open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Economic Issues for the Good Doctor
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.07 03:16:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Roemy Schneider
lots of big "if"s, certainly, but i have been thinking of acquiring a fort knox on my own. just not in gold but all kinds of raw materials.

I don't do market manipulation like you speculate however I do maintain my own personal fort knox of materials. There have been a few cases where I've lost a few 10's of millions due to things bottoming out even further however I don't mind really. I don't experience buyer's remorse even if the price drops.

I buy at what I'm happy with and I hang onto that feeling. I hang on to... ...

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 04:14:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 07/09/2007 04:15:59
Originally by: Daeva Vios
Setting a higher cost for changing prices by .01 isk would prohibit setting orders by .01 isk. You're just giving your restrictions a different name. I play on games with restrictions very similar to what you're asking for here, and the economy in those games is entirely screwed up. Someone with no idea about market mechanics can, and will, completely destroy a market out of simple ignorance. To limit the market in the method you're suggesting would be bad for the free market economy.


It is not a restriction. It is a cost of doing business and it is about making the game a bit more fun. Camping in a station for hours tweaking orders by 0.01 ISK every few minutes is not good gameplay (but of course in games there are always some who will do just that). Associating a base cost to changing your orders discourages endless fiddling and makes room for more strategic thinking on how much you price your orders and how often you manipulate them. The associated cost is of course a matter of balance and should be low enough that it is not a big deal to change here and there but significant enough that doing 50+ times in a day to move your price 0.01 adds up to a real impact on your bottom line.

I am not sure but it would also probably help their Need for Speed initiative by lowering server queries.


Quote:
The point is very much what I care about. I don't do mineral compression. I recognize that it influences the prices of my goods. Nerfing it means the cost of goods will increase universally as the cost of transporting minerals increases and industrialists realize their overhead is growing.


Yes costs would probably rise but it would affect everyone evenly. If CCP wished they could boost ISK faucets to compensate some (I'd rather they didn't but they could) It would open more room for traders to do their thing and presumably give those who like shooting people more things to shoot. This is also a step in the direction of being able to interdict your enemies supply chain.


Quote:
Have you thought that perhaps, instead of impinging on the mineral market, rat loot helps to drive it? Recycling in the real world certainly harms mine owners' bottom line, but in the end it does help reduce the overall cost of minerals as mine owners have to scale their costs to compete with new sources of raw materials. I don't believe minerals from rat loot represent a significant portion of the mineral market, in comparison to minerals from mining. I do, however, believe it's significant enough to keep the mineral market as active as it is.


Recycling in the real world actually does not affect miners since recycled materials are more expensive than that mined.

I would love to see data on how much refined loot is a part of the mineral market. I agree it probably is not a huger percentage but I suspect it is enough to have a measurable effect.


Quote:
Yes, I did notice. I also noticed they rose again once CCP reduced the refine rate. Reducing or eliminating minerals from rat loot would have this same effect across the board. EVERY SINGLE ITEM would be touched by this, even rat loot.


Good. That is the point. Let miners be the source of minerals. Let manufacturers be the source of mods. Make more room for traders. If this affects prices too much CCP has the power to tweak the economy (lower mineral reqs on building items or injecting more cash in from missions/bounties for two examples).

There are many times where I have built some items and find I need to refine them back into mins to build a different order. Reducing what I get back most certainly would hurt me. I still think this would be better.


Quote:
I agree basic items need to be removed from rat loot tables.


Curious how you agree with this but argue against nerfing minerals from rat loot. Although I agree I think removing basic items from the loot tables would be best.

Melinda Bettin
Posted - 2007.09.07 05:18:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

1) Mineral Compression
2) Artificial caps/floors on mineral prices
3) Market wars 0.01 ISK at a time (or as I like to call it "Death by a Thousand Cuts")
4) Market Hubs
5) Minerals from Rat Loot
6) Minerals from Drone Regions (or just Drones in general)
7) Insurance
8) Low Sec (broad but roughly economic improvements to encourage people out there)
9) NPC Trade Goods (not sure this merits a spot...opinions?)
10) Nothing...just wanted 10 items for the aesthetic appeal rather than nine items (doubtless I missed something anyway).



