These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#401 - 2013-12-03 17:35:02 UTC
Rob Crowley wrote:

Gizznitt wrote:
IMO, there really has been only one acceptable proposal. That's to add a buy order query function that checks the order for available funds. They way it would function:
Right click on order & select "have broker verify funds".
--- This is player driven, making it low overhead
--- It should cost isk, creating a new isk sink.
--- The use of the margin trade skill remains completely intact, leaving it very useful.
--- It would allow you to vet a "margin trade scam" without buying all the margin trade items.
It's an interesting proposal and combined with a changed escrow mechanic where a failed order loses the order's owner 24% of the order's value it could work out fine. The one thing about this solution that rubs me the wrong way is that on a covered order this can be used to get info about the owner's wallet size.


1.) This provides very limited information on the owner's wallet size.... Why would this be a bad thing?

2.) Why do you insist on punishing people with failed buy orders. They already lose the buy order and all broker fees associated with the purchase, and if this is implemented, you don't even need the goods to vet their order. So why insist on the loss of 24% (this comes across as unnecessarily vindictive)?


Rob Crowley wrote:

Gizznitt wrote:
It doesn't matter if a specific buy order will fail or not. You really don't need, nor deserve, to know that! Why should you be privy to this information? If you buy an item to resell... you accept the risks of not being able to sell it for profit. This requires more work than looking at the posted buy orders, and if you can't handle that then find another profession. Your rantings about how buy orders should be guaranteed, or how the market interface is lying to you, is really just entitled bullshit. The interface says there is an offer to buy the item. It is not lying. The mechanics let you know that said buy order may fail if the buyer doesn't have funds. This knowledge needs to be more clairvoyant. When you know this, you can look at trade history (price & volume) and accurately assess the risks of trading in any in-game item. Take the risk or dont.


There are a few factual errors in here: Firstly, assessing the legitimacy of a buy order is not "more work", under the current system it's simply impossible. There is no way to tell if a buy order is covered or not.

Secondly, the mechanics don't let you know that a buy order may fail if the buyer doesn't have funds. There is no indication whatsoever in the game that buy orders can fail like this. Maybe the mechanics let you know after it has failed, I'm not sure about that, but they definitely don't let you know in advance.

Now, if you want to call the broker system lying is a matter of opinion and might verge on the philosophical, but I'd say an order that isn't covered does not actually exist and therefore the broker claiming this order exists is lying. Or at the very least being sloppy enough that the broker is not trustworthy enough to broker business.



I'm not factually incorrect! I never claimed you could 100% assess the legitimacy of a buy order. I said: When buying an item to resell for profit, assessing the risks of such a transaction requires more work than looking at posted buy orders.

-- You KNOW that buy orders are not guaranteed. You can see the sells history, including typical trade price & volume. This information gives you a reasonable estimate on how hard it is to sell an item. Whether a specific buy order goes through is completely irrelevant, because you know there is ALWAYS the chance it fails. Yes, you are essentially playing roulette that any specific buy order will succeed or not. Some items, the odds of it going through are very high (99+%), and some items are very low (<10%). The chances of "winning" may be ascertained by an items trade history, which you keep belittling. Furthermore, unlike the roulette game where you lose your bet, with this game you keep your bet so you can play again on the next buy order, or the buy order after that. Or you can place a sell order to sell the item passively. Essentially, as long as you ascertained the item at a tradeable price, you always win. What you keep asking for, is for buy orders to be 100% guaranteed (or close to it), thereby removing the uncertainty that a specific buy order will go through. Why should we implement this?

idea: Perhaps we should include the number of failed buy orders in the price history on an item?

Rob Crowley wrote:

  • Seriously, why do you need &/or deserve to have market orders guaranteed?

    • Because the market is anonymous, so you can't filter out the trustworthy people you want to do business with. This is the reason why we have a neutral broker system in place, so you only need to trust the broker system. Of course this doesn't work when the broker system is lying to you about orders that don't actually exist cause they're not covered.

