It's not like POE isn't trying to meet us half way with the API.
I can with 12 clicks, globally price check an item against all for sale, list it for sale, and fully complete the trade.
After they put in the AFK / DND tags i've had almost zero problems trading with people.
Exceptions currency trades on poe.trade as they don't have a great afk / dnd tag setup... yet.
Maps. The one and only thing i cringe when it comes to trading.
My suggestion is make zana actually carry a full stock of them so less trading for end game play is needed.
But we also come to the technical challenges.
Auction Houses create a ton of server loads to deal with. have problems being instanced, and creates all sorts of issues with duplication if things go bad.
You then also have the issue of swapping the money around etc.
Think of the transaction chain.
Player puts item into their trade tab, set price, game indexes it, lists in AH. player goes offline, when this happens your character data is no longer active on the server freeing up resources. Player wishes to buy your item, the game uses the seller id to locate your account, starts up your account, thus causing your whole account data to load, it then pulls your stash data from the account data, removes the item and ensures through checks and balances it makes it to the other account, it then takes the money from the buying persons stash / person and transfer it. To your inventory. It then spins down your account. Trade complete.
Now lets look at all the places that start to need a crap ton of code to deal with. the buyer clicks but doesn't have enough money on them, so now it has to read their stash data as well. As we know this data is only available in towns or the players own instance. Thus the issue of siosa not being able to access your stash for buying skill gems. This creates the problem of having to fully redo the stash system to be spun up for a player that is offline, yet inside the last town they were in, but wait the stashes are only spun up inside the town where you spawn in that 1 instance, to cut down on town instance data, one of the highest data back and forth between characters in the entire game.
so a full rework of how stashes function from their core design and process is required.
So the person makes the purchase but doesn't have room in their inventory for the item, then what? so you have to code that there is enough item space for the buyers inventory.
With the money where does it go, the players stash what if they only have 4 stash tabs and no currency tab. Have to now figure out where the bought item was in the stash tab array and place the currency there. Once again meaning offline stash and player data is staying up all the freaking time, wearing on server resources.
What happens if a player has a multi-tab full of items, that have been indexed for a while, then flicks the public key off, before the game can run through it's indexing that removes the items from AH. Now you ahve to build in another check to make sure an item is still available. What if some jerk is standing there turning it on and off constantly.
Then you have all the an item went missing, or i didn't get my item, or it took money and i didn't get item. Customer service requests, which triples the "support" costs lowering development costs.
It also means the devs would have to cut into revenue by offering all players at least one in game trade tab. As your free item indexers would no longer be able to supply the AH.
Also the load increase on the servers will impact costs as all the filtering becomes part of the game servers instead of being managed mostly by other 3rd party groups / sites. Think about all the search requests going into POE.trade that would have to be managed by the game.
So there are a ton of technical aspects that create problems.
You could try what some games did where the AH ships items to a mail box system, where you then pay to pick up etc. However in all games like that people used them for free storage in most cases.
my thought is fix the only thing i ever cringe at for trading. Maps. just let me buy them for a set money sink if i need to, while keeping their drop rates same or better than current.
It's not like POE isn't trying to meet us half way with the API.
I can with 12 clicks, globally price check an item against all for sale, list it for sale, and fully complete the trade.
After they put in the AFK / DND tags i've had almost zero problems trading with people.
Exceptions currency trades on poe.trade as they don't have a great afk / dnd tag setup... yet.
Maps. The one and only thing i cringe when it comes to trading.
My suggestion is make zana actually carry a full stock of them so less trading for end game play is needed.
But we also come to the technical challenges.
Auction Houses create a ton of server loads to deal with. have problems being instanced, and creates all sorts of issues with duplication if things go bad.
You then also have the issue of swapping the money around etc.
Think of the transaction chain.
Player puts item into their trade tab, set price, game indexes it, lists in AH. player goes offline, when this happens your character data is no longer active on the server freeing up resources. Player wishes to buy your item, the game uses the seller id to locate your account, starts up your account, thus causing your whole account data to load, it then pulls your stash data from the account data, removes the item and ensures through checks and balances it makes it to the other account, it then takes the money from the buying persons stash / person and transfer it. To your inventory. It then spins down your account. Trade complete.
