Guild Wars 2

so, i dont like price undercutting, oh i have no problem with it when its a sizable amount (you decide what sizable is) but when its one copper i find it a little bit….cheap. its like paying 1 copper to go to the front of the line and it does nothing but hurt the people who came before you AND the consumers who are being cheated out of meaningful competition by sellers

what i wana do is this, make it so that, as the buyer, YOU have the power to decide which offer you want to purchase, just click the check box and click buy the way it works now (except it will no longer check all the previous offers). this way people can have the power to both buy and sell however they want, you CAN still undercut and people will still probaly buy your offer (a penny saved is a penny earned and all that) but for buyers like me who look at an offer of 99,99,99 under an offer of 100g and go “thats despicable” we are no longer FORCED to buy from the undercutter

i think this way everyone can get what they want (except people who undercut for a living in which case go mess with another game’s economy).

EDIT
i said it below and il say it again here, stop reffering to me as the seller who is getting undercut and giving me “advice” on how to no longer get undercut…this is not happening to me….i am the buyer who wants to buy from the more expensive seller in this scenario

if one copper is that important to you i feel a little sorry for you, but you might change your ways someday when you wana sell something valuable

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Min-1-price-difference/first

Eight pages of feedback for you on this topic. Dev comments too.

my solution is different because it has less of an impact on the economy than a 1% forced margin of difference (which would drive prices down very fast)

Your idea was also discussed in that topic. Your idea would actually make NO difference to anything because only a handful of people would do it, so why inplement it?

lets assume you are right and only a few people would do it (i think u sound a bit too confident in this regard but thats just me) it makes a difference to those people, without seriously affecting the economy, and without taking away from the people who dont want to do it, it literally helps everyone without hurting anyone, and its not a big or complex update that would eat up anet’s time if thats what your implying

the real question is, why dont YOU want it done (and keep in mind (“its not a big update” is not a valid answer to this question because not every update has to be big to be meaningful….helping someone is still helping)

Because it solves a problem only you see. Without the greater causes of labour rights or such things to keep me from going to Walmart, their prices are lower because they have set them lower and I would shop there otherwise.

No moral complications exist in a game economy, undercutting is not a problem for me. One copper cheaper is one copper cheaper and I will take that deal every time, I have no greater respect for Seller 100G than seller 99.99G just because one made a listing first.

NonToxic.9185:

Because it solves a problem only you see. Without the greater causes of labour rights or such things to keep me from going to Walmart, their prices are lower because they have set them lower and I would shop there otherwise.

No moral complications exist in a game economy, undercutting is not a problem for me. One copper cheaper is one copper cheaper and I will take that deal every time, I have no greater respect for Seller 100G than seller 99.99G just because one made a listing first.

its probaly not a good idea to use walmart as your example as that hurts tens of millions of people and doesnt actually make things cheaper for u, it just punishes you with hidden costs you dont see (like getting paid less because the people who employ YOU have to compete with goods and services available cheaper)

second, yes a moral complication does exist, just because this isnt “real life” doesnt mean it doesnt matter and the feelings and concerns of other people are still present. there are studies that show that people who think otherwise and behave in an unsavory way in video games tend to develope signs of anti social personality disorder. in other words, your beliefs about other people in game can affect your beliefs about people in real life, dont let video games turn you into a rotten person

third, and while this is my own opinion i DO have more respect for that person who put in for 100g instead of 99g , if only for lack of respect for the under cutter, he could have chosen to put his offer in for the same offer, but fear of losing to ANOTHER undercutter forced him to undercut first. thats what this current system is, an economy of fear and paranoia, is that the economy you want?

Since 2/3 of your post is directed at my character instead of my point, I feel like I shouldn’t bother responding further.

Duke Nukem.6783:

lets assume you are right and only a few people would do it (i think u sound a bit too confident in this regard but thats just me) it makes a difference to those people, without seriously affecting the economy, and without taking away from the people who dont want to do it, it literally helps everyone without hurting anyone, and its not a big or complex update that would eat up anet’s time if thats what your implying

the real question is, why dont YOU want it done (and keep in mind (“its not a big update” is not a valid answer to this question because not every update has to be big to be meaningful….helping someone is still helping)

I just the think the impact of this change would be so minimal that it shouldnt be a priority. There is nothing wrong with your idea, but in my opinion, it would affect so few people that its not worth the dev time. There have been many other QoL suggestions towards the functionality of the TP that presumingly take the same amount of dev time and would affect way more players in a positive way than yours.