    P.S. Could you tone down your wording a bit? While "entitled bullshit" might be a matter of opinion, I don't see how any of my posts in this thread would possibly qualify as ranting.


    The broker system can be trusted completely.
    -- It tells you if a buy order exists.
    -- It guarantees you the terms of a transaction: Buyer gets X units, Seller gets X isk, or else the transaction is null & void with both sides keeping their stuff.
    The broker system does NOT guarantee that every buy orer transaction will complete, which for some reason you think it should. Why?

    (note: I'm all for putting the sellers name up there, as I don't believe the market should be anonymous).

    p.s. Sorry if my tone was harsh, that was inappropriate and I'll be a bit more civil.
    RubyPorto
    RubysRhymes
    #402 - 2013-12-03 18:45:06 UTC
    Rob Crowley wrote:
    There is no way to tell if a buy order is covered or not.


    Because it doesn't matter. You cannot be harmed by a buy order failing for any reason.

    "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
    unreasonable reason
    University of Caille
    Gallente Federation
    #403 - 2013-12-03 18:58:08 UTC
    here's an idea: pretty similar to the idea worked with the CSM but a slight change.

    if the owner of the buy order have enough isk in wallet to cover for the minimum quantity of that order then the order remains displayed on the market.
    but if the owner's isk in wallet falls below the amount required for that order then the order is not canceled but become hidden to the public and cannot be sold to (it can't be sold to anyway).
    the buy orders that the owner cannot cover are marked in red to the owner in their orders list, the expiry countdown of the orders continues normally whether it is hidden or not.
    if the owner's wallet changed to having enough isk to cover the order then it is again displayed to the market and can be filled.

    example:

    isk in wallet - 40,000,000 isk

    buy order 1 - 1x brutix - 40,000,000 isk ea - requires 30,000,000 isk to cover
    buy order 2 - 6x thorax - 10,000,000 isk ea - minimum quantity = 2 - requires 14,000,000 isk to cover 2x thorax
    buy order 3 - 5x vexor - 10,000,000 isk ea - minimum quantity = 1 - requires 7,000,000 isk to cover

    order 1 is filled, isk in wallet = 10,000,000 isk

    order 2 is marked red in buyer's orders list and is hidden from market. items selling to buy orders will be selling to the next highest available buy order and isk amounts will be displayed to seller accordingly.
    order 3 for the vexor remains visible and available to public market.

    wallet increased to 20,000,000 isk

    order 2 is again visible to market and becomes active again.
    Rhivre
    TarNec
    Invisible Exchequer
    #404 - 2013-12-04 10:39:06 UTC
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

    (note: I'm all for putting the sellers name up there, as I don't believe the market should be anonymous).




    The market should be anonymous because if it was not, then it would be a little too easy to ensure that all sales went to your corp/alliance/friends.

    If I am working with a large group of people to control the market, and I tell them "Hey, go buy all the Badgers in Jita", at the moment, they have no way of telling which order is mine, without me giving them that information.
    If my name, or more likely, my alts name is on the order, then I just tell them "Only buy the badgers that are listed by X, Y, Z"

    Additionally, for most people, adding names to the market would be meaningless, as many people use NPC corp alts, or otherwise anonymous alts, so it wouldn't matter if you could see the name. You would see a lot of orders from "Jita Trader 100404020345".

    The only people who would have any consequences from this would be new traders and those who rarely trade.

    Fluffy Bunny Pic!

    Dav Varan
    State Protectorate
    Caldari State
    #405 - 2013-12-04 10:43:20 UTC
    RubyPorto wrote:
    Rob Crowley wrote:
    There is no way to tell if a buy order is covered or not.


    Because it doesn't matter. You cannot be harmed by a buy order failing for any reason.



    Incorrect.