Now lets look at all the places that start to need a crap ton of code to deal with. the buyer clicks but doesn't have enough money on them, so now it has to read their stash data as well. As we know this data is only available in towns or the players own instance. Thus the issue of siosa not being able to access your stash for buying skill gems. This creates the problem of having to fully redo the stash system to be spun up for a player that is offline, yet inside the last town they were in, but wait the stashes are only spun up inside the town where you spawn in that 1 instance, to cut down on town instance data, one of the highest data back and forth between characters in the entire game.
so a full rework of how stashes function from their core design and process is required.
So the person makes the purchase but doesn't have room in their inventory for the item, then what? so you have to code that there is enough item space for the buyers inventory.
With the money where does it go, the players stash what if they only have 4 stash tabs and no currency tab. Have to now figure out where the bought item was in the stash tab array and place the currency there. Once again meaning offline stash and player data is staying up all the freaking time, wearing on server resources.
What happens if a player has a multi-tab full of items, that have been indexed for a while, then flicks the public key off, before the game can run through it's indexing that removes the items from AH. Now you ahve to build in another check to make sure an item is still available. What if some jerk is standing there turning it on and off constantly.
Then you have all the an item went missing, or i didn't get my item, or it took money and i didn't get item. Customer service requests, which triples the "support" costs lowering development costs.
It also means the devs would have to cut into revenue by offering all players at least one in game trade tab. As your free item indexers would no longer be able to supply the AH.
Also the load increase on the servers will impact costs as all the filtering becomes part of the game servers instead of being managed mostly by other 3rd party groups / sites. Think about all the search requests going into POE.trade that would have to be managed by the game.
So there are a ton of technical aspects that create problems.
You could try what some games did where the AH ships items to a mail box system, where you then pay to pick up etc. However in all games like that people used them for free storage in most cases.
my thought is fix the only thing i ever cringe at for trading. Maps. just let me buy them for a set money sink if i need to, while keeping their drop rates same or better than current.
Most of the problems you describe would be solved by moving items into a remove-only tab, which is almost certainly what they would do if they ever implemented asynchronous trading.
That said, I'm on GGG's side with this, not because I think that artificially slowing down gear progression makes the game more engaging (it doesn't, necessarily) but because the easier gear acquisition enabled by an AH would force GGG to uptune all content massively, which in turn would completely fuck the SSF playstyle, force everyone to trade, and further de-emphasize the actual gameplay. So, premises aside, I at least agree with their conclusion: An AH would doubtless make the game less engaging and less fun.
Having originally written this post, knowing full well it would have been discussed before and therefore hopefully only people with legitimate reasoning would be inclined to respond, I have to admit I applaud everyone who replied.
I had not considered the ease of price fixing. While I wouldn't directly reference D3 AH to what would happen here, I agree that it cannot be discounted.
The idea of remote trading (Trading while in party but not needing to be in the same instance) would be great.
While I agree that slowing down trading to prevent botting is good, I also think it is still too slow.
To those who where somewhat (or a lot..) abusive towards me, I have this to say: When an issue arises that you disagree with, and the powers that be say No, what do you do? Do you sit back and let it be? No, you fight for what you believe in. If you keep at it, circumstances might change. Saying to stop making threads about something is like saying you are happy with slavery in 1850 because it's normal, and you're told it will never go away. Guess what. People kept fighting to have it removed. 15 years later, it was. This is no different.
And no, poe.trade is not an AH.
As for destroying progression ... I disagree based on what I see as progression. The progression you talk about is for SSF. As soon as you are able to trade, the progression, gear or experience, vanishes instantly, because it isn't just you, with your gear, and just your one build at a time.
Saying something isn't true, and then giving no extra information... helps no one. Please make valid arguments for or against, not arbitrary statements without any substance.
Server load is a highly valid argument. Thank you for who said that, you know who you are.
