Guild Wars 2

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Duke Nukem.6783:

your “solution” is absurd. so we are all supposed to be psychic and read the market? it should be up to the buyer to decide if they want to buy from the 19 99 99 or the 20 00 00, thats a simple change and doesnt restrict anyone, you can still undercut if you want

and why is there no room for a grey area???

Nope. Computers cannot “read minds”. It cannot tell if someone is sad that they were undercut. In fact, it would be completely unfair if a computer allowed a lower priced item to sell after a higher priced item. Now if this were 2050, and we have computers capable of human thought and learning, perhaps we could have some gray areas in the market. Maybe then we could see a computer having the compassion necessary to facilitate the need to sell an item priced at 20 ahead of an item priced at 19.99.99.

Going back to selling for cheaper. This tactic actually makes plenty sense. If you list something at 20 Gold, and someone undercuts it with 19.99.99, that sucks right? Well if the velocity of that item’s market is high enough, BOTH items will sell. However, if the velocity of the market is stagnant at those prices, BOTH items will NOT sell. That means it’s the Seller’s fault for overpricing the item. If you want the item to sell, you need to price it lower to attract more people willing to buy it. Thus the need to list it for 10 to 15 Gold.

Now say you list it for 10 to 15 Gold, and someone undercuts you. Ok, that’s no big deal, as the velocity of the item’s market is much higher now, and so being undercut won’t hurt. Both items would sell much faster since it’s cheaper. You went from having 0 potential buyers, to maybe a handful now.

tl;dr – In order to do well in any market, you need to know how to read it. Amateur sellers who list items at any odd price without doing research will always lose.

tl;dr2 – The current market is well balanced, and working as intended. No fix needed.

so im pretty sick of these illogical arguments (i mean ur first paragraph is so off topic its almost report worthy) so instead of responding to u AGAIN and getting a resposne back that really isnt a response il just ask you this: why do you think this shouldnt be done

keep in mind: the following are invalid answers because they contain one or more “sins of science”
“the market is working fine as is (imperfect solution fallacy) nothing is perfect and everything has room for imporvement

“you just want to keep your stuff from getting undercut” (straw man argument" do not make personal attacks or assumptions and pretend that is a response to an argument

“we need undercutting by 1c because it keeps prices competative” (slippery slope fallacy) do not make arguments that assume one event leads to another without evidence of their connection, also do not attack small pieces of arguments ignoring the larger whole (misdirection falacy) as iv said before we are not taking away undercutting, we are just giving people the choice

“the developers can better use their time” (false inferences) you do not know the developers and are not a developer, if you are / do then you do not know all of the factors involved in their development schedual, even if you did, you do not know what the future holds and cannot assume that anet will NEVER have time for this, not even anet employees would be justified in making this claim.

“very few people benefit” (faulty generalization) do not reach a conclusion from weak premises. you dont know how many people would like this after it was implemented.

so with these in mind please answer the above question “why do YOU not want this done?”

The only illogical argument is that there is a problem here that needs fixing.

Duke Nukem.6783:

so with these in mind please answer the above question “why do YOU not want this done?”

Because your proposed solution isnt a good fix for the problem you describe (which in my opinion isnt a problem at all) because you cant determine, if a listing is from a regular player or an “evil undercutter” as all listings are anonymous.

Even if your solution was implemented and we assume most people use it like you propose, i could still list 9 items at 10g, then undercut myself by 1 copper, which results in all the “righteous people like you” buying my listing anyways.

Or someone lists a precursor at 1100g, then he gets undercut by another one by 100g (which is a good undercut that you would buy) that is listed at 1000g.
Now I, the evil TP Baron come in at list at 999.9999g and also get undercut several times by various amounts because there is more supply than demand atm for that precursor. My listing and the listing 1 copper above me doesnt get sold for another 2 weeks and the player who listed at 1000g decides to pull his listing and sell to the highest bidder to cut his losses. After another week, all listings below me sell, so i got the lowest one but get immediately undercut by 1 copper again.
Now you decide to buy that precursor and see the 3 lowest listings: 999.9998g, my listing at 999.9999g and the listing at 1100g.

