Observations

"

ThisIsNotMyActualAccountName wrote:

Lets talk about POE's trade system. I see nothing wrong (fundamentally) with player based free trade. It actually encourages interpersonal communication and can be viewed as a positive thing. In reality however, you have 3 segregated groups of people. (C1) People that have enough currency to satisfy any requirements (Mirrored items and a stockpile of currency). (C2) People that have their basic build but still need to optimize it (Vaaling ect). (C3) People that have no real assets, very little currency and are struggling to make their perceived build. Now I understand there are sub-categories in between, but I'm just going to deal with the extremes to paint a more vivid picture. POE's economic model (Standard League) in reality becomes stagnant in relation to new players, new items and new uses for currency. What I mean is if no new people play, you eventually run out of consumers. If new items stop being made, no new markets are created. If currency is used just for bartering Vs actual use...Players will hold it rather than sink it, therefore preventing a potentially infinite resource over a infinite amount of time to actually decay per se.

My point is this. If we did have an auction house it would only accelerate this process. Currency itself would plummet to near nothing values and it would make even the most sought after items very cheap. While this may appeal to a new player, it would completely undermine actually playing the game. In essence it would feel more action oriented and less like an rpg. It would also create a paradox in where legacy, perfect and corrupted items would cost more than any player would be able to get reasonably. Consider this, legacy items exist in finite values, everything else does not. That would be the only market and the end result of an auction house.

Diablo 3 is a good example of this. When the game was fresh the auction house worked well realistically. In time it just served as a very large database. Either you had billions in gold or went without upgrades. In essence, if you were not taking advantage of the auction house you were not progressing.

1. Unlike D3, PoE's economy has a ceiling on market prices. You can use currency to create items directly, if desperate enough.
2. Because of #1, sellers must always price items below their average (alleged) crafting cost in order to maintain relevance; buyers will not bother with sellers if they can reasonably craft for same cost, so sellers maintain attractive prices.
3. Because of #2, players who are plugged into the economy essentially never craft with currency, just hoard it. This is because they have become conditioned to a situation where sellers will always offer items at below crafting cost.

Thus, because players can craft items with currency, pretty much no one does. The only incentive to craft is to create items so badass they do not exist yet; the Mirror of Kalandra is the mechanical light at the end of the tunnel, and where currency goes to die.

However, in this way the PoE economy is much better at quietly self-regulating itself than the D3 economy, providing the feel of gold without that nasty potential for hyperinflation. If hyperinflation is your argument against asynchronous trade in PoE, it is a flimsy argument.

"

ThisIsNotMyActualAccountName wrote:

POE's peer to peer trading makes flipping a lot more work and requires a lot more time. It also supplies noise and feedback to give hints your being ripped off.

I believe flipping is stronger in PoE and was weaker in AH D3, because flipping increases in strength as trading becomes more difficult, creating arbitrage opportunities, NOT as trading becomes easier. Flipping in D3 wasn't easy at all, it was virtually impossible due to the AH fee, it's just that it was outrageous when it happened because it was just clicking a button, items were so ridiculously liquid that you'd see the profits automatically, and often within mere minutes... but the stars would have to align for you to pull it off. PoE flipping is more work but is much, much more reliable overall.

You have a point about ripoff hints, however, and a good one. Essentially, that's why I am against asynchronous buyout systems (such as AH D3). I am not, however, against asynchronous bidding systems, which can offer AFK trade completion while still providing the noise you refer to.

"

ThisIsNotMyActualAccountName wrote:

Now, I do not support an auction house. You really just need to look at the long term implications, (My opinion but based on evidence) However, I suggest that perhaps let players have personal markets within their hideouts. It would create 3 important things. A better player v game atmosphere, as players could publicly go to your hideout, explore it and buy things regardless of online status. It would also serve as an easier way to manage and sell items. Prices would be indexed and put into a type of stash for public transactions. Much like POE trade, but through a stash interface potential buyers could browse. Also, people could potentially really care about micromanaging their hideout decorations. Which could in turn lead to MTX sales. It would also cut out the interpersonal communication aspect of the game but at the same time encourage it, for the sake of haggling.