Perhaps an "/NCT" command would be good. Rather than AFK or DND, "Not Currently Trading" would stop people repeatedly asking for an item, then getting abused for it, simply for wanting an item and wondering why they haven't had a response.
Also, and this is a stretch, but a "report for illicit trading practices" would also be helpful -- referencing anyone who can't be bothered replying ever, or who lists an item for a very low cost then expects much higher now you've messaged them (which IS chat recorded as proof).
Again, with exception to a few abusers, I thank everyone for the pros and cons, the fors and againsts, of this issue. You have satisfactorily given enough information for me to see that an AH would be more negative than positive, and also more than unlikely to happen either way.
GGG can barely keep up with patches to keep the game from exploding while you run it or some godforsaken some other issue (such as their balance decisions).
I 100% do not trust them to add an AH that would function properly without duping items or some other stuff.
I would add an "ingame" profile system though where you can add comments/feedback for the person in question for their trading that would show if you want to see it before you message the person for the item.
So I can perma ignore all price fixers.
I want this! Profiling would be awesome.
Last edited by Tnargav on Jan 25, 2018, 3:04:35 AM
Having originally written this post, knowing full well it would have been discussed before and therefore hopefully only people with legitimate reasoning would be inclined to respond, I have to admit I applaud everyone who replied.
Did you get any genuinely new information, or did you just get the same arguments that the same thread posted six months ago got?
I had not considered the ease of price fixing. While I wouldn't directly reference D3 AH to what would happen here, I agree that it cannot be discounted.
You totally don't need to consider that: the mechanism of trade doesn't make any difference to this, other than by scale, as the larger the market the harder it is to manipulate. Regardless of size, however, it is entirely possible to manipulate. You can disregard that in discussions of the mechanics of trade.
As for destroying progression ... I disagree based on what I see as progression. The progression you talk about is for SSF. As soon as you are able to trade, the progression, gear or experience, vanishes instantly, because it isn't just you, with your gear, and just your one build at a time.
You ... might want to tell us what your definition of progression is, given that this is an ARPG based around gradual upgrades, sidegrades, or new builds based on loot drops. Serious question, if you don't see gearing up as progression in PoE, what do you see as progression?
Saying something isn't true, and then giving no extra information... helps no one. Please make valid arguments for or against, not arbitrary statements without any substance.
Server load is a highly valid argument. Thank you for who said that, you know who you are.
It really isn't, honestly. This sort of speculation is almost never accurate, but even if it is ... speculating about how this might change costs on the GGG side is irrelevant without considering a larger picture. eg: if this brings more players, who buy MTX worth more than the additional server costs to handle this new load, was that load a problem in the first place?
Also, and this is a stretch, but a "report for illicit trading practices" would also be helpful -- referencing anyone who can't be bothered replying ever, or who lists an item for a very low cost then expects much higher now you've messaged them (which IS chat recorded as proof).
I'm curious, what penalty do you expect to be applied here? Like, say you report me for not responding to your enquiry, what should happen to me?
Having originally written this post, knowing full well it would have been discussed before and therefore hopefully only people with legitimate reasoning would be inclined to respond, I have to admit I applaud everyone who replied.
Did you get any genuinely new information, or did you just get the same arguments that the same thread posted six months ago got?
I had not considered the ease of price fixing. While I wouldn't directly reference D3 AH to what would happen here, I agree that it cannot be discounted.
You totally don't need to consider that: the mechanism of trade doesn't make any difference to this, other than by scale, as the larger the market the harder it is to manipulate. Regardless of size, however, it is entirely possible to manipulate. You can disregard that in discussions of the mechanics of trade.
As for destroying progression ... I disagree based on what I see as progression. The progression you talk about is for SSF. As soon as you are able to trade, the progression, gear or experience, vanishes instantly, because it isn't just you, with your gear, and just your one build at a time.
You ... might want to tell us what your definition of progression is, given that this is an ARPG based around gradual upgrades, sidegrades, or new builds based on loot drops. Serious question, if you don't see gearing up as progression in PoE, what do you see as progression?
Saying something isn't true, and then giving no extra information... helps no one. Please make valid arguments for or against, not arbitrary statements without any substance.
