PoE 2 needs an Auction House

No it does not.

Would only support all these f***** price fixers and botters out there

NO AUCTION HOUSE !

It's weird there's still so many who don't realize the dangers and problems an Auction House brings to a game. I mean, you think the bots are bad now? Least right now they're still limited by invites and trade time, small as it is.

Make that instant? Good luck buying anything of reasonable worth at a good price.

An 'auction house' is not needed, nor ever will be.

A streamlined trading experience, however, is *badly* needed.
Currently that is available only via third party things I can't mention here but GGG knows all about but refuses to lift a finger to address.

It needs to be set up so you dump something in a public tab and assign a price to it, and it's just there until someone clicks on it and dumps the requested currency into a trade window. Click accept and done. Move on.
No items can be listed public as 'no price' unless it's in a global public tab with a set price.
Will this encourage b***? Yes, it WILL. Why? Because they're already in exhaustive use!!! Adding a more convenient trading system will not invite any more than there are now, because they're already here.

Or just get rid of trade entirely and make the entire game SSF for *everyone* (including parties).

No, it doesn't an Auction House.

Auction Houses are a bad idea for ARPGs.

If you want to know why, read the Trade Manifesto, all the reasons are clearly explained there:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2025870

"

Unquietheart wrote:

If you want to know why, read the Trade Manifesto, all the reasons are clearly explained there:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2025870

A huge document that is 100% self-rationalizing to avoid a demanded feature.

Markets need to be made and accessible to all. Look at Eve Online for example. Tens of *thousands* of items, 98% of which can be accessed and manufactured by 100% of the playerbase with the requisite skills. Market manipulation happens, and is countered by manipulations against the initial investment through other channels. It all balances out.

Heck, Oxford has an entire *course* on studying macro economics via controlled markets in games - Eve Online, specifically. An entire semester was spent just studying, by doctoral level students, the market after an artificially created 0.2% change in base tritium gained via every method that generated it, and then comparing that to a sudden drop in oil production after Hurricanes Katrina/Rita and how that affected global fuel prices.



Chris can take a look at these studies and make a trade system that utilizes their findings - but he won't, because he's too lazy and they counter his personal 'play style' that is SSF Hardcore (he's always wanted that to be PoE, despite how wildly unrealistic it is).

"

MrsDeath_ wrote:

and whats that better trading system?

Note-based trading for example, secondary effect would be that it's the groundwork for a proper messaging-system outside of chat in the game, something which is lacking since years.
Someone offers an item? Generate an automated message with an attachment of your currency you're paying, the partner accepts it, items get exchanged.
This causes waiting time, binds currency but removes the tedium of trying to grab the attention of that one guy who's afk 9 out of 10 hours he's online.
Just as an example.

In-game trade-mechanic of any kind. For example an in-game search function identical to the poe.trade site or the official poe trading.

A commodity-market, it doesn't affect the equipment-market directly and only serves as an exchange for consumables.

Many many many other options outside of an AH. And heck... even an AH CAN be implemented with the proper limitations, each of them has been discussed in detail so much that it becomes an utter joke to repeat the same things again and again, they have been dismantled so far into detail that GGG could even re-create one from scratch just by reading through the discussions about them... a working one even.

"

MrsDeath_ wrote:

Could that system be fit to game's current pace and drop rate?

If properly executed surely. The notion of 'but it can always be crap' is utterly mindless in itself, everything can be garbage. Which brings us to your next sentence:

"

MrsDeath_ wrote:

Can you give a guarantee that it would not destroy the economy of the game?

Duh... obviously not. Can you guarantee that you won't slip tomorrow and die from it? Can you guarantee that your freshly bought car won't break suddenly? Obviously there is NEVER a guarantee, that's an inherent rule of anything new of any kind. No risk no reward. Going with that train of thought would mean we're still at PoE 1.0 as ANY sort of change has risks.

But... we got 3 big recurring topics which are brought up over... and over... and over again:
Trading
Lab
Balance

No other topic is as often seen as those, that alone shows they are fairly important to tackle. Sadly... NONE of them are by GGG, which is a grave mistake as those bother people the most obviously as seen.

"

Phrazz wrote:

It matters greatly. A small, wrong turn, and it all goes to shit. And it's not something that's easily reversible either, without serious havoc in the community. But yes, I welcome trade improvements. No, I don't think it's needed per se. But to call the current system "good"? No sane person would. But the impact the current trade system has on game play, in-game progression and the overall feel of the GAME? Underestimated.

Umh... obviously? That's not what I was talking about though? Also obviously ANYTHING can be made into garbage with enough incompetence...
And which brings us again to you agreeing actually. It's not 'good' as you say. Since that it the case it needs resources to be allocated to become that obviously as it's a sour point of the game otherwise, and will stay like that until it's resolved.

"

Phrazz wrote:

Anyhow, trading isn't necessarily meant to "feel good". It's meant to be a means to an end. It's something designed to use when you really NEED to, not when you WANT to.

So... never then? You can easily play through the game in SSF, heck... I didn't exchange my gloves of ilvl 56 until after uber-elder, in the current situation there is no need for any sort of trading.
The most you'll 'need' is 4-5 maps which just simply don't drop despite lots of effort, or maybe a single item along the line which just won't give you an upgrade... but otherwise? There's never a actual NEED for trade.

It becomes important when you're trying to indulge into specific goals. Crafting an item with a rare mod-combination or simply higher then usual stats, or by obtaining some uniques which are fairly rare. It can also come into effect to upgrade from a 'decent' item which brings you easily to T16 to a 'good' one which makes everything easy at T16.