It got really long and lenghty in some of those replies so I didn't bother to read them Razz

1) Happy they will be removing it.
2) They should all be removed from game, take off the training wheels ccp. Exploit and a non intended side effect of CCPs horrific miscalculation on minearal prices from day one. For those who think they really pulled some great trick out of the hat, just look at the exploit fixes in last patch notes.
3) Will haunt us to our graves.
4) Don't mind these if it wern't for lag.
5-6) Perfect Refine has always been a joke. Look at description of Mexallon for crying out loud. "Very flexible metallic mineral, dull to bright silvery green in color. Can be mixed with tritanium to make extremely hard alloys or it can be used by itself for various purposes. Fairly common in most regions" Hence, it's property is changing. I.E. It's no longer mexallon or tritanium because it changes physical properties. 50% refine should be max on ships, and many modules IMO (flame on flamers)
7) Insurance should move to a dynamic price structure. Dr. EyjoG would help here. But to get you started, CCP has access to all regions mineral prices. I'll let you game design out the rest.
8) Don't get me started...
9) NPC trade goods were "fixed" pffft. Again, perhaps Dr. EyjoG has some fun experiments he'd like to run with these.
10) There are many "experts" in this trade fourm ... They like to talk about doing things and how they are too rich and lazy to do others. Once a month something mildly interesting will pop up.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.07 05:41:00 - [34]
 

Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 05:49:09
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 05:48:57
Quote:
It is not a restriction. It is a cost of doing business and it is about making the game a bit more fun.


How is increasing the cost of doing business not a restriction? You're punishing players who can play better than you can because they have more time. You are asking for a free market economy to have price restrictions imposed on it in the form of what amounts to a fine for posting a competitive price.

It's been stated countless times, and I'll say it again: You do not have to compete in the .01 isk wars to make gobs and gobs of isk in this game. If you can't figure out what I mean, that is your failing, not mine, not anyone else's, and CERTAINLY NOT the fault of those who participate in the market on a level you'd rather not.

I'm so sick of people blaming their problems on everyone else.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2007.09.07 10:49:00 - [35]
 

The problem with the current system and "0.01 ISK wars" is the fact the sales are completely anonymous, and a sale is always awarded to the player with a lower sales price, regardless of the price difference (0.01 or several mil, doesn't matter, lower wins) or even what the buyer actually selects (if I know a friend always sets sales prices with ".77 ISK" and want to buy from him not others there, I can't... I'll always buy from the lowest seller).

The problem is that you can make a sale or "not make a sale" simply by not being active enough to undercut the other.
Given equal costs for a product's manufacture by several players, the hyperactive player can afford to ALWAYS undercut by 0.01 ISK, and buy off the other guy's stock as soon as the undercutting goes below manufacture cost if the others undercut more agressively, or simply undercut a lot more often for minimal benefit loss, but a guaranteed sale.

If you can't see anything wrong with all of the above, then you must be playing EVE for too long and forgotten how people act in real-life.
__

So, are 0.01 ISK price wars inherently bad ?
Depends on your definition, but they do certainly give a huge advantage to people willing to spend loads of time online (or use some sort of illegal macro to do it for them)... and player skill gets mostly overriden by activity level.
While not necessarily a "bad" thing in and all by itself, it should be avoided if possible, while not breaking any existing mechanics.
And, let's not forget, while a harsh and unforgiving place, this is afterall a GAME not real-life work, so a minimal degree of "fun" should be maintained.

So, now, what could be done here ?


You can try to impose extra taxes on order changes, but that's counter-productive at best, or downright bad at worst.
Sure, you do reduce the incidence of the same people doing the cuts constantly on large orders, but that won't ever stop people placing and babysitting smaller orders, replacing them as soon as they get sold, and so on and so forth.
You end up hurting the people not able to be online constantly to do it themseleves, so no.
This is defientely NOT the answer.


You could try to implement an actual in-game broker (as, well, you do pay "broker fees", yet your broker seems pretty dumb to deserve its money), a broker that would adjust prices after a certain preset delay (with or without randomness) with a certain price (again, either fixed or with some randomness, either amount or percent).
Basically, some system-managed "market bot" (the thing a broker is supposed to be), that WILL play the "0.01 ISK wars" for you if you like to participate, even if you're NOT online contantly to do it.
The one and only negative part of this approach is the fact it will never happend due to the fact it would take insane amounts of extra processing power for no significant gameplay improvement (traders make up a minority of the general population).