    What if you just travelled 15 jumps in a freighter full of trit to make a buy order ?
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #406 - 2013-12-04 11:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
    That does not harm you. You don't lose anything if the buy order fails. You still have your starting ISK, your trit, your freighter. You haven't lost anything or been penalized and you can still sell that trit to other buy orders from the same location so you haven't wasted time either.
    Grenn Putubi
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #407 - 2013-12-04 14:29:06 UTC
    Wish I had seen this thread before I made another thread about market issues. If you didn't catch my thread you can read it here:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=302024&find=unread

    but the idea I proposed concerning Margin Trading games is thus:

    Require that you keep at least enough isk in escrow to make a single purchase. So if you put up a buy order for an item the amount in escrow needs to allow you to purchase at least 1 unit of the item in question, or in the case that a buy order has a minimum amount at least enough to make 1 purchase. Meaning that someone placing a buy order for 1000 units of an item with a minimum buy order of 1000 would be required to front the isk for the entire purchase regardless of his level in Margin Trading. But someone placing a buy order for the same 1000 units with only a 100 unit minimum would only have to put isk in escrow according to his Margin Trading skill since 100 units would have the price be below the 24% threshold that you reach at lvl5 in Margin Trading. The amount in escrow should also be refilled from the player's wallet at the time a purchase is made and if the required amount in escrow can't be fulfilled the order should then be removed from the market. This is how markets work in reality and it makes sense for the brokerages to require their customers to keep funds in escrow to cover their intended purchases, Margin Calls happen in real life for this very reason. For players placing orders for large quantities of low value items (ie minerals, salvage, etc...) this would have very little impact on how they do business. For players placing orders for low quantities of high value items it would create a significant change in the how they play the market. Any purchases they could not afford after that first purchase would be cancelled before they could happen and no seller would walk away from a deal completely empty handed since at least 1 unit of whatever they were trying to sell would be guaranteed to transact.
    RubyPorto
    RubysRhymes
    #408 - 2013-12-04 15:35:08 UTC
    Dav Varan wrote:
    RubyPorto wrote:
    Rob Crowley wrote:
    There is no way to tell if a buy order is covered or not.


    Because it doesn't matter. You cannot be harmed by a buy order failing for any reason.

    Incorrect.

    What if you just travelled 15 jumps in a freighter full of trit to make a buy order ?


    Before you attempt to sell your goods, you have your goods at some location.
    After you attempt to sell your goods, you still have your goods at the same location.

    How have you been harmed? Your speculative efforts before attempting to sell your goods are irrelevant.

    "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
    Arttimus
    Gibralter II
    #409 - 2013-12-29 20:38:54 UTC
    Why is the Margin Trading skill trainable on trial accounts? The only reason I can see is so that you can escape the consequences of a negative wallet. This should be a bannable offense the same as using trial accounts to escape negative security status consequences.
    Xe'Cara'eos
    A Big Enough Lever
    #410 - 2013-12-29 20:57:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Xe'Cara'eos
    Thomas Hurt wrote:
    Automatically cancel any orders where the 'Minimum Buy Volume' * 'Price per unit' is greater than the amount in your wallet


    This is what I was going to suggest - curse you sir, for getting in first

    this would enable large order that would never be filled to still exist - such as 1000 deadspace LAR's at 10M/unit....
    but should cause problems with some of the worst of the margin trading scams

    On another note - the market interface is really, and I mean REALLY bad about showing you minimum buy orders (scammer in local sells 2x station assembly array in contract for 750M, market price is 750M for 1 but minimum buy volume is 10)

    EDIT:
    quick one - it doesn't have to cancel the order - just not show it......
    also - this will not necessarily work on multiple item scams - where you put out several buy orders, but can only fulfill one......

