For the love of god can we have a in game auction system?

Botters have already automated their trading. Presence of AH doesn't affect them, except maybe making trading even quicker. Debatable whether that's good or bad.

Also, those defending the current trading system shouldn't use the argument that D3's AH was bad because it made players spend more time on AH than actually playing; because PoE is worse at that due to not only the current trading system but also in everything else. There are better arguments, e.g., AH will encourage more botting etc.

Auction makes trading slower because you have to wait some time before the session ends. It is nature by its core design: you offer your price, then someone else offers his price and then someone else is doing the same until the time expires. At the end the best offer will be applied to close the deal. You cannot just buy something you need like in shop or marketplace.

I think the biggest and most reasonable argument is having to whisper 30+ people to buy the same item before someone accepts on the item they posted to begin with. Secondarily, it helps with price fixing.

Also, the stance that is slower is not effective. If they'd like, they can set it up three ways: buy now price, bidding, or both. Multiple games have worked with all of these systems.

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

Noooova wrote:

Just putting out "arguments" against an AH and never having tested it doesn't make GGG right. Auction houses are an ancient old idea. They work, period.

Of course they "work". No one has ever argued against that. When we consider trade - and trade alone, an AH will work. It's the repercussions of an AH, and its effect on the rest of the game, the in-game progression, item value, economy, what it would do to things that are meant to be hard to come by, things you are meant to "want" and not "have whenever you want to have them".

The argument of many people here, is just to ignore all of these argument as a none-issue. The same people have serious troubles naming ONE game with an ARPG itemization that has/had a successful AH. That alone more or less proves that trading - and the balance between the in-game progression and trading - is hard - and obviously not as simple as "I want to have easier access to stuff I want, and I want people to have easier access to things I want to sell". You mention WoW, which is a completely different game, with a completely different economy - and a completely different itemization. Now, bring forth an ARPG as an example.

Now, is trading in PoE perfect? Absolutely not. Far from. But personally, I take what we have now over a full-fletched AH any day of the week.

And "tested it"? What happened when they "tested" Harvest? People that want an AH (and bots) will think it's the most perfect thing ever. The effects of an AH won't come right away; they will come when the AH has been the center of balance for a few months, and every addition and balance decision made, are being made with the AH in mind - with the AH in the center.

There are probably 2394847 solutions to the trade situation in PoE. AH isn't one of them, at least not for gear. I've debated this for years, so I'm probably done. The horse is dead and buried.

The thing is, most modern ARPGS have no need of an AH because they don't have the completely messed up itemization that POE has. Or they are mainly a single player game.
Grim Dawn, D3, Last Epoch and Wolcen don't need an AH because the player can come across gear that is actually an upgrade through playing once they get to endgame. That's something that doesn't really happen in POE, you hit your wall and you aren't getting anything better than HP/Res/Res/and a few other affixes on gear. You can't get any of the really fun affixes, the really powerful stuff to drop. That stuff has to be tediously crafted with currency or bought from other players.
And, don't forget, Chris believes that the economy is sacrosanct, yet makes it harder than hell to actually partake in the economy. So there's something really messed up about his vision. He's actually scared of people partaking in the economy, like WTF?

"

jdp29 wrote:

He's actually scared of people partaking in the economy, like WTF?

Sure no! He is afraid of quiting ppl from the game when they use market as a "cheat" to boost they progress drastically. Market is a way to shorten their way (and time) you need to spend on the game to achieve their goal. It's so clear.

I did debate whether to wade into this topic again, but really I'm not sure of some of the "newer" folks understand. And actually, I cannot blame them. So here we go...

GGG has made their point on this clear. What's not so clear, is the fact that it's not been revised or adjusted since the OG Manifesto came out. I think its embarrassingly stubborn, close minded, outdated, uninformed, and probably a number of other things.

The overall point being, GGG isnt changing. Again I don't know if this is driven by fear, or a symptom of developmental stubbornness. But that said, there is no way you can read the trade manifesto with out cringing. Half of it doesnt even make sense anymore, or take into account all of the tools subsequently available. How is using TFT or the trade website (GGG's own version) not evidence to the contrary of what's written?

In addition, the trading process is just a flat out disservice to the players. Scams and price fixing are a problem, and not to mention the time wasted to even complete the trade itself. Its totally unnecessary.

For the tools, TFT, PoB, CoE, Awakened PoE Trade and more were developed by the community because GGG wouldn't. And now they have to reap what they sowed. It's bad, really bad. They even had to shift development of some league mechanics (like harvest, betrayal, and incursion) because the tools outperformed what was available in the game should you not use them. Who suffers? Yup the players (especially average players that dont use all those tools)

Finally it's worth noting the games looting is balanced around trade. This is significant. The idea being that the "scarcity" of items protects against extreme player gear progression. Unfortunately, because of what I've stated above, developed over the course of years, that "balance" is a joke. The gear progression is also a joke, because you almost never find your own upgrades (trade league), and crafting/ trade completely overshadow looting.

The argument that if there was an AH nothing but the best items would sell, or that it would be filled with junk, or its "too easy", make no sense given the current situation. The tools allow you to search and eliminate items, and it provides you with direct contact to the seller.

So that that brings us to the final overriding principle here. Does GGG really believe that sending a party invite, then forcing the other person to accept and stop what they are doing, protecting the integrity of gear progression for the entire game? REALLY? What's stopping the game from "failing" is accepting a whisper (from their own trade site), portaling out, running to your stash, (potentially being scammed), and then accepting a trade? COME THE FUCK ON.

I'm sorry but yeah this entire thing is an absolute joke in 2023, and nobody is happy. Defending it is equally embarrassing, because there is nothing beneficial to the players. If people here really believe that the Trade Manifesto. GGG's stance, or the overall player experience is positive in regards to trade, well thanks for the laugh. Anyone that has actually played the game knows better. That doesnt mean it will change, but dont defend it on their behalf. It isn't needed, and your not on the "right side" objectively. It's not a winnable arguement. There is no counter-point.

It's this way because GGG wants it this way, for no reason beyond a parent telling their kid "because I said so". It makes about as much sense too.

Edit: some grammar and context

All items especially currency needs to be account bound. All trade/scam problems solved.

"

DreadLordAvatar wrote:

All items especially currency needs to be account bound. All trade/scam problems solved.

If only there was an optional game mode where you can't trade anything. GGG please make it now!!!

"

If only there was an optional game mode where you can't trade anything...

but balanced around... wait... trading!

"

hasatt0 wrote:

"

If only there was an optional game mode where you can't trade anything...

but balanced around... wait... trading!

True, admittedly balancing SSF around Trade League was an annoying, confounding decison, but it was the necessary evil. Many people dont realize, or are so new, that GGG fought hard to not have an SSF worrying it would divide the community too much. (At least that's what they said)

I suppose the logic is that if SSF was more rewarding from a balance perspective, people would call for that in trade, or worse, people would prefer solo play in general and it might fuck up their metric understanding.

I do wonder how GGG feels about SSF generally speaking now as it's very popular amongst content creators, custom leagues, and event challenges.