WE - NEED --> Auction House

"

The problem is not limited, cumbersome trading. The effects of that are small as only a very few people do it.
The problem would come from unlimited, easy trading because everyone would do it!

Thats why everyone hates trading, the current economy only allow a few people to trade. A auction house would allow EVERYONE to trade.

here is news for you but less than 10% of players use forum and gl selling anything or finding what you need here. I use poe often and no, it's not always efficient and I had to combine it with acquisition. The only people that don't agree with an auction house are the ''holy traders'' that like to make hundreds of ex ripping off the rest and preach about the ''instability of economies and how it would destroy it'' (destroy it for them sure). Also D3 issue wasn't the ah, it was the fact it used real life money to trade

"

here is news for you but less than 10% of players use forum and gl selling anything or finding what you need here. I use poe often and no, it's not always efficient and I had to combine it with acquisition. The only people that don't agree with an auction house are the ''holy traders'' that like to make hundreds of ex ripping off the rest and preach about the ''instability of economies and how it would destroy it'' (destroy it for them sure). Also D3 issue wasn't the ah, it was the fact it used real life money to trade

Exactly!
I guess everyone, who take D3 as a bad example has never played it before or have no clue what it is.

"

goetzjam wrote:

Why threads like this have to come up every week ...

Because many people do not like current state of trading.

"

Because many people do not like current state of trading.

But GGG won't care, cause they balance the game only around the 0,0000001 % of the playerbase.

"

morinius wrote:

"

Cyzax wrote:

The problem would come from unlimited, easy trading because everyone would do it!

Here is the problem: any economy that can't handle that is an unstable economy. It is not well designed.
Any economy that is properly designed will thrive in an open trading environment. Open, easy trading, could never hurt a good economy.
Of course, having a good, stable economy, requires a lot of design, testing and developing time. It doesn't fit with the lazy design policy that they are currently using.

Good post. Not sure about the last part, but there are itemization design decisions which could be made to further strengthen things. Stuff like having the best 3 rare prefixes being a matter of intense debate instead of an overwhelming community consensus.

Poe.trade is essentially an auction house. It's silly to say PoE's economy would collapse under an AH because it would have collapsed already.

A better AH developed by GGG would be nice. But it is certainly not needed.

"

morinius wrote:

"

Cyzax wrote:

The problem would come from unlimited, easy trading because everyone would do it!

Here is the problem: any economy that can't handle that is an unstable economy. It is not well designed.
Any economy that is properly designed will thrive in an open trading environment. Open, easy trading, could never hurt a good economy.
Of course, having a good, stable economy, requires a lot of design, testing and developing time. It doesn't fit with the lazy design policy that they are currently using. Too many design decisions in this game are "the easy way out" - restricting content through RNG, 1shot mechanics, refusing to implement common features... This just prevents it from being the great game that it could be.

The only way a game economy with easy trading could be (semi-)stable was if items got 'used up while being used'. Otherwise good items would get traded and accumulate among active players, forever pressing the level for what is 'good' upwards.

Without that, eventually players will not find anything 'good' themselves, and the 'finding' part of the game is dead. Then GGG will have to adjust the difficulty upwards as everyone now get cheap 'good' items from trade.

If items get 'used up while being used', I'm all for an auction house as there would be an outflow to balance the inflow of items. Without that though, there is only an inflow, which no economy of any type can handle.

"

Blackjak wrote:

"

Also D3 issue wasn't the ah, it was the fact it used real life money to trade

Exactly!
I guess everyone, who take D3 as a bad example has never played it before or have no clue what it is.

I played it, and saw the effects. The RMT was not the problem... Had there been no RMT, but just the easy exchange of items using ingame currency, the problem would have been the same. Good items accumulating in the economy, not leaving it, and forever pressing the level of 'good' upwards.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Poe.trade is essentially an auction house. It's silly to say PoE's economy would collapse under an AH because it would have collapsed already.

Poe.trade is an 'auction house' used by a small minority, and not for very many items relatively speaking. The damage from it is not big.
An in-game auction house would be used by almost everyone. The damage would be much worse.

That's the difference...

Implement an in-game auction house, and you can wave goodby to self-found gameplay... GGG would have to keep adjusting the difficulty level up...

If you accumulate items then price will go down because some people will actually want to sell. Fast and easy trading promotes customer and makes economy healthy. Cumbersome trading slows down economy.