Didn’t Russel Peters have a joke about stuff like this..? Something involving 50 cents and being able to make a dollar?

Look, I’m speaking as somebody who likes to buy things. I don’t care who listed what first or last. There are no names linked to the trading post so in essence everyone who is selling something is a faceless corporation out to get my hard earned money. I’m going to go with the corporation who’s offering me what I want for less of my money. If it’s a one copper savings then that’s one extra copper in my pocket. Maybe if I can save 100 copper I can get 1 silver, then buy myself something else nice?

This isn’t the real world where the mom&pop stores are gonna go out of business if you don’t shop there.

The only players who actually care about this issue are the ones who like to make threads about the evil TP undercutters who steal the hard earned play money from someone by pricing just under the current market price. It’s not a real magic sword and you’re not paying for it with real gold coins, the vast majority of players don’t even bother thinking about the moral implications of buying a virtual object that’s one imaginary penny cheaper.

The real issue is “I want to sell my stuff now and when someone undercuts me, then someone undercuts him it takes that much longer to get my play money so I can buy more virtual stuff. Make people buy my stuff instead!”

The issue will still exist whether it’s one fake penny or ten or a fake silver or 15 fake gold lower. You’ll still get undercut and have to wait for your fake money and the devs aren’t going to rearrange the game to suit you.

A copper saved is a copper earned. In short, no way in hell would an idea like this work. The only time it DOES work is when a given item can have various stat combinations (which functions as quality levels) and certain values are determined for various combinations. With GW2, you always get XYZ stats when you by item ABC.

A bit of fun:
“A copper saved is a copper earned”
let’s say it takes you 3 seconds to select the 10g price instead of the 9g99s99c price. 1c for 3 seconds = 12s/hour.

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

lets assume you are right and only a few people would do it (i think u sound a bit too confident in this regard but thats just me) it makes a difference to those people, without seriously affecting the economy, and without taking away from the people who dont want to do it, it literally helps everyone without hurting anyone, and its not a big or complex update that would eat up anet’s time if thats what your implying

the real question is, why dont YOU want it done (and keep in mind (“its not a big update” is not a valid answer to this question because not every update has to be big to be meaningful….helping someone is still helping)

I just the think the impact of this change would be so minimal that it shouldnt be a priority. There is nothing wrong with your idea, but in my opinion, it would affect so few people that its not worth the dev time. There have been many other QoL suggestions towards the functionality of the TP that presumingly take the same amount of dev time and would affect way more players in a positive way than yours.

i can admit and aggree to that, but that doesnt mean it should never be done

Aidan Savage.2078:

A copper saved is a copper earned. In short, no way in hell would an idea like this work. The only time it DOES work is when a given item can have various stat combinations (which functions as quality levels) and certain values are determined for various combinations. With GW2, you always get XYZ stats when you by item ABC.

i dont see any logical connections in your post at all. i dont even know what you are saying, are you saying that NOONE would do it cuz a copper is a copper? im living proof otherwise and i am not alone, and what do stat combinations have to do with any of these, please take the time to rethink and rephrase

tolunart.2095:

The only players who actually care about this issue are the ones who like to make threads about the evil TP undercutters who steal the hard earned play money from someone by pricing just under the current market price. It’s not a real magic sword and you’re not paying for it with real gold coins, the vast majority of players don’t even bother thinking about the moral implications of buying a virtual object that’s one imaginary penny cheaper.

The real issue is “I want to sell my stuff now and when someone undercuts me, then someone undercuts him it takes that much longer to get my play money so I can buy more virtual stuff. Make people buy my stuff instead!”

im not forcing any1 to buy my options so your argument is invalid , instead im giving everyone the choice, you can pick the cheaper one if you want, you dont have to

The issue will still exist whether it’s one fake penny or ten or a fake silver or 15 fake gold lower. You’ll still get undercut and have to wait for your fake money and the devs aren’t going to rearrange the game to suit you.

