The efficiency of our IPO market is heavily damaged by the constant threat of scams.
This is my opinion, but after having watched a professional scammer in action, I find it a pathetic defense to argue that 'scamming is just PvP' or some other silly argument. Scams destroy the basic trust between human beings that is essential to the social fabric of a community. I have often played PvP and enjoy the competition (and I suck at PvP but do it anyway). There is no need for a competitive community to have to deal with this kind of destructive behavior. I like that in EVE there is danger lurking in every corner. That danger can exist just fine without having to deal with people who destructively scam at the cost of the enjoyment of others.
Just my opinion, and I recognize I might very well be in the minority. So be it.
- Lexander
|
Absimi Liard
Gallente
Confederate Miners Union of Eve
space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 19:28:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
Originally by: Absimi Liard
unless it's the idea of financing pirates.
Well there is something infinitely satisfying in getting popped in low sec. Researching the corp that popped you, buying out every single possible item of real use, remarking it up and then paying for a merc corp to harrass them.
Ahhh the things you do when you have far to much isk to spend at times.
I have to say, I so need to be rich so I can do this sort of thing.
But I was thinking more of financing a pirate corp for profit, like a bond or IPO, than hiring one to target your opponent. Not that I don't like that idea as well.
But IPO-ing a pirate corp feels so very . . . well . . . Elizabethan to me. Privateers and pirates were very much business concerns historically, with signed charters and shares for the crews just like whalers had. So ever since I bumped across someone looking for ISK to pirate with I've had this dream of being rich enough to finance a few pirate corps and then sitting back like some baron in England while my evil henchmen go out and Yarr for our mutual profit. Evil and profitable, does it get better than that in EVE? Really?
-abs
|
Petyr Baelich
Taggart Transdimensional
Virtue of Selfishness
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 23:44:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 13/08/2008 18:11:23
I would classify this as a scam.
It is unlikely for me to believe that anybody (besides a person who bought an account or had a very rich friend) would be completely ignorant of the price of an Industrial ship of this type. They certainly would not expect to pay hundreds of millions. This isn't a case of exploiting ignorance (which is often what is done when pricing things between markets), but of playing on the fact that somebody quickly looked at a number and failed to recognize what they were paying. That to me has all the hallmarks of a scam.
Scams rely on information asymmetry through force. The market is open to all, the tools to see historical prices are there for anyone to access. No one can force you to blindly hit enter on a buy order without looking at the price or noticing that it is several orders of magnitude higher than "normal". In order to buy something off the market you must first seek out the item in question, see the price displayed before you, and then accept the price given to you. Since there is no way for a seller to change the price that is displayed to you, it is impossible to "scam" a sell order.
Scams are only possible if one side has information that is either impossible or difficult beyond a reasonable standard for the other party to obtain. An example would be if you could sell an item for one price and advertise it as being a different price, (as you can almost do with contracts). Or if you are using actual force to compel someone to buy something. Neither one of those applies in this case.
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
I tend to be in the category of people that believe that scams are bad for games. I have the bad luck to have to deal with a professional con artist on a semi-regular basis (he is the father of my stepson). The worst part of dealing with this guy is the knowledge that you can't strike a deal with him. He simply won't keep his side of the bargain. He changes his stories whenever trapped, plays on the specific weaknesses of individuals, and treats people in terms of how he can take advantage of them. The only weapon we have against him is the threat of violent force and the power of the government to throw him in jail. It is a bad business.
I have watched the harm this person has caused for several years now. Credit ratings ruined, people left destitute and homeless. Scamming may be legal in the game. It may even be in the spirit of the game, but I also believe it harms the game. The efficiency of our IPO market is heavily damaged by the constant threat of scams.