There would be another approach, in which you ALWAYS buy from the order you select, essentially bypassing undercutters willingly as a buyer.
For instance, if you see an order at 3 mil ISK exactly and many others at 0.01 to 100 ISK lower, you could just choose to "punish" the rest and buy the one at exactly 3 mil ISK.
Again soemthing not likely to happend because of the "but but but 1 bil ISK torpedo in Jita 4-4" argument.
It's a bogus argument (you can do that anyway, just in a more quiet station and with a less conspicious product), but still carries weight for the devs apparently.


And the LAST but probably best option overall ?
If more than one order for the same product exists in a certain station, you CAN NOT place a sales price in the -X%/+X% range except if at the exact same price (where X is at least 1%, at most 5%, could depend on skills).
Sales would be random for same price orders, depening on VOLUMES in those orders.
Not perfect, but works.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.07 11:28:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 11:34:01
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 11:29:35
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 11:28:42
Quote:
There would be another approach, in which you ALWAYS buy from the order you select, essentially bypassing undercutters willingly as a buyer.
For instance, if you see an order at 3 mil ISK exactly and many others at 0.01 to 100 ISK lower, you could just choose to "punish" the rest and buy the one at exactly 3 mil ISK.
Again soemthing not likely to happend because of the "but but but 1 bil ISK torpedo in Jita 4-4" argument.
It's a bogus argument (you can do that anyway, just in a more quiet station and with a less conspicious product), but still carries weight for the devs apparently.


If you would like an opportunity to willingly pay more than market value to reward someone who refuses to participate in the informal .01 isk bidding agreements, I will gladly set you up with this opportunity. I will charge average market value for whatever item you want and not reduce my prices as the price goes down, regardless of the amount of change. I will, however, increase the price if the market value increases. I will only increase the price on items by whole percentage values, so you'll only have to worry about .01 increases on the least individually expensive items.

For more information about this exciting opportunity, contact me in-game.

Falbala
Gallente
Ishtar's Destiny
Posted - 2007.09.07 11:45:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Falbala on 07/09/2007 11:46:32
Originally by: Daeva Vios
2) Artificial caps/floors on mineral prices.

Removing these could very well cause hyperinflation. Enough people have enough isk to guarantee new players wouldn't be able to afford anything but the most basic mining gear.

That's just the way I see it. I could be wrong.



Yes I think it's wrong. The reason why is newbies have access to enough money through the missioning system to be able to buy BPOs. With 5 millions which is very easily obtainable with missions they would be able to buy enough BPOs for their need. Even unresearched and with PE0 they would still be able to either (if they can't afford to buy directly on market):

1) mine or reprocess and sell the minerals for enough profit to get the stuff they want
2) mine or reprocess and make their own stuff by dropping the unresearched BPO in the factory

Of course more experimented producers would probably make better offers, 2) is a worst case scenario.

There are also "good souls" who make sure newbies have cheap stuff available at their station. Check in Bourynes or Kisogo you will notice.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.07 12:06:00 - [38]
 

The problem is that even in a system where everyone has the desire to spend their time mining and producing their own goods (not this one) it really wouldn't take long for new players to learn the ins and outs of the economy and increase their own wallet balances.

The largest two items prohibiting a system you're proposing are:

1) The ease with which one can acquire ISK via EULA-breaking methods. If the market lost what few controls it has, the ISK sellers would step up their efforts to increase inflation. I hope you didn't think the hyperinflation I talked about above was a natural occurence...
2) Human laziness.

I certainly see your points. Look at this as something of a poker game. I see your bet and raise you.


Redbad
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.09.07 12:49:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: Redbad on 07/09/2007 12:52:21
Hello Imperator,

I just want to say a few things about the issues you raised as the 10 primary issues in the industry debates.

3) Market wars 0.01 ISK at a time
Many people think of the market buy- and sellorder interface as the primary (and some think even only) way to sell your goods. If you socialize in this game and try to build relationships with buyers and sellers and actually make some promotion for your business you don't need the anonymous market. It is just there for your convenience if you are lazy, not for being a primary tool to conduct trade.


4) Market Hubs
Are a good thing, big bazaars mean also that there are little bazaars where my margins will be greater. Get a good distribution network to those smaller bazaars and you have good business.

5) Minerals from rat loot.
Should be there, I use them in 0.0 to produce my ammo, ships and other little PvP attributes.

7) Insurance.
Is good, because it keeps my buyers good in the cashflow which they can hand over to me again.

8) Low sec improvements
Low sec is good as it is. It dangerous enough to keep competitors that dont have the balls to entrprise not coming there and it attracts the crowds I'm looking for in my business strategy.