There are 2 ways to ensure that people won’t ruin your sale by undercutting you by a copper. Use the sell now option or list at a fair price that the buy now listings will eventually return to. Putting an item up on the TP is inherently risky and if you are not prepared to just cut your losses on occasion you should just use sell now.

I have no sympathy for people that get undercut.

Work the market properly and sell your drops properly and you will never have an issue.

I under cut all the time… I don’t often do it by 1c… I do it by 10-20c on small stuff I’m worried might get undercut… and go up for larger. Point is leave a gap and your stuff will move.

When I do undercut by 1c… its because I KNOW the product will move. The odd time I remove something that sat there for a day and relist. Its really not an issue.

Patience. Research.

If the trading range is fairly stable it should be trivial to set a price, even one higher than the current lowest sale, and have it bought within a week if not a day.

You all fret to much when your item is undercut.

If you don’t want to “reward” someone who undercut another person and to buy from the higher priced person, the higher priced person undercut someone else. Who undercut someone who undercut someone who undercut someone……. How far back are you willing to go to find the person who didn’t undercut? Even if you found a group of people who matched prices, the person you buy from is the person who has been there the longest, and who is the person who undercut someone more expensive.

Sometimes I undercut for fun, esp. if I have an idea of whose price is the current low offer. I could care less if I was a respected seller or not. If my item sells, great. If not, then that means the other person’s item won’t sell before mine. It’s a win/win situation.

Something else that makes the OP’s concept flawed, IMO is this:

Seller1 wants 950c for an item.
Seller2 wants 949c for an item.

OP wants to buy the item from Seller1 because he doesn’t want to “reward” the trivial undercutter.

In effect, the OP wants to reward the seller that’s the “greediest”. The fact that it’s 1c difference doesn’t degrade the notion that Seller2 is the more reasonable ‘vendor’.

Both sellers are out for money. One was just in line earlier and didn’t put their item up at a price that was attractive enough to move before someone else put their identical item up for less. Six of one, half dozen of the other. The net result is a buyer will save a copper, Seller1 will have to wait a tiny bit longer (unless their item plummets in value). This is what we in the real world term as “No Biggie”.

The devs have far more important and impactful things to work on (many of which have been on the burner for eons as it is); no need to waste time on trivialities.

Cormac.3871:

There are 2 ways to ensure that people won’t ruin your sale by undercutting you by a copper. Use the sell now option or list at a fair price that the buy now listings will eventually return to. Putting an item up on the TP is inherently risky and if you are not prepared to just cut your losses on occasion you should just use sell now.

this seems like an argument increadibly biased in favor of the buyer, and for what reason? we can all make more money not using sell now (which would eventually drag all prices down to the point where the economy was not worth participating in (remember runescape) and do not attempt to justify one cupper undercutting as a neccesary form of risk, it serves no benefit, it doesnt even bring prices down for the buyer

im hearing alot of arguments of people explaining how they do things and assuming that that justifies the undercutting system because “i got used to it”

i am not however, hearing any arguments about why undercutting by 1c is better than what i suggested only “its what we have now”

things can get better

also, stop reffering to me as the seller. im not the 1 getting undercut in this scenario, im the one buying and i dont want to buy from undercutters

Kruhljak.2705:

Something else that makes the OP’s concept flawed, IMO is this:

Seller1 wants 950c for an item.
Seller2 wants 949c for an item.

OP wants to buy the item from Seller1 because he doesn’t want to “reward” the trivial undercutter.

In effect, the OP wants to reward the seller that’s the “greediest”. The fact that it’s 1c difference doesn’t degrade the notion that Seller2 is the more reasonable ‘vendor’.

Both sellers are out for money. One was just in line earlier and didn’t put their item up at a price that was attractive enough to move before someone else put their identical item up for less. Six of one, half dozen of the other. The net result is a buyer will save a copper, Seller1 will have to wait a tiny bit longer (unless their item plummets in value). This is what we in the real world term as “No Biggie”.

