These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Multi-sell minor tweak request
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
who1 eva
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#1 - 2015-06-09 20:24:28 UTC  |  Edited by: who1 eva
Hi all,

I have a minor feature tweak request for the relatively new multi-sell feature which by and large is a great addition to Eve. The problem is that if you don't stack your items before selling, they currently get sold individually as separate transactions. The solution would be to have the implementation automatically combine all like items that are part of that sale.

For example, if I drag one hundred Metal Scraps to sell that haven't already been stacked, upon sale they should be automatically combined into a single transaction of 100 items rather than 100 transactions of one item (even if this is done inside the server after the seller clicks sell).

I see this issue all the time when looking through my transactions logs and it makes everything less readable.

Clarification: Why is this a problem when I could just stack items first? The problem is that I'm normally a large-scale buyer and I can't control what sellers do and since the multi-sell feature was introduced a lot of people are selling quantities of the same item as one transaction per item instead of stacking first. This means a lot of extra transactions that clutter the transaction feed.

Thanks!

--who1 eva
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
#2 - 2015-06-09 20:28:52 UTC
Seriously?

This is a troll post. Reporting, please lock.

The UI update we deserve
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#3 - 2015-06-10 01:46:08 UTC
Not to be rude, but what is so hard about right clicking and hitting "stack all" before selling things?

What is it with everyone all of the sudden wanting everything in Eve to be auto-magically handled when a solution is already present? I understand the whole notion of simplicity for convenience, but this is getting redonkulous, people. It's not that hard.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#4 - 2015-06-10 06:36:24 UTC
So, you're too lazy to Ctrl+A, right click, left click "Stack All"?

Well, i do hope the devs are too lazy to waste hours of development and testing on a useless feature, and instead focus on doing things that really need fixing/improving.

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#5 - 2015-06-10 07:39:41 UTC
What if i'd like to sell the exactly one hundred of metal scraps and keep reamaining ones at hangar?

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#6 - 2015-06-10 12:24:08 UTC
"Stack All" is your friend and requires very little effort.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law
who1 eva
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#7 - 2015-06-10 21:07:43 UTC
No, you're missing the point.

As a *buyer*, I can't control whether sellers chose to stack their items or not. What I've noticed is that since the multi-sell feature was introduced, a *lot* of sellers are now lazy and can't be bothered to stack their items before they sell. That means lines and lines of the same item in my transaction feed instead of a single line as it should be.

Yes, I could chose to limit my buys to a minimum quantity but when a lot of people are selling 40 of something as 40 separate transactions because they're not stacking, I don't want to pass up on those orders, either.
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#8 - 2015-06-10 21:12:37 UTC
who1 eva wrote:
No, you're missing the point.

As a *buyer*, I can't control whether sellers chose to stack their items or not. What I've noticed is that since the multi-sell feature was introduced, a *lot* of sellers are now lazy and can't be bothered to stack their items before they sell. That means lines and lines of the same item in my transaction feed instead of a single line as it should be.

Yes, I could chose to limit my buys to a minimum quantity but when a lot of people are selling 40 of something as 40 separate transactions because they're not stacking, I don't want to pass up on those orders, either.


I thought you were describing your own experience but now you are talking on behalf of the majority? All you need is to learn that lesson don't be lazy and pay attention to what you are doing. Marketing is a hard job sometimes and all those makes you an effective or fail marketer.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
who1 eva
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#9 - 2015-06-10 21:22:22 UTC
Tiddle Jr wrote:
who1 eva wrote:
No, you're missing the point.

As a *buyer*, I can't control whether sellers chose to stack their items or not. What I've noticed is that since the multi-sell feature was introduced, a *lot* of sellers are now lazy and can't be bothered to stack their items before they sell. That means lines and lines of the same item in my transaction feed instead of a single line as it should be.

Yes, I could chose to limit my buys to a minimum quantity but when a lot of people are selling 40 of something as 40 separate transactions because they're not stacking, I don't want to pass up on those orders, either.


