The real reason why they aren't making an auction house

"

Sickness wrote:

Yes exactly! That's why I'm saying that Poe.trade confirms this.
A systeme that is even more efficient than poe.trade would make the situation far worse. We can tell by the people crying in this thread that poe.trade is far from hassle free to use, so at least there is some barrier.

So we have only 2 ways to solve this problem properly:

1. Assume "we DONT want to trade" and turn PoE into SSF game (like it was done with D3). Drops should be balanced accordingly.
2. Assume "we WANT to trade", and implement AH with instant buyouts, to make trading feel fluid and not annoying at all. A situation, where players buys 95-99% of his upgrades from AH, should be considered as normal and intended way to play the game, from this perspective.

Standing "the middle ground" is impossible.

"

MortalKombat3 wrote:

So we have only 2 ways to solve this problem properly:

1. Assume "we DONT want to trade" and turn PoE into SSF game (like it was done with D3). Drops should be balanced accordingly.
2. Assume "we WANT to trade", and implement AH with instant buyouts, to make trading feel fluid and not annoying at all. A situation, where players buys 95-99% of his upgrades from AH, should be considered as normal and intended way to play the game, from this perspective.

Standing "the middle ground" is impossible.

No. That's a false dichotomy.
That some trading is good and too much trading is bad is a perfectly valid position to hold.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

MortalKombat3 wrote:

So we have only 2 ways to solve this problem properly:

1. Assume "we DONT want to trade" and turn PoE into SSF game (like it was done with D3). Drops should be balanced accordingly.
2. Assume "we WANT to trade", and implement AH with instant buyouts, to make trading feel fluid and not annoying at all. A situation, where players buys 95-99% of his upgrades from AH, should be considered as normal and intended way to play the game, from this perspective.

Standing "the middle ground" is impossible.

No. That's a false dichotomy.
That some trading is good and too much trading is bad is a perfectly valid position to hold.

This "dichotomy" is inevitable as long as all items are tradeable. Sure, if you make most items "soulbound" (not tradeable), as it's done in most MMORPGs, then you can find a "middle ground", where players will trade only those items you allow them to.

"

MortalKombat3 wrote:

This "dichotomy" is inevitable as long as all items are tradeable. Sure, if you make most items "soulbound" (not tradeable), as it's done in most MMORPGs, then you can find a "middle ground", where players will trade only those items you allow them to.

No, it's not. Why would it be?

"

Sickness wrote:

"

MortalKombat3 wrote:

This "dichotomy" is inevitable as long as all items are tradeable. Sure, if you make most items "soulbound" (not tradeable), as it's done in most MMORPGs, then you can find a "middle ground", where players will trade only those items you allow them to.

No, it's not. Why would it be?

Don't know, maybe because it's already happening?

PoE has the unofficial AH in poe.trade that makes 99.99% of your own finds worse that what you can buy for a small amount of currency.

It's a goddamn fact that you should rely on "peons" or bots to trade for an upgrade than the chance to find a weapon that could advance you throught the game (it's better for other gear pieces), and don't start that the "grind" is so good, as you only have "uniques" to rely as deterministic loot, in a game where the focus should be placed on rares.

And no one should argue that the current system seems a "place holder", but as any temporary solution, became one more permanent than intended...

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

"

MortalKombat3 wrote:

This "dichotomy" is inevitable as long as all items are tradeable. Sure, if you make most items "soulbound" (not tradeable), as it's done in most MMORPGs, then you can find a "middle ground", where players will trade only those items you allow them to.

No, it's not. Why would it be?

Don't know, maybe because it's already happening?

PoE has the unofficial AH in poe.trade that makes 99.99% of your own finds worse that what you can buy for a small amount of currency.

It's a goddamn fact that you should rely on "peons" or bots to trade for an upgrade than the chance to find a weapon that could advance you throught the game (it's better for other gear pieces), and don't start that the "grind" is so good, as you only have "uniques" to rely as deterministic loot, in a game where the focus should be placed on rares.