9) NPC trade goods
Not many profits in that for a heap of work. Good for starting players in trading that are trying to learn what their terrirory can hold for them in opportunities.

10) Nothing
Well this is the best point yet you made. I really think there is nothing wrong with the market as it is. If you spot the opportunities you are in business, if you actually care to think and place yourself in the shoes of your customers and talk to, you are in business I you find out what they need or desire, you are in business.

High prices, low prices, it doesnt matter to a trader, the only thing that matters is margin. And that, Imperator, is understanding this is a game with people with a gaming mindset, not a RL mindset, it's not a real market. It will never be a real market.

RB

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 13:44:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Daeva Vios
It's been stated countless times, and I'll say it again: You do not have to compete in the .01 isk wars to make gobs and gobs of isk in this game. If you can't figure out what I mean, that is your failing, not mine, not anyone else's, and CERTAINLY NOT the fault of those who participate in the market on a level you'd rather not.

I'm so sick of people blaming their problems on everyone else.


And I am sick of people making wholly unfounded assumptions that anyone asking for change must somehow be lacking in their ability to play EVE. Perhaps you haven't noticed but I am FAR from the only one to point out that 0.01 ISK trade wars are a lousy mechanic. Are you suggesting everyone who points this out are idiots who cannot play EVE?

In my manufacturing business I currently go through about 12-15 billion ISK in minerals per week, every week. While that may not make me HUGE in the scheme of things I'd say it is a respectable amount and certainly not something I could keep up if I were such a miserable failure. I do just fine thank you very much.

Keep your personal attacks to yourself.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 14:01:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Redbad
3) Market wars 0.01 ISK at a time
Many people think of the market buy- and sellorder interface as the primary (and some think even only) way to sell your goods. If you socialize in this game and try to build relationships with buyers and sellers and actually make some promotion for your business you don't need the anonymous market. It is just there for your convenience if you are lazy, not for being a primary tool to conduct trade.


Thanks for the tip but I am not here for tips. In fact around 75% of my business comes from customers who place orders with me (varies of course...some weeks 0%, other weeks 100%). Why you assume I think there is only the market to sell my goods I have no idea.


Quote:
4) Market Hubs
Are a good thing, big bazaars mean also that there are little bazaars where my margins will be greater. Get a good distribution network to those smaller bazaars and you have good business.


I agree. I also think they are an emergent aspect of EVE and there is no fixing them. That said something to help nudge some market activity into other places rather than just the hubs is not a bad goal.


Quote:
5) Minerals from rat loot.
Should be there, I use them in 0.0 to produce my ammo, ships and other little PvP attributes.


This is not an argument to keep it. This is an argument that you personally benefit from it. If you could not do that a miner would have a job to provide that mineral supply. Instead you are essentially mining with guns. To be fair then I think asteroids should drop loot. Rolling Eyes


Quote:
7) Insurance.
Is good, because it keeps my buyers good in the cashflow which they can hand over to me again.


I never suggested removing it completely but as it stands it makes for some less than desirable game play mechanics.


Quote:
8) Low sec improvements
Low sec is good as it is. It dangerous enough to keep competitors that dont have the balls to entrprise not coming there and it attracts the crowds I'm looking for in my business strategy.


That you make a go of it there fine. I know some do. Generally though the cost of running a business there far outweighs the benefits compared to hi sec. If you want to pat yourself on the back thinking you are the only one with balls and in all the rest of EVE very few others can muster that you are delusional. EVE has plenty of savvy players and if Low Sec made good sense a lot more people would be there.


Quote:
9) NPC trade goods
Not many profits in that for a heap of work. Good for starting players in trading that are trying to learn what their terrirory can hold for them in opportunities.


They form the basis for price caps on some minerals. There have also been a few over the top cases of STAGGERING profits from trade for almost no work/risk (may have been sorted now...I lost track of that).


Quote:
10) Nothing
Well this is the best point yet you made. I really think there is nothing wrong with the market as it is. If you spot the opportunities you are in business, if you actually care to think and place yourself in the shoes of your customers and talk to, you are in business I you find out what they need or desire, you are in business.

High prices, low prices, it doesnt matter to a trader, the only thing that matters is margin. And that, Imperator, is understanding this is a game with people with a gaming mindset, not a RL mindset, it's not a real market. It will never be a real market.




