These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jta Grl
2 Pingeons Incorporated
#601 - 2014-02-26 15:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jta Grl
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Jta Grl wrote:
How can you tell a forum poster is not lying about something just like a in-game player is? You can't.


Easy. Cross-check the information you've been given with forum posts about the same topic. Also, this is a moot point because we both know that the Margin Trading scam has been detailed truthfully on these forums in an exhaustive manner countless times.

Part of the way that EVE has always educated new players is through the forum community. It is a massive resource. To treat it like it doesn't exist just because it's not embedded in the game is ridiculous.


The community is an awesome resource. Ppl who resort to cooperation in EvE tend to be much more sucessful than solo players. Nonetheless the game can't oblige someone to depend on someon else to be sucessful. The name of the game is Everyone vs. Everyone. A player should have the means to face everyone else as a competitor if he wants to. The game must either make it clear for everyone it is possible for some buy orders to fail or change the way this mechanic works to be competitive.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#602 - 2014-02-26 15:57:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Goldiiee wrote:
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
A nerf is a nerf. Not only do I think it's unfair in and of itself, but even a supposedly "small" nerf just opens the door for more later on.

Fallacies like 'Slippery Slope' are a poor substitute for an actual fix to a broken UI.
You've shown a remarkable need to use fallacies in this thread, as well as others. So let's not go there.

As far as the UI being broken, it isn't. It shows an order and as NO ORDER is ever guaranteed, nothing shown is false.

Again, there is a simple fix. I as well as Gizznitt Malikite and others, have shown how to fix the actual problem here. The problem is not with the UI, it's with pilots assuming that an order is guaranteed. One of your ideas in this regard, is to find a way of making this a fact. A way of making a buy order guaranteed. I think that is bad for the game and so far no one has come up with a reason why this should be the case. Even when asked simple questions, you cannot answer them.

There is a far more simple way, one that you have ignored. But why choose the easy route, when you could look to break the game in other ways? Amiright?

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
#603 - 2014-02-26 16:29:52 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
A nerf is a nerf. Not only do I think it's unfair in and of itself, but even a supposedly "small" nerf just opens the door for more later on.

Fallacies like 'Slippery Slope' are a poor substitute for an actual fix to a broken UI.
You've shown a remarkable need to use fallacies in this thread, as well as others. So let's not go there.

As far as the UI being broken, it isn't. It shows an order and as NO ORDER is ever guaranteed, nothing shown is false.

Again, there is a simple fix. I as well as Gizznitt Malikite and others, have shown how to fix the actual problem here. The problem is not with the UI, it's with pilots assuming that an order is guaranteed. One of your ideas in this regard, is to find a way of making this a fact. A way of making a buy order guaranteed. I think that is bad for the game and so far no one has come up with a reason why this should be the case. Even when asked simple questions, you cannot answer them.

There is a far more simple way, one that you have ignored. But why choose the easy route, when you could look to break the game in other ways? Amiright?

You are entitled to your opinion, no one is denying that, regardless of how ineffectual it is.

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
#604 - 2014-02-26 16:36:32 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
Mag's wrote:
You've shown a remarkable need to use fallacies in this thread, as well as others. So let's not go there.

As far as the UI being broken, it isn't. It shows an order and as NO ORDER is ever guaranteed, nothing shown is false.

Again, there is a simple fix. I as well as Gizznitt Malikite and others, have shown how to fix the actual problem here. The problem is not with the UI, it's with pilots assuming that an order is guaranteed. One of your ideas in this regard, is to find a way of making this a fact. A way of making a buy order guaranteed. I think that is bad for the game and so far no one has come up with a reason why this should be the case. Even when asked simple questions, you cannot answer them.

There is a far more simple way, one that you have ignored. But why choose the easy route, when you could look to break the game in other ways? Amiright?

You are entitled to your opinion, no one is denying that, regardless of how ineffectual it is.
Oh you've shown just how ineffectual, by avoiding answering simple questions for the past few pages. But thanks for the compliment, even though it wasn't intended as one. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#605 - 2014-02-26 23:50:22 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
Fallacies like 'Slippery Slope' are a poor substitute for an actual fix to a broken UI.


If you actually read my arguments, you'd see that the "slippery slope" part isn't a substitute for a solution. There's a far more elegant, organic solution that doesn't penalize the vast majority of traders who use Margin Trading legitimately. The "slippery slope" bit is just icing on the cake.
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#606 - 2014-02-26 23:53:20 UTC
Jta Grl wrote:
The community is an awesome resource. Ppl who resort to cooperation in EvE tend to be much more sucessful than solo players. Nonetheless the game can't oblige someone to depend on someon else to be sucessful. The name of the game is Everyone vs. Everyone. A player should have the means to face everyone else as a competitor if he wants to. The game must either make it clear for everyone it is possible for some buy orders to fail or change the way this mechanic works to be competitive.


The community is self-evidently helpful. I can't think of a single topic on which every single experienced player on the forums would remain mum, or somehow work with all the other experienced players to coordinate a big lie intended to keep newbies in the dark. It just doesn't happen. There are too many people on the forums for that to happen, and a lot of them actually derive satisfaction from helping new players (as long as the request for help isn't phrased in the form of "OMG I got scammed! Nerf this!").
JP Nakamura
Union of Intergalactic Miners and Nano Assemblers
#607 - 2014-02-27 00:09:04 UTC
First, sorry. I read the first two or three pages, but stopped after that, so if this suggestion was already made, shot down, etc, sorry for wasting the bandwidth.

The same as the GUI shows the Price over time and Volume, let it show Failed Trades. This would be an easy indicator to people to beware (if they see it, but thats a NPE issue more than anything) and should be low footprint on server resources compared to other changes.

CCP: 10+ years of Harvesting players Tears  (latest efforts being Source Limited Edition, and Alliance Logo Revised Policies)
Alexia Marhx
The Witch's Den
#608 - 2014-02-27 07:07:24 UTC
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Alexia Marhx wrote:
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.


What you're arguing is that a person retains some sort of ownership over a buy order, and must be guaranteed permission to successfully fill it, just because he/she noticed its existence. That's not how the market has ever worked, nor does the market ever purport to work that way.



You are voluntarily misinterpreting me... And before you write that I want to penalize "the vast majority":
- I never even suggested to remove the margin trading skill... I'm skilling in trade in order to use it in the near future!
- A negative wallet balance wouldn't hurt in ANY way honest traders. On the contrary, it would help them by completing a transaction that would have failed (Keep in mind that when a honest trader place a margin trading order, it is because he/she feel the need to acquire the goods for any reason);
- It would be way more realistic;
- Inexperienced honest traders would be protected.

The ONLY people being penalized by that are the people using the skill for
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
nefarious reasons

that would need to find another way to get ISKs.

Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Alexia Marhx wrote:
Now, I guess the ones misusing it will go on arguing against that idea...


Yet another complainer, resting on the assumption that those who disagree must only do so for nefarious reasons. You're an imbecile.


I've reported your post for the last sentence... Obviously, you don't like constructive suggestions that would correct the situation...
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#609 - 2014-02-27 08:37:29 UTC
Alexia Marhx wrote:
You are voluntarily misinterpreting me... And before you write that I want to penalize "the vast majority":
- I never even suggested to remove the margin trading skill... I'm skilling in trade in order to use it in the near future!
- A negative wallet balance wouldn't hurt in ANY way honest traders. On the contrary, it would help them by completing a transaction that would have failed (Keep in mind that when a honest trader place a margin trading order, it is because he/she feel the need to acquire the goods for any reason);
- It would be way more realistic;
- Inexperienced honest traders would be protected.


It's already been explained several times why a negative balance isn't a remotely useful solution. And even if it were, the chances that CCP would actually implement it are nil, so even arguing about it any further with you is pointless.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#610 - 2014-02-27 09:33:01 UTC
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Alexia Marhx wrote:
You are voluntarily misinterpreting me... And before you write that I want to penalize "the vast majority":
- I never even suggested to remove the margin trading skill... I'm skilling in trade in order to use it in the near future!
- A negative wallet balance wouldn't hurt in ANY way honest traders. On the contrary, it would help them by completing a transaction that would have failed (Keep in mind that when a honest trader place a margin trading order, it is because he/she feel the need to acquire the goods for any reason);
- It would be way more realistic;
- Inexperienced honest traders would be protected.


It's already been explained several times why a negative balance isn't a remotely useful solution. And even if it were, the chances that CCP would actually implement it are nil, so even arguing about it any further with you is pointless.


The range of scams/exploits you could achieve with alts and negative balances are beyond belief.
Galmas
United System's Commonwealth
#611 - 2014-02-27 13:40:32 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

...
There are several problems with this solution, the biggest of which is that it puts unwanted pressure on legitimate up-and-coming market traders who need to be able to leverage the ISK they have. 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. If you guys have feelings either way about this solution please share.
...

Thanks!



I don't think this is really a problem. What would happen if you just removed that whole margin trading? How much stress would that really put on "up-and-coming market traders"? Do you really need this so called "advanced market gameplay"?

I would vote for just removing the root cause of that issue. Remove the margin trading. I can't see how that would hurt the game a lot. I admit that i am not a trader though. I bet that this scamming via margin trading made a lot of folks quit already since there is no explicit indication whatsoever that the buy order might be fake.
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#612 - 2014-02-27 13:58:03 UTC
Galmas wrote:
I don't think this is really a problem. What would happen if you just removed that whole margin trading? How much stress would that really put on "up-and-coming market traders"? Do you really need this so called "advanced market gameplay"?


Actually, it would hurt high-level traders quite a lot for reasons already outlined in this thread.

Quote:
I would vote for just removing the root cause of that issue. Remove the margin trading. I can't see how that would hurt the game a lot. I admit that i am not a trader though. I bet that this scamming via margin trading made a lot of folks quit already since there is no explicit indication whatsoever that the buy order might be fake.


Margin Trading isn't the root cause. Also, you admit your own ignorance and then you suggest removing a whole skill from the game. Not a good look.
JP Nakamura
Union of Intergalactic Miners and Nano Assemblers
#613 - 2014-02-28 15:29:58 UTC
Mu-Shi Ai wrote:
Galmas wrote:
I don't think this is really a problem. What would happen if you just removed that whole margin trading? How much stress would that really put on "up-and-coming market traders"? Do you really need this so called "advanced market gameplay"?


Actually, it would hurt high-level traders quite a lot for reasons already outlined in this thread.

Quote:
I would vote for just removing the root cause of that issue. Remove the margin trading. I can't see how that would hurt the game a lot. I admit that i am not a trader though. I bet that this scamming via margin trading made a lot of folks quit already since there is no explicit indication whatsoever that the buy order might be fake.


Margin Trading isn't the root cause. Also, you admit your own ignorance and then you suggest removing a whole skill from the game. Not a good look.


I agree with you, but I would also be very curious to see a simple small graphs with:
- Number of Trades (ISK)
- Number of Trades (Volume)
- Number of Trades on Margin (ISK)
- Number of Trades on Margin (Volume)
- Number of Trade on Margin - Failed (ISK)
- Number of Trades on Margin (Volume)

Without really knowing those numbers we (the community) have no idea of how much or how little Margin in used in relation to the economy as a whole, or how much it used for scamming (I would assume failed margin trades are 99% scammers, but could easily be wrong).

I don't know that CCP have ever released these numbers to any non NDA folk, but would love some basic insight from CCP (a little graph love [:D]) might go a long way for helping us understand the situation better.

(at a very high level, we're talking for the economy as a whole, not any specific region or item, so I would think it should be "safe" to release)

CCP: 10+ years of Harvesting players Tears  (latest efforts being Source Limited Edition, and Alliance Logo Revised Policies)
Ludacrys
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#614 - 2014-03-03 09:39:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Ludacrys
Dont cancel the orders that cant cover a minimum quantity buy, "pause" them, meaning they are not showed in the market interface until the wallet has enough money to cover a minimum quantity buy again, then they are shown again
This way no false information is displayed on the market and the legitimate traders dont lose any functionality at all
Alexia Marhx
The Witch's Den
#615 - 2014-03-04 15:33:46 UTC
Ludacrys wrote:
Dont cancel the orders that cant cover a minimum quantity buy, "pause" them, meaning they are not showed in the market interface until the wallet has enough money to cover a minimum quantity buy again, then they are shown again
This way no false information is displayed on the market and the legitimate traders dont lose any functionality at all


That's one of the best ideas so far! Blink
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#616 - 2014-03-04 16:01:10 UTC
Alexia Marhx wrote:
Ludacrys wrote:
Dont cancel the orders that cant cover a minimum quantity buy, "pause" them, meaning they are not showed in the market interface until the wallet has enough money to cover a minimum quantity buy again, then they are shown again
This way no false information is displayed on the market and the legitimate traders dont lose any functionality at all


That's one of the best ideas so far! Blink


And that way the Margin trading scam still works, I like it.

"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 =-
Mu-Shi Ai
Hosono House
#617 - 2014-03-05 05:35:48 UTC
Ludacrys wrote:
Dont cancel the orders that cant cover a minimum quantity buy, "pause" them, meaning they are not showed in the market interface until the wallet has enough money to cover a minimum quantity buy again, then they are shown again
This way no false information is displayed on the market and the legitimate traders dont lose any functionality at all


Why? The market isn't currently displaying false information.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#618 - 2014-03-12 19:23:28 UTC
Bump

"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 =-
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#619 - 2014-03-12 20:09:06 UTC
TheSmokingHertog wrote:
Bump


Why are you bumping this thread. It has pretty much run its course. It is time to let it die!
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#620 - 2014-03-12 20:51:28 UTC
The rules:
14. Bumping outside the EVE Marketplace and Alliance & Corporation Recruitment channels is prohibited.

The bumping of posts to alter the order of the thread listing on a forum is prohibited outside the EVE Marketplace and Alliance & Corporation Recruitment forum channels. Within the EVE Marketplace section of the forums, each forum category has its own rules regarding acceptable bumping for sales threads clearly listed in the stickies.

Similarly the Alliance & Corporation Recruitment channel also has its own rules. Please be aware that the rules vary from forum to forum. Please review the sticky threads in these forum channels for specific details.

Thread locked 24 hours to compensate.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)