And it's absolutely ok if trading isn't designed to 'feel good'. What's not ok is for trading to be designed in a way so it feels 'frustrating'. That's a problem. It can have severe downsides... those aren't allowed to feel like you're unable to obtain items which are dangled in front of your nose. Nobody likes a carrot on a stick to follow it and then being unable to obtain it. It's not something you have control over, people like to have control. Take away the control and it feels bad. It has been shown with the master-rework what the difference is for that. Since we can choose it feels 'nice', before it felt like shit... and that despite actively having less masters to run in total.

"

bex_HB wrote:

Would only support all these f***** price fixers and botters out there

You mean... more then an API which does exactly that better then ANY other mechanic ever could?

You mean the unfair advantage of an automated system scanning through the whole available amount of items and even automatically copying a message into your clipboard (which is allowed) to paste it with a single click of a button is better then one where any automated system would need to insert data and scan through visual feedback?

Yeah... that's not how that works.



Once again (since people are too dumb to read seemingly):
A fully automated system WITHOUT limitations is BAD.
A fully automated system WITH PROPER limitations is GOOD.

The ONLY thing which has to be determined is the TYPE and SEVERITY of those limitations, not the inherent need for them or that it would feel better with another system, that has been proven.
A unlimited AH obviously 'feels' better for the user then the current system... the repercussions outside of it are just to severe. Hence we only need to look for what type of trading 'feels' best while also needing the least amount of effort to set up quickly in a working manner.

"

BlaqWolf wrote:

"

Unquietheart wrote:

If you want to know why, read the Trade Manifesto, all the reasons are clearly explained there:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2025870

A huge document that is 100% self-rationalizing to avoid a demanded feature.

No, it's a document by a professional game designer with a keen understanding of his game system. A document written to explain to non-game designers why a feature they might like might not be good for the game as a whole.

"

BlaqWolf wrote:

Markets need to be made and accessible to all. Look at Eve Online for example. Tens of *thousands* of items, 98% of which can be accessed and manufactured by 100% of the playerbase with the requisite skills. Market manipulation happens, and is countered by manipulations against the initial investment through other channels. It all balances out.

EVE Online has one of the best Auction House systems I've ever seen.

But it's not applicable here. EVE Online is an MMO. (To mention just a few of the key differences here:) It uses a shared overworld where players compete for resources. Most equipable items (such as ships) aren't actually items, they're consumables. They are by their nature in the EVE universe, transitory, disposable.

EVE Online is built around that Auction House system. The core game play loops are about acquiring resources and blueprints and making stuff, selling stuff and buying stuff (that you don't personally make) to do all that other stuff with.

It's a beautifully done system, and it has nothing to do with ARPGs.

ARPGs (usually) have no shared overworld. They attempt to provide a standing wave of challenge, and they reward incremental upgrades by killing monsters. Items are much more durable (frequently being completely durable, although some ARPGs have experimented with limited durability). There's no competition for resources, the game worlds are instanced.

The best example that's actually relevant is Diablo 3.

Which Chris Wilson actually played back when it was new (and which I also played back with it was new) and had the Auction House system in place. He played it then, and saw personally how it impacted an ARPG.

Blizzards official statement on the issue is that the AH was removed because it undermined the core gameplay loop for that type of game.

You can find that here: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/d3/topic/9972208129

"

BlaqWolf wrote:

Heck, Oxford has an entire *course* on studying macro economics via controlled markets in games - Eve Online, specifically. An entire semester was spent just studying, by doctoral level students, the market after an artificially created 0.2% change in base tritium gained via every method that generated it, and then comparing that to a sudden drop in oil production after Hurricanes Katrina/Rita and how that affected global fuel prices.

I'm sure it's a great course, but it's still EVE Online, and MMO. A different type of game than this one. And Chris Wilson is still the guy who's actually created a successful game (and a successful game company) in today's market, and you, me, and the Oxford professors in question ... are not (AFAIK).

"

BlaqWolf wrote:

Chris can take a look at these studies and make a trade system that utilizes their findings - but he won't, because he's too lazy and they counter his personal 'play style' that is SSF Hardcore (he's always wanted that to be PoE, despite how wildly unrealistic it is).

I hardly think the insults are necessary. I appreciate that it can be a frustrating subject. I appreciate that there might be better solutions out there. I don't think adding in an Auction House is it.

"

Unquietheart wrote:

No, it's a document by a professional game designer with a keen understanding of his game system. A document written to explain to non-game designers why a feature they might like might not be good for the EVE Online is an MMO. (To mention just a few of the key differences here:) It uses a shared overworld where players compete for resources. Most equipable items (such as ships) aren't actually items, they're consumables. They are by their nature in the EVE universe, transitory, disposable.

This is actually the major player in why game economies inevitably fail unless the bar is consistently pushed forward by expansions, level caps or other means of economic "resets".

If items are never consumed, lost or broken they will always saturate the market and lose value which results in a chain of other events. It's all based around the simple factual flaw that players don't like to lose their items. Heh, esp if that game allow player looting.

Games with the most successful long term economies have durability, lost/stolen items and an overall need to replace even the best gear which is ideally facilitated by other player interactions creating not only a competitive market but a competitive resource to furnish that market.

I agree we need AH and be able to post buyouts. trading too unreliable.

All the people on here saying "no" are the same people who don't reply to a trade and you never get an item or its crazy over priced.

sick of dealing with greasy people.

Trading is an incredible chore.

Obtaining low value items is tedious because people don't often reply to whispers asking to buy low value things so you end up having to shotgun out tons of whispers to get the low value thing you wanted that should have been easy to get.

Obtaining high-value items is easier via trading because people don't usually ignore whispers asking to buy a valuable item.