These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Feedback Request - Margin trading and accurate market UI

First post First post First post
Author
Nil'kandra
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2013-11-21 17:54:45 UTC
mynnna wrote:

Thomas Hurt wrote:
Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet

This isn't bad, I think.


I disagree due only to practicality concerns. Server load would be unpleasant on the Jita node if it was making this check every time a quantity of isk was deducted from a wallet.
Hanazava Karyna
The Foundation Of Mammon
#22 - 2013-11-21 17:57:17 UTC
Margin Trading scams are part of Eve, are Eve itself.

Market is PvP and you want to take market's the most gudgeon-killing (and one of the most popular trick in market transations) feature of all time. It's deeply integrated into market logic and I wouldn't even dream about touching those regions.
Why would you want to take this out in the first place? To make market childish playground with training wheels? Every investement can be profitable, but the more it's profitable the more dangerous it (potentially) becomes. Sometimes you have to be fast to buy something cheap and sell high, but you have to read with understanding *what* are you buying and *what* are you going to give for it. Read every detail, be fast, think about your decision.. Yeah, think. Because making even 2000% profit seems very legit. And, how weird!, you can only sell those items in a pack of 10! Well, more money!

Don't make market childish playground. You just want to cut out a huge PvP aspect from PvP game.
And, just for your information, Eve has one of the best and realistic player-driven market in history of gaming. Think about it.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#23 - 2013-11-21 17:57:29 UTC
Nil'kandra wrote:
mynnna wrote:

Thomas Hurt wrote:
Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet

This isn't bad, I think.


I disagree due only to practicality concerns. Server load would be unpleasant on the Jita node if it was making this check every time a quantity of isk was deducted from a wallet.


Server load is the downside, yeah, if it's possible for it to be minimized it'd be okay.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Maevra
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-11-21 17:57:44 UTC
Nil'kandra wrote:
mynnna wrote:

Thomas Hurt wrote:
Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet

This isn't bad, I think.


I disagree due only to practicality concerns. Server load would be unpleasant on the Jita node if it was making this check every time a quantity of isk was deducted from a wallet.

This is what CCP Rise was proposing so I think they've considered server issues, and I think market interactions don't take place on system servers as they're tied to the regions.
Kyt Thrace
Lightspeed Enterprises
Goonswarm Federation
#25 - 2013-11-21 17:58:32 UTC
Morwennon wrote:
Kyt Thrace wrote:
A player (Buyer) creates a buy order and with margin trading and puts 24% of the total buy order in escrow.

The other 74% isk does not come out of player's (Buyer) wallet, but the amount is marked against player's (Buyer) wallet.

Another player (Seller) sells said item against buy order and the player (Buyer) who created the order does not have the isk to fullfill it;

the player's (Buyer) wallet is deducted the isk amount which then becomes a negative amount.

the Player (Seller) receives isk for the item he sells at the buy order price.

I do not agree that a player can use the UI to scam someone. This mechanic needs to be fixed. So if you start to penalize the person who is trying to take advantage of this then it will stop.

The players who actually use this feature the proper way & for the reason it was implemented will not be affected.

This doesn't penalize the seller, this allows anyone who can afford an alt account to generate infinite free ISK for themselves by creating buy orders for some trash item (trit at 1b per unit, say) on a throwaway alt in an out of the way station, emptying the alt's wallet, filling the order with their main, and then just letting the alt account with the immensely negative wallet expire.



I got to thinking after I posted this, you are right. Someone would just use this to make free isk.

Forget what I said.

R.I.P. Vile Rat

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#26 - 2013-11-21 17:58:53 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
CCP Rise wrote:
The Margin Trading Scam exploits the mechanic where a character with the Margin Trading skill can place buy orders and only place a portion of the ISK in escrow. If they then transfer all of their ISK away, the order will fail when someone tries to sell to it, essentially allowing them to make a fake buy order. Usually this means players make purchases that are grossly overpriced with the expectation that they can sell them to the margin trading-based buy order and make money, but instead are left with a pile of items that they will have to take a loss on.


The Margin Trading Scam exploit's the mark's credulity and unwillingness to do basic research before investing. The market history window provides more than enough information to allow easy identification of overpriced items.

No order is guaranteed to be available when you want to sell to it. Someone else can beat you to it, the owner can take it down, etc.