Again thanks for the clue. I really had no idea. I was wondering why the ISK I make is not available in my ATM. Rolling Eyes

As for my customers most are repeat and I actively find new ones and...shocker...I actually manage to build them what they want. As soon as I figure a way to sell lasers to a projectile user I'll really be in business but I am not holding my breath on that one.

Ricdic
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2007.09.07 14:09:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h

And I am sick of people making wholly unfounded assumptions that anyone asking for change must somehow be lacking in their ability to play EVE. Perhaps you haven't noticed but I am FAR from the only one to point out that 0.01 ISK trade wars are a lousy mechanic. Are you suggesting everyone who points this out are idiots who cannot play EVE?


Without going into details I believe Daeva was referring to things like buying your competitors out, causing a large enough impact to force them to move away.

I control a good portion of the mineral market for a region I produce capitals in. Very few buy orders compete with me, as I can reduce my profit a little to try and force them away from my region (or co-exist in some cases through partnerships) without touching the 0.01 isk game.

I also know of a bloke who used to handle this in some of the largest hubs in Eve on a hardcore basis, going as far as hiring mercs to handle his competitors. Your buy orders will only have 0.01 isk price wars if you let them.

Do a big increase in buy price, wait for your opponent to beat it, remove your order, and fill his order causing him mass financial losses. Rinse/repeat.

There are far more ways to beat those competing with you than requesting a CCP fix. Even after saying all this, I would like to see small but significant penalties involved for mass order changing but I definitely wouldn't have it anywhere near my Top 10 list of economical change requests.

Anyway, you made your post to offer your personal Top 10 list, and I won't detract from it, this post was more to explain what I believe Daeva was referring too.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 14:22:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 07/09/2007 14:27:29
Originally by: Ricdic
Anyway, you made your post to offer your personal Top 10 list, and I won't detract from it, this post was more to explain what I believe Daeva was referring too.


Gotcha.

FWIW I never (and I do mean never) play the 0.01 game. I fiddled with it once some time back and it was nothing more than annoying and I play to have fun. Like you I manage my orders just fine and turn a healthy profit.

I still think the 0.01 mechanic is a lousy one and could use sorting. Even not playing the 0.01 game myself I still have to deal with these shenanigans from time to time. I'd find it much more fun to square off in the market versus (say) you.

How to fix it is of course open to debate and that's fine. Great even and as it should be.

Redbad
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.09.07 14:52:00 - [44]
 

Edited by: Redbad on 07/09/2007 15:01:08

Hello Imperator, some responses:

3)market wars 0,01 ISK at a time.
I was generally speaking dude, no intent of assuming anything other then a lot of traders don't trade the way you and I might do.

5) Minerals from rat loot.
All the discussion is about personal benefit Imperator. 0,01 ISK wars, one doesn't like, one does like it. Insurance, one hates it, others needs it. Hubs, one doesnt go there, others need to see lots of ships around them.

7) Insurance.
Stating it being a less desirable game play mechanic proves my response above. I like this game mechanic.

8) Low sec improvements
Again, I was generaly speaking. Are you Amarr roleplaying or something? Keep refraining from narrowmined remarks and relating everything to yourself plz. If you experience it in that way, I'm really ok with it, but it isnt the Ammarian Godgiven truth for everyone, mkay. Reality of trading in EVE is much grayer then you and I can portrait here. You certainly cannot say that in general cost outweigh the benefits in low-sec.

There are many niches in trading in low-sec. I found a few and it works fine for me. I'm sure there are others experiencing the same thing as I do.

RB


Falbala
Gallente
Ishtar's Destiny
Posted - 2007.09.07 15:14:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: Falbala on 07/09/2007 15:15:40
Originally by: Ricdic
Do a big increase in buy price, wait for your opponent to beat it, remove your order, and fill his order causing him mass financial losses. Rinse/repeat.


Doesn't work anymore. some freighter comes and brings you all the minerals from Devoid or Khanid (I see a lot of freighters when I go there). 750k m3 do the maths this is 75 millions of tritanium, worth the trip. If it's more valuable minerals then it's worth even more.

It's better to assume that if you place a buy order it will be filled, because if it's interesting enough it will.

Also when people try this on me I place a buy order above them for 100k units, to limit my risks.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 15:34:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Redbad
5) Minerals from rat loot.
All the discussion is about personal benefit Imperator. 0,01 ISK wars, one doesn't like, one does like it. Insurance, one hates it, others needs it. Hubs, one doesnt go there, others need to see lots of ships around them.


