These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#321 - 2013-11-27 09:31:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dav Varan
.Failure to pay your Trader bills blats your MT skill back to lvl 0.
or
.Remove the skill entirelly and re-imburse
or

.Make escrow percentage based on standings*
*Standing to corp which own the station at which the order is to be placed ( MT only allowed at npc owned stations )
failure to pay hits standings hard

e.g. escrow percentage = 3%* MT lvl * Standing min 0 max 95
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#322 - 2013-11-27 11:17:30 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:
.Failure to pay your Trader bills blats your MT skill back to lvl 0.
or
.Remove the skill entirely and re-reimburse
or

.Make escrow percentage based on standings*
*Standing to corp which own the station at which the order is to be placed ( MT only allowed at npc owned stations )
failure to pay hits standings hard

e.g. escrow percentage = 3%* MT lvl * Standing min 0 max 95


Aha, to point 1; so I can kill my competitor by stocking up and hitting his buys a few times a month. Nice to know. Killing his skill and standings (if you count 2 in)

To point 2; the leverage reached by margin trading should be general, not just High Sec, if you want to change it, make it for non-high sec, people then can take the risk for themselves. What would reach the goal; safe noobs.

Having standings influence your maximal Escrow is a very good idea. Lets do that.

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
Uncle Gagarin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#323 - 2013-11-27 13:02:58 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:


Why do we need buy orders to be guaranteed?

Because eve already has a market that is not guaranteed. You drop the item in space, let the other person pick it up and gift you the money. The purpose of the secure market is to give players who wish to expend taxes and broker fees a way of trading securely.


You have contracts for guaranteed Trading....
You have Sell orders that are guaranteed...

Why do you need buy orders guaranteed?



First off, why do you need SELL orders guaranteed then ?
That is exactly same obligation to make business. To trade something.

Well, how that problem could be fixed:

1. I like idea of colored orders in market UI. It doesn't hurt legit traders but gives a kind of warning to less educated players.

2. Any idea of reducing or removing orders based on someone wallet status is bad.
It will bring unnecessary complication to "life" of many peoples and even bigger to server administrators.
I cant even imagine lag they will generate.

3. I assume that margin trading is necessary mechanics helping a lot ot ppl to drive their legit busined but at the same time it is abused.
There is no risk on abuser side. At the moment someone will try to fulfill an order it is canceled and funds are returned to "buyer"/
All risk is on seller side. IMHO this is source of all problem - risk unbalance.

4. What if Margin trading will be kept as is (with addition of color in market UI). What if the mechanics behind that is enriched by adding risk for buyer ?

  • If the order is fulfilled but buyer has no money to fully pay order gets frozen for let say 7 days.
  • During that time buyer has to fulfill promise to buy items at given price.
  • After that time, if buyer still doesn't pay order is canceled.
  • Buyer get's nothing but pays all deposited ISK to seller.
  • Seller keeps items he tried to sell.


BR,
Uncle
Steadly Sol
Sonic Intoxication
#324 - 2013-11-27 13:13:45 UTC
the station in question should cover the margin of error in the order itself, since the seller cannot or will not do so.

this in turn means that the player is in debt to the station, with interest, since the station covered the market margin for the player.

no real difference from what ccp does to people they suspect but cannot prove sell isk or plex and subtract a couple of billion from those players accounts

meaning that the margin trader should keep the isk for the escrow, or face the wrath of the station.

legitimate scams should not revolve around the game lieing to players. (which is real heinous coding btw, egregiously terribad coding).

scamming someone because they are dumb, ignorant, wishfully thinking, drunk, and just taking advantage of someone
is fine and dandy, and expected.

when I sell to the market I expect the market to treat me fairly because it says it does.
i dont expect to sell 200mil of a product and get 15 mil.

that is just bad coding.

no if's and's or but's.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#325 - 2013-11-27 13:17:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhivre
You wont sell 200m of a product and get 15m.