I thought you were describing your own experience but now you are talking on behalf of the majority? All you need is to learn that lesson don't be lazy and pay attention to what you are doing. Marketing is a hard job sometimes and all those makes you an effective or fail marketer.


Nope, still missing the point. I'm talking about my own experience as a large-volume buyer. I have no problem at all making my buy orders and filling them and don't need any marketing help either. :-)

I just wanted to raise a minor tweak that would make things better for sellers like myself because transaction logs are useful to be able to scan through and see what's happening without completely relying on external tools (which I also use). Having line after line of the same item in the logs because many sellers are no longer stacking their items before sale is very annoying when you're talking about high volumes of transactions to scan through. I analyze my profit/loss outside of Eve so it's not critically important but it's an annoyance and a "could be better" thing.
Zepheros Naeonis
TinklePee
#10 - 2015-06-11 00:39:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Zepheros Naeonis
At first I thought "stop being lazy and stack", but now after re-reading and skimming the rest of the posts, I can see that no one else actually bothered to read the first post and skimmed it like I did at first. Then spewed a bunch of crap that has nothing to do with what the TC is proposing.

It is a problem for anyone who deals with mass market orders, either buying or selling and keeps track of transactions either in or out of EVE. I can understand why the transaction history works like it does, but it would be really convenient if there was a drop down tab (think inventory ship/item hangar) for any item that there was more than one transaction of in the current history. All the finer details that separate each transaction such as price, time, seller, etc, would just show up in the drop down. This would really compact the transactions history and make it so much cleaner and easier to work with when number crunching.

eg: I go on the market to buy 20 amarr shuttles. I see a seller listing 35 for sale, but there are 5 other sellers with cheaper prices. When I purchase those 20, there will be 6 different transactions.
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#11 - 2015-06-11 03:14:30 UTC
Zepheros Naeonis wrote:
At first I thought "stop being lazy and stack", but now after re-reading and skimming the rest of the posts, I can see that no one else actually bothered to read the first post and skimmed it like I did at first. Then spewed a bunch of crap that has nothing to do with what the TC is proposing.

It is a problem for anyone who deals with mass market orders, either buying or selling and keeps track of transactions either in or out of EVE. I can understand why the transaction history works like it does, but it would be really convenient if there was a drop down tab (think inventory ship/item hangar) for any item that there was more than one transaction of in the current history. All the finer details that separate each transaction such as price, time, seller, etc, would just show up in the drop down. This would really compact the transactions history and make it so much cleaner and easier to work with when number crunching.

eg: I go on the market to buy 20 amarr shuttles. I see a seller listing 35 for sale, but there are 5 other sellers with cheaper prices. When I purchase those 20, there will be 6 different transactions.


He didn't mention that in his original post and started from staking ussue. If you would like people hear you please make a clear definition of what actual problem is

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Zepheros Naeonis
TinklePee
#12 - 2015-06-11 17:30:51 UTC
Tiddle Jr wrote:
He didn't mention that in his original post and started from staking ussue. If you would like people hear you please make a clear definition of what actual problem is


Yes he did. It may have been poorly stated, but if you re-read the post instead of jumping to conclusions, his proposal is pretty obvious.

Everyone jumped to conclusions like I did because skimming the post first makes it sound like he fails at stacking. Take a few seconds to read the actual post and you can put the pieces together to realize "oh, hey! This isn't about stacking items at all! derp".
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#13 - 2015-06-11 20:42:41 UTC
Zepheros Naeonis wrote:
Tiddle Jr wrote:
He didn't mention that in his original post and started from staking ussue. If you would like people hear you please make a clear definition of what actual problem is


Yes he did. It may have been poorly stated, but if you re-read the post instead of jumping to conclusions, his proposal is pretty obvious.

Everyone jumped to conclusions like I did because skimming the post first makes it sound like he fails at stacking. Take a few seconds to read the actual post and you can put the pieces together to realize "oh, hey! This isn't about stacking items at all! derp".


Agree, you are the onlt one. Congrats.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP