Trading sucks.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

Wouldn't that depend on the trade site you use? Barring the currency trade section which is always awful no matter what site you use, the official trade is more responsive to updating status. You're correct that it's not quick, but that still doesn't mean you can't use something like /autoreply if you'd rather not trust /afk.

It boils down to the actual trade-API, the mechanic behind the listing.
GGG's personal site has a direct contact with the API, hence it'll always be quicker to update, that's why live-searches through there are more viable then through poe.trade as an example.

Nonetheless, if you test out how fast status-changes happen (or listings) by intentionally setting a well-sought item for a low price you can easily see the actual speed of the site.

This as mentioned usually sits somewhere between 5 seconds (rarely) and 30 minutes (rarely) with some examples of the item not being listed at all (easy to see by searching your own item).
The common time-frame is between 2-5 minutes for listings, that's the time a blighted-map takes, roughly 5 times the amount of someone sorting out their inventory after each map and roughly 20 times the amount of someone simply using a dump-tab while opening a new portal during that.

Would the API actually be instant or below 1 minute then I could agree wholeheartedly with you, which sadly isn't the case.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

The problem in this scenario is that it's going to happen irrespective of you using /autoreply or not.

Exactly! And that is a shortcoming of the actual mechanic --> change needed.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

Turns out if you give people a reason why you didn't invite them the second they PM'd you, they're less likely to move on to find something of similar worth.

True, absolutely, but think about the reasons why this might happen as well:
Currency-trade is beyond awful at times, imagine you being the buyer, having already asked 20 people in the list and getting no answer. After 5 minutes of fruitless 'Me buy thingy for other thingy' posts you're most likely getting frustrated (and loose motivation to play on, but that's another huge issue of trade as a side-topic here). Then, finally! One person replies. That guy will gladly wait 3 or 5 minutes before trying their luck with more people. Or... also very likely he'll wait while searching for another one and waste your time as soon as you're ready.

Can't be mad at any solution they take there, I value my personal time also higher then the time of someone else, I'm openly proclaiming that I'm no 'goody two-shoes' who isn't out for his own agenda when in-game.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

Of course, this is just my experience. I can't speak for people who claimed to get salty, impatient buyers. I personally have not had it happen so far, and all I did was make sure I put up an auto response to explain why I'm busy.

I got (at the current time) 3 quad-tabs and 6 normal premium tabs full of items listed in Standard, while the turnover-rate is far smaller there... oh boy, the interactions at times.
If you are heavily invested in trade - either by actual choice or simply by the age of your account - then you'll find such issues all over the place. Most of the time it goes well... and then you get a day of utter trading-nightmare for some reason.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

This is the only option we have, and if some people insist we stick to a crappy trade system, it's what we should be using.

I'm pro-change here, for obvious reasons. I won't discuss the usage of a system which has repeatedly proven to be actually broken. I rather push towards exchanging that with another system with similar (not the same) limitations that solves at least the frustration.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

I wish GGG would do something to make trade easier to engage in, but they're not and probably will never do it. So if they won't fix the issue of trade being exploitable for price fixers, I'll use what tools currently available which is the ability to block people's item listings in the official trade if they won't explain why they're not responding, at least for items at exceptionally low cost relative to everything else.

Yeah, I'm definitely not doing that, it limits my already limited options after all. If I would do that then buying fossils (which I do in stacks of 100 at the moment) would be an even worse situation. It's just not something I can handle with the current system.

I'm fine with a shortage of supply... I'm not fine with an abundance of supply but a shortage of proper mechanics to access that supply, even if it means the price grows because of it.

I literally don't have the leeway of doing it anymore, if you're interacting in Standard anytime then you'll realize why. In a league... fine mostly. In Standard... nah.

Also it's the reason why I'm not supporting GGG anymore. See the blight- and Legion-pack? Yeah, won them in a giveaway (because I'm seemingly a lucky bastard). I said back in Synthesis 'no more until shit is fixed' and I intend to stay that way until it is.
I'm also fairly sure that I'm not the only person playing this game, willing to spend hundreds of € (World of Tanks was my game before PoE, before it became 'garbage', 1500€ left there in 2 years) but abstain from doing so because the current state of the game just isn't worth it.

And no, my 70 stash-tabs of all sorts aren't enough for me. My comfort-zone is 150-200 in PoE. That's a lot of open margin there which I'm willing to 'invest' into.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

If I'm ultimately left with trade bots, then so be it. At least I, personally, solved the problem by eliminating the price fixers since GGG won't do it. :P

They are dry in Standard, literally :p You're not the only one with the same idea.
Also as said: turnover-rate is lower in general, which also means acquisition of consumables tends to be a bit slower there.

Give it 3 leagues or so with the current player-numbers and leagues will also have the same issue, given that people don't move over to other games rather then staying (which already happens sadly).

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

And it's not like I just ignore and forget about it. If they actually respond after I block their lists, I always unblock them. It's not that difficult to either scroll back up through the item listings and unblock them or taking a look through the ignore list and unblock them that way.

True, but even more extra effort which would take me away from doing what I want in PoE... namely playing the game. Crafting, running maps, running Delve, every little thing which takes me away from what I WANT to do via arbitrary limitations is time I'm very sour about. I'm a gamer at heart... and that means I take my gaming-time fairly serious and don't want it wasted by incompetence to provide proper mechanics other games have since years.

"

Pizzarugi wrote:

"

Kulze wrote:

Oh, something smells in here... oh right, I know this smell, it's a 'BS argument' rotting away!

[Removed by Support]

this, coming from the one who expects everyone to use autoreply just so pizza doesn't jump to a conclusion that they're all price fixers if it takes longer than 10 seconds to respond?


you 're literally advocating everyone to play the way YOU want them to. as if all ~10 million or whatever players' poe lives revolve around your messaging.

"

Kulze wrote:

"

Cyzax wrote:

No solutions to the main issue, that any kind of easier trade would widen the difficulty gap between trading and non-trading players have been presented by anyone.

Because that base notion is INHERENTLY WRONG.

How little you know of game design and mechanics (and general economics)...

Easier trade, by definition, will lead to the average trading player having better gear, but the non-trading players will have the same as today.

To maintain difficulty level for the trading players, GGG would have to raise game difficulty for ALL players... including the (majority) non-trading players.

It is too financially risky, and it would not bring in any new revenue. For a commercial company, it is a non-starter... especially since it is not really an issue except to a (very) small group of (very) vocal players.

"

Cyzax wrote:

How little you know of game design and mechanics (and general economics)...

Easier trade, by definition, will lead to the average trading player having better gear, but the non-trading players will have the same as today.

To maintain difficulty level for the trading players, GGG would have to raise game difficulty for ALL players... including the (majority) non-trading players.

It is too financially risky, and it would not bring in any new revenue. For a commercial company, it is a non-starter... especially since it is not really an issue except to a (very) small group of (very) vocal players.

"How little you know of game design and mechanics (and general economics)" that is what I ask you!

The average trading player is still far away from a top player and with an easier trade system the non-traders will become traders

Anyone who chooses not to trade when it's an easy feat should go play SSF

An easy in-game trade system will be especially friendly to new players making more of them to continue in the game

"

Cyzax wrote:

...
Easier trade, by definition, will lead to the average trading player having better gear...

I think you're missing a major point: Easier trade need not lead to better equipped players. OK, it depends on your definition of easy.
What Kulze (and others) have been suggesting is a less annoying, but similarly limiting trade interface.

Trivial example (nonsense in itself, but just to clarify why your statement above is incorrect): If every buyer had to pay the seller a base fee of an Ex on top of whatever the seller is asking for, trade could be trivially easy without giving the buyer any extra power.

And now take this extreme example on the one side, the current annoying system on the other side and figure out compromises with which trade can be limited without killing it off completely. Keeping the goal of "cheap-to-midlevel items should not lose their value too badly" alive.
It certainly can be done.