You will sell 15m of a product and get 15m, or you will sell 0 of a product, and get 0.


the vast majority of margin scams jump out at you as much as "Free Beer" does.

If it is not a margin scam, and merely run out of isk, then the order below it is likely to be within a few isk of it.
Worst case scenario, you have to create a sell order. Which, unless you have bought the items for one of those glaringly obvious margin scams, means you will get your profit.

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#326 - 2013-11-27 14:03:35 UTC
TheSmokingHertog wrote:
Dav Varan wrote:
.Failure to pay your Trader bills blats your MT skill back to lvl 0.
or
.Remove the skill entirely and re-reimburse
or

.Make escrow percentage based on standings*
*Standing to corp which own the station at which the order is to be placed ( MT only allowed at npc owned stations )
failure to pay hits standings hard

e.g. escrow percentage = 3%* MT lvl * Standing min 0 max 95


Aha, to point 1; so I can kill my competitor by stocking up and hitting his buys a few times a month. Nice to know. Killing his skill and standings (if you count 2 in)

To point 2; the leverage reached by margin trading should be general, not just High Sec, if you want to change it, make it for non-high sec, people then can take the risk for themselves. What would reach the goal; safe noobs.

Having standings influence your maximal Escrow is a very good idea. Lets do that.


point 1 you traders are always calling it pvp.
You have no way of knowing if the order is covered or not , maybe you just end up giving them exactly what they need at a great price. + they can turn round and do exactly the same to you, careful who you mess with.


point 2 - There are npc stations in null and low sec too.
Its not possible to use the mechanic at player owned stations due to corp standing being set by players no way to panalty , after thought maybe thats not really an issue though as peops ripping off station users can be corp kicked or whatever.
sell at player owned staions at your own risk.
BadSeamus
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#327 - 2013-11-27 14:05:31 UTC
Don't cancel orders if there isn't enough cash on hand to back them, simply do not display them to any other user.

If I have ten orders, and enough cash to back only one (but any one) of them, all ten of my orders are returned in everyone else's market browser. The minute my one order gets hit, the 9 others disappear from the market, until I get my cash reserves up.

If I have enough cash to cover the five smallest orders, then only those five display to anyone else (I can see my own orders so I can cancel or edit them etc.) Orders that I do not have enough cash on hand to execute are highlighted in red to ME only.

Cant see a problem with this - but then Ive given it all of 2 minutes thought. Perhaps a real trader can tell me if it blocks any legitimate activity?

SK
Careby
#328 - 2013-11-27 14:06:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Careby
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
...Although I would like to point out that the entire point of MT skill is to be able to create orders that cannot be fulfilled entirely and immideately. Only those orders that cannot be fulfilled even at the minimum value set by the buy order creator should be hidden...

I can't tell if you mean individual orders that can't be fulfilled, or a group of orders. It's true that the margin trading skill, as currently implemented, will allow you to create a single buy order that cannot be filled entirely and immediately. But that isn't of much use to me, and I have to think that's not its intended purpose. I use it to be able to have more open orders than my available ISK will cover in total, knowing that not all the orders are likely to be executed in a limited period of time. I keep more than enough ISK on hand to make sure that any of my orders (but not all) can be filled immediately and completely, otherwise why would I enter that order? It isn't like I enjoy paying broker fees for failed orders. So the ideal improvement, in my opinion, would never show other players a greater quantity on one of my buy orders than I have the ISK to execute.

The changes being discussed here are not likely to affect my trading very much. I try to maintain adequate funds to prevent my orders from failing. Even if the changes reduce lost broker fees by making invalid orders invisible and impossible to execute, there isn't much to be gained from having invisible orders. But I think the improvement in trust that players might have in the market would be good for all traders, whether honest or scammer.
Careby
#329 - 2013-11-27 14:09:57 UTC
BadSeamus wrote:
Don't cancel orders if there isn't enough cash on hand to back them, simply do not display them to any other user.