I'd like to think the discussion is about making EVE better overall. Certainly there are some who benefit from the status quo and for personal reasons would not like to see a given mechanic changed.

I benefit from insurance. I benefit from trade hubs. I benefit from melting rat loot. I do think endless 0.01 price wars is a lousy mechanic period. Nevertheless I think these things could use modification. I'll adapt just fine as I am sure most everyone else would too. I am not suggesting these necessarily be tossed entirely (wouldn;t mind basic rat loot to go away) but that changes would make for a more enjoyable, immersive game.


Quote:
8) Low sec improvements
Again, I was generaly speaking. Are you Amarr roleplaying or something? Keep refraining from narrowmined remarks and relating everything to yourself plz. If you experience it in that way, I'm really ok with it, but it isnt the Ammarian Godgiven truth for everyone, mkay. Reality of trading in EVE is much grayer then you and I can portrait here. You certainly cannot say that in general cost outweigh the benefits in low-sec.

There are many niches in trading in low-sec. I found a few and it works fine for me. I'm sure there are others experiencing the same thing as I do.

RB


You are taking me to task for relating everything to me when just above that you argued that it is all about personal benefit?

Besides, where am I relating it to me? I am pointing out that low sec is deficient. This is not even a point most would disagree with. Just open your map anytime while playing and look at the remarkably low population in low sec. It is not even only industrialists who find it lacking. Pirate types frequently complain about the general emptiness of Low Sec.

Obviously some make a go of it there and more power to them. But by and large Low Sec could use some modification to lure more people out there. Indeed this would probably benefit you, especially if you are already established out there. More competition sure but you have a head start on them and more people means more customers. More people means more ships getting popped by pirates which means more business. Make rats and ore more valuable out there? Benefit to you again. Not sure why you would argue against these.

The solutions to "fixing" low sec are difficult to be sure and wide open to debate but we have a smart and savvy community and with enough discussion some ideas might percolate out and improve the game for everyone.


Ricdic
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2007.09.07 15:51:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Falbala
Edited by: Falbala on 07/09/2007 15:15:40
Originally by: Ricdic
Do a big increase in buy price, wait for your opponent to beat it, remove your order, and fill his order causing him mass financial losses. Rinse/repeat.


Doesn't work anymore. some freighter comes and brings you all the minerals from Devoid or Khanid (I see a lot of freighters when I go there). 750k m3 do the maths this is 75 millions of tritanium, worth the trip. If it's more valuable minerals then it's worth even more.

It's better to assume that if you place a buy order it will be filled, because if it's interesting enough it will.

Also when people try this on me I place a buy order above them for 100k units, to limit my risks.



Hint, margin trading skill at level 5, with a smaller amount of isk in corp wallet.
Means you don't send yourself broke trying to trick your opponent.

Falbala
Gallente
Ishtar's Destiny
Posted - 2007.09.07 16:11:00 - [48]
 

Ah yes I thought the fine was big enough to discourage this. Then I would deposit the whole amount for sale at your station slightly above your buying price I guess if I was freighter.

Another trick is to offer best price on isogen or nocxium and sligthly less than opponents on pyerite/mex/trit, miners will bring you their goods and overall it costs you less than if you had the best buying prices on all minerals. It works if your orders don't cover the same range than your competitors of course.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.07 16:33:00 - [49]
 

The point is. re: 0.01 isk wars, is that there are plenty of in-game solutions without requiring some form of politicized solution. The fact that for many the only solutions they see is to either join in or leave the market entirely is a lack in them not the rest of us.

So, in response to the question earlier, yes; If you can't figure out another solution and you want CCP to code a fix for you; imho you are mentally deficient.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.07 16:37:00 - [50]
 

Quote:
I still think the 0.01 mechanic is a lousy one and could use sorting. Even not playing the 0.01 game myself I still have to deal with these shenanigans from time to time.


Ok, so you say you claim you move through a large volume of minerals per week. From this I assume you have a suitably large wallet balance, or at least a significant amount of easily liquified assets. I can further guess, from your attitude and the above claim, you hate the .01 isk wars and are not affected by them in the slightest except in as much as they are a minor annoyance.

So...what's the problem with them?

