open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Increasing the order modification cost
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Author Topic

The Scope
Posted - 2011.05.08 18:17:00 - [1]

This is something I've been thinking about for a while now and wanted to throw the idea out there. The primary positive consequences I see are bolded.

Let's say it were increased to something like 50% of the cost of creating an order. What would be the effects? These are the immediate ones I can see:

1. Repeated adjustments of orders would not be practical and changes to orders would be a considerable faction of the overall value.

2. Because of #1, micromanaging traders would be encouraged to use smaller but more numerous orders instead of moving large single orders around. So a players that is constantly managing their trading will still be able to greatly increase their market share during their active playtime. However, this type of micromanagement wouldn't lead to whale orders messing up the market values when they're offline.

3. Because of #1, prices would better converge to balanced market values where supply meets demand as opposed to going wherever one person wants to drive the undercutting war. (current situation)

4. Because of #1, #2, and #3, it would be an environment where many small orders are constantly being added, filled, and disappearing while a few larger orders farther from the currently fine tuned market value act as backstops against rapid market swings. This is a more interesting situation than a few highly micromanaged orders squishing any others, and is thus better gameplay.

5. Because of #4, those that do not wish to heavily micromanage their orders can more effectively use them to buy and sell goods.

6. Because of #2, #4, and #5, there is more room for varied types of traders: those that focus on covering locations for customer convenience, manufacturers and consumers that just want to buy/sell at a good price, those that want to micromanage a single thing, and those that want to do long timeframe investments/speculation/manipulation.

7. Because of #5, players that aren't really traders would be encouraged to use their order slots for passive income like they would their R&D slots.

8. Because of #7, more players would get into the trading thing meaning more order slots would be used and thus the overall coverage in the galaxy would improve, better serving the players with availability of items on markets.

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2011.05.09 16:37:00 - [2]

What is the problem you're trying to solve? The current system is working just fine, allows the markets to adjust rapidly to changes in supply/demand dynamic and allows the manipulation of the market making it a more interesting system for traders to play with. Yes this means tricking .01 isk micromanagers too, so you can profit from people blindly outbidding you.

The current system can also be used for easy passive income already, so the current ability to micro manage orders doesn't prevent that. It just means you have to think for a second at what price point are you going to put your order up and how large you're going to make it.

You also can't be serious about the cost of altering an order. It would freeze many orders on the market and stagnate the whole system or you'd have to increase the number of orders used by manyfold to compensate. The number of orders is already too small on one character for a serious trader and you want to make a system that is designed in a way that people have to split their orders to multiple small ones or stop playing the current market games entirely.

Basicly I see some serious downsides to this and can't see what significant benefit your proposal would provide for the system or the players that would warrant such a change.

The Scope
Posted - 2011.05.09 22:35:00 - [3]

Edited by: Gimpb on 09/05/2011 22:37:46
Alright, here are a few of these things in terms of problems:

Trading is rather robotic in the sense of maintaining market orders. This makes it ripe for botting and such. While that is not in and of itself a reason to change it, it is symptomatic of poor gameplay. I think many people would agree that maintaining market orders feels like a chore.

How this helps:
It makes price something you have to actually think about. This means trading becomes an activity about thought, decision, and consequence as opposed to who performs the same repetitive action over and over the most.

The market buy and sale values for a given item tends to move like a train of lemmings and that does not represent a balanced market value. Therefore it leads to all the orders getting filled and none being left, or backed up amounts of stock in certain items and yet the prices still don't move toward a value at which they will sell. It's a broadly shared feeling that changing your price doesn't generally do much to improve your sales, it more or less just decreases margins for all the traders.

How this helps:
With players thinking more about setting things at the correct price, the market maintains a more balanced market value where orders live healthy lifecycles and buy and sell orders are less likely to get backed up or stripped. Furthermore, larger orders are more likely to be used with larger margins meaning they will act as a buffer against wild market changes as opposed to acting as a wall right on the current market value that prevents smaller orders from going through.

Tehg Rhind
Posted - 2011.05.11 21:08:00 - [4]

This is an interesting idea. It would completely change the markets to one where you placed new orders instead of updating old ones. Updating becomes impssible in most markets as each update severely cuts into you profitability, basically doubling your fees.

One place I can see a huge problem with this, however, is in large ticket items.

Right now if I want to trade in towers or faction ships I pu in my 1-300 mil for a 1 unit order and update the order to grab the item, generally looking at a 5-10% profit. With this system it would turn into some kind of horrible "price is right" game where the nex dude puts up a .01 bid and I now am stuck with 2 choices: update and eat into profits, or do nothing and hope that his order clears. If it doesn't the only way my order will clear is if there is a market swing, which could see me loosing money if it DOES clear.

Often times I will update orders down if I see the market shifting. You're removing that option.

Another problem is that you are giving a massive advantage to people who have superlow fees (due to standings). Those players will have massively lower update costs, so they have a better margin to beging with and are able to update more often.

Interesting idea but I don't think it would work.

Wyke Mossari
Posted - 2011.05.12 23:44:00 - [5]

Originally by: Gimpb

Trading is rather robotic in the sense of maintaining market orders. This makes it ripe for botting and such. While that is not in and of itself a reason to change it, it is symptomatic of poor gameplay. I think many people would agree that maintaining market orders feels like a chore.

Playing the 0.01 ISK game is a symptom of a poor playing style, So don't do. It is perfectly possible to trade in the way you suggest and make ISK, I rarely modify my orders and make billion.

Glyken Touchon
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.05.18 21:17:00 - [6]

increasing cost- no

increasing cooldown between changes- maybe


This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only