If I have ten orders, and enough cash to back only one (but any one) of them, all ten of my orders are returned in everyone else's market browser. The minute my one order gets hit, the 9 others disappear from the market, until I get my cash reserves up.

If I have enough cash to cover the five smallest orders, then only those five display to anyone else (I can see my own orders so I can cancel or edit them etc.) Orders that I do not have enough cash on hand to execute are highlighted in red to ME only.

Cant see a problem with this - but then Ive given it all of 2 minutes thought. Perhaps a real trader can tell me if it blocks any legitimate activity?

SK


2 minutes of thought was enough. I don't know what the qualifications are for "real trader," but I agree with everything you said.
Titus Balls
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#330 - 2013-11-27 14:32:11 UTC
Thread is now tl;dr for me to go find if this has been mentioned - but as part of changes to the trade UI - please allow for modification of quantity of an order too.

For example, I stick up 20 frigates in a station - a month later only two have sold, so I decide to I want to take 10 back and resell them in Jita to recoup some of the loss.

I should be able to take back some of my stock - of course loosing any brokers fee and taxes I have already paid.
Careby
#331 - 2013-11-27 14:57:28 UTC
Titus Balls wrote:
Thread is now tl;dr for me to go find if this has been mentioned - but as part of changes to the trade UI - please allow for modification of quantity of an order too.

For example, I stick up 20 frigates in a station - a month later only two have sold, so I decide to I want to take 10 back and resell them in Jita to recoup some of the loss.

I should be able to take back some of my stock - of course loosing any brokers fee and taxes I have already paid.

My first thought is that an easy way to do this would be to make market transactions between you and yourself, or you and your corp, tax free. Then you could buy those frigates back from yourself without racking up any additional transaction cost. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain why this is a really bad idea. Until then, I like it!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#332 - 2013-11-27 16:55:04 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
What information do you have exactly that tells you when an order has had it's escrow forcibly removed?
There's ways of estimating the chances that an order is a scam, but there is no way to tell if an order has had it's escrow reduced to lower than a single item.


Export the market screen to excel, check the initial qty vs the current qty.

here:

Margin Scam (highlighted in yellow)

The "vol remaining" is the qty left on the order

Vol entered is how many were initially on the order.

There were initially 20 required, with a min qty of 10.

The buyer then sold himself 10, clearing the escrow and leaving it looking as if there was an order for 10, min qty 10.


EDIT: There are ofc, other uses for this information aside from margin scam checking
And it's not possible that someone wanted 2 stacks of 10 of an item, and someone sold them a single stack?
This is what I mean, you can estimate that it is a margin scam, and in this case are probably correct, but we should not need to assume.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#333 - 2013-11-27 17:07:13 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…and EVE is not “most games”. All orders are real, by the way, for the simple reason that there is no way to mechanistically determine the intent behind an order that isn't fully covered. They can also all fail without there being anything wrong or shady with what just happened. That is the lack of guarantees that players need to learn about. For you as a seller, it doesn't matter one whit why it failed. Just move on to the next order and cash in — problem solved. If this means you take a loss, the problem was never with the buy order but with you buying overpriced goods.
No, EVE is not "most" games, but that is not always a good thing. Alienating players by having a market with no information and no guidance that essentially lies to you (from the perspectives of mechanics you are used to) is not a great way to gain new players.

Tippia wrote:
Tbh, I think it rather is, but that's besides the point. The thing is that they need to learn how this game works, and how to get the information they need to make intelligence choices in their purchases. So it's not about mechanics or about fixing the skill, but about UI and education.
Exactly. So provide them the information in the UI. If someone still chooses to ignore this information, that's tough luck. But at the moment the only info provided is only of use to you if you are a seasoned player and know how to understand it in context. You can't expect new players to stay if you can simply scam the living hell out of them and then say "shoulda been more educated". You say they need to learn how to get the information they need, but then we don't offer out even the suggestion that there is information they are missing. They see an order, all looks normal, just a higher price. It's unreasonable to assume that someone brand new to the game should react in the same way you or I would.

