GGG's argument about AH/state of trade that is grinding my gears - 2018 edition

So according to you, adding an AH with instant buy-outs would not have any affect on how much people rely on traded gear, except for the players who litterally never traded before?

"

Sickness wrote:

So according to you, adding an AH with instant buy-outs would not have any affect on how much people rely on traded gear, except for the players who litterally never traded before?

IF GGG would also address the pitfalls of looting as an alternative to "crafting" or "trading", of course!

We already have such a thing (albeit with a moderate delay) right now, there is 0 need to hide it.

So if they would add the "Auction House", GGG would also have to address the other sides, like loot actually presenting more incentive to be obtained, crafting becoming less random regarding mod selection and highly RNG based regarding tiers and values, and trading should always come with a time cost and a currency cost for that added convenience of having "everything at your finger tips"...

But such a "market" would also mean that GGG is actually regulating the economy, and you are forced to keep your word and trade items for listed prices. And that would be a very good thing for reducing the lost time with scamming, flipping and just wasting time when searching and buying a "non meta or opie-op" item...

Sure, it would need to also have a large number of "failsafes" to keep things "fair" for all parties, but the current amount of hassle, makes the added SSF mode a GODSEND for most that don't ever want to be bothered with the "trade" system (the rest have to deal with it as it currently is, even if they only buy, or sell only a few items from time to time).

So improvements are NEEDED regarding the "trade" system. It's up to GGG to make the system live up to the "trade is a central part of the PoE experience" hype. The current one, is unfortunately lacking and should be actualized ASAP...

imho, automated trading would only work with "account bound" tech after a trade to prevent mass buyouts and flipping. they could start that with some single item market, maybe maps.

you buy a map, you have to run it.

"

cronus wrote:

imho, automated trading would only work with "account bound" tech after a trade to prevent mass buyouts and flipping. they could start that with some single item market, maybe maps.

you buy a map, you have to run it.

lul, nope

"

Sickness wrote:

The easier it is to trade the more frequently a player will trade. That means for example buying gear upgrades more often during the acts, making the game easier and reducing the reliance and usage of self-found/crafted gear.

correct.

"

karoollll2534 wrote:

"

cronus wrote:

imho, automated trading would only work with "account bound" tech after a trade to prevent mass buyouts and flipping. they could start that with some single item market, maybe maps.

you buy a map, you have to run it.

lul, nope

can't beat that argument. (where is it?)

"

Sickness wrote:

So according to you, adding an AH with instant buy-outs would not have any affect on how much people rely on traded gear, except for the players who litterally never traded before?

Why are you moving the goal post and putting words in my mouth i never used?

I specifically started when i joined this thread to state that i think "the act of trading" is currently fine.

But that i want the current trade functionality's to be represented and found into the game.

So no, i don't think that and i never stated so.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

So according to you, adding an AH with instant buy-outs would not have any affect on how much people rely on traded gear, except for the players who litterally never traded before?

Why are you moving the goal post and putting words in my mouth i never used?

I specifically started when i joined this thread to state that i think "the act of trading" is currently fine.

But that i want the current trade functionality's to be represented and found into the game.

So no, i don't think that and i never stated so.

Peace,

-Boem-

I am not moving the goal posts, I am taking your claims to the logical conclusion.
If players only trade when they are unable to progress then it should not matter if it's instant buy-outs.

So does the ease of trading affect the frequency of trading or not? You can't have it both ways.

"

The_Scourge wrote:

Time to bite the bullet and just do a damn marketplace like every other game, GGG.

Yeah because nothing screams really cool game then homogenization.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

So according to you, adding an AH with instant buy-outs would not have any affect on how much people rely on traded gear, except for the players who litterally never traded before?

Why are you moving the goal post and putting words in my mouth i never used?

I specifically started when i joined this thread to state that i think "the act of trading" is currently fine.

But that i want the current trade functionality's to be represented and found into the game.

So no, i don't think that and i never stated so.

Peace,

-Boem-

I am not moving the goal posts, I am taking your claims to the logical conclusion.
If players only trade when they are unable to progress then it should not matter if it's instant buy-outs.

So does the ease of trading affect the frequency of trading or not? You can't have it both ways.

Of course it maters, since instant buy-outs allows scripted programs to abuse such a system, while the current implementation does not.

Which is a far greater concern then "efficiency of trading".

Peace,

-Boem-