According to your logic and mindset you expressed several times in this topic, you will buy my listing.

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

so with these in mind please answer the above question “why do YOU not want this done?”

Because your proposed solution isnt a good fix for the problem you describe (which in my opinion isnt a problem at all) because you cant determine, if a listing is from a regular player or an “evil undercutter” as all listings are anonymous.

Even if your solution was implemented and we assume most people use it like you propose, i could still list 9 items at 10g, then undercut myself by 1 copper, which results in all the “righteous people like you” buying my listing anyways.

Or someone lists a precursor at 1100g, then he gets undercut by another one by 100g (which is a good undercut that you would buy) that is listed at 1000g.
Now I, the evil TP Baron come in at list at 999.9999g and also get undercut several times by various amounts because there is more supply than demand atm for that precursor. My listing and the listing 1 copper above me doesnt get sold for another 2 weeks and the player who listed at 1000g decides to pull his listing and sell to the highest bidder to cut his losses. After another week, all listings below me sell, so i got the lowest one but get immediately undercut by 1 copper again.
Now you decide to buy that precursor and see the 3 lowest listings: 999.9998g, my listing at 999.9999g and the listing at 1100g.

According to your logic and mindset you expressed several times in this topic, you will buy my listing.

if any offer is 1c below the previous offer (and its not a material im buying in bulk) i choose to buy from the one that is 1c more expensive. its that simple , stop trying to over think it, and stop trying to get everyone else to overthink it

also, i asked you to avoid the imperfect solution fallacy, u just used it. COULD someone undercut themselves? yes, will that be a common problem? no. does that mean we shouldnt do this just because “its not perfect and it doesnt fix the problem entirley” no. it makes it better, and thats all that matters

please do your best to keep your arguments in higher standards and avoid illogical fallacy in the future. please read up on illogical fallacy and their use

The only illogical fallacy is the entire premise this thread is created on. I still fail to see why anyone would bother with the idiotic act of paying more for an item when there’s a perfectly good listing that’s cheaper. Sure it’s only cheaper by a copper, yet those savings add up in the long run, especially if you’re buying in bulk. Face it, you’re buying from an undercutter no matter what you do. Unless you’re buying from the very first person to have sold that item, you will never buy from someone who did not undercut another person.

Aidan Savage.2078:

The only illogical fallacy is the entire premise this thread is created on. I still fail to see why anyone would bother with the idiotic act of paying more for an item when there’s a perfectly good listing that’s cheaper. Sure it’s only cheaper by a copper, yet those savings add up in the long run, especially if you’re buying in bulk. Face it, you’re buying from an undercutter no matter what you do. Unless you’re buying from the very first person to have sold that item, you will never buy from someone who did not undercut another person.

if you dont see the problem you dont want to see the problem, not aggreeing is one thing, but not having the empathy required to understand why someone might not want to reward an undercutter is an act of will. there are more important things to me than money, hopefully to you too…

You dont get it, do you? No matter who you buy from, you’re buying from someone who undercut others. What are you going to do? Blow through all your money like a fool because you’re buying the most expensive price listing?

I’m sorry, but what you have is a personal problem with how the market works, not a general population problem that needs solving. The fact that there are people NOT the so-called “TP Barons” saying there’s no problem, does not mean they dont see the problem, it means there is no problem in the first place. Why should Anet take the time to work on a problem that is possessed solely by one or two people?

Aidan Savage.2078:

You dont get it, do you? No matter who you buy from, you’re buying from someone who undercut others. What are you going to do? Blow through all your money like a fool because you’re buying the most expensive price listing?

He gets it. Telling him the same thing for the hundredth time just gets the same response the last 99 did. This isn’t a discussion, it’s a contest to see who can write more letters of the alphabet in the snow without using his hands.