This is my opinion, but after having watched a professional scammer in action, I find it a pathetic defense to argue that 'scamming is just PvP' or some other silly argument. Scams destroy the basic trust between human beings that is essential to the social fabric of a community. I have often played PvP and enjoy the competition (and I suck at PvP but do it anyway). There is no need for a competitive community to have to deal with this kind of destructive behavior. I like that in EVE there is danger lurking in every corner. That danger can exist just fine without having to deal with people who destructively scam at the cost of the enjoyment of others.
Just my opinion, and I recognize I might very well be in the minority. So be it.
- Lexander
Agreed, but none of that applies to an open market order. There is no lying, there is no misrepresentation, there is no use of force.
|
Lexander Morinex
Caldari
LDD Investments
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 01:22:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 14/08/2008 01:22:30
Quote:
Scams rely on information asymmetry through force. The market is open to all, the tools to see historical prices are there for anyone to access. No one can force you to blindly hit enter on a buy order without looking at the price or noticing that it is several orders of magnitude higher than "normal". In order to buy something off the market you must first seek out the item in question, see the price displayed before you, and then accept the price given to you. Since there is no way for a seller to change the price that is displayed to you, it is impossible to "scam" a sell order.
Scams are only possible if one side has information that is either impossible or difficult beyond a reasonable standard for the other party to obtain. An example would be if you could sell an item for one price and advertise it as being a different price, (as you can almost do with contracts). Or if you are using actual force to compel someone to buy something. Neither one of those applies in this case.
You argument is elegant, but in the end I must simply disagree with your definition. I feel scammed anytime the person who is selling or buying something from me attempts to directly or indirectly mislead me, even when I am under no compulsion and have full access to the facts. I end up doing a lot of reading the fine print and avoiding my share of scams that way.
- Lexander
|
Rho'varo
Diversified Operational Services
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 01:54:00 -
[35]
If a pilot is extracting profit by force from another, I'd call that plain ol' robbery, or even good ol' victory.
Features & Ideas: Winding Up Learning Skills |
Ricdics
Corporate Placement Holding
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 04:28:00 -
[36]
There will always be varying opinions on this topic.
For example a couple of days ago I put a Guristas Shuttle on contract for 1 billion isk. If it sells would it be considered a scam? I only have a few of them and they are no longer available so I consider the item to be of relative rarity.
Whilst lots of people may have them, the contracts system allows me to offer my product to regular players who may not watch different channels or directly associate with others. These people won't know that there are a fair few Guristas Shuttle's out there so (with some luck) will buy my epic rare product.
I haven't mislabelled it in any way, I simply determine that I am not interested in letting go of these items below the 1 billion isk mark (it is teh sexy).
Am I scamming?  |
Lexander Morinex
Caldari
LDD Investments
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 04:57:00 -
[37]
Selling an item at a price that another person is willing to pay (not one they accidentally paid without checking) might qualify as price gouging, but it certainly is not a scam.
One might find price gouging unethical, but I don't. All I ask is that a person make a decision knowing what it is they are paying and that they get what they agreed to buy.
- Lexander
|
RaWBLooD
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 05:15:00 -
[38]
If someone pays me more than something is worth by a power of 10 then I will attempt to contact them about it when I notice.
miners-you can: switch, rob, wardec, nerf, scam them, buy below market, pirate them on their way to sell. mining < trading, ratting, manufacturing from market bought minerals,they still wont go away |
Amrumm
Rhetorical Devices
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 08:27:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 13/08/2008 18:11:23
<snip>
This is my opinion, but after having watched a professional scammer in action, I find it a pathetic defense to argue that 'scamming is just PvP' or some other silly argument. Scams destroy the basic trust between human beings that is essential to the social fabric of a community. I have often played PvP and enjoy the competition (and I suck at PvP but do it anyway). There is no need for a competitive community to have to deal with this kind of destructive behavior. I like that in EVE there is danger lurking in every corner. That danger can exist just fine without having to deal with people who destructively scam at the cost of the enjoyment of others.
Just my opinion, and I recognize I might very well be in the minority. So be it.