Bolded the part where you seem to be saying every bit of market PVP is bad. It's a zero sum game, someone wins and someone else loses. Making an investment (the first bolded bit) exposes you to the risk that you'll be the one losing (the second bolded bit). Neglecting to properly research the investment you're making greatly increases that risk.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Kal Arkhenty
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2013-11-21 18:03:47 UTC
mynnna wrote:

Grandma Squirel wrote:
What about a penalty paid by the margin trader for a failed order? To start with, the 24% or more that the put down could be paid to the attempted seller; so the seller gets 24% and keeps their item(s). You could ratchet it up and have the penalty that could bring the trader's wallet negative, though obviously, you couldn't give any of the negative wallet penalty to the seller, it would need to just be an isk sink.


Both ideas ultimately can hit a legitimate user as well, and while in real world terms the legitimate uses are really sort of odd, they are what they are.

I think being fined for not having enough funds to pay for an order, albeit annoying, is reasonable. In the real world you get fined if you write a check you can't cover. It would force you to pay more attention to how you lay out your buy orders.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#28 - 2013-11-21 18:03:55 UTC

I have mixed thoughts on this:

The Margin Trading Scam: The only way the scammer makes any isk at all from a Margin Trade Scam is if they trick a person to purchase overpriced goods directly from them. Any player that actually investigates teh value of the product they are buying won't fall for margin trade scams:

--- Price history gives a solid indication of how much an item has been selling for.
--- Sales Volume History gives a solid indication of how rapidly an item moves.

Both of these tell you the volatility of an item, which moreless represents the risk associated with buying an item to resell for profit. A trader willingly assumes this risk when they purchase an item.

IMO, you do not need to change the margin trade skill at all. Instead, CCP needs to make this pointt CRYSTAL CLEAR:

Quote:
ALL buy orders are NOT GUARANTEED.


It is that simple.... Put it right on the market interface....

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#29 - 2013-11-21 18:10:59 UTC
Kal Arkhenty wrote:
I think being fined for not having enough funds to pay for an order, albeit annoying, is reasonable. In the real world you get fined if you write a check you can't cover. It would force you to pay more attention to how you lay out your buy orders.


You actually don't get fined for writing a check you can't cover. You get fined when someone tries to cash a check you can't cover. It's a pretty important difference.

When you give someone a bad check, you receive something of value, and the person who sold it to you ends up receiving nothing in exchange.

When a margin order fails, you receive nothing and the person who's trying to sell to you loses nothing because no exchange took place. This would be like you writing a check, calling your bank to find your balance is low before giving the check to the seller, and deciding not to complete the transaction. The seller keeps the goods, you keep your lack of money.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Banlish
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#30 - 2013-11-21 18:14:06 UTC
A possible solution
What if it was possible to open two market windows on the SAME client and you could 'DEAL LINK' the two items between them, then if the buy order had the isk available the order would show 'GREEN' if the order could not currenly be filled it would show 'RED DO NOT BUY' this would stop a global appearance where someone with big bucks or a ton of supply could nuke out a bunch of orders just because they are a different color(however PLEASE remmber there are color blind people in the world and figure out a fix for them too), but if someone wanted to take the time to MANUALLY link the two orders in the interface they could see the results they need. It would require a 1 minute tutorial video and give the player a reward of like a +1 implant or a week of +1 to all stat training time to watch it and you'd be quite good to go.

A way a VISIBLE TO ALL EASILY market change could be ruthlessly abused.
Remember there are those of us with anywhere from 40b to a few trillion lying around, now lets say I wanted to abuse this new mechanic, how would I do it? Well lets say I see 100 market buy orders for a moon mineral, but I see that the bottom 40 of them don't have the isk available. I buy the full amount of moon mineral for the biggest order and try to sell to them all, canceling every order that doesn't have enough isk. THIS COULD BE WORTH IT TO ME if I was trying to corner the market and push it up. Please keep that in mind with how this is handled CSM and Dev like ppl.

Why Margin trading has to at least stay around
I personally sell somewhere around 40b to 60b per month of tech two, I invent it all and build it all, but I don't keep enough isk around (10 accounts are expensive) to cover all my supplies up front. Margin trading has allowed me to have 20% of the available isk and put my sell orders up maybe 1% to 2% under market average to get quick sales so I CAN cover my missing isk before the orders are filled.