Duke Nukem.6783:

if you dont see the problem you dont want to see the problem, not aggreeing is one thing, but not having the empathy required to understand why someone might not want to reward an undercutter is an act of will. there are more important things to me than money, hopefully to you too…

But there isn’t a problem. People who trade don’t do so out of empathy for their competition. They do so for profit. Money is more important that your feelings.

I’ll try to explain things to you one more time. If you list an item for sale, and it doesn’t sell after you’ve been undercut by someone else, that means your price is too high. Meaning, it’s your fault the item isn’t sold. List the item for cheaper, and it will sell faster.

I can promise you that I will more likely not undercut a price that’s too low.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Duke Nukem.6783:

if you dont see the problem you dont want to see the problem, not aggreeing is one thing, but not having the empathy required to understand why someone might not want to reward an undercutter is an act of will. there are more important things to me than money, hopefully to you too…

But there isn’t a problem. People who trade don’t do so out of empathy for their competition. They do so for profit. Money is more important that your feelings.

I’ll try to explain things to you one more time. If you list an item for sale, and it doesn’t sell after you’ve been undercut by someone else, that means your price is too high. Meaning, it’s your fault the item isn’t sold. List the item for cheaper, and it will sell faster.

I can promise you that I will more likely not undercut a price that’s too low.

that explains why you would choose not to use this change i am proposing, not why you are so strongly fighting it

The way I see it (and many others as well), if there’s no problem to begin with, there’s no need for a solution.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

The way I see it (and many others as well), if there’s no problem to begin with, there’s no need for a solution.

that doesnt explain why u feel the need to argue AGAINST it, ur statement implies neutrality, ur actions are anything but neutral. why dont u come up with a reason for me, can u do that?

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem. You’re motivation for discussion was to influence change. Your haven’t presented a non-personal reason showing how this would be better for the game as a whole to justify the change your proposing.

Anet is a business; they do have to justify changes to their stakeholders. If they didn’t intent for only buying the lowest order, it wouldn’t be that way in the first place. The change has to be sensible AND significant enough to even get on the table of implementation.

This suggestion is neither and seems to only be another thinly veiled attempt to cry about people making money on the TP because of some perceived idea that people that price to sell are slimy filth that don’t deserve your gold.

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

The way I see it (and many others as well), if there’s no problem to begin with, there’s no need for a solution.

You can’t win an argument with a rock.

JS said a long time ago that this sort of thing is not a solution, and another hundred threads about it isn’t going to make him change his mind. If you read an announcement that JS resigned and has been replaced by a parrot, then we might have a problem. Until then, however, no amount of “discussion” about this non-problem is going to lead to change.

Duke Nukem.6783:

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Your proposal is a false inference to begin with. Those thousands of people simply do not existand did not post in this section expressing their feeling to buy a more expensive listing.

Duke Nukem.6783:

that doesnt explain why u feel the need to argue AGAINST it, ur statement implies neutrality, ur actions are anything but neutral. why dont u come up with a reason for me, can u do that?

I’ll use a real world example to describe the up-hill battle you’re trying to fight.

An elementary aged child speaking with a scientist about the time it takes for the light of the sun to reach the Earth. The scientist studied the topic at hand, and has the formulas to tell you that it takes a little over 8 minutes. The child says that it doesn’t, because when he look up, the light is already there. The child thinks he’s right, because his perception is that the sun’s light instantly reaches the Earth.

So basically, you have Black Lion Trading Post experts all telling you that there’s currently no problem with the TP as it is now. The mistake you’re making is that you’re taking your own, personal preferences, and subconsciously manifesting them into “perceived problems” with in-game mechanics. Like a child who doesn’t understand the science of light travel, you’re looking at something, and attributing false facts as the reality of how you understand the TP.

VideoGamermike.5813:

edit: oh and penguin, that little rant has a serious flaw. There is a massive difference between a player run market(where there is no ‘expert’ outside of analyst, as anyone can be a potential ‘professional’ in the field of buying/selling), while a very nice example, it doesn’t ring here. Its not like me whom had a lack of knowledge. in my first post here.

It’s accurate enough because he’s basically being told even by people who’ve merely taken a few science classes in highschool that light takes 8 minutes to reach the Earth. And he’s still adamant that “it’s instantly there.”