Tippia wrote:
Again, why? Why does this particular reason an order might fail need so many safeguards when there are so many reasons for the same thing to happen? That just seems like an awful lot of redundant db-thrashing to do something that isn't particularly needed to begin with, and which will end up being wrong by the time you press the “sell” button anyway.
Why? Because clearly margin trade scams are targeting inexperience. I happen to believe EVE would be better off with more players. I don't like that most people's first experience with EVE is "I joined, I got trolled, I left". Providing what I would consider to be some basic information as part of the UI is a good way to give that information over to the people willing to read it and understand it, without requiring them to understand the full fundamentals of the EVE market. It wouldn't eliminate margin trading scams, it would simply give newer people more of a chance to educate themselves before getting scammed.

Tippia wrote:
If anything should change about the skill itself, it would be to allow the same thing for sell orders: you want to sell 10M units of trit, but only have 3M at hand, so you put those up and try to gather up the rest before the order is filled. We need the item escrow to be properly parallel to the ISK escrow.
As far as I'm concerned the skill is fine as is. It's purely the info on the market that needs to be expanded a bit.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Zor'katar
Matari Recreation
#334 - 2013-11-27 18:31:37 UTC
Glad to see that you guys consider this a broken mechanic. I'll admit I haven't gone through the threadnaught, so this may be duplicate content.

CCP Rise wrote:
The issue here is that the client (via the market interface) is essentially lying to the player by showing an order which can't actually be filled.


CCP Rise wrote:
There is also some advanced market gameplay around putting up very large buy orders which you can't technically cover, but which also will never realistically get filled.

Seems to me you can't solve the former while respecting the latter, as putting up a very large buy order that can't be covered is just another way to make the interface lie to the players.

I think your initial solution was fine, but I agree that the second solution stated was pretty flawed and would probably do more harm than good. The way I would personally implement Margin Trading if it was my baby:

Players have control over their market escrow total. They can add/remove from it at any time. They can then place buy orders in any combination as long as the total value of the buy orders respects their total available capital (calculated by their escrow and their level of MT). These orders can individually be larger than their escrow could cover, but when customers do market searches, only the amount that could immediately be covered will be displayed. Items for which not even a single item could be covered won't be displayed.
AKA Mordiki
Perkone
Caldari State
#335 - 2013-11-27 18:52:12 UTC
Nimrodion wrote:
In my opinion, the best way to deal with this issue is to simply hide the buy orders that can't be fulfilled with the current amount of ISK the buyer has in their wallet. The legitimate users of the Margin Trading technique would benefit from this change as they wouldn't have to re-post buy orders that have failed due to temporary lack of funds in their wallet, and would be able to resume their orders as soon as they get the necessary funds.

However, this change would render all margin trading scams impossible, as fail-able buy orders would no longer be visible on the market. As I believe EVE should remain a cold and dark place, an additional mechanic should be implemented to give scammers a way to continue practicing their craft, while also keeping the benefits for the legitimate traders.

When placing a buy order, buyers should have an option to choose what happens to their to their buy order once their wallet drops bellow what is needed to complete the order. One would be to hide the order while the wallet remains bellow the funds needed, while preserving the order expiry timer, and is something legitimate traders would use. The other option would be to keep the order visible even after the wallet balance drops, but incur some sort of penalty if someone tries to fulfill the order and fails. This penalty could be forfeiture of escrow, an escalating cost of escrow for all future buy orders which would escalate with every failed buy order, higher broker fees or something similar. The important thing is that on the surface, in the eyes of the seller, all the buy orders would look the same.

One thing that could be shown to sellers who have triggered a failed buy order is the name of the character that has set it up, as well as giving players an option to set "Ignore Market Orders" on whoever they want.


I think this is a great idea
SpaceSaft
Almost Dangerous
Wolves Amongst Strangers
#336 - 2013-11-27 19:20:27 UTC  |  Edited by: SpaceSaft
The scam consists of the scammer predicting that the victim will falsely conclude they can make a profit from the information the UI provides and uses that against the victim, correct?