Such an asynchronous buyout model is practically a D3-style AH, considering third-party indexers will inevitably sink their fingers in. If GGG forbids such behavior, than what you'll have is illegitimate third-party indexers which malicious players will still use. It's a bad idea.

"

ThisIsNotMyActualAccountName wrote:

Currency, that can self decay is a great implication. However, what happens when the monetary value out values realistic use? You implement greater realistic use,

None of this would violate my earlier points regarding currency flow. Sellers would still need to undercut average crafting costs to maintain relevance. Buyers would still prefer to buy from sellers because prices would be lower. Mirror-worthy items would still be the ideal use for currency. The only difference is that you'd be turning all those optimal transactions into a race which nolifers would have a huge advantage with, while casuals are forced into suboptimal currency decisions by a timer. Another horrible idea.

"

ThisIsNotMyActualAccountName wrote:

What I suggest is to make maps a lot easier to find exponentially. It really doesn't matter how you implement it. It's a simple matter. Restrict Xp growth in relation to the games development philosophy vs time. Also, make maps account bound. This is to provide content to players while promoting a more competitive environment among races.

You realize that popular players will just have others party with them and open maps for them, right? It's easy to share maps without trading. If you want an event where popularity isn't a factor, do it properly and request more solo events, not halfmeasures which solve nothing and put other players out.

Economics in general can always lead to very long but educational debates. If you ask multiple people who are in the field of economics you will most likely get multiple evaluations. Normally based on history, logic, statistics and hyper dimensions (Niche X,Y,Z,W, Markets, targets, ect). Economics, is by no means a hard science, although debatable, we can simply observe and come to our own conclusions. In the end we can agree that a new paradigm, potentially, could be better or worse vs no change.

Allow me to further elaborate on some previous points considering it is my own failure for not doing so.

Nice meeting you by the way, you have a trend of providing good points and feedback.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

1. Unlike D3, PoE's economy has a ceiling on market prices. You can use currency to create items directly, if desperate enough.
2. Because of #1, sellers must always price items below their average (alleged) crafting cost in order to maintain relevance; buyers will not bother with sellers if they can reasonably craft for same cost, so sellers maintain attractive prices.
3. Because of #2, players who are plugged into the economy essentially never craft with currency, just hoard it. This is because they have become conditioned to a situation where sellers will always offer items at below crafting cost.

Point one is true. Considering ratio's, trade rates, vendor rates ect. Currency has real value, however it also has relative value. An extreme would be a mirror in a temp league or anything outside of vendor rates. I suppose the rates that exist in the player base are statistically correlated to time invested vs acquisition rate.

Point two is also true allegedly. We can't assume all people are competent, or incompetent. This is related to crafting, buying, and selling.

Point three is self evident and true based on my own observations.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Thus, because players can craft items with currency, pretty much no one does. The only incentive to craft is to create items so badass they do not exist yet; the Mirror of Kalandra is the mechanical light at the end of the tunnel, and where currency goes to die.

Right, it's a diffusion of responsibility within the market to simply wait until someone else crafts an ideal item. Rates reflect a small portion of actual crafting cost. More or less mirrors are responsible.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

However, in this way the PoE economy is much better at quietly self-regulating itself than the D3 economy, providing the feel of gold without that nasty potential for hyperinflation. If hyperinflation is your argument against asynchronous trade in PoE, it is a flimsy argument.