- Lexander
So you are okay with virtually killing people, as long as they are not scammed? Interesting.
|
Lexander Talonix
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 14:34:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Amrumm
So you are okay with virtually killing people, as long as they are not scammed? Interesting.
Yes. I make fairly strong distinctions between competitive behavior and griefing and scamming. Virtual killing is 'mostly harmless'. More importantly, it is clearly understood when signing up that the game involved the virtual killing of other players. You aren't getting anything you didn't sign up for.
It comes down to the competitive nature of a game. Two or more parties, engaged in a competition, agree to use any legal means within the game to win. Arguably, the rules in EVE allow griefing and scamming so such play is 'fair game'. I tend to take the view that such behavior should should be deliberately limited by CCP and other players.
I argue this for the same reason I would argue in any game. Anti-social behavior is destructive to games. I believe this is why most games that allow unlimited loss-based PvP tend to have difficulty being successful. I don't think the designers of EVE really intended to have players spend quite so much time in hi-sec as they do. In my youth, I was a rules lawyer. I could find and bend rules to the extreme. Very quickly I learned that such behavior caused other players to voluntarily leave. People play games to have a good time. The ability to maintain competitive balance at all times is why I admire the games of Reiner Knizia.
I once played a game that had two sides fighting over a virtual battlefield. It was imagined by the designers as a competitive fight, but they forget that giving the winner advantages over the loser resulted in everybody fighting for the winner. Sure enough, on every server the maps looked like one side controlling 90% percent of the map (and this after the game was out for mere days). The online servers were barren, since one side always had such advantages they couldn't find an enemy.
To me, it is ethical to price manipulate in EVE. Such behavior is essentially competitive, and can be countered by other players. Attempting to deceive another player to pay 100,000,000 when they mean to pay 10,000,000 is not so much about competition as about exploitation. It is legal, but if repeated often will cause people to decide they want to have nothing to do with such behavior and leave. It is my contention that for a healthy game, you need to have and keep your playerbase. Sure, it is fun to be the king of the world, but if the game steadily drains players then eventually you will be king of an empty wasteland. Encouraging social behavior that allows for competition but limits unnecessary anti-social behavior is important to the experience. It is why I think that eventually CCP should consider a regulatory framework, since such a framework would improve that aspect of the game.
I believe that if players feel they are in an environment with limited scams, and without destructive ganking and griefing that they will eventually come to recognize that PvP is the fun part of the game. There will always be a purely carebear contingent, but as long as such players are merely supporting the PvP framework then that is fine. After all, as much as I am working to be an EVE trillionaire it doesn't carry the prestige of being the ruler of a large area in 0.0.
- Lexander
|
Banni Vinda
Minmatar
Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 15:47:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Lexander Talonix
Yes. I make fairly strong distinctions between competitive behavior and griefing and scamming. Virtual killing is 'mostly harmless'. More importantly, it is clearly understood when signing up that the game involved the virtual killing of other players. You aren't getting anything you didn't sign up for.
Isn't it also clearly understood when signing up that EVE also involves power struggles that don't involve guns. From EVE's own FAQ:
Quote:
The bottom line is that we at CCP have strived to create a rich and immersive universe centered on human interaction. Players can play the game as a simple space trading game...
Originally by: Lexander Talonix
It comes down to the competitive nature of a game. Two or more parties, engaged in a competition, agree to use any legal means within the game to win. Arguably, the rules in EVE allow griefing and scamming so such play is 'fair game'. I tend to take the view that such behavior should should be deliberately limited by CCP and other players.
Well the rules deliberately do allow any scams within legal game mechanics. It is one of the essential natures of the game. A number of people heard about EVE via the publicity generated by actions of groups such as GHSC.
In fact just this morning at work, I was debating with a game designer how EVE is one of the most open, sandbox-style games we know that has actually worked, rather than descending into anarchy, or a furry-haven.