Then the fault lies not in the UI, it lies with the victim, because it's his or hers wrong conclusion.

There is nothing that could prevent players from making bad decisions and neither should there be.

If they decide to go for a can that's 20 km of a gate in 0.0 because they don't see the cloaked fleet waiting for this, there is nothing wrong with the UI. That's about the same decision. They expect a profit in a hostile environment that they maybe didn't research.

If I'm not mistaken this is a scam that can't occur in "good" saturated markets because it relies on the victim buying the overpriced goods right?

Possible solutions

IMO CCP should disallow or mark margin trading in stations or areas where there is a low volume of trade for this item. But that's probably pretty hard.

Cancellation or other penalties or other measures of the orders could hurt legitimate traders.

IMO there isn't a problem but if you really have to do something you have to absolutely make sure that the legitimate traders don't get hurt by it.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#337 - 2013-11-27 22:32:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Here is a fix I see:

Put the minimum escrow at 1 unit, or the amount allowed by margin trading, whichever is higher.

Meaning, margin trading would still have it's full power for the intended usage, but if you wanted to pretend the price is higher than it actually is, it would force you to put at least 1 units worth up escrow at risk...killing the scam completely in most ways.

eg, compressed unit of supershit for 1.2 billion isk....you have to throw up the escrow, because the you are only selling 1 unit.

I suppose this would have the side effect of making margin only useful if you are buying more than 2 - 3 things at a time.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#338 - 2013-11-27 22:52:49 UTC
SpaceSaft wrote:
The scam consists of the scammer predicting that the victim will falsely conclude they can make a profit from the information the UI provides and uses that against the victim, correct?

Then the fault lies not in the UI, it lies with the victim, because it's his or hers wrong conclusion.
That is ludicrous. If the UI is not providing adequate information, it clearly can be the UI at fault. You can't expect people just to know how it all works.
If you logged in to a mouse driven game for the first time, and there was no mouse pointer, and to get a mouse pointer you had to hold Ctrl + shift + p then type "I like space", but this was not written anywhere, it's not your fault if you assume that the mouse functionality is broken or missing. In the same way the UI only provides information that can be acted on if you know the game and know the market system well. If you are new or inexperienced, how can you be expected to just know how it works?

SpaceSaft wrote:
if you really have to do something you have to absolutely make sure that the legitimate traders don't get hurt by it.
True, which is why adding info to the market UI to show to max available to sell based on escrow+wallet for an order is ideal. Any normal trader won't be affected at all, it will still be possible to scam people who don't bother checking, but newer players will see the number and find out what it means. Add a mission on it to the trade career and you're all set.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#339 - 2013-11-27 22:55:54 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Here is a fix I see:

Put the minimum escrow at 1 unit, or the amount allowed by margin trading, whichever is higher.

Meaning, margin trading would still have it's full power for the intended usage, but if you wanted to pretend the price is higher than it actually is, it would force you to put at least 1 units worth up escrow at risk...killing the scam completely in most ways.

eg, compressed unit of supershit for 1.2 billion isk....you have to throw up the escrow, because the you are only selling 1 unit.

I suppose this would have the side effect of making margin only useful if you are buying more than 2 - 3 things at a time.
It would need to be 1 purchase, rather than one item. The problem is that they put a min quantity on, so they may have enoug for 1 unit, but not enough for the min quantity.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#340 - 2013-11-27 22:58:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
All "minimums" should have to be fulfilled by escrow imo. The minimum purchase/unit, should have to have a 100% escrow backing it.

Anything BEYOND that, you get the full benefit of Margin trading. That is how I would fix it.

You could still artificially inflate things or play games on that level, but you would always have to fulfill a minimum order each time.

If somebody fulfills the minimum, and there is no money left for more, THEN the order gets deleted.

You could allow people to right-click the order and add more ISK into the order to keep it active.