    For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
    Pic'n dor
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #411 - 2013-12-30 01:18:19 UTC
    here some ideas :

    1) Margin trading not on trial account
    2) reduce % to something like 3-5% per level
    3) allow min quantity only for under 1M isk item
    4) introduce economy training tutorial with anti-scam safety instruction and basic/advanced market mechanics understanding


    5) delete this skill reimburse SP
    6) code a new role that allow corp trading and multiple user to modify corp market order
    7) Corp / Alliance / Standing closed market

    COUCOU TOUCHE TOUCHE
    Natsumi Nishizawa
    PonySWAG Crusaders
    #412 - 2013-12-30 06:54:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Natsumi Nishizawa
    Morwennon wrote:
    Wouldn't it be better to have a more sensible escrow system such that a buy order is always backed by at least x% of its face value? IIRC, the way it works now is that if you post a buy order with Margin Trading V, the game takes 24% of the order's value from your wallet and dumps it into escrow. However, when someone sells to that buy order, they get paid from the escrow rather than from your wallet until the escrow is drained. This is what allows scamming players to create orders with zero backing - they place the order and then immediately sell some of their own goods into it at a price that will consume all of the escrow money. With the escrow thus removed, they empty the wallet of the buying character leaving a buy order that is backed by no escrow and an empty wallet and therefore cannot ever be filled.

    You could change it so that any time someone tried to sell to the order, 24% of the payout would come from the escrow and 76% from the buying character's wallet. That would at least ensure that all orders were backed by the expected percentage and put a cap on the maximum profit achievable from a single fake MT buy order.


    I just have to say that this is NOT how it works.

    What they do is set a minimum number to sell (ie. 5) and if the money is not there to cover all 5 the whole sale doesn't go through. They don't drain the escrow because there is no point to that. They get all the escrow back when the order fails.

    The simplest non-bullshit fix to this is get rid of minimum numbers on orders period. It doesn't really fulfill an IMPORTANT role as is, since most people don't do region orders anyway.
    Andy Koraka
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #413 - 2013-12-30 08:11:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Koraka
    Natsumi Nishizawa wrote:
    Morwennon wrote:
    Wouldn't it be better to have a more sensible escrow system such that a buy order is always backed by at least x% of its face value? IIRC, the way it works now is that if you post a buy order with Margin Trading V, the game takes 24% of the order's value from your wallet and dumps it into escrow. However, when someone sells to that buy order, they get paid from the escrow rather than from your wallet until the escrow is drained. This is what allows scamming players to create orders with zero backing - they place the order and then immediately sell some of their own goods into it at a price that will consume all of the escrow money. With the escrow thus removed, they empty the wallet of the buying character leaving a buy order that is backed by no escrow and an empty wallet and therefore cannot ever be filled.

    You could change it so that any time someone tried to sell to the order, 24% of the payout would come from the escrow and 76% from the buying character's wallet. That would at least ensure that all orders were backed by the expected percentage and put a cap on the maximum profit achievable from a single fake MT buy order.


    I just have to say that this is NOT how it works.

    What they do is set a minimum number to sell (ie. 5) and if the money is not there to cover all 5 the whole sale doesn't go through. They don't drain the escrow because there is no point to that. They get all the escrow back when the order fails.

    The simplest non-bullshit fix to this is get rid of minimum numbers on orders period. It doesn't really fulfill an IMPORTANT role as is, since most people don't do region orders anyway.


    Morwennon is actually correct, intelligent scammers always clear their escrow by selling to themselves and the ones who don't lose a LOT of money to counter-scams. Basically there are a number of people (some of them bulk traders, many of them fellow scammers) who purchase significant quantities of the cheap items which are frequently scammed.

    Example: Tom Scammer sets up a Margin Trade buy order for 1,000 Meta 1 Explosive Hardeners at 1 million each, a total value of 1billion isk. He has Margin Trading IV (noone actually gets it to V) which means he has 316,406,250isk tied up in Escrow.

    Trader Joe, recognizes the margin scam linked in local and realizes he has 1,000 Meta 1 Explosive Hardeners (which normally sell at 1,000 isk each) from a long duration buy order. Joe sells to the buy order at a price of 300,000isk each for a total value of 300m isk. 300m is transferred from Tom's escrow directly to Joe's wallet and the 16,406,250 remaining escrow is returned to Tom's wallet since the buy order is filled.

    In that situation Tom is out 300m to Joe, 50m in Broker fees, and however much he originally paid for the items. By clearing your escrow (by selling to yourself on an alt) none of your money is actually at risk.