The devs have far more important and impactful things to work on (many of which have been on the burner for eons as it is); no need to waste time on trivialities.

i would say the person who wants it sooner is greedier, epsecially when you consider that the person selling for 1c higher didnt undercut someone by 1c (if they did then this is irrelivent cuz i would buy from the first person who left a big gap)

in any event i am sick of hearing the same illogical arguemnt over and over again, stop saying that just because it isnt a big deal we cant fix it. it can wait sure, but small fixes are what make our experiences better, much more than adding a new boss we might visit for a few mins once a day

From my perspective your problem with this is vastly larger than the problem itself (a notion that remains nothing more than an unsupported contention). I’d wager that very few if any would agree with you that this is a valid problem that warrants any dev time at all, much less whatever real time it would require to implement whatever fix suits you. Perhaps this is why the general responses have focused more on the validity of your issue rather than how to “make the situation better”.

If you get undercut by 1c and your item never sells, then you priced your sell listing too high by 1c.

That’s the nature of the game.

Kruhljak.2705:

From my perspective your problem with this is vastly larger than the problem itself (a notion that remains nothing more than an unsupported contention). I’d wager that very few if any would agree with you that this is a valid problem that warrants any dev time at all, much less whatever real time it would require to implement whatever fix suits you. Perhaps this is why the general responses have focused more on the validity of your issue rather than how to “make the situation better”.

This^^^^^^

Not a problem.

Mhh, now I’m not the big TP mogul here, I use it rather rarely actually, but often when I place my valuable merchandise I add a copper or two. How do you know which offer was there first?

A major problem associated with letting the buyer pick which price/seller to buy from is that you allow gold sellers to use the TP to deliver gold purchases.

This is how it worked in a previous game I played. In that game, I would sometimes do as you’d like to do, OP, and I would buy from someone who was clearly undercut by a small amount, when it was obvious that they were undercut. I don’t know why, since i don’t really have a problem with undercutting. Anyway, that was nice to be able to do now and then, but I wouldn’t trade it for what we have now, which IMO just works better.

This seems like it’s just another poorly disguised “oh noes, i keep being undercut, quick nerf undercutting so i can sell stuf” thread.

Point being, there’s no need to fix undercutting. It happens all the time in real life, yet you dont see people complaining “oh please, stop letting them price stuff lower than me, I need to make money.” You see them dealing with it by either entering direct competition via price drops, or waiting it out to see if prices return to what they were before.

And just so you know, the reason prices are what they are for a vast majority of items is for one simple reason: undercutting.

In real life, do you go to a market and when pricing items, insist on buying the most expensive one? After all the people who are selling the cheaper items are undercutting the higher priced ones and this is real life where not buying the more expensive item hurts their bank account directly.

If insisting on buying the more expensive item is more fair in a game it’s even more so in real life and you should always do so.

In the real world you might choose to pay more for an identical item because the box it’s in (or the store) doesn’t look like it’s been through a rock tumbler. But here, every copy of an item is identical. They aren’t “gently used” or “overstock” or “discontinued” versions. All sellers are equal in reputation, being anonymous. There are no “costs” involved to discover which seller is offering the item for less.

A “rational” player in this kind of market should always choose the cheapest.

Of course players aren’t “rational”, if they were so many wouldn’t be selling to highest bidder or buying from lowest seller as default.

tolunart.2095:

The only players who actually care about this issue are the ones who like to make threads about the evil TP undercutters who steal the hard earned play money from someone by pricing just under the current market price. It’s not a real magic sword and you’re not paying for it with real gold coins, the vast majority of players don’t even bother thinking about the moral implications of buying a virtual object that’s one imaginary penny cheaper.

I have several problems with undercutting listings by 1c. I posted in that thread as well, by my arguments aren’t about how I’m being robbed, but rather that small bid increments result in inefficient markets — an efficient market would have a spread of ~15% or less between buy and sell prices, and many markets in GW2’s TP don’t converge to that — because they’re not sufficiently high volume, and the 1c minimum difference is too slow given their volume. Making it a % would cause geometric movement towards an efficient spread, which would allow many more markets to reach that.

I would also note that being undercut by 1c is discouraging to new TP players — they feel frustrated and concerned that they’re going to have wasted their listing fee. It penalizes them for being the first to list, when normally we want to reward the person who lists first with the first sale — they established a sell order, helping create a market.

The market is OK without a minimum increment, I just think it’d be a little more efficient and a little less frustrating for new players with one; it’s also a simple concept (present in many other trading platforms for similar reasons).

