GGG's argument about AH/state of trade that is grinding my gears - 2018 edition
" What exactly do you base that on? What was the problem with the RMAH that did not affect the gold AH? Did they not close at the same time? Last edited by Sickness#1007 on Feb 14, 2018, 3:21:34 AM
|
![]() |
" It's been the topic for the last 20 pages. " ...and there is proof that it's not a "moot point". Last edited by Sickness#1007 on Feb 14, 2018, 3:05:00 AM
|
![]() |
" Lol no. I am claiming that GGG already balances drop tables under the assumption that people trade efficiently. And the people that trade efficiently already do so whenever they see fit. Adding instant buy-out functionality would not alter this behavior, just shave of X amount of seconds of each trade they are already currently doing. The reason i refuse an instant buy-out system is because i'm a realist and don't think GGG can handle the incomming bot wave if they ever implement such a system. I don't refuse such a system on the basis you are assuming. You make two wrong assumptions. 1) people would trade more if trading was made more efficient. This is simply wrong, what would happen if they moved it in-game is that people who are not trading/unaware of trading might start to trade. So the total volume of trades would go up. But for the people already aware of trading and using the tool like they should, nothing would change. There are no downsides to the current trade-system. You don't have a day limit of X trades, you don't need a certain currency to enable trade, nothing prevents players currently from using it whenever they please. As a result of this, their average of trades would remain the same. 2) trading is always efficient This is also not the case there are cases where trading is inefficient currently (like selling 1 alch unique's 1 month into a league), this is similar to picking up scrolls of wisdom and portal scrolls in maps. It's inefficient on a macro scale. Fast-sales to under-price vs the current market etc There are cases where the use of trading leads to inefficiency if knowledge is not applied correctly. Wrong use of trading can lead to inefficient time management. Funnily enough, most of these cases are enabled by the current efficient trading system when comparing it to the old forum trade system. Since it's easy to just spam listings on the indexers. Trading, in itself, also requires development of game-knowledge and skill. But in order to develop that they first need to be exposed to the system which is currently not the case. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
" So you are really sticking to it. The idea that players would not trade more even if they implemented an instant buy-out AH is frankly the most ridiculous thing I have read in a long while. How do you expect to have any credibility when the logical conclusion of your argument is that people who trade would trade just as much in a game with only trade chats as they would in a game with an instant buy-out AH? |
![]() |
" Yeah because i'm totally using a PoE trade functionality of five years ago as a baseline for my argumentation and not the current state of PoE. zzzZZZZzzzzz Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
" You are all over the place... One of the following must be true for your argument to be true: 1. The current system is efficient enough that further improvements makes no difference to the frequency of trading. 2. The system never has an effect on the frequency of trading. Which one is it? |
![]() |
" Why are you asking redundant questions at this point. It's option 1 in the current game state. Eagerly awaiting your "so you do want an AH" comeback. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
" Thank you. Now, explain to me at what point a system becomes efficient enough for further improvemetns to not affect the frequency of trading. " I have never made that claim, that you believe I have is just because you failed the logic check. |
![]() |
My God!
You guys are both wrong. And right. If they push the "current" indexing function into the main game, it DOES become more "available" to everyone. This WILL result in more trades. Thinking otherwise, is naive - at best. But will it have a huge effect on the game/economy? Doubtful, as long as they keep the minimum amount of effort required to trade. Personally, I do not care at ALL how they develop trading in the future, as long as they keep the drop rates, in-game progression and the possibility of doing things by yourself - with trade as a supplement. But they have to be careful. The more apparent trade gets in the game, the more it will influence and affect other parts of the game - indirectly and directly. And the easier and more efficient it gets, the more required it gets. But I liked the trade manifesto. It game my soul peace. I like their philosophy on the matter. But an in-game implementation of the current system wouldn't really break their philosophy, as long as they do it right. Bring me some coffee and I'll bring you a smile.
|
![]() |
" His argument is that players that currently trade, will trade more if it's in the game engine. I always stated the volume of trading will go up, but for players that already utilize trade, nothing will change. They won't magically require more upgrades or be tempted to upgrade more, since they already upgrade whenever they experience discomfort. My whole initial point is that i want trade to be available for every-one so they can learn about it and for that to happen it needs to be an integrated game system not hidden away on some third party environment. More so because GGG claims it's a fundamental part of their game which they utilize as a balance tool. Which results in players that trade having a fairly good experience and people who do not struggle.(obviously the later is only playing half the game, or playing the game without all the tools the developers balance around a player having) " Trading is utilized in the current game to bypass discomfort efficiently.(as opposed to grinding/crafting as forms of character progression) The current trade implementation already achieves this and when a player is no longer exposed to discomfort(having a fun time playing the game) he will not go out of his way to trade any more. Depending on individual skill of the player discomfort goes up or down based on player power relative to content. This is already the case, which is why some players will do act 10 kitava without max resistances and a lower health pool.(their skill enables lower threshold before discomfort appears) There is no additional motivation for a regular player just "playing the game" to trade. For trade-centric players, they already capitalize fully on the system and will do so irrelevant of implementation. They are not playing "PoE the game" but "PoE the market simulator". Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
|