These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#561 - 2014-02-25 10:22:38 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
In the last 5 pages 26 people have discussed a way to legitimize Margin Trading, and 4 people have used every misleading argument in their repertoire to derail the conversation or legitimize the current abuse of the Market UI.

Good thing you're not in the majority here guys, or someone might think there's some personal bias involved. :)
Still couldn't answer the question I see.

But hey why answer a simple question, when you can throw logical fallacies at it instead? Blink

Who does leaving these fail orders up benefit?
1. Noobs that try to fill them? No.
2. Marketers that are trying to find a reasonable price to sell their wares? No
3. Anyone other than the person that set up the scam? No
4. People in local chat reading the 'Look at the market fail' Posts every 20 seconds. No
5. CCP? No
6. Me? No
7. Some scammer trying to capitalize on the ignorance of new players? Yes

I am sure that more than a few new players were discouraged from continuing to play after losing all their ISK to one of these scams. But I don't think one player has ever been made destitute from legitimate market orders.

So if we are to establish a rule, or practice, that the good of EVE-Online is retaining players and not discouraging players by an obscure hidden market manipulation, then these fail orders should not be posted in the UI.

There's your answer

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#562 - 2014-02-25 10:39:15 UTC
Quote:
I am sure that more than a few new players were discouraged from continuing to play after losing all their ISK to one of these scams. But I don't think one player has ever been made destitute from legitimate market orders.


Both of those are lies. And I have as much proof of my statement, as you do of yours.

Quote:
So if we are to establish a rule, or practice, that the good of EVE-Online is retaining players and not discouraging players by an obscure hidden market manipulation, then these fail orders should not be posted in the UI.


It's not "obscure". You do know that the Price History tab is a thing, right?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#563 - 2014-02-25 11:09:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Mu-Shi Ai
Goldiiee wrote:
Who does leaving these fail orders up benefit?
1. Noobs that try to fill them? No.
2. Marketers that are trying to find a reasonable price to sell their wares? No
3. Anyone other than the person that set up the scam? No
4. People in local chat reading the 'Look at the market fail' Posts every 20 seconds. No
5. CCP? No
6. Me? No
7. Some scammer trying to capitalize on the ignorance of new players? Yes


The primary beneficiaries are the majority of traders with the Margin Trading skill, who use it legitimately in order to do their business. They don't deserve to have their game nerfed just because a handful of players insist on bilking the ignorant. And wouldn't you know it, there is a way for people to stop being scammed by that handful of players. It's called paying attention to what you're doing, and engaging in basic research, which the game gives players the tools to do. This is simultaneously the least destructive and most effective solution to the problem.
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#564 - 2014-02-25 12:22:36 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
I am sure that more than a few new players were discouraged from continuing to play after losing all their ISK to one of these scams. But I don't think one player has ever been made destitute from legitimate market orders.

Both of those are lies. And I have as much proof of my statement, as you do of yours.

No they are not, and deflection is a poor defence.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
So if we are to establish a rule, or practice, that the good of EVE-Online is retaining players and not discouraging players by an obscure hidden market manipulation, then these fail orders should not be posted in the UI.
[/quote]

It's not "obscure". You do know that the Price History tab is a thing, right?[/quote]
What's that got to do with the price of tea in China.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#565 - 2014-02-25 12:24:28 UTC
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
Who does leaving these fail orders up benefit?
1. Noobs that try to fill them? No.
2. Marketers that are trying to find a reasonable price to sell their wares? No
3. Anyone other than the person that set up the scam? No
4. People in local chat reading the 'Look at the market fail' Posts every 20 seconds. No
5. CCP? No
6. Me? No
7. Some scammer trying to capitalize on the ignorance of new players? Yes


The primary beneficiaries are the majority of traders with the Margin Trading skill, who use it legitimately in order to do their business. They don't deserve to have their game nerfed just because a handful of players insist on bilking the ignorant. And wouldn't you know it, there is a way for people to stop being scammed by that handful of players. It's called paying attention to what you're doing, and engaging in basic research, which the game gives players the tools to do. This is simultaneously the least destructive and most effective solution to the problem.

So again you deflect, this change does not hurt marketers, It only hurts scams that create a false UI. So thousands of marketers are fine and a few scammers have to find a new toy to break.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#566 - 2014-02-25 12:52:45 UTC
Quote:
No they are not, and deflection is a poor defence.


