These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#281 - 2013-11-25 11:21:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhivre
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
Careby
#282 - 2013-11-25 13:02:53 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
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

I hesitate to focus on margin trade scamming, since even though the issue under discussion is used for such scams, it is by no means limited to them. But on the subject of scams, here are a few observations:

1. Many, if not most, margin trade scams do not depend on minimum quantity greater than zero.

2. Escrow is common across multiple buy orders, so escrow for one can be cleared by manipulating another unrelated one.

3. Many margin scams involve items with extremely low trading volume, for which there is no useful history, let alone a consensus of value, for a potential seller to check.

I'll explain my own experience with these ebil scammers by showing where on the doll I was touched. I was a new(er) player who came into possession of a rare but not terribly useful officer item, an Estemel's something-or-other if I recall correctly. I was anxious to sell it so I went to Eve-Central, which I had happily discovered, to see what I could get for it. There were no sell orders, but there were a wide range of buy orders. The highest one was, unsurprisingly, in Jita. So I loaded it in my Iteron I and trekked over to Jita by way of Uedama and sold it. Or rather I tried to sell it, but of course the buy order failed. I didn't know the reason, but I knew someone could have beaten me to it, or it could have expired, or it could have been canceled or changed. So I looked for the next buy best order, which was in Amarr. So I schlepped through Niarja to Amarr and sold it. Or rather I tried to sell it, but of course the buy order failed. WTF, this could not be a coincidence. So I did some Googling on failed orders and eventually became familiar with the margin trading scam. By that time, the Jita buy order was back up, and I figured if I was ever going to sell this thing, Jita would be my best shot. So I took it back to Jita, and failed the buy order again. Over the next month or two, every time I was in Jita, I would fail that buy order, smugly satisfied by all the broker fees I was costing that bad man (I don't know who it was). This experience was a valuable lesson for me, because it taught me that buy orders could be fake. That's an important thing to know given the current state of market mechanics. Of course, there would be no need to learn that particular lesson if market mechanics were changed to eliminate fake orders. And the experience did not teach me how to identify fake orders, which I am still too much of a newbie to know how to do. Luckily it did not cause me to over-react and think "if it looks too good to be true, it is." That would have been a disaster, because every day I find deals that look too good to be true but are true anyway. Those are my favorite deals, and sometimes I even find them posted in Jita local.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#283 - 2013-11-25 13:09:59 UTC
If it is a single item, it (should) still have the escrow, so there are ways to sell to it (provided you can get the item cheap enough)
Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
#284 - 2013-11-25 14:52:26 UTC
Izzy Ankhavees wrote:

The remaining few posts that cant be countered by those two statements bear some reason, but the feature itself is a "scambait", because there is no scenario where that feature can take place and asure the honesty of the order in any way. If there is no forceful way for the seller to provide the payment when due, there is no way to ensure that the payment will be done.


Everything works as intended: when there isn't enough money, the buy order fails. Margin trading or not. Too many people in this thread ignore the necessary first step for the margin trading skill to work: that the victim first buys an item from an another sell order, mistaking it for a bargain. Most likely because the scammer even advertized it in local ("LOL, found fail buy order, whish I had money ...").

That's where the scam happens.

EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager.

Lord Jita
Lord Jita's Big Gay Corp
#285 - 2013-11-25 15:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Jita
Careby wrote:

2. Escrow is common across multiple buy orders, so escrow for one can be cleared by manipulating another unrelated one.


I liked your story but this is untrue. (It is per-order basis, see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3886771#post3886771 )

But I, too, have used single unit margin scams to push up prices in very rare/ low volume items, and no amount of staring at the price history graph would have helped you.
Bob FromMarketing
Space Marketing Department
#286 - 2013-11-25 15:28:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Bob FromMarketing
Hel O'Ween wrote:


That's where the scam happens.


no, the scam happens before the isk is garnered, in the same way that a third party scam happens when the buyer agrees to use the third party and not when he sends the isk, as the idea has already been placed. The scam happens because the client is misrepresenting buy orders that are designed to be impossible to fill, but are made to look legit and for all intents and purposes seem to be real to anyone who isn't in the know (new marketers, new players etc) which is where the problem lies

Rhivre wrote:

long ass story.


and this story proves my above point, and my post on the previous page that margin trades that are designed to fail when the buy order is to be implemented should be hidden, not requiring a re-setup or another broker fee payment, but simply removed so as not to either mislead someone to fall for a margin trading scam, or artificially manipulate the price of some lesser-traded items
Careby
#287 - 2013-11-25 15:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Careby
Lord Jita wrote:
I liked your story but this is untrue. (It is per-order basis, see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3886771#post3886771 )

Thanks for the correction. I feel certain that I have experienced otherwise, but I am probably mistaken.