Well, not exactly. Diablo 3's economy was tailored around the basis of an auction house. More or less providing an omnipotent vector players could access. Quality items existed in fractional amounts (Very rare). Overtime, (Around a year) quality items became beyond demand and near perfect items became priceless. My suggestion was to create less inconvenience but purposely imposing a flawed system. You maintain a still limited market range. You also avoid the inclusion of an omnipotent database. POEtrade in it's intent represents the aforementioned database. However, It functions realistically very poorly. It also destroys depth within the game (My opinion). It has a steep learning curve (What do I need to do to post an item) as well as third party association (Procurement). Lastly, it incorporates an inherent advantage to leader board status with a dynamic green name tag. (I'm online now)

More or less, I am pointing out that such things already exist within (Not within internally) the game already. Also, to promote a system that idealistically exists within the game, in order to preserve depth. Lastly, it will be a purposely flawed system in order to preserve a limited market range. Peer to peer trading with unknown/unknown inconvenience. No omnipototent databases just your character and your time and your own logistics via who you know or see. Now that me and you are aware of each others existence I could (/ScrotieMcb Hq) go to your hideout to see if you have potential deals, regardless of your online status.

We can agree that currency within POE has actual value and not relative value like gold. However, assets within POE have relative value and are therefore subject to hyperinflation which will then in turn affect currency. Logically, I could buy 1 veil of night with 1 fusing. Or I could buy 1 fusing with 1 veil of night. I'm not trying to form a technical argument. I'm just trying to explain my own logic. An extreme would be 100 veil of nights for 1 fusing. Relative use vs actual use vs actual value. Stone of Jordans as currency in Diablo II was a good example. It later moved to runes which is actually somewhat similar to POE's economy now. (Rates are statistically correlated to time invested vs acquisition rate) Rune words served as entropy and poorly rolled rune words served as asset based entropy. (Not really but resulted in a massive loss of value) You also have the factor of actual use, and this is in light of gold in Diablo II having actual use. (Gambling, Repairing)

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I believe flipping is stronger in PoE and was weaker in AH D3, because flipping increases in strength as trading becomes more difficult, creating arbitrage opportunities, NOT as trading becomes easier. Flipping in D3 wasn't easy at all, it was virtually impossible due to the AH fee, it's just that it was outrageous when it happened because it was just clicking a button, items were so ridiculously liquid that you'd see the profits automatically, and often within mere minutes... but the stars would have to align for you to pull it off. PoE flipping is more work but is much, much more reliable overall.

That has a lot to do with aptitude. The second part of your first statement is true however. Diablo 3 flipping was a matter of dredging certain affix combinations and having a knowledge of popular market value. In my own experiences I took advantage of the PvP market. While the market for PvE based items were easy to evaluate (1 more damage regardless of all other factors). PvP based items were based on a balanced stat average. (EHP + DPS) I took advantage of the niche market and it was very lucrative.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

You have a point about ripoff hints, however, and a good one. Essentially, that's why I am against asynchronous buyout systems (such as AH D3). I am not, however, against asynchronous bidding systems, which can offer AFK trade completion while still providing the noise you refer to.

Like you I agree that a player should be in a position that favors actually playing. Not catering to potential buyers and being in a position to drop what they are doing. This of course applies to online/offline status as well.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

None of this would violate my earlier points regarding currency flow. Sellers would still need to undercut average crafting costs to maintain relevance. Buyers would still prefer to buy from sellers because prices would be lower. Mirror-worthy items would still be the ideal use for currency. The only difference is that you'd be turning all those optimal transactions into a race which nolifers would have a huge advantage with, while casuals are forced into suboptimal currency decisions by a timer. Another horrible idea.

Well my intent was to add another dimension to currency in order to encourage use. Not necessarily make currency more efficient. For example a fusing orb can effect both unique and rares alike. My suggestion was to give orbs that only cater to rares a use towards unique items as well. I'm not suggesting the ability to mirror or add affixes to uniques, but to add another dimension or use to the currency it's self.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

You realize that popular players will just have others party with them and open maps for them, right? It's easy to share maps without trading. If you want an event where popularity isn't a factor, do it properly and request more solo events, not halfmeasures which solve nothing and put other players out.