I would argue that any player with sufficient isk to fall for the typical Margin Trading scam is highly unlikely to be a genuine newbie.

You don't get to use new players as the brunt of your argument. New or old, falling for a Margin scam is quite simply stupidity. Stupidity knows no character age.

Quote:
What's that got to do with the price of tea in China.


Because no matter how loud you bleat about a "false UI" (nevermind that a buy order being posted is guarantee of nothing by definition), it is not a false UI.

The means are there to see through Margin Trading scams. Often, the Price History tab is the first, and last, stop that you need to make.

Someone's failure to use the resources they already have is not indicative of a need for change.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#567 - 2014-02-25 12:54:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Goldiiee wrote:

So again you deflect, this change does not hurt marketers, It only hurts scams that create a false UI. So thousands of marketers are fine and a few scammers have to find a new toy to break.


... do you have the slightest clue how this skill works?

I mean, it is genuinely the height of ignorance to say what you just said.

Oh yeah, and there is no "this change". There is no change. This inane idea died a long time ago, and this thread ought to have been locked by now.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#568 - 2014-02-25 14:17:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Mu-Shi Ai
Goldiiee wrote:
So again you deflect, this change does not hurt marketers, It only hurts scams that create a false UI. So thousands of marketers are fine and a few scammers have to find a new toy to break.


I'm not "deflecting" anything. If the game goes from letting my order--which could potentially be covered by the time somebody tries to fill it--stay on the market, to automatically canceling that order outright before anybody tries to sell to it, then that hurts legitimate marketers. I don't care if we're talking about having to be able to cover the full value of the order, or only one unit. That's a nerf pure and simple. The fact that you've minimized it down to something that appears "trivial" doesn't change that.

And really, none of what you're talking about is ever going to happen anyway. I will, however, argue you into the ground on it for the sake of posterity. I want anybody who finds this thread in the future to see that the pro-nerfing position was put flat on its behind, as a ward against a re-opening of the issue.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#569 - 2014-02-25 14:25:59 UTC
Alexia Marhx wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
In the last 5 pages 26 people have discussed a way to legitimize Margin Trading, and 4 people have used every misleading argument in their repertoire to derail the conversation or legitimize the current abuse of the Market UI.

Good thing you're not in the majority here guys, or someone might think there's some personal bias involved. :)



I second that, especially with the latest comments... The margin trading skill was intended for bulk buyers, to avoid them having their funds uselessly frozen for weeks/months... It was NOT intended as a way to fool honest sellers... So, like I keep suggesting, the very simple way to solve this issue is to enable negative wallet balance. Period.

Now, I guess the ones misusing it will go on arguing against that idea...
So your solution to a seller not being harmed when a buy order fails, is to create an ISK faucet? Your solution to a seller not losing a thing when a buy order fails, is to compare it with RMT?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#570 - 2014-02-25 14:30:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Goldiiee wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
In the last 5 pages 26 people have discussed a way to legitimize Margin Trading, and 4 people have used every misleading argument in their repertoire to derail the conversation or legitimize the current abuse of the Market UI.

Good thing you're not in the majority here guys, or someone might think there's some personal bias involved. :)
Still couldn't answer the question I see.

But hey why answer a simple question, when you can throw logical fallacies at it instead? Blink

Who does leaving these fail orders up benefit?
1. Noobs that try to fill them? No.
2. Marketers that are trying to find a reasonable price to sell their wares? No
3. Anyone other than the person that set up the scam? No
4. People in local chat reading the 'Look at the market fail' Posts every 20 seconds. No
5. CCP? No
6. Me? No
7. Some scammer trying to capitalize on the ignorance of new players? Yes

I am sure that more than a few new players were discouraged from continuing to play after losing all their ISK to one of these scams. But I don't think one player has ever been made destitute from legitimate market orders.

So if we are to establish a rule, or practice, that the good of EVE-Online is retaining players and not discouraging players by an obscure hidden market manipulation, then these fail orders should not be posted in the UI.

There's your answer
You didn't answer my questions, you posed your own and answered that. Nice try, but no cigar.
No player was ever made destitute, from a failed buy order.

Plus I already said what the problem was and mentioned the simple fix. You are not interested, but instead wish to break the game.

So again.

Why shouldn't those orders be allowed?
Are you suggesting that a single buy order, should be a guarantee of the true value of an item? That a buy order should be guaranteed, in order for this to be the case?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#571 - 2014-02-25 14:41:42 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Mag's wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
In the last 5 pages 26 people have discussed a way to legitimize Margin Trading, and 4 people have used every misleading argument in their repertoire to derail the conversation or legitimize the current abuse of the Market UI.

Good thing you're not in the majority here guys, or someone might think there's some personal bias involved. :)
Still couldn't answer the question I see.

But hey why answer a simple question, when you can throw logical fallacies at it instead? Blink

Who does leaving these fail orders up benefit?
1. Noobs that try to fill them? No.
2. Marketers that are trying to find a reasonable price to sell their wares? No
3. Anyone other than the person that set up the scam? No
4. People in local chat reading the 'Look at the market fail' Posts every 20 seconds. No
5. CCP? No
6. Me? No
7. Some scammer trying to capitalize on the ignorance of new players? Yes

I am sure that more than a few new players were discouraged from continuing to play after losing all their ISK to one of these scams. But I don't think one player has ever been made destitute from legitimate market orders.

So if we are to establish a rule, or practice, that the good of EVE-Online is retaining players and not discouraging players by an obscure hidden market manipulation, then these fail orders should not be posted in the UI.

There's your answer
You didn't answer my questions, you posed your own and answered that. Nice try, but no cigar.

So again.

Why shouldn't those orders be allowed?
Are you suggesting that a single buy order, should be a guarantee of the true value of an item? That a buy order should be guaranteed, in order for this to be the case?

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

If you want to buy something, you place a market order and if someone wishes to sell it at that price you will get the product. If you can't afford it the order gets removed, it's as simple as that. Margin Trading allows you place the order for multiple items in the same order, if you can afford one of the items the order stands, if you can't the order is deleted.

If you can't afford it then you don't get to be in line to buy it. So yes, single buy orders should be fiscally backed up by ISK, as all buy orders are made with a set quantity if you can't afford that quantity then delete it.

It's not rocket science, it's simple to the point and without ambiguity.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#572 - 2014-02-25 14:45:11 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
It's not rocket science, it's simple to the point and without ambiguity.


And yet, not nearly as simple as "Don't be rash with your investments," which is the most direct, effective solution of all. I have yet to hear a case of somebody who fell for the Margin Trading scam, truly learned how it worked and how to avoid it, and then fell for it again. It's incredibly easy to avoid if you pay attention.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#573 - 2014-02-25 14:47:39 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Goldiiee wrote:
Mag's wrote:
You didn't answer my questions, you posed your own and answered that. Nice try, but no cigar.
No player was ever made destitute, from a failed buy order.

Plus I already said what the problem was and mentioned the simple fix. You are not interested, but instead wish to break the game.

So again.

Why shouldn't those orders be allowed?
Are you suggesting that a single buy order, should be a guarantee of the true value of an item? That a buy order should be guaranteed, in order for this to be the case?

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

If you want to buy something, you place a market order and if someone wishes to sell it at that price you will get the product. If you can't afford it the order gets removed, it's as simple as that. Margin Trading allows you place the order for multiple items in the same order, if you can afford one of the items the order stands, if you can't the order is deleted.

If you can't afford it then you don't get to be in line to buy it. So yes, single buy orders should be fiscally backed up by ISK, as all buy orders are made with a set quantity if you can't afford that quantity then delete it.

It's not rocket science, it's simple to the point and without ambiguity.
That was irony right? Because you have so far failed to answer the questions I have asked.

If I want to buy something and the buy order fails due to insufficient funds, the only one hurt is me. So what is the problem?

So are you now suggesting that the only orders that should be guaranteed, are buy orders?

Oh and like I said, I already dealt with the problem, you don't seem interested and want to break the game instead.


So again.

Why shouldn't those orders be allowed?
Are you suggesting that a single buy order, should be a guarantee of the true value of an item? That a buy order should be guaranteed, in order for this to be the case?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#574 - 2014-02-25 15:07:44 UTC
This thread is back again?
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#575 - 2014-02-25 15:08:59 UTC
Mag's wrote:


Oh and like I said, I already dealt with the problem, you don't seem interested and want to break the game instead.