Originally by: Lexander Talonix
In my youth, I was a rules lawyer. I could find and bend rules to the extreme. Very quickly I learned that such behavior caused other players to voluntarily leave
Well this rules-pushing does happen. That is why you now can no longer fit multiple ABs/MWDs to a ship, why instas were replaced with WTZ, why the mechanics of war-decs have altered, why we have the impending nano-nerfs and changes to suicide-ganking. People were looking at what was allowed, then trying to push those rules to an extreme. How many people does it cause to leave? Ask all those who post in nerf threads threatening to cancel their accounts, how many are still here? |
Banni Vinda
Minmatar
Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 15:48:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Lexander Talonix
I once played a game that had two sides fighting over a virtual battlefield. It was imagined by the designers as a competitive fight, but they forget that giving the winner advantages over the loser resulted in everybody fighting for the winner. Sure enough, on every server the maps looked like one side controlling 90% percent of the map (and this after the game was out for mere days). The online servers were barren, since one side always had such advantages they couldn't find an enemy.
Fair enough, we don't want this to happen. Thanks to regular nerfs/buffs, various sides in EVE tend to rise and fall, and in general, there aren't too many cases of one-sidedness. Look at the introduction of invention. T2 BPO ownership was making the game too one sided, invention was developed to move the balance.
Originally by: Lexander Talonix
To me, it is ethical to price manipulate in EVE. Such behavior is essentially competitive, and can be countered by other players. Attempting to deceive another player to pay 100,000,000 when they mean to pay 10,000,000 is not so much about competition as about exploitation. It is legal, but if repeated often will cause people to decide they want to have nothing to do with such behavior and leave. It is my contention that for a healthy game, you need to have and keep your playerbase. Sure, it is fun to be the king of the world, but if the game steadily drains players then eventually you will be king of an empty wasteland. Encouraging social behavior that allows for competition but limits unnecessary anti-social behavior is important to the experience. It is why I think that eventually CCP should consider a regulatory framework, since such a framework would improve that aspect of the game.
Why should this be regulated? As someone said above, no-one is forcing a person to make that purchase. The information to determine if a price is reasonable is within a couple of clicks.
Originally by: Lexander Talonix
I believe that if players feel they are in an environment with limited scams, and without destructive ganking and griefing that they will eventually come to recognize that PvP is the fun part of the game. There will always be a purely carebear contingent, but as long as such players are merely supporting the PvP framework then that is fine. After all, as much as I am working to be an EVE trillionaire it doesn't carry the prestige of being the ruler of a large area in 0.0.
We say this a lot in MD, but PvP (in the pew-pew sense) isn't the only fun part in EVE. In fact I can pretty bad at it, though I still enjoy it. There is much more to this game than firin' ma lasors, and that's why I love it. |
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 15:52:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Banni Vinda
Fair enough, we don't want this to happen. Thanks to regular nerfs/buffs, various sides in EVE tend to rise and fall, and in general, there aren't too many cases of one-sidedness. Look at the introduction of invention. T2 BPO ownership was making the game too one sided, invention was developed to move the balance.
The problem being with invention however is that instead of the bottleneck being at the BPO, thanks to the distribution of mats, the bottleneck is now at the moons.
Add to that the horrible (Im loathe now to say broken since they are working as intended) sov mechanics and we have an interesting t2 market. |
Banni Vinda
Minmatar
Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 16:00:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
The problem being with invention however is that instead of the bottleneck being at the BPO, thanks to the distribution of mats, the bottleneck is now at the moons.
Add to that the horrible (Im loathe now to say broken since they are working as intended) sov mechanics and we have an interesting t2 market.
Yeah, I agree not everything is perfectly balanced, or that it ever has been in EVE. I wasn't saying that invention perfectly levelled the playing field, since there are other bumps in it like you mentioned. I only gave that as an example to show that there aren't any runaway spirals leading 90% of players onto one side, such as the described above by Lexander. |
Lexander Morinex
Caldari
LDD Investments
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 16:22:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Banni Vinda
Why should this be regulated? As someone said above, no-one is forcing a person to make that purchase. The information to determine if a price is reasonable is within a couple of clicks.
First of all, the market is ALREADY regulated. Buy orders and sell orders on the market screen automagically transfer ISK and materials between players. This is a regulated function, an improvement on the alternative of two players meeting with ships and trying to work out a trade.
This one regulated function is one of the main reasons the game has a working market. Players know that you go to a station, buy or sell and the game will make sure you get your money or your item. It is so heavily used on so many items that players take it for granted.
I am a free market person, and what they call in the U.S. a libertarian. I am no fan of regulation. But regulation in a limited form (such as clearing houses and exchanges) can provide a safe, effective means for players to trade safely and securely. The current stock markets of the world function on the assumption that what you trade for is what you get. Scams and other unethical behavior are a danger because they damage the trust required to make markets actually work.
The current IPO market in MD is a great example. Enormous amounts of ISK that might be doing something productive are sitting around uselessly making 3% or less because we simply can't trust people. That problem can never be removed by regulation, but it can be limited in ways that improve the market.
Markets are a fundamental problem for PvP games. Markets only function well in the presence of trust. Players enjoy the game when they can buy what the need (even if expensive), with some assurance that what they contract for they get. Anything that makes that happen efficiently is 'good for the game'.
In the real world, markets often form in wartime out of simple necessity. But these markets are prone to liquidity problems, price gouging and other behavior that can afflict the desperate. These are not good for a GAME. I recognize my argument does not appeal to everyone, but I am arguing in favor of a game with a maximum competitive balance, happy players who enjoy what they are doing, but plenty of risk and reward.
- Lexander
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 16:34:00 -
[46]
No offense Lex, but if your a player even 1 month into the game (about the time where you would need an itty III) and you cannot recognize that its costing you nearly 300%+ over and above normal.
Well frankly you deserve to have your isk taken away |
Banni Vinda
Minmatar
Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 16:39:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
P.S. To clarify how I would address THIS issue. Two things. One, make the final price clearer and in a bigger font where you look at it. Two, provide the same warning when people are buying well above the 1-day regional market that I get whenever I put a sell order in way below the current market. I have typed one too many 0's a few times and ended up paying too much in fees for that simple reason. Truth be told, if this particular scam was never fixed I wouldn't really care all that much.
There actually is a partial solution already implemented. Look on the settings tab on your market screen. There are min/max price filters for buy/sell orders. Set these up to filter out any sell orders above 200% of average price. That way, you won't ever even see these inflated prices.
(This is from memory so the labelling may be incorrect, but you should understand what I mean)
|
Seamus OReilly
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 17:38:00 -
[48]
Quote:
It is why I think that eventually CCP should consider a regulatory framework, since such a framework would improve that aspect of the game.
I think in this case the cure is worse than the disease. I want Firefly, not Star Trek!
|
Amrumm
Rhetorical Devices
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 18:06:00 -
[49]
The new filter options on the market allow you to screen out orders that deviate too much from the average. So if you require training wheels, activate the option.
Doesn't protect you from swapping price & quantity though. One time someone wanted to put up a buy order at 10 isk for 1m cruise missiles, but he changed the numbers. That was the easiest 10m profit I ever earned.
|
Lexander Talonix
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 18:29:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
No offense Lex, but if your a player even 1 month into the game (about the time where you would need an itty III) and you cannot recognize that its costing you nearly 300%+ over and above normal.
Well frankly you deserve to have your isk taken away
*shrugs* It isn't like I bought one. I just define the action as a scam. My own Bestower cost me about 350,000K ISK and I have been more than happy with it. And I am a pretty happy EVE player. The spirit of liberty that pervades the game is one of the best parts of it.