It’s been explained in your other thread there VGmike.

A seller can either sell only to the highest bidder (actually create a sell order at the current high bid price) or set a price higher than that.

A buyer can choose to buy only from the lowest seller, which can fail if an item at that price is no longer available, or set a price lower than that.

The market then matches buyers to sellers. If a seller is selling 100 of something but the buyer only wanted 50, then you will see the price spike down to the previous high bid price and the gap between the buy and sell price narrows to as little as a copper.

As others have said, the system coded to assume the seller wants the most they can get for an item they are selling. The notion of selling it for less than the current highest offer is unimaginable. That isn’t what an efficient market does.

Back in City of Heroes the player market was set up as a double blind consignment market. When you put something up for sale, you are saying you will take no less than X for this item. Buyers on the other hand offer Y for that item, take it or leave it. Since neither side can see the seller or buyer range of prices but only the last five transactions and how many offers and unsold items are still available, setting a price to maximize your value is very different. Especially if you take into consideration that highest buy offer is matched to lowest sell offer, as long as the buy offer is higher, and the seller gets the full amount the seller was willing to spend for that item.

That meant that if you were offering an item for 10 and someone was willing to pay 1000, you got 1000 (minus fees). This led to players low balling their sell orders to sell faster and buyers low balling their offers in hope of finding players low balling their sell orders. It led to times where the last five transactions were 1000, 1000, 1000, 60, 1000. Look, someone got a deal and someone got greedy or impatient and lost.

Bellehagh, this line made me stop reading anything you said after.
“The notion fo selling ti for less than the current highest offer is unimaginable, thats what an efficient market does”

where do I even begin with that? claps hands together, ok, I’ll play you’re little game. Lets start this for the two very obvious problems and fallacies.
1) efficient markets are one that send out reasonable acts of trade with little effort on both sides of the trade. so both buyers and sellers can walk up, make a price, and walk out, with as little effort as possible. Markets are not entered around the merchant making money and no one else mattering. Right now, as a buyer, I feel cheated when I look at a great many of the items, prompting me to put effort into waiting for a reasonable price, or simply not trading, thats not an efficient market.
2) Eveyrone joins markets for their own reasons, sure, to some people passing up a deal that give you a passable profit is assanine. But guess what, that still doesnt work. Many people go into markets like this for Many reasons, some people for the sake of just making fair trades, some people for the sake of dumping their useless items, and some people for the sake of philanthropy, they all set a price that -they- choose. As such, being willing to sell something for below the expected value is not an act of stupidity.

Oh and, guess what, look up a few episodes in .hack//roots, where three merchants ended the insane overpricing of items pushed onto other players by simply using their free will and courage to call current prices unfair, and drew a hoard of new customers to the markets with fair and reasonable pricing, only possible when they went against the expectations of the buyers. Seem ‘stupid’ to you? Well they made a wondrous profit off all the new customers they got.

now that thats over lets get a bit more complex
3) See my example up there going nice and strong? Thats not possible in this game, even if the seller wants to go below market value to encourage trade and lower prices, perhaps in the hope that when he goes to buy similar items, those prices will also be much lower. so then both buyer and seller become completely powerless when items become all that expensive, as buyers cannot wait the days it would take to go all that noticeable under current values(nor have incentive to), and sells have no power to effect the market at all if they feel the pricing is not to their likeing. So now both sections of the economy feel powerless, and choose not to partake. Still freel the market is efficient and proper?

4) The fact is, any market system that makes both buyer and seller feel worthless even after spend days trying to find a solution, simply because of a choice of design, is not an efficient market. I am not the only person who feels this way, and I have talked to entire maps at once that literally abandoned the TP because of lack of real control, and insane prices with no real hope of fixing anything. Thus, the market system is pushing people away because of major flaws and lack of ability to adapt. Thats not efficient, its broken.

This isn’t a flee market or tag sale or even eBay. You never know the buyer or seller. The TP is a nameless, faceless intermediary third party, a guy who looks in a ledger and tells us what the current high bid and low sell order are, produce a list of prices with amounts if we are willing to wait a moment, and ask us what we want to do. In every case they take the item or money upfront, make a note about it in their ledger. If there’s a match you’ll get a text to tell you where to go to pick up your money or item.

Sounds like you want to interact with buyers or sellers. That you want to be able to choose who you deal with. That’s not efficient when there are tens of thousands of buyers and sellers at any one time.

while I agree the traditional market of meeting your seller is certainly not efficient either, the way is stands is just as bad. We are left in a situation where buyers are afraid to demand price drops(at least in a number meaningful enough to care), and sellers cannot give any indication whether or not they are willing to go beyond the price point,

ex: Say you have an item that requires some set in-game price. When you sell that item, ignoring time and labor, you sell it close to the original cost of you making it. Even in TP, these kind of synthetic items can have this as well. So if a seller knows this, he knows he -can’t- go any lower, and thus almost no merchants post low prices, driving a market value more solidly.

However in lets say silver doubloons, where the price is more subjective, the buyer has to find a price point that can be considered fair, in this scenario we have sellers posting a huge variety of prices, some the cost of their pebbles, others the cost of their time, in all cases the seller can show where they are willing to draw the line based on those prices posted both ways.

However, as a buyer(and I did put myself in this position), you end up being unable to know when this happens, you can’t tell when a price is at its minimum, or if it can be lowered due to subjective value. the only way to know is to the the item in deep detail, I have no idea why say ancient bone is so rare, nor would I know why iron and steel items are so rare as well, and unless I knew that I could wait months before an order I forgot I made was filled because theres no way to gauge when prices can be dropped without the market giving some kind of indication.

this is the problem, without -some- kind of setting from both the seller AND the buyer, a market can never hope to be efficient, as neither can truely gauge the reaction of one-another in any kind of interaction. It’s important as a buyer I be able to know when a price is actually debatable -without- knowing the item, but as it stands, the seller has zero means of communicating. And because of that, buyers like me who lack the time to research it, are left in the dust.

However, keep in mind what Is aid about .hack//roots, without those players dropping prices significantly, that worlds trade would have been dead and gone because no one would bother showing up thinking prices would never change. If you’re a buyer and see a ridiculous price you know won’t change, would you come back to the post, or just spend a few days getting the item yourself. Without the indication that the market is willing to change, the buyers with the courage to change things, will always pick the later.

In fact, this is where the OP is out of his mind, Markets are always undercutting eachother, its necessary, ESPECIALLY in a faceless market, to have those varies prices set by the seller so that the people can tell when the price is where it -must- be, or whether it’s where it -can- be.

VideoGamermike.5813:

4) I am not the only person who feels this way, and I have talked to entire maps at once that literally abandoned the TP because of lack of real control, and insane prices with no real hope of fixing anything. Thus, the market system is pushing people away because of major flaws and lack of ability to adapt. Thats not efficient, its broken.

Why don’t you start a guild with all those likeminded people, where you can trade between people in guild using whatever prices you (personally, or collectively as guild) agree to be fair?

If that is not an option, you can always go to Lion’s Arch, or other in-game hub and do good old map-chat advertising of the goods you want to sell for the price you’ve set.