And no one should argue that the current system seems a "place holder", but as any temporary solution, became one more permanent than intended...

Why do you lock it to what you can find for your own build? I find good stuff every league. Rarely anything for myself but if I would sell it I can buy something for myself. There is no problem in how this works, this is what PoE is about.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Don't know, maybe because it's already happening?

PoE has the unofficial AH in poe.trade that makes 99.99% of your own finds worse that what you can buy for a small amount of currency.

It's a goddamn fact that you should rely on "peons" or bots to trade for an upgrade than the chance to find a weapon that could advance you throught the game (it's better for other gear pieces), and don't start that the "grind" is so good, as you only have "uniques" to rely as deterministic loot, in a game where the focus should be placed on rares.

And no one should argue that the current system seems a "place holder", but as any temporary solution, became one more permanent than intended...

And you want to make it even worse? That makes no sense.

had 2 pieces of unique shield from the beachhead, and decided to buy another 2 to complete unique.
it took me only 117 whispers to buy that 2 pieces...

everyone who defends current trade system just can go eat some shit

"

Miská wrote:

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Don't know, maybe because it's already happening?

PoE has the unofficial AH in poe.trade that makes 99.99% of your own finds worse that what you can buy for a small amount of currency.

It's a goddamn fact that you should rely on "peons" or bots to trade for an upgrade than the chance to find a weapon that could advance you throught the game (it's better for other gear pieces), and don't start that the "grind" is so good, as you only have "uniques" to rely as deterministic loot, in a game where the focus should be placed on rares.

And no one should argue that the current system seems a "place holder", but as any temporary solution, became one more permanent than intended...

Why do you lock it to what you can find for your own build? I find good stuff every league. Rarely anything for myself but if I would sell it I can buy something for myself. There is no problem in how this works, this is what PoE is about.

Right, so finding any "worthy" one/two handed weapon goes into locking to a specific build these days, my bad for thinking about "melee" as a viable "playstyle" which scales damage based on items mainly...

I don't mind trading stuff for other options, but when 99.99% of the uniques feel better than their rare equivalent for 99% of the players, 99% of the time, you must concede that itemisation regarding rares is skewed.

Oh, I even "got thrown a bone" as I dropped a "worthy" mace after "only" 3K hours played, and by that I mean one that outpaces a damn Doryiani's Catalyst in a RT full elemental conversion for main skill. The sad thing is that I can't be certain that it won't take me at least 10K hours more to see something like that again, as @Snorkle_uk still says that the best pDPS dagger that dropped for him in >12K hours played is a Bino's. And do take in consideration that my case is that of a n00b hoarder that always identifies all rares (even for the Chaos recipe, which should have been reversed from the start, by the way)...

If price signals rarity, do count the number of Disfavour/Starforge, heck, even Hegemony's Era, alternatives as rares, and let's not talk about one handers where the situation is as dire, or even more so.

I get it that they will have to change a lot of things, if only to give asynchronous trading, with/without a full blown AH. GGG gets it too.

Now, they just have to man up, and post a goddamn manifesto regarding these "minor quibbles". It's way past due to present their solution without hollow justifications. They should come out and say that they're so afraid of what AH/asynchronous trading will highlight about itemisation in PoE that a "trade system" will only get implemented in a PoE sequel. That and the fact they will continue to support the "unofficial AH" that poe.trade currently is, heck, even improve upon it - removing all AFK/DND from listing and making available/unavailable having a meaning again...

"

Sickness wrote:

And you want to make it even worse? That makes no sense.

A solution like asynchronous trading, in a limited amount, and with certain limitations in place might not be worse than the current situation.

At this moment, not even a full blown AH might not be worse, as already all of GGG fears became real due to poe.trade.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

At this moment, not even a full blown AH might not be worse, as already all of GGG fears became real due to poe.trade.

Statements like this just reveals that you do not understand the issue.
Is it really so hard to think of it as sliding scale and not binary?