Trading is horrendous - Especially this time of the league!

"
trixxar wrote:
The lead dev has already shot down players and the other devs who wanted an AH (read the trade manifesto and the days of arguments his own devs gave him).

He can’t back down without losing face, even as all the arguments are shown to be nonsensical.

China has proved it actually changes progression very little.

Leagues have proved that power expansion happens anyway and can be dealt with.

Crafting is the only path to endgame anyway which costs currency and people won’t post items for less than crafting costs.

Flooding the game with low end items would happen but it would mostly impact players making the jump from acts to maps (higher end items take crafting, only found items would be super cheap)

Ssf is there for those who don’t like it (and always has been)


(Note on the other side you won’t see logical posts, only vague “ruin the game” stuff, or “uh I already posted something, no clue where”, or “this is the way it is because it is this way” reasoning.)

But I agree with them on one thing, it won’t change. Here’s to the next round of Arpgs and hoping they learn from PoEs failure to make basic QoL features. No currency pickups, no attempt at better tool tips, no trade improvements, no qa for content, no passive tree planner in the game (China has this as well).


The fact that China has proven AH has little change to progression should be reason enough to implement it. It's one of the biggest things "mUh TrAyD mAnIfEsTu" harps on about.

Agreed. Easier trades aren't going to make more players broken OP. Powercreep introduced by new leagues will handle that for us. I disagree that they "deal with it", though. Powercreep has already forced GGG to buff mob HP and damage twice over the game's life, which has had a negative impact on poor players.

Harvest introduced a better way to craft that isn't gated to all except the ultra rich. If GGG were to make it so Harvest-crafted gear becomes soulbound to the player, or at least have seeds not be able to be traded, this would open up the system to a lot more people without it harming "mUh EcUnUmi". I believe Harvest would solve peoples' issues with difficulty of obtaining gear by encouraging them to make it themselves.

I will argue that SSF is not for those who don't like it. SSF is a mode for masochists who want to play in a game that's built around a dependence on trade. The quality of your gear will be drastically worse in SSF compared to a trade league, by design. I wouldn't be upset if GGG put Harvest exclusively in it, it would be a massive improvement for SSF.
PoE players: Our game has a wide diversity of builds.

Also PoE players: The [league mechanic] doesn't need to be nerfed, you just need to play a [current meta] build!

And the winds will cry / and many men will die / and all the waves will bow down / to the Loreley
Last edited by Pizzarugi#6258 on Nov 24, 2020, 11:54:16 AM
It's gonna get worse every day now.

Heist, 2 months into the league: 17k avg. concurrent online players
Harvest, 2 months into the league: 40k avg. concurrent online players
(the above is based on steam charts)

Remember when people cried that harvest was a bad league? I wonder, why if it was so bad, its player retention was so much better?
Sitting in HO spamming alts for 4 hours straight is peak PoE gameplay. Thanks, Chris.
"
Ydoum wrote:
It's gonna get worse every day now.

Heist, 2 months into the league: 17k avg. concurrent online players
Harvest, 2 months into the league: 40k avg. concurrent online players
(the above is based on steam charts)

Remember when people cried that harvest was a bad league? I wonder, why if it was so bad, its player retention was so much better?


Harvest had the lowest player retention out of any league released to date where it matters, which is the first few weeks.

The reason that it had more active players later in the season is:

(1) The PS5 and Xbox release. Blight had something like 35k less day 1 players than the leagues before it and afterwards; which was largely attributable to the launch date clashing with vanilla WOW. The day 1 player count went right back up afterwards, and has been fairly steady every league.

(2) Players churning out ridiculous items for standard - and by that I mean they were making multiple copies of items like tailwind/elusive boots to sell in standard. Sure its players that are going to be online, but not sure if its indicative of 'good' or 'bad'.

None of this has anything to do with AH or the state of trade, so I'm not really sure what your point is.
I don't care about the subject of the AH or not, GGG will do what they want either way so it is pointless to discuss on the forums.