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 16:55:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Daeva Vios
Ok, so you say you claim you move through a large volume of minerals per week. From this I assume you have a suitably large wallet balance, or at least a significant amount of easily liquified assets. I can further guess, from your attitude and the above claim, you hate the .01 isk wars and are not affected by them in the slightest except in as much as they are a minor annoyance.

So...what's the problem with them?


As I said they do impact me. Minor annoyance? Well, I do not lose sleep over it but definitely is an annoyance. I do not want to buy from these people but I have to. I actively watch my orders but I have to babysit them far more because someone will undercut me by 0.01 ISK with effectively no repercussion to them. That some have the time and inclination to seemingly camp the market and tweak orders by 0.01 ISK endlessly impacts gameplay for everyone who deals with the market.

As AkitaT mentioned above you really have to be willfully blind to think this is just a dandy way for the market to operate and clearly there are many who think so (again search these boards for numerous threads on this very topic).

Falbala
Gallente
Ishtar's Destiny
Posted - 2007.09.07 17:15:00 - [52]
 

Edited by: Falbala on 07/09/2007 17:20:47
I think buy orders are a source of revenue, to get mineral at low price, eventually produce with it or sell them back. It's not meant to provide you with enough minerals for your daily production. If you want that contract a hauling or a mining corp.

And nothing better than hire a mining corp to come strip the belts in your neighboring systems to ruin your competitors.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.07 17:22:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
As AkitaT mentioned above you really have to be willfully blind to think this is just a dandy way for the market to operate and clearly there are many who think so (again search these boards for numerous threads on this very topic).

Akita is separate from you and in this particular instance Akita is incorrect. Of course the Eve market does not simulate real life very well. The reasons for this are apparent and have been denoted ad infinitum ad nauseum.

Secondly, your supposition that the numerous threads is representative of a large dissatisfaction is specious at best. I really dislike your insistence on substantiating your position with the flimsiest of rationale.

Just tell me one thing: Why should you be the one to tell me how to price my products and/or how much profit I am allowed to make? Or, alternatively, actually espouse a theoretical solution that actually works. (The added charge doesn't as there's already a charge for every modification.)

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.07 17:34:00 - [54]
 

Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 17:35:58
I actually do see a way to limit .01 isk modifications. It's a two-part solution.

1) Eliminate modification of orders once posted. This means adding an additional, very harsh fine for cancellation once the order has been posted. This will prevent the removal of orders in order to repost them at .01 isk below your competition.

2) Reduce the timespan of an active order. Let's say...to a 24 hour period? This way, no one order will be undercutting for too long.

In order to offset these changes, we can even make it so you post a minimum bid amount, and allow the consumer to up the ante as they deem appropriate, thus placing the horrific burden of order modification on the buyer.

And yes, this post is slightly sarcastic...but in order to disable .01 isk undercuts, the change made would have to be nearly as monumental as changing the market system from a broker system (where the burden of order modification in order to compete is on the seller, which you have a problem with) to an auction system (where the burden of order modification in order to compete is on the buyer, which severely dumbs down the economy).

My thoughts.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.07 18:04:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Daeva Vios
I actually do see a way to limit .01 isk modifications. It's a two-part solution. {stuff} to an auction system (where the burden of order modification in order to compete is on the buyer, which severely dumbs down the economy).

LOL, is that not wow's auction house?
(The system and the dumbed down economy both! Twisted Evil)

Dr Slurm
General Commodities
Posted - 2007.09.07 18:25:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Daeva Vios
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 07/09/2007 17:35:58
I actually do see a way to limit .01 isk modifications. It's a two-part solution.

1) Eliminate modification of orders once posted. This means adding an additional, very harsh fine for cancellation once the order has been posted. This will prevent the removal of orders in order to repost them at .01 isk below your competition.

2) Reduce the timespan of an active order. Let's say...to a 24 hour period? This way, no one order will be undercutting for too long.

In order to offset these changes, we can even make it so you post a minimum bid amount, and allow the consumer to up the ante as they deem appropriate, thus placing the horrific burden of order modification on the buyer.

And yes, this post is slightly sarcastic...but in order to disable .01 isk undercuts, the change made would have to be nearly as monumental as changing the market system from a broker system (where the burden of order modification in order to compete is on the seller, which you have a problem with) to an auction system (where the burden of order modification in order to compete is on the buyer, which severely dumbs down the economy).

My thoughts.