One thing that might help if you are going to rework Margin Trading anyway
Can we get a log of what orders closed unfilled, even a notification of the original order, size and price, nothing worse then putting in a buy order for 12 things, one FAILED being filled 2 minutes after you logged off, the other 11 were filled and you don't know because it's no longer on your buy orders or in your wallet whatsoever. Please give us something that would allow me to sign on, see the 11 and just put up the 12th AGAIN to fill it. Would help market activity.

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#31 - 2013-11-21 18:15:27 UTC
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet

At first this looked like a good idea, then I thought about it and realized that the margin trading scam would still live on if this were the rule.

The scammer would put up a buy for 5 items, minimum 1. He would put up a sell for 5 of the same item 12 jumps away. Now the mark (the victim) could go 12 jumps, buy one item, return and sell; testing to see if its a scam. But in all likelihood the mark will buy all 5 and get scammed. The mark will do this because he does not yet know about this scam, and seeing a deal that looks like an error on the part of another trader will want to take advantage as fast as possible before someone else does.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#32 - 2013-11-21 18:21:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

The solution we proposed to the CSM initially was based around the idea that if you didn't have enough money in your wallet to back an order, that order would be cancelled.


I believe this is completely unacceptable:

I regularly trade (and am not a Margin Trade Scammer), with billions in sell orders, and sometimes billions in buy orders. I put up buy orders to acquire more construction materials, often with the understanding and foreknowledge that I'll have the isk to pay the order before the order completes. I also move isk between characters quite a bit, replacing PvP ships, taking advantage of "deals" from corp mates unloading loot, etc. Having 50 buy orders cancelled because I transferred a bit too much isk to my alt, or because I spent some money in the mean time buying other stuff. The point of the margin trade skill is to FREE up my isk to take advantage of these opportunities, and that's why I trained the skill in the first place!

If you implement this, thereby negating the value of the Margin Trade skill, I'd request you refund my SP in Margin Trading.

CCP Rise wrote:

A second possibility, which emerged from the discussion with the CSM, was built around marking orders in the market interface based on whether or not they were placed using margin trading. This would mean that when you place a buy order you would have to decide whether that would be a 'guaranteed' order or not, and then it would be marked (colored or check boxed or something) in the market interface so that people would know whether there was risk involved in trying to fill the order. This has several problems also, including: making legitimate market activity seem shady, making the interface more confusing, adding clicks for people placing orders and also costing new players money by steering them away from cheaper orders because of fear of scams.

It's a complex problem and we want to handle it carefully but we would appreciate any ideas or insights you guys can provide to help us.

Thanks!


To be honest, this is acceptable. I would request an additional feature to this:
-- Show the name of the buyer on the buy order too.

  • This way "rare item traders' can make a name for themselves, and can rise above the margin trade stigma.
  • [*] This information could also be fortuitous in enhancing marketeer conflict.
    Vincent Athena
    Photosynth
    #33 - 2013-11-21 18:25:45 UTC
    mynnna wrote:
    Nil'kandra wrote:
    mynnna wrote:

    Thomas Hurt wrote:
    Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet

    This isn't bad, I think.


    I disagree due only to practicality concerns. Server load would be unpleasant on the Jita node if it was making this check every time a quantity of isk was deducted from a wallet.


    Server load is the downside, yeah, if it's possible for it to be minimized it'd be okay.

    Thats why I suggest that the amount needed to cover the biggest buy should always be kept in escrow. The server need only check every time orders change, either by the trader or due to an order fill.

    Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

    Frozen fanfiction

    Noriko Mai
    #34 - 2013-11-21 18:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Noriko Mai
    Thomas Hurt wrote:
    Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet

    This, in my opinion, is the best solution. The minimum buy volume must always be covered. If min. buy volume > 24% in escrow, then escrow = 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit'.
    For all those, who think it will harm traders. Please show one example where this is the case.

    "Meh.." - Albert Einstein

    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #35 - 2013-11-21 18:26:23 UTC
    Kal Arkhenty wrote:
    I think being fined for not having enough funds to pay for an order, albeit annoying, is reasonable. In the real world you get fined if you write a check you can't cover. It would force you to pay more attention to how you lay out your buy orders.


    First off, there is a big difference between writing a "bad check" a failed buy order. With the bad check, you actually acquire the goods and services you were buying. With a failed buy order, you lose broker fees and gain nothing!

    Have you ever ordered drive through only to discover you don't have your wallet? Ever have a prescription filled only to leave it behind because you don't have your insurance card? As long as you don't take possession of the food (aka like eat the food before realizing you can't pay for it), there are very few recourses a business can take against you.