This is a game. We all play to have fun, even the guy who made a mistake and got scammed. If that guy gets scammed enough, he will stop playing. Have enough bad things in a game and too many people leave. Survival of the fittest might be a biological necessity but it isn't necessary in a game.
My views come from the disparity between my physical and mental abilities. In one arena everybody dominates me and I have had my share of getting called noob because my reflexes are the slowest in the room. In another arena I tend to dominate everyone because I am abnormally good at math. And yet despite the fact that I am top 0.1% in one area I still manage to always find somebody who can make me look average.
Nobody deserves to have their ISK taken away. Then again, nobody deserves to be protected against having it taken away. What I support is enough of a framework that people can feel comfortable that when they make a trade that what they get is what they thought they were buying.
- Lexander
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 18:33:00 -
[51]
As stated before, the framework is already in place.
You can only hold someones hand so long. |
Pax Empyrean
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 22:58:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Pax Empyrean on 14/08/2008 22:58:02
Quote:
Survival of the fittest might be a biological necessity but it isn't necessary in a game.
Sure it is. A game that caters to the absolute dumbest members of the potential player base isn't going to be much for anyone else.
Eve is tilted a little bit harder against the idiots than most other MMOs, which is an inevitable consequence of its complexity. I'd rather have a complex game where players have to look out for themselves instead of one where the primary design goal is making everything tard-friendly.
|
adriaans
Amarr
Explora Empire
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 00:03:00 -
[53]
Edited by: adriaans on 15/08/2008 00:06:49
Edited by: adriaans on 15/08/2008 00:04:41
while i can't say i'm the one doing that in caldari space, my alt is making a fortune in a different region, and to make it more fun, i make more isk than i thought since people keep dumping masses on the market i just buy up and resell again for 500% price increase ;)
on daily basis around 500 mill isk from only industrials is gotten from selling off large amunts of my stock for then to be used buying out all other competitors trying to join the bandwagen, sure they make isk too, but not near what i make.
the market is getting 'depleted' (as lack of better word), so i'm pulling out now with my 750 mill (production cost) of industrials, each i'm able to sell at 5 mill easily in the amounts of 100-250 a day, my first attempt at market manipulaton. industrials fills my freighter up too fast though, so i'm looking for something better now, i already control 3 other markets in 2 days time, my main problem is i got not enough isk to make it bigger scale :P
i'd like to thank whoever it was that unknowingly made me aware of this opportunity! :)
edit to clarify: i own none of the multihundred million orders, they sell to slow and i can't be bothered sitting with a stock of severla thousands of industrials :P
edit2: i'm having great fun with this, it's a nice break when i've lost too many ships in pvp ;)
-sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr!
|
Tasko Pal
Heron Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 02:04:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 13/08/2008 18:11:23
I would classify this as a scam.
I agree. Anything that relies on deceiving the other trader for most or all of the profit is a scam.
Quote:
This is my opinion, but after having watched a professional scammer in action, I find it a pathetic defense to argue that 'scamming is just PvP' or some other silly argument. Scams destroy the basic trust between human beings that is essential to the social fabric of a community. I have often played PvP and enjoy the competition (and I suck at PvP but do it anyway). There is no need for a competitive community to have to deal with this kind of destructive behavior. I like that in EVE there is danger lurking in every corner. That danger can exist just fine without having to deal with people who destructively scam at the cost of the enjoyment of others.
Just my opinion, and I recognize I might very well be in the minority. So be it.