Server load is a highly valid argument. Thank you for who said that, you know who you are.
It really isn't, honestly. This sort of speculation is almost never accurate, but even if it is ... speculating about how this might change costs on the GGG side is irrelevant without considering a larger picture. eg: if this brings more players, who buy MTX worth more than the additional server costs to handle this new load, was that load a problem in the first place?
Also, and this is a stretch, but a "report for illicit trading practices" would also be helpful -- referencing anyone who can't be bothered replying ever, or who lists an item for a very low cost then expects much higher now you've messaged them (which IS chat recorded as proof).
I'm curious, what penalty do you expect to be applied here? Like, say you report me for not responding to your enquiry, what should happen to me?
-----
1. Yes, new information was provided. Information changes over time, as do opinions.
2. Yes, price foxing is, and always will be, an issue. But faster trades means it is easier to do. So yes, it needs to be considered.
3. Progression is, very simply, getting to the end of the game. SSF means it's just you. As soon as you have trading, it is relatively irrelevant as to how/when/why you buy and/or do anything to reach that goal.
4. Your "cough" was unnecessary. I gave more information. May be actually read what someone writes, rather than what you want to read, or what you think they wrote, before making comment.
5. Again, server load is an issue and you saying that it isnt without any valid reasoning.. wastes everyones time.
6. Prevent that account from trading. Short term, long term, it wouldn't matter in the end. The message would be "If you want to trade, do so, but do not do so haphazardly or with the intent to waste other players time". It is a solid concept, with no flaws, because there would only be two types of traders. Those who are online and willing to trade, and those who are not online. No more "I'm busy" no more "DND". If you put stuff up to trade, as a salesperson, you must be within easy distance of your storefront, or be prevented from trading altogether.
As a final note, I do feel like you have responded with a copy of my post, simply to attack it, rather than be helpful (and therefore make your post pointless). Your wording is poor, your reasoning is lacking, and the tone of your words leaves a lot to be desired.
Last edited by Raxxxis on Jan 25, 2018, 8:36:59 PM
I used to want an AH but after some critical thinking I believe I understand much better why they're terrible for games like this. While trading is not very fun in this game and can definitely be improved, an offline, D3 style AH would kill this game. The economy is pretty bad each league after the first few weeks. If we had an AH it would happen after a day or two, perhaps even within hours for some items. I personally don't want to end up with exalts going for 1500c and 6l shav's costing an alch. That kind of value erosion is what happens in every game with an AH (and I've played a lot of games with player-to-player AH). You see, POE doesn't have those RPG staples of consumables and similar items to keep an economy running when items flood the market. It is primarily already rolled items and the consumables are the currency. It's odd. But regardless it would get destroyed by an AH.
Also, GGG has explicitly stated this is not happening in POE, so I read these threads with some bemusement. To be honest, I'd be happy with:
1. A really, really robust, in-game item search system.
2. The ability to trade without leaving my instance.
If we had both of those then 90% of trade would be fixed I think. For #2 I'm thinking a shop in my H/O. It's only open when I'm online and only has spots for a limited number of items. I put items and prices, buyers put orbs in that unlock the item to be removed. Something like that isn't an AH and only provides a small convenience boost by me not having to leave my map or the lab to conduct the transaction. You could run your shop by mixing items that sell quickly with more expensive items that sell slowly. If you could have 4 or 5 items it would be enough. Although, as I type that, perhaps that is still too much of a cost-of-effort reduction and would also be damaging to the economy. I don't know but I like the concept anyway.
P.S. As I reread that last paragraph that concept is so close to an AH that some might argue it's no different. In my experience that is significantly different than an AH where items from lots of different people can all be purchased individually. I'm speaking of taking only one step out of the transaction, me returning to the h/o to put the item in a window and have the buyer put orbs in another window. Can't we do that while I'm still in the lab? ;-)
P.P.S. Actually, remote trading would be good. Forget all that other mumbo jumbo. lol.
GGG also stated that there won't be loot options in party play . Later on loot options popped up . Just saying :D