    Many businesses deal with "false buy orders" on a regular basis. The majority of times it is accidental, and they eat the cost of prepping the food and hope to sell it to someone else. Sometimes it is malicious (did you ever have unpaid pizza delivered to someone as a prank?), and in these cases the Business owners take steps to avoid future losses.

    In EvE, which is purposely dystopic, you too can suffer from "false buy orders". You can also implement good business practices to avoid future losses (like researching the true value of your goods, as well as their sales volume and volatility). And unlike the above scenarios, when the buy order fails, you keep the goods, which are NOT perishable, meaning it is even easier to avoid losses like the above.

    In short.... Players should be expected to do some research when engaging in trade-for-money, especially regarding high value slow moving items. Don't change the market system because of a few lazy or incompetent players.

    At the end of the day, there is ONE simple change that needs to be done:

    Tell players that BUY ORDERS are NOT GUARANTEED!!!!!


    Vincent Athena
    Photosynth
    #36 - 2013-11-21 18:31:42 UTC
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:

    The solution we proposed to the CSM initially was based around the idea that if you didn't have enough money in your wallet to back an order, that order would be cancelled.


    I believe this is completely unacceptable:


    What if your orders were not canceled, but put in suspension until funds became available? And it was all automatic?
    What if the number of units was reduced when escrow ran low, and was automatically increased as funds became available?

    All you orders remain, all can eventually be filled, they just are not on the market until funds to cover them are available.

    Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

    Frozen fanfiction

    Kal Arkhenty
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #37 - 2013-11-21 18:32:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kal Arkhenty
    How about:
    - Buy order is put up and 24% escrow is created.
    - As buy order gets filled ISK is taken 76% from the wallet 24% from escrow.
    - If the order is cancelled, remaining escrow is given back.
    - If the order is failed, remaining escrow is kept by "the bank" as a fine.

    In this way the escrow is kept as an insurance for your buy order. You could lower the penalty by making the fine a percentage of the remaining escrow, you could even make it modifiable with a new skill if you so wish.

    Maybe you could even give a percentage of that fine to the player that caused the order to fail, you know, as compensation for their troubles.

    edit: fixed a typo
    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #38 - 2013-11-21 18:35:53 UTC
    Vincent Athena wrote:
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:

    The solution we proposed to the CSM initially was based around the idea that if you didn't have enough money in your wallet to back an order, that order would be cancelled.


    I believe this is completely unacceptable:


    What if your orders were not canceled, but put in suspension until funds became available? And it was all automatic?
    What if the number of units was reduced when escrow ran low, and was automatically increased as funds became available?

    All you orders remain, all can eventually be filled, they just are not on the market until funds to cover them are available.


    What if CCP just told everyone that buy orders are NOT GUARANTEED....


    Seriously, what is wrong with that very, very simple concept.

    I want to sell this item.... I can place a sell order, or attempt to sell it to a buy order knowing it there is a risk that order will not complete.

    I can't fathom why we need to do more than this... it is so ******* simple!!!



    Vincent Athena
    Photosynth
    #39 - 2013-11-21 18:42:04 UTC
    Kal Arkhenty wrote:
    How about:
    - Buy order is put up and 24% escrow is created.
    - As buy order gets filled ISK is taken 76% from the wallet 24% from escrow.
    - If the order is cancelled, remaining escrow is given back.
    - If the order is failed, remaining escrow is kept by "the bank" as a fine.

    In this way the escrow is kept as an insurance for your buy order. You could lower the penalty by making the fine a percentage of the remaining escrow, you could even make it modifiable with a new skill if you so wish.

    Maybe you could even give a percentage of that fine to the player that caused the order to fail, you know, as compensation for their troubles.

    edit: fixed a typo

    Scammers would still do the margin trading scam. Place the buy at twice the price of the sell. The "fine" would reduce their income by a factor of 2, but they would still make money off it. And the market would still be lying about having an order that is not really an order.

    Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

    Frozen fanfiction

    Noriko Mai
    #40 - 2013-11-21 18:49:02 UTC
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
    What if CCP just told everyone that buy orders are NOT GUARANTEED....


    Why should a buy order be not guaranteed? It's one thing if you are late and someone else filled it, but if you are in time and can't sell because of some ingame mechanics...
    I think at least the minimum volume or 24% (the higher of this two) must be guaranteed.

    "Meh.." - Albert Einstein