Nothing good would come of this. I started a thread a while ago about fixing .01 isk bids. From that thread I realized there is nothing wrong with micro bidding. If you don't like it combat it another way with the features already ingame. Its possible and constantly described in this forum.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 18:33:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
Just tell me one thing: Why should you be the one to tell me how to price my products and/or how much profit I am allowed to make? Or, alternatively, actually espouse a theoretical solution that actually works. (The added charge doesn't as there's already a charge for every modification.)[/justify]


Price them as you like. Please point to where I said what profit you are allowed to make? And please explain how your profits are hurt by this or how you have been prevented from doing anything you do today?

I did espouse a solution if you bothered to read. Yes there is a charge to modify orders but it is so pathetic one has to wonder why it is even there in the first place.

My idea is to place a base percentage (below which no skill can take you, a floor on the cost if you will) for every order placed or modified. Ideally it should be a percentage. Say 0.5% of the order price (please do not get hung up on that number as it is an example...the balance can be whatever they figure best).

This cost applies to all people equally so it is not as if you suddenly lost some huge amount of profit or market advantage and you can of course modify your prices to cover it. It is not so significant as to force inflated prices and you can adjust your prices to accommodate that extra cost. However, if you are someone who decides to adjust your price by 0.01 ISK 50 times a day that 0.5% will add up to a 25% hit on your bottom line. The result is a few market corrections are not too big a deal but endless spamming of them would be.

Again that 0.5% can be tweaked but the point being to discourage endless market spamming.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 18:44:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Dr Slurm
Nothing good would come of this. I started a thread a while ago about fixing .01 isk bids. From that thread I realized there is nothing wrong with micro bidding. If you don't like it combat it another way with the features already ingame. Its possible and constantly described in this forum.


Micro bidding like this favors those with the time and inclination to babysit their orders 23/7. I do not think it makes for a good game mechanic.

If nothing else I would love for CCP's economist to weigh in on the matter. Not make a change at first, just a blog on his assessment of this feature. If he explains why it is a great mechanic with lots of pretty charts so be it.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.07 18:59:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Daeva Vios
I actually do see a way to limit .01 isk modifications. It's a two-part solution. {stuff} to an auction system (where the burden of order modification in order to compete is on the buyer, which severely dumbs down the economy).

LOL, is that not wow's auction house?
(The system and the dumbed down economy both! Twisted Evil)


Laughing My point exactly.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.07 19:11:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Micro bidding like this favors those with the time and inclination to babysit their orders 23/7. I do not think it makes for a good game mechanic.

Okay, we may have something here. Please tell me why those who have the time and dedication to "babysit" their orders should be punished? Why is it that people so consistently try to be punitive to people who have the leisure to be online more than they do?

I spend massively more time logged into eve than I think 80% of this game does but often enough I'm afk because of how my life is situated. Some days I can be active for 8 hours or more and others I get interrupted for sudden counseling or any number of other things whenever I sit down for more than 10 minutes.

But, where is the rule/tradition/idea that my being able to spend my time in Eve doing {insert_activity} is subject to fix by coding simply because others can't spend that time?

In truth I'm just trying to honestly figure out what you really think the problem is here because I truly believe, after over 5 years of being here, that the freedom to, or not to, micro-bid is one of Eve's strongest selling points.
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
If nothing else I would love for CCP's economist to weigh in on the matter. Not make a change at first, just a blog on his assessment of this feature. If he explains why it is a great mechanic with lots of pretty charts so be it.

This paragraph here is where I think this community does the "Good Doctor" the greatest disservice of all. Firstly you need to understand what it means, or means to the Good Doctor & CCP, to be an Economist. Far too often I hear people in this forum, or others, ask what is the Good Doctor going to do about {Insert_Game_Mechanic}. He's not a game designer, he's not a programmer, and he is (so far) not much of an Eve expert. The first, and foremost, part of his job is statistician. Additionally, he's going to apply real world mathematical theorems to Eve and that is going to have to be interpreted by the game designers into Eve applicability.

You will find that the Good Doctor will have great influence on the processes and features added over the coming years but it'll be mostly from being able to present our universe's macroeconomic (and micro) trends and behaviors. He's going to be more Grand Vizier pulling back the impenetrable curtains of the nebulous economic landscapes instead of some High Adjudicator righting wrongs and punishing evildoers.

I think you need to realize the scope and position of the Good Doctor before you can begin to think your favorite pet peeve (we all have them) is his bailiwick.


Pages: 1 [2] 3

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


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only