I don’t think it’d work as well on the buy side because either you could circumvent it trivially, or it would make underbids too difficult. On the sell side, since all listings come with a 5% fee, usually circumvention would be too expensive to be a concern.

Facepunch.5710:

A major problem associated with letting the buyer pick which price/seller to buy from is that you allow gold sellers to use the TP to deliver gold purchases.

This is how it worked in a previous game I played. In that game, I would sometimes do as you’d like to do, OP, and I would buy from someone who was clearly undercut by a small amount, when it was obvious that they were undercut. I don’t know why, since i don’t really have a problem with undercutting. Anyway, that was nice to be able to do now and then, but I wouldn’t trade it for what we have now, which IMO just works better.

Thats actually quite a good point against, which I havent thought about.
As i said earlier, i didnt mind this feature being implemented because i didnt see why not, except that i would rather see dev time being used somewhere else but your point is a good one not to implement it.

This poor deceased equine shall be forever bludgeoned…..

Brother Grimm.5176:

This poor deceased equine shall be forever bludgeoned…..

Undercuts Brother Grimm by one attachment. ^^

mtpelion.4562:

If you get undercut by 1c and your item never sells, then you priced your sell listing too high by 1c.

That’s the nature of the game.

no it is not the nature of the game, its how the game is now, dont assume things cant be changed, also as i said in my OP (which u clearly didnt heed) i am NOT the seller in this scenario

Wanze.8410:

Facepunch.5710:

A major problem associated with letting the buyer pick which price/seller to buy from is that you allow gold sellers to use the TP to deliver gold purchases.

This is how it worked in a previous game I played. In that game, I would sometimes do as you’d like to do, OP, and I would buy from someone who was clearly undercut by a small amount, when it was obvious that they were undercut. I don’t know why, since i don’t really have a problem with undercutting. Anyway, that was nice to be able to do now and then, but I wouldn’t trade it for what we have now, which IMO just works better.

Thats actually quite a good point against, which I havent thought about.
As i said earlier, i didnt mind this feature being implemented because i didnt see why not, except that i would rather see dev time being used somewhere else but your point is a good one not to implement it.

it really does not matter actually as they can mail eachother gold without any concern at all (and dont say anet can track the mail easier cuz they can watch everything with equal ease)

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Facepunch.5710:

A major problem associated with letting the buyer pick which price/seller to buy from is that you allow gold sellers to use the TP to deliver gold purchases.

This is how it worked in a previous game I played. In that game, I would sometimes do as you’d like to do, OP, and I would buy from someone who was clearly undercut by a small amount, when it was obvious that they were undercut. I don’t know why, since i don’t really have a problem with undercutting. Anyway, that was nice to be able to do now and then, but I wouldn’t trade it for what we have now, which IMO just works better.

Thats actually quite a good point against, which I havent thought about.
As i said earlier, i didnt mind this feature being implemented because i didnt see why not, except that i would rather see dev time being used somewhere else but your point is a good one not to implement it.

it really does not matter actually as they can mail eachother gold without any concern at all (and dont say anet can track the mail easier cuz they can watch everything with equal ease)

Anet can track 500g sent by mail easier than 2 stacks of t1 dust being sold for 1g each.

Duke Nukem.6783:

no it is not the nature of the game, its how the game is now, dont assume things cant be changed, also as i said in my OP (which u clearly didnt heed) i am NOT the seller in this scenario

Your suggestion is designed to reward sellers who priced their product too high. You may not be the seller, but that’s irrelevant. Your idea is unnecessary, adds nothing positive to the game experience, and promotes market inefficiencies.

The point I was making above is simple: if I can undercut you by 1c then you listed your item too high by at least 1c. Why would you want to reward the guy who listed too high instead of the guy who is offering you a better deal?

I sort of think the whole notion stems from the system of those “other” games. Placing an order cost gold (%), same as here, but the offers expired. Many of us might thus be able to sympathize with the person who got undercut because we ourself had to list the item again after finally having a lucky drop worth listing.

So don’t worry about the person who was undercut, he will sell his product as well. For a copper more.

Guild Wars 2
For a fistful of copper

Edit: And in local news, Wanze is dealing in dust. Saviour or menace of rubble? Stay tuned.