You think that not changing anything other than making a buy order be a actual buy order would Break EVE. Me and everyone else can now safely ignore any more comments posted by you, Thanks.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#576 - 2014-02-25 15:10:34 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
This thread is back again?
For some it's much easier to break the game, then to give people knowledge about it. They therefore prefer to try and keep calls to break it, alive.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#577 - 2014-02-25 15:15:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Goldiiee wrote:
Mag's wrote:


Oh and like I said, I already dealt with the problem, you don't seem interested and want to break the game instead.

You think that not changing anything other than making a buy order be a actual buy order would Break EVE. Me and everyone else can now safely ignore any more comments posted by you, Thanks.
This is why I mentioned irony, because I have not actually said anything of the sort.
That wasn't your initial idea and you have already questioned how you would go about guaranteeing a 'Contract to buy' as you put it. Or do you also fail to read what you wrote?

Please read my reply to you in post 537. It shows me linking my fix.

If you cannot argue the point and find yourself failing to come up with answers, (that do not undermine your stance) we understand. You obviously find it far easier to claim I said something I didn't, than answering simply questions.

So again.

Why shouldn't those orders be allowed?
Are you suggesting that a single buy order, should be a guarantee of the true value of an item? That a buy order should be guaranteed, in order for this to be the case?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Jta Grl
2 Pingeons Incorporated
#578 - 2014-02-25 17:18:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Jta Grl
I know most of the posters on this thread now are discussing the matter more for the sake of discussion than anything else. Nonetheless I'd like to add my opinion.

IMO Margin Trading is bad right now because new market players have no way of knowing such mechanic exists before they try to fill an order. I haven't played the tutorials for some time, but I also don't believe there is a marketing tutorial out there that teaches about it. Not even the skill text tells what happens when the buyer has no credits to pay the order. This makes the scam require little ability to pull.
It used to be the same with courier scams. Courier scammers also relied on the game's lack of information on nullsec mechanics to set up high collateral contracts to undockable stations. CCP fixed it by adding a warning. I'm anxious to see what they are going to do about Margin Trading.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#579 - 2014-02-25 18:17:01 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Simplest answer to this is to fufill the order, but take the players wallet negative, imposing the usual negative wallet restrictions.
and the trashing negative wallet toons is against ccp policies, etc


This solves nothing...

I can simply create a new account... use the "negative wallet" option to gain massive amounts of isk, and let the account expire and ignore it forever.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#580 - 2014-02-25 19:58:48 UTC

Here is a summary of the quality information presented in this thread:

1.) Margin Trade is a very useful tool for traders.

2.) This game does a poor job of informing new players that buy orders are not guaranteed.

3.) Margin Trade scammers first feed on the ignorance of players. Secondly they feed on the greed of players. Ignorance is easily fixed by education, and no one should care about the greedy getting scammed.


Reasonable Solution:
Education! There should be some extra emphasis to inform players that buy orders are not guaranteed. This solves everything, tbh. Hell, put it in bold letters above the "buy orders" section. Put it in a market tutorial, where you perhaps explain the margin trade skill.

Unreasonable Solutions:
a.) Negative Wallet Balances: This can be easily exploited to double your isk, especially with throw-away accounts.

b.) Massive Penalties to failed buy orders: The point of margin trade is to leverage your isk to its fullest potential. Players do not get an option on how much they may back up their orders, and no one is seriously harmed from a failed buy order (neither the buy nor the seller). The loss of broker fees is plenty, although I can see standing hits to the NPC corp owning the station being fair too.

c.) Auto-cancelling orders: This is a waste of resources. If we really desire to know if an order is valid, implement a Verify Order function. This would allow any player to spend some isk and verify if a specific buy order has funds to back it up prior to gathering all the necessary items to fulfill the order.

d.) Removing the Margin Trade Skill: This skill is widely used by ALL serious traders in the game, and removing it just because some morons fall for Margin trade scams is ridiculous.

Additional Notes:
Creating an "Escrow coverage" column won't help much. It will potentially open the door for players to educate themselves, but 99% of the orders on the market quickly trend to 0.00 isk in the Escrow account after 25% of the order gets fulfilled. Unless CCP changed the Escrow account to be drained "last", this won't help much at all.