    IMO the previous "you got greedy, welcome to EvE" response from CCP is the right approach and the mechanic should remain intact. Maybe some better labeling or overhaul on the UI to make features (like the minimum quantity to fill an order) more prominent is in order and will fix the issue.

    The UI design team has been through inventories and contextuals for major QOL improvements, maybe it's the market's turn that way the UI can't be accused of "lying" to anyone. Even now the information is all there to blow the cover off a scam, people just get greedy and don't take the time to naviagate the UI.

    However, the time isnt right for a revamp of the basic market functionality, specifically since there are so many blatantly broken gameplay systems that are screaming for Dev time (like the Dominion Sov and the ensuing 10% Ti-Di misery surrounding it) that need to be fixed. Core gameplay that affects thousands of players on a daily basis are far more important than fixing an ancillary system affecting a small handful of people.
    CraigVoller
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #414 - 2013-12-30 20:10:07 UTC
    mynnna wrote:
    Destoya wrote:
    I'm all for the removal of the margin trading scam; I think something that appears to work in the market UI (selling a valuable item in the case of the scam) should work. Scams should in my opinion require some human error (ex selling 2 plex for 1 or w/e), not just not understanding how the orders work.


    Gonna get out in front here and say that this is my viewpoint exactly. Scams are cool, scams that work because the game is lying to you or because the interface is bad/unclear rather than because you talked someone out of their stuff, less so. But wrecking the many legitimate uses of the skill is also not cool, so let's hear your ideas.



    My thoughts exactly. Plus 1
    Cheekything
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #415 - 2014-01-01 13:57:37 UTC
    This might sound like a long shot and I apologise if I missed it when reading this thread, but frankly I'd like to see an end to bad buy orders in general, not just scams.

    I would like to see that any buy orders that exceed 2-5 times of the market average for that region have to have the isk for 24-72 hours before they appear on the market and get removed the instantly when the isk is removed.

    So using a mundane item as an example an Atron ship if the average is 500k sell for that region and the buy order suddenly goes to 2 million then that gets flagged as a exception and has to wait to appear then if it's using margin trading then the seller has to always have the iskies else the trade vanishes.

    Another option to combat bad buy orders would be to have a setting on the market place that filters sell to orders that have a minimum requirement that is more than 1 and you have to manually set it off to see the orders that require more than 1.

    This would have the affect of hiding all these combo buy orders which tend to be the biggest issue when it comes to margin trading in my option, I've rarely seen 1 of the items to buy order it's normally 2 or 3 to stop randoms with a spare of those items affecting the order.
    Caleb Seremshur
    Commando Guri
    Guristas Pirates
    #416 - 2014-01-01 14:52:07 UTC
    mynnna wrote:
    Destoya wrote:
    I'm all for the removal of the margin trading scam; I think something that appears to work in the market UI (selling a valuable item in the case of the scam) should work. Scams should in my opinion require some human error (ex selling 2 plex for 1 or w/e), not just not understanding how the orders work.


    Gonna get out in front here and say that this is my viewpoint exactly. Scams are cool, scams that work because the game is lying to you or because the interface is bad/unclear rather than because you talked someone out of their stuff, less so. But wrecking the many legitimate uses of the skill is also not cool, so let's hear your ideas.


    Remove the skill entirely until an actual solution is found. Draconian but it solves the problem. Without some kind of central authority handling credit ratings there's just simply no way to make this work in any realistic or sensible way.
    Mag's
    Azn Empire
    #417 - 2014-01-01 15:15:51 UTC
    Caleb Seremshur wrote:
    mynnna wrote:
    Destoya wrote:
    I'm all for the removal of the margin trading scam; I think something that appears to work in the market UI (selling a valuable item in the case of the scam) should work. Scams should in my opinion require some human error (ex selling 2 plex for 1 or w/e), not just not understanding how the orders work.