But I would really love them to work on a system that weeds out price manipulators and people that list items and clearly do not intend to sell for the given price or even sell at all. This would be super complex to implement to stop bad actors trying to manipulate the system. It would need to be derived from internal data and take into account factors such as being afk and trying to trick the system.

With the system that picks up and monitors these people it can allow you sort by sellers that have a low trade "confidence". I like how they exposed whether the seller was afk and when the item was listed so you can kind of save yourself time and avoid certain sellers but this would take it to another level.

Just my 5 cents.
Last edited by dupie#7991 on Nov 25, 2020, 4:09:18 PM
"
dupie wrote:
I like how they exposed wether the seller was afk and when the item was listed so you can kind of save yourself time and avoid certain sellers but this would take it to another level.

Just my 5 cents.


Funny thing: Sometimes it seems the AFK players are more likely to react to your trade messages than those who aren't AFK. :)
Understandable, when you're watching youtube while your char is picking its nose in the hideout, you're more likely to respond than when youre in the middle of heist.
Last edited by NonExistingName#1567 on Nov 25, 2020, 7:19:34 AM
"
Pizzarugi wrote:
"
trixxar wrote:
The lead dev has already shot down players and the other devs who wanted an AH (read the trade manifesto and the days of arguments his own devs gave him).

He can’t back down without losing face, even as all the arguments are shown to be nonsensical.

China has proved it actually changes progression very little.

Leagues have proved that power expansion happens anyway and can be dealt with.

Crafting is the only path to endgame anyway which costs currency and people won’t post items for less than crafting costs.

Flooding the game with low end items would happen but it would mostly impact players making the jump from acts to maps (higher end items take crafting, only found items would be super cheap)

Ssf is there for those who don’t like it (and always has been)


(Note on the other side you won’t see logical posts, only vague “ruin the game” stuff, or “uh I already posted something, no clue where”, or “this is the way it is because it is this way” reasoning.)

But I agree with them on one thing, it won’t change. Here’s to the next round of Arpgs and hoping they learn from PoEs failure to make basic QoL features. No currency pickups, no attempt at better tool tips, no trade improvements, no qa for content, no passive tree planner in the game (China has this as well).


The fact that China has proven AH has little change to progression should be reason enough to implement it. It's one of the biggest things "mUh TrAyD mAnIfEsTu" harps on about.

Agreed. Easier trades aren't going to make more players broken OP. Powercreep introduced by new leagues will handle that for us. I disagree that they "deal with it", though. Powercreep has already forced GGG to buff mob HP and damage twice over the game's life, which has had a negative impact on poor players.

Harvest introduced a better way to craft that isn't gated to all except the ultra rich. If GGG were to make it so Harvest-crafted gear becomes soulbound to the player, or at least have seeds not be able to be traded, this would open up the system to a lot more people without it harming "mUh EcUnUmi". I believe Harvest would solve peoples' issues with difficulty of obtaining gear by encouraging them to make it themselves.

I will argue that SSF is not for those who don't like it. SSF is a mode for masochists who want to play in a game that's built around a dependence on trade. The quality of your gear will be drastically worse in SSF compared to a trade league, by design. I wouldn't be upset if GGG put Harvest exclusively in it, it would be a massive improvement for SSF.


'mUh trAed mAniFesT' is literally a joke, a meme from Chris, it's full of biased and baseless claims on the economy system.

As someone with Bachelor degree in Economics I can easily write up 10000 words analysis and debunk each and every single point in that manifest. But to what end? Thousands of people have tried before me, for years and years, with no prevail. Chris is too stubborn to ever admit his failure.
Last edited by nagisanzeninz#3227 on Nov 25, 2020, 10:40:46 PM
Well, dead horse or not, but it is a problem.

Especially if you know it can be done better. I know personally some players, who gave up because of current market system. Sending countless whispers and waiting/ hoping for a response is just silly waste of playtime and emotions. I dont mind buying preimium tabs, I can tolerate mixed currency, but you should have an option to buy an item directly when it's listed.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info