VideoGamermike.5813:

~~~ snip ~~~

What it all comes down to is competition between Buyers. If there are 10,000 potential Buyers for Item X, with an average Buy Order of 7 Gold, but there are one or two who are willing to pay 10 Gold just to get Item X right away, the market will sell at that price at that moment in time.

So as you can see, the market works. The Seller gets more money for Item X, and the Buyer get it before everyone else. It’s efficient and effective. Both parties are happy.

kuittaa.7360:

If that is not an option, you can always go to Lion’s Arch, or other in-game hub and do good old map-chat advertising of the goods you want to sell for the price you’ve set.

No dude, don’t recommend that. I report anyone I see with “WTS/WTB” Map Chat spams. If people want to do that in their Guild Chat between their friends, that’s fine.

kuittaa.7360:

If that is not an option, you can always go to Lion’s Arch, or other in-game hub and do good old map-chat advertising of the goods you want to sell for the price you’ve set.

I wouldnt recommend players to spam chat trying to sell items. Not only can they be ripped off, it’s also violating game rules and they can be reported and, depending on the severity, banned for it.

Aidan Savage.2078:

kuittaa.7360:

If that is not an option, you can always go to Lion’s Arch, or other in-game hub and do good old map-chat advertising of the goods you want to sell for the price you’ve set.

I wouldnt recommend players to spam chat trying to sell items. Not only can they be ripped off, it’s also violating game rules and they can be reported and, depending on the severity, banned for it.

But he wants to be ripped off.

Wanze.8410:

But he wants to be ripped off.

That means the TP is protecting him from himself.

VGmike is annoyed that while the TP does allow players to attempt to force prices up, there is no easy way to force prices down, other than selling tons of an item to a bidder until the high bid falls to the desired price range. In this case you are buying out bids and not sale orders and on high priced items there are a whole lot more bids than sale orders. And if you were able to hoard that many items to make a significant dent in the sale orders, the effect is temporary at best because it’s the rate supply is added that’s the most important factor in supply. Without a significant change in that, rises and dips in supply are temporary.

In the end it’s still supply and demand that sets price. You have to look at what factors are changing supply and demand to understand why the price moved that way.

Aidan Savage.2078:

I wouldnt recommend players to spam chat trying to sell items. Not only can they be ripped off, it’s also violating game rules and they can be reported and, depending on the severity, banned for it.

I do understand this. However, it is quite apparent that VideoGamermike (and to some extent, OP too) does not want to use TP at all, because it is not working in a manner he and “entire maps” would prefer. Since TP is out of the question, this leaves very few ways for trade. Unfortunately, these ways will inevitably result in unwanted actions and behaviour.

I see it as a price and risk one must take, if he/she does not want to use safe and efficient TP.

Short of reworking the TP, only viable option is to form the aforementioned guild. That would be mildly interesting experiment; they would become a conglomerate of “anti-TP-barons”, who would only trade with and between very limited group of people (I highly doubt that even combined, they would have power to lower the price of any good to what they deem “fair price”). While this kind of trade is extremely inefficient, resulting in severe scarcity of great amount of goods, it would allow them to have full control of the price.

And then, soon or very soon, someone would take an advantage of this, and relist all the items to TP with ~market price.

I wonder if OP does this in real life. If, for example, there are 2 gasoline stations next to each other where one has undercut the posted price of its neighbor by one penny, does he go to the more expensive one to reward it for not being despicable?

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Your proposal is a false inference to begin with. Those thousands of people simply do not existand did not post in this section expressing their feeling to buy a more expensive listing.

haha no, they absolutly exist and people HAVE made threads on this before and people DO complain about it in game. stop trying to undermine the issue by saying it isnt an issue, its an issue to me and u need to respect that

Astral Projections.7320:

I wonder if OP does this in real life. If, for example, there are 2 gasoline stations next to each other where one has undercut the posted price of its neighbor by one penny, does he go to the more expensive one to reward it for not being despicable?

i would but things in real life are usually overpriced not underpriced (like gas for example) i do however do it with foods because fat people dont need 99 cent bags of chips

Duke Nukem.6783:

haha no, they absolutly exist and people HAVE made threads on this before and people DO complain about it in game. stop trying to undermine the issue by saying it isnt an issue, its an issue to me and u need to respect that

People, in general, want to receive the most amount of money possible and spend the least amount of money possible whenever they engage in a financial transaction.

Sure, there are those who want to cheat themselves for various reasons, but they represent a statistical aberration, not the norm.

What you are suggesting is that all gloves ever made should have 3 fingers and a thumb on them, because some people have lost a finger.

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Your proposal is a false inference to begin with. Those thousands of people simply do not existand did not post in this section expressing their feeling to buy a more expensive listing.

haha no, they absolutly exist and people HAVE made threads on this