    Gonna get out in front here and say that this is my viewpoint exactly. Scams are cool, scams that work because the game is lying to you or because the interface is bad/unclear rather than because you talked someone out of their stuff, less so. But wrecking the many legitimate uses of the skill is also not cool, so let's hear your ideas.


    Remove the skill entirely until an actual solution is found. Draconian but it solves the problem. Without some kind of central authority handling credit ratings there's just simply no way to make this work in any realistic or sensible way.
    What problem? You cannot be harmed by the failure of a buy order.

    If you mean the problem of some, assuming buy orders are guaranteed? Then how does removing the skill help that in any way? Surely a simple warning that states they are not, would suffice?

    Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
    Jacob Cobb
    Doomheim
    #418 - 2014-01-25 22:59:51 UTC
    Right... So let me get this straight. Now... I have been an player of EVE for many years now. I have even played in different places around the world. Hell... I even tried playing during some down time in Afghanistan and Iraq..... that did not go so well.
    At any rate, I was recently made aware of something. Now this did not happen to me. But It happened to a friend I got interested in EVE. And apparently this is, and has been an on going issue for some time. Apparently it is has gone on long enough and become enough of an issue to have had a DEV assigned to it. My question is why has nothing been done to fix it. Especially when in the opening remark from the DEV (CCP Rise) says... The intent was to have this fixed at the release of Rubicon.

    Well apparently CCP (the company) has spoken with the CSM (a group of elected players) about the identified 'exploit' problem. However, CCP was for what ever reason, under whatever guise, was dissuaded from doing anything. Wait what? So who's really driving the bus here? I mean who's in charge of making decisions.... the CSM -an elected group of individuals that for all practical purposes only represent the PVP, low and null sec players. After all that is who got them elected. Or is CCP -you know the actual company that employs the programmers? After all the original concept of the CSM was to bring issues that the payers presented to them to the CCP staff. Not to say or dictate what is or is not acceptable, or what is or is not going to be fixed.

    But on to the initial problem I see here. I am all for the learning curve of EVE. It helps to weed out individuals that should be off playing some other warm and fuzzy hack and slash fantasy game. However, when there is an openly known exploit (or mechanic that is being abused) in the game where players can use the in game mechanic to 'legally' steal from other players. That is wrong in my opinion. Don't misunderstand me here. I am all for scamming people. If you can sweet talk someone into buying a polished turd for a billion ISK, more power to ya. But this margin trading scam is not that.

    I see the only way to fix the issue as being this. You place a BUY order. You either have the ISK to cover it your you don't. IF you have the funds, buy order processed and listed on the market. IF you don't.... then no trade for you... period. With the Margin trading skill you can place the order (based upon your skill) with a % of the total sale. However, if you become unable to pay the full amount (for any reason, the ISK in not available) your buy order(s) are canceled. No refund of any incurred cost.
    Note this dose not prevent someone from selling that polished turd for a billion ISK. But it dose stop a person from using an in game mechanic to legally steal from another player without any real interaction between the players.

    Further more it will not hurt a legitimate deal. Because if a player is trying to by a ship and places a buy order for two. Full well knowing they can only buy one. As soon as that buy order goes through for one of them. The second buy order is canceled. No longer appearing on the market.

    Scamming people is one thing using an in game mechanic to rob them is different plain and simple. Now all of the folks that have learnt how to use this in game mechanic to their benefit are going to come up with all sorts of reasons and explanations on how its not an exploit, and it doesn't need to be changed, or its not broken, or any number of other lame reasons. The point of the fact is this. The in game mechanic is being abused and exploited ... fix it.
    Froggie Ribbit
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #419 - 2014-01-26 20:45:16 UTC
    Bump... Cause this needs to stay up and be addressed....
    Xe'Cara'eos
    A Big Enough Lever
    #420 - 2014-01-27 00:05:33 UTC
    I agree, I've already said my piece - about if an order can't be fulfilled (sold to) it shouldn't show on the market and that the minimum quantity should be more easily visible.
    But this really should be addressed sooner rather than later.

    For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.