I wouldn't consider "scamming is just market PvP" to be a defense, but more a statement of fact. Eve is a low trust environment. One of the prices of that is precisely that scamming exists. From a role playing angle, some of the biggest scams would even be lauded. If NPC Corp A legally scammed several tens of trillion isk from NPC Corp B, Corp A would probably boast about that in their recruitment ads. Eve has the sort of disfunctional society where good cons are often admired and envied openly. In this low trust environment, players attempt to build corporations and other things. I think it makes achievements like the big 0.0 alliances, the successful IPOs, and the large businesses more remarkable.
|
Lexander Talonix
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 02:27:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Lexander Talonix on 15/08/2008 02:28:13
Originally by: Tasko Pal
I wouldn't consider "scamming is just market PvP" to be a defense, but more a statement of fact. Eve is a low trust environment. One of the prices of that is precisely that scamming exists. From a role playing angle, some of the biggest scams would even be lauded. If NPC Corp A legally scammed several tens of trillion isk from NPC Corp B, Corp A would probably boast about that in their recruitment ads. Eve has the sort of disfunctional society where good cons are often admired and envied openly. In this low trust environment, players attempt to build corporations and other things. I think it makes achievements like the big 0.0 alliances, the successful IPOs, and the large businesses more remarkable.
You know, I can accept that. This is a low trust environment. I am not much for calling people idiots because they make mistakes, or laughing in people's faces. I seeing idiotic behavior all the time, sometimes from the smartest of people.
My position is a 'health of the game' argument. I think that giving people an environment that is cutthroat but rewarding is what EVE can be. Players compete, fight in battles, initiate market manuevers, even use deceptive practices such as spying, etc. I think I tend to dislike scams because they are discouraging to players in a way that few other things can be.
The 'be tough' argument sounds good and all, but in my experience the toughest people I have known were also the ones least likely to scam.
- Lexander
|
Petyr Baelich
Taggart Transdimensional
Virtue of Selfishness
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 02:37:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Tasko Pal
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 13/08/2008 18:11:23
I would classify this as a scam.
I agree. Anything that relies on deceiving the other trader for most or all of the profit is a scam.
Please tell me how buying an item for one price and then relisting it at a markup qualifies as deceiving anyone. The price is clearly displayed on the market screen. If it's too much, don't pay it, buy it somewhere else or do without. This is like people saying gas prices are "too high" and the government should do something. No price is ever "too high" in a free market. If it's higher than the majority of people are willing to pay, then that item will not sell and competition/profit motive will bring the price down to the point where people are willing to pay it.
If you are not using physical force or deception, (relisting something at exactly 10x its previous value is not deceptive, the price is RIGHT THERE. It just requires that you OPEN YOUR EYES AND LOOK) then it is not a scam!
|
KtoJest
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 10:49:00 -
[57]
Quote:
If you are selling a Raven advertised as a Raven but at a 300% premium you aren't necessarily misleading people. You are selling a product at a price that is right for you. The buyer has the option to purchase or not purchase.
Amen to that! |
Tasko Pal
Heron Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 22:26:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Tasko Pal on 17/08/2008 22:26:37
Originally by: Petyr Baelich
Originally by: Tasko Pal
Originally by: Lexander Morinex
Edited by: Lexander Morinex on 13/08/2008 18:11:23
I would classify this as a scam.
I agree. Anything that relies on deceiving the other trader for most or all of the profit is a scam.
Please tell me how buying an item for one price and then relisting it at a markup qualifies as deceiving anyone. The price is clearly displayed on the market screen. If it's too much, don't pay it, buy it somewhere else or do without. This is like people saying gas prices are "too high" and the government should do something. No price is ever "too high" in a free market. If it's higher than the majority of people are willing to pay, then that item will not sell and competition/profit motive will bring the price down to the point where people are willing to pay it.
If you are not using physical force or deception, (relisting something at exactly 10x its previous value is not deceptive, the price is RIGHT THERE. It just requires that you OPEN YOUR EYES AND LOOK) then it is not a scam!
Read my definition. If most of the profit from a transaction is acquired via deception, then it's a scam. If you're not, then it isn't a scam. Use of force is not a scam, marking things up by a factor of ten isn't a scam. It doesn't matter if all the relevant data is there. You can still scam someone even if they have access to all the data.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |