These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] kill the failed market buy order scam
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ViciousCycle
Dark One Inc.
#1 - 2014-03-10 15:41:36 UTC
as older players know, wildly high buy orders [esp. for obscure or rare items] in the markets are frequently part of a scam -- any attempt to sell to one fails because the 'buyer' doesn't have and never had the isk required to complete the sale.

this mostly impacts newer players who aren't aware of the mechanism involved -- that some skills permit a buy order to be placed without having 100% of the isk to back it up and therefore trying to sell to it always fails -- meanwhile, the scammer is selling a few units at less wildly overpriced values -- usually via contract or five jumps away.

I think this violates the EULA -- it takes advantage of game mechanics to do something that ordinarily shouldn't be possible.

It also takes advantage of the new players that ccp so needs to join and continue playing. [games that lose player numbers over years die off and ccp's entire business is based on EVE.]

***
my proposed change -- keep the skills as they are. change the market mechanics so that when a buy order fails because the 'buyer' hasn't the isk to back it up two things happen:

first, his deposit is irretrievably lost. [sure, maybe it was only 20% of the buy price in actual isk -- but lost is lost].

second, such incidents are logged and any 'toon that appears more than a very few times over months is investigated for EULA violation.

{seems to me that any one 'toon acting as the 'buyer' can't have very many of these going at once, or his total deposits would be enough that the first one to be tried would actually work -- which the scammer can't have happen.}

a possible replacement for the third change would be to force the 'toon's account balance to negative -- thus seizing any funds transferred in for any reason -- and the scammer would then have to abandon that 'toon and go to the trouble and isk of using a different one for scamming. [still have the 'sale' fail -- some risk to unwary players is appropriate.]


{My two cents' worth after over ten years ingame. I was in Earth 'N Beyond before EVE and watched that game die due to lack of new content and thus lack of new players. of course, being bought by EA didn't help EnB either since EA's purpose was to get the programmers for their other games.}

Yes, the scammers and their representatives will dislike this idea. Behaving like a 12 year old should have consequences in games just as in RL.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#2 - 2014-03-10 17:33:28 UTC
ViciousCycle wrote:
I think this violates the EULA


It doesn't. That's not to say it is or isn't a bad mechanic in the first place.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2014-03-10 17:54:46 UTC
ViciousCycle wrote:
Yes, the scammers and their representatives will dislike this idea. Behaving like a 12 year old should have consequences in games just as in RL.

yeh let's start the thread by being derogatory.

when i was a newbie a few weeks old i saw the scam in local, thought 'this must surely be a scam', bought the item at a different hub and lost no more than 500k isk. using only a little brains instead of being greedy means so much.

scamming's a legitimate playstyle. the only problem with the margin trading scam is ignorance.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#4 - 2014-03-10 18:15:32 UTC
ViciousCycle wrote:
as older players know, wildly high buy orders [esp. for obscure or rare items] in the markets are frequently part of a scam -- any attempt to sell to one fails because the 'buyer' doesn't have and never had the isk required to complete the sale.

this mostly impacts newer players who aren't aware of the mechanism involved -- that some skills permit a buy order to be placed without having 100% of the isk to back it up and therefore trying to sell to it always fails -- meanwhile, the scammer is selling a few units at less wildly overpriced values -- usually via contract or five jumps away.

I think this violates the EULA -- it takes advantage of game mechanics to do something that ordinarily shouldn't be possible.

It also takes advantage of the new players that ccp so needs to join and continue playing. [games that lose player numbers over years die off and ccp's entire business is based on EVE.]


You touched on the true problem, that CCP's tutorial and interface simply don't inform players that buy orders are not guaranteed. That is all that needs to change! We simply need more information disseminated that buy orders are NOT guaranteed and my fail because the buyer doesn't have enough money.

ViciousCycle wrote:

my proposed change -- keep the skills as they are. change the market mechanics so that when a buy order fails because the 'buyer' hasn't the isk to back it up two things happen:

first, his deposit is irretrievably lost. [sure, maybe it was only 20% of the buy price in actual isk -- but lost is lost].

second, such incidents are logged and any 'toon that appears more than a very few times over months is investigated for EULA violation.


The buyer loses his broker fees. As for his escrow account (which holds more than 24% of the total order), this can easily be emptied (and is by a competent margin trade scammer), insuring only the broker fees are lost. In other words, your first change is pointless.

Second, it isn't a EULA violation, so logging and investigating it is pointless extra work for no benefits.

ViciousCycle wrote:

{seems to me that any one 'toon acting as the 'buyer' can't have very many of these going at once, or his total deposits would be enough that the first one to be tried would actually work -- which the scammer can't have happen.}

a possible replacement for the third change would be to force the 'toon's account balance to negative -- thus seizing any funds transferred in for any reason -- and the scammer would then have to abandon that 'toon and go to the trouble and isk of using a different one for scamming. [still have the 'sale' fail -- some risk to unwary players is appropriate.]


Negative account balances would be broken beyond belief. I'd simply setup a 100b isk sell order for some obscure item, with 24b in escrow. Then I'd sell myself that obscure item, increasing my main's balance by 76b isk. I can do this three times per account, and make more than enough to plex accounts to do this repeatedly. Negative balances will break the game.

ViciousCycle wrote:

{My two cents' worth after over ten years ingame. I was in Earth 'N Beyond before EVE and watched that game die due to lack of new content and thus lack of new players. of course, being bought by EA didn't help EnB either since EA's purpose was to get the programmers for their other games.}

Yes, the scammers and their representatives will dislike this idea. Behaving like a 12 year old should have consequences in games just as in RL.


If you really want a "solution" to this that isn't taxing on resources, and is fairly balanced:

Create a "Verify Order" function:

Simply right click on a buy order and select Verify Order. The broker then verifies that the buyer has funds to complete the minimum buy order.
♦ If he does, it tells you the funds are verified, and you can race to complete the order.
♦ If he doesn't, it tells you that there are insufficient funds to complete the order, and auto-cancels the order.

To prevent spamming, this function should cost you 1m isk to perform.

Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2014-03-10 18:29:40 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
You touched on the true problem, that CCP's tutorial and interface simply don't inform players that buy orders are not guaranteed. That is all that needs to change! We simply need more information disseminated that buy orders are NOT guaranteed and my fail because the buyer doesn't have enough money.

almost exactly what i expressed in the official feedback thread
Mag's
Azn Empire
#6 - 2014-03-10 18:33:52 UTC
ViciousCycle wrote:
Behaving like a 12 year old should have consequences in games just as in RL.
Just as buying items without taking the time to verify their value does. Blink

I do find it odd that you blame the scammer, when it was in fact the buyer of the over priced items that first thought he was doing another player over first.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298037&find=unread

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2014-03-10 18:49:55 UTC
Mag's wrote:
ViciousCycle wrote:
Behaving like a 12 year old should have consequences in games just as in RL.
Just as buying items without taking the time to verify their value does. Blink

I do find it odd that you blame the scammer, when it was in fact the buyer of the over priced items that first thought he was doing another player over first.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298037&find=unread

hahaha that thread's last pages are awful

i see gizznitt making a lot of sense in the first few pages, too