Wanze.8410:

Thats actually quite a good point against, which I havent thought about.
As i said earlier, i didnt mind this feature being implemented because i didnt see why not, except that i would rather see dev time being used somewhere else but your point is a good one not to implement it.

“It won’t hurt nuthin’,” is not sufficient reason to devote Anet’s limited resources (dev man hours = money) to a trivial change to the game. If you had a choice between this and adding the ability to search by armor type (light/medium/heavy), which would be more benefit to the game? Neither is a negative change, but searching armor would benefit many more players than this. And yet even that has not been implemented yet, probably because it doesn’t add enough to the game revenue to support the cost of planning, developing and testing the change.

This is clearly a rather uninspired attempt by a gold seller to have his dreams come true… a way to move huge amounts of money that isn’t monitored by their anti-gold selling systems….

I will concede this is pretty much the perfect plan to make sure gold sellers completely dominate this game, but I don’t see any other benefits besides that.

Price undercutting is how the market adjusts prices. If someone undercuts me I’d prefer it be by 1c over any other amount. The greater the amount I’m undercut the greater my listing price appears over market value.

As far as choosing to buy from someone who lists at 100g over 99g 99s 99c, perhaps the lowest price occurred by the seller who listed at 100g 1c and was then undercut by the 100g listing. So yes, what I’m saying is that this topic is silly.

Duke Nukem.6783:

Cormac.3871:

There are 2 ways to ensure that people won’t ruin your sale by undercutting you by a copper. Use the sell now option or list at a fair price that the buy now listings will eventually return to. Putting an item up on the TP is inherently risky and if you are not prepared to just cut your losses on occasion you should just use sell now.

this seems like an argument increadibly biased in favor of the buyer, and for what reason? we can all make more money not using sell now (which would eventually drag all prices down to the point where the economy was not worth participating in (remember runescape) and do not attempt to justify one cupper undercutting as a neccesary form of risk, it serves no benefit, it doesnt even bring prices down for the buyer

I think I see where you’re coming from. Part of the problem is that the listing fee places a risk for the seller, where no such equivalent risk exists for a buyer placing a bid. I concede that there is an imbalance there which I had not considered. Working in the buyer’s favour however is that there has been a reasonably steady level of inflation, meaning that in most cases the price will eventually rise to meet the seller assuming that the price was a fair one to begin with and that a new patch does not suddenly devalue that item.

I would also say that for high velocity items of less than one gold value this is not an issue at all. I have been buying up t6 mats for my gift of fortune and with the speed that market moves simply undercutting by a copper at a time the price could easily change by 10% in a day.

So I assume you are talking about rarer, more valuable items such as skins, precursors and other desirable named exotic items.

In this case I can understand your concern, but I have two problems with your solution:

1) It probably won’t work.
2) If it did work, it probably wouldn’t work.

Point 1 has been gone over a lot in this thread, but here is what I mean by point 2. Somebody has put up Dawn for exactly 100 gold under the previous asking price. I have a Dawn which I want to sell, so I put it in at 1 copper over that price. You come along and think you going to teach the undercutter a lesson, so you buy off me. Put simply, your system can be gamed.

A better solution would be to only allow for four significant figures in sell offers. Anything up to a gold could be sold at 1 copper increments, from 1 gold to 10 gold you are selling at 10 copper increments (you can sell an item for one gold, or one gold and ten copper, or one gold and twenty copper etc.) and so on. So once you are are above 1,000 gold the undercutters have to move by at least 1 gold.

The gold seller issue brought up in an above post is important.

Undercutting and rising ‘highest bid offer’s are how item prices equalize to a stable price.

As far as the OP seeing undercutting as a ‘problem’, do you realize that when some sells an item using ‘match lowest seller’, it’s the most recent listing that sells first? It doesn’t matter if he undercuts by 1c or matches the lowest sell price, it is his item that will sell first either way.

If there are 1,000 listings at 50c for an item, and I list mine for 50c as well, my item will sell first.

If there are 1,000 listings at 50c for an item, and I list mine for 49c, my item will sell first.

Undercutting is good for the economy because it seeks to stabilize the ‘true’ price of items. It’s not some evil, immoral practice that should be frowned upon.

The TP is FIFO – First In, First Out. That means if I list an item for sale at 10s and ten minutes later you list the same item also at 10s, mine will sell first.