Absolutely, but it will also (Possibly) involve hurt feelings and more micromanaging of followers to exploit efficiently. It will make intent easier to recognize and players naturally do not like being used.(I hope) At best popularity will get you 5 members on a rotation. While potential members and or spectators are left out due to choice in favor of others. (You can use my map if you play with me)
It will also stifle map procurement via currency, so you couldn't directly buy your content at your own expense or at the expense of others. Would I want to be apart of non-reciprocal support or would I make friends and go by online availability.

Of course this all under the assumption that people will not support someone if a choice exists, which I think was your point.

It was also to encourage actually playing and sharing your content mutually, rather than focus on it's use as a commodity. No loss in potential real profit vs running a map.

Also, yeah. More solo events would be reasonable, I'm not sure about yourself but I prefer to be left to my own devices in regards to competitive play.

Mc.B I would also like to point out your post was edited by someone other than yourself, at a future date that actually doesn't exist. Haha. ..... Last edited by Bex_GGG on September 31, 2015 0:61 PM ?

"

rushjo wrote:

"

ThisIsNotMyActualAccountName wrote:

per se

everytime i see someone writing "per se" i have to think about that vampire kid in southpark.. ;p

but well, i did like the idea about some kind of merchant in your hideout so people can also buy items from you when you are offline, but as more as i was thinking about it, as more ive started to dislike it. it would take a big social component out of the game, it would kill bartering and result in undercutting prices.. pretty much the same as an auctionhouse would do. so if you are against an auction house then you should also dislike your own ho-merchant idea.(?)

Yeah, I live in NY now but I grew up in (Dirty South) Louisiana. I guess it reflects in my writing per se. Southpark references are a big trend here.

I suggest a system that is between auction house omnipotence and pure player based freetrade.
Although, I do get your point and Mc.B also explained.

To re-iterate I suggest a purposely flawed system that encourages a still limited market range, it still maintains depth but also cuts out player vs player inconvenience. It only adds a dimension that already exists outside of the game. Instead it exists in the game, and the market is influenced by what you know, who you know and where you go. It would have to start with a name. First, you would have to go to said names place. There would not be an index of names to browse for potential products. You would have to physically navigate to a persons hideout and browse. For example, you now know I exist and have an account name "ShinFuuma" copy this, and go to my hideout and look for potential deals.

In the end it's just a suggestion and I have no evidence to reinforce the paradigm. No change could very well be better. Thanks for the feedback.

"

ShinFuuma wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

1. Unlike D3, PoE's economy has a ceiling on market prices. You can use currency to create items directly, if desperate enough.
2. Because of #1, sellers must always price items below their average (alleged) crafting cost in order to maintain relevance; buyers will not bother with sellers if they can reasonably craft for same cost, so sellers maintain attractive prices.
3. Because of #2, players who are plugged into the economy essentially never craft with currency, just hoard it. This is because they have become conditioned to a situation where sellers will always offer items at below crafting cost.

Point one is true. Considering ratio's, trade rates, vendor rates ect. Currency has real value, however it also has relative value. An extreme would be a mirror in a temp league or anything outside of vendor rates. I suppose the rates that exist in the player base are statistically correlated to time invested vs acquisition rate.

Point two is also true allegedly. We can't assume all people are competent, or incompetent. This is related to crafting, buying, and selling.

Point three is self evident and true based on my own observations.

Perhaps I should have bolded the "because of"s. My point is that as long as currency is essentially gambling fodder, it will be hoarded until it can be used to trade for better gear, waiting on the market if necessary, unless some alternative mechanic (Mirror) is introduced. It is exceeding difficult to create mechanics which can efficiently attack this core behavior.

"

ShinFuuma wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

Thus, because players can craft items with currency, pretty much no one does. The only incentive to craft is to create items so badass they do not exist yet; the Mirror of Kalandra is the mechanical light at the end of the tunnel, and where currency goes to die.

Right, it's a diffusion of responsibility within the market to simply wait until someone else crafts an ideal item. Rates reflect a small portion of actual crafting cost. More or less mirrors are responsible.

They aren't responsible for anything bad, if that's what you're getting at.

Mirrors are the most important mechanic in the economy, without which it wouldn't work. They create an exception wherein it is not the correct play to wait for someone else to craft first, it becomes an advantage to craft first yourself and then Mirror-service your way to (even more) riches.

What is interesting about this is: the more best-in-slot unique items exist for builds, the more the economy turns to shit. The less rares are BiS, the more Mirrors become irrelevant and the less inventive there is to actually craft high-level items, and thus the more the economy becomes a game of chicken where currency is hoarded instead of spent. Essentially, good unique gear reduces entropy within the system.

And naturally, the idea of removing mirrors is tantamount to inciting a D3-style economic collapse.

"

ShinFuuma wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

However, in this way the PoE economy is much better at quietly self-regulating itself than the D3 economy, providing the feel of gold without that nasty potential for hyperinflation. If hyperinflation is your argument against asynchronous trade in PoE, it is a flimsy argument.

Well, not exactly. Diablo 3's economy was tailored around the basis of an auction house.

Spoiler

More or less providing an omnipotent vector players could access. Quality items existed in fractional amounts (Very rare). Overtime, (Around a year) quality items became beyond demand and near perfect items became priceless. My suggestion was to create less inconvenience but purposely imposing a flawed system. You maintain a still limited market range. You also avoid the inclusion of an omnipotent database. POEtrade in it's intent represents the aforementioned database. However, It functions realistically very poorly. It also destroys depth within the game (My opinion). It has a steep learning curve (What do I need to do to post an item) as well as third party association (Procurement). Lastly, it incorporates an inherent advantage to leader board status with a dynamic green name tag. (I'm online now)

It wasn't tailored. In a D3 postmortem Jay Wilson admitted they believed very few players would use the Auction Houses, and it shows it the utterly slapdash, disastrous, and stupid currency design of pre-RoS D3.

"

ShinFuuma wrote:

More or less, I am pointing out that such things already exist within (Not within internally) the game already. Also, to promote a system that idealistically exists within the game, in order to preserve depth. Lastly, it will be a purposely flawed system in order to preserve a limited market range. Peer to peer trading with unknown/unknown inconvenience. No omnipototent databases just your character and your time and your own logistics via who you know or see. Now that me and you are aware of each others existence I could (/ScrotieMcb Hq) go to your hideout to see if you have potential deals, regardless of your online status.

While D3 "proved" that auction houses in trade-enabled ARPGs don't work, PoE proved that auction houses in trade-enabled ARPGs are inevitable - and do not always destroy the game. It's a logical contradiction, to which the only response are to try to qualify out poe.trade as "not an AH" through some form of nitpickery, or to acknowledge poe.trade as the AH it is and acknowledge that something else - like currency design - explains D3's economic meltdown.

My 2 cents on Mirrors (and Legacys / legacy mods)... as long as they exist in the game I will NOT craft any endgame item on my own. There is no reason... sure, there are players who love the gamble and losing everything they WORKED for in a matter of seconds/minutes is something they are ok with... but I want the BiS items, and they are now only obtainable with mirrors because it's almost impossible to craft anything near perfect without legacy Eternals and even then... BiS mirror worthy items have legacy mods too (at least ES gear/IIQ)... even with all the wealth you could gather you can't beat any existing stuff.

That leaves me with two choises: Spend 2 years of progress on a gamble for a half decent item or just buy a legacy mirror item I could never ever craft on my own for less.



Are mirrors/legacys the bane of this game? Maybe it's just my expectation to acquire at least one char with BiS items sometimes... sadly, it's now impossible to do on my own -.-