EDIT: I just tested this on Singularity and indeed, the escrow was per-order. I created two buy orders, and attempted to exhaust the escrow by selling to only one of them. Although the total amount in escrow was enough to fill the single order I tried to execute, it failed and the escrow for the other order remained. So it would seem that in order to zero out the escrow in a margin trade scam, the buy order would have to initially have a higher quantity than one. A partial fill of the order could then be used to remove the escrowed funds.
Lord Jita
Lord Jita's Big Gay Corp
#288 - 2013-11-25 15:51:36 UTC
Anyways here is MY solution: CCP should have a background process(es) constantly running that just goes thru approx. top 5% buy orders in every item and doing wallet checks to see if order would fail or not.

If wallet check fails, color the order red. And when you mouse over it, have a big ******* tooltip that says something like ORDER NOT GUARENTEED.

Something like this: http://i.imgur.com/wCj7aSp.jpg

If the order is fixed, the next time the background process checks it, it turns the warning off.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#289 - 2013-11-25 15:57:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
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.
The operating phrase is “if they need to”. In other words, if the order failing would result in them taking a loss. For most orders, there is simply no need because you just try the previously second highest (now the highest, since the first one failed) order and get on with business.

If they absolutely need to be sure that an outstanding order is priced correctly, the way to spot them is to look at the pricing history. The trick is to do this before you make your investment, not once you're trying to sell the stuff you bought from the scammer. It's all about knowing what your investment is worth and the information needed for this is readily available if you look for it.

Quote:
Except there isn't information available, there's estimations available. You can guess at the chances of an order being real, that's all. That's entirely different from "information". Market orders on most games just simply work.
…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.

That information needed is available, and it's very detailed — not an estimate.

Quote:
It's not unreasonable for gamers to come to EVE and thin kit will be the same here.
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.

Quote:
I think providing players with solid information is the way forward. The market window should indicate how much of an order can actually be filled.
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.


e: 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.
Careby
#290 - 2013-11-25 16:58:16 UTC
Careby wrote:
...I just tested this on Singularity and indeed, the escrow was per-order. I created two buy orders, and attempted to exhaust the escrow by selling to only one of them. Although the total amount in escrow was enough to fill the single order I tried to execute, it failed and the escrow for the other order remained. So it would seem that in order to zero out the escrow in a margin trade scam, the buy order would have to initially have a higher quantity than one. A partial fill of the order could then be used to remove the escrowed funds.

This brings up another issue that could be corrected if a change is made to margin trading mechanics.

Currently if I have lots of buy orders for multiple quantities of various things, and some have executed, there is no easy way to know which orders still have funds in escrow and which have been depleted. So if I let my wallet run low, I will have unfillable orders, even though the orders window shows I have billions in escrow.

Until testing this myself, I was under the impression the escrow was pooled among orders, and that all my buy orders were good. Now I know this is not the case.
Beta Maoye
#291 - 2013-11-25 18:07:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Beta Maoye
I think the answer lies within the liquidity and the extent of mark-up price of an item. If the volume of transaction is very low and without any mark-up price limit, a malicious trader can easily mark-up a price ridiculously high by exploiting the margin trading feature. I do not agree to totally ban margin trading nor highlight margin order in the buy queue. Margin trading should be allowed if weekly average volume is over 1,000 transactions and the mark-up price is within 10% of last bid.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#292 - 2013-11-25 19:33:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
I have no experience with market trading. I will just point out that right now the NPE only touches on the market.

Given that the market is richer and deeper than that, wouldn't it make more sense to add something to the NPE--possibly even a new agent--that really introduces players to the market, and then points them to further in-depth reading? That way, the focus shifts away from "protect the poor players from this aspect of the game" to "educate the new players about this aspect of the game," which has the additional potential to enrich the market by introducing new, informed participants.

If someone skips the tutorial, or breezes through without paying attention? You've led the horse to water. That's all you can reasonably do.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

TheMercenaryKing
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#293 - 2013-11-25 20:10:35 UTC
How about marking the order as red text in the market UI and selling/buying to the next order.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#294 - 2013-11-25 21:13:33 UTC  |  Edited by: TheSmokingHertog
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
How about marking the order as red text in the market UI and selling/buying to the next order.


No, I always want to decide myself if the bid price on the product is worth my while.

Besides that, this would urge everyone to setup market scams to get cheap product, setup ALT A with an order that has a high price, completely drained of escrow based on margin trading mechanics and then setup an order with ALT B on half price, to scoop up the sales.

"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 =-

Lord Jita
Lord Jita's Big Gay Corp
#295 - 2013-11-25 21:40:40 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
I have no experience with market trading. I will just point out that right now the NPE only touches on the market.

Given that the market is richer and deeper than that, wouldn't it make more sense to add something to the NPE--possibly even a new agent--that really introduces players to the market, and then points them to further in-depth reading? That way, the focus shifts away from "protect the poor players from this aspect of the game" to "educate the new players about this aspect of the game," which has the additional potential to enrich the market by introducing new, informed participants.

If someone skips the tutorial, or breezes through without paying attention? You've led the horse to water. That's all you can reasonably do.



So teach players about a bad game mechanic rather than fix the bad game mechanic?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#296 - 2013-11-25 21:57:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Lord Jita wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
I have no experience with market trading. I will just point out that right now the NPE only touches on the market.

Given that the market is richer and deeper than that, wouldn't it make more sense to add something to the NPE--possibly even a new agent--that really introduces players to the market, and then points them to further in-depth reading? That way, the focus shifts away from "protect the poor players from this aspect of the game" to "educate the new players about this aspect of the game," which has the additional potential to enrich the market by introducing new, informed participants.

If someone skips the tutorial, or breezes through without paying attention? You've led the horse to water. That's all you can reasonably do.



So teach players about a bad game mechanic rather than fix the bad game mechanic?


As I hope the first sentence of my post makes clear, I'm not qualified to say whether it's a "bad" mechanic, or how it should be fixed.. Riffing on what seems to be broad understanding that the Market Trading skill is legitimately useful, I'm just saying, why not take the opportunity to tell new players that hey, this isn't the WoW Bazaar. This is deeper and richer and more perilous, and this is how it works and these are the tools it offers. I'm assuming that that would remain a useful initiative even if the UI or the skill were tweaked to address the lack of information that makes a particular scam possible, because you still want to educate players about how it works, right?

I've seen a couple of suggested tweaks that seem reasonable to me; I'm just aware of the fact that "seems reasonable to me" means nothing given that I have only done the most casual dabbling in the market, and I haven't so much as injected the Market Trading skill. My particular axe is the NPE.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#297 - 2013-11-25 22:02:57 UTC
Careby wrote:


By that time, the Jita buy order was back up, and I figured if I was ever going to sell this thing, Jita would be my best shot. So I took it back to Jita, and failed the buy order again. Over the next month or two, every time I was in Jita, I would fail that buy order, smugly satisfied by all the broker fees I was costing that bad man (I don't know who it was). This experience was a valuable lesson for me, because it taught me that buy orders could be fake. That's an important thing to know given the current state of market mechanics.


Two Points:

1.) You learned that buy orders could fail. This is what CCP needs to drive home... no change to mechanics are needed, they only need to inform players that buy orders are not guaranteed (i.e. they can fail).

2.) You could have posted the item for sale instead of constantly selling to the buy order. If they place buy orders for 100m isk, you could simply put up a sell order for 50m isk. They then have to buy up your item to continue performing the scam, or they need to place a "minimum quantity" on their order (which will probably result in some other player buying your item to sell to that order).



Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#298 - 2013-11-26 00:54:13 UTC
Delete the margin trading skill. Problem solved.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#299 - 2013-11-26 01:21:05 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Delete the margin trading skill. Problem solved.


Ban players who are incapable of or unwilling to exercise a little due diligence when attempting to use the market. Problem solved.
Nimrodion
Xanthium Prime
#300 - 2013-11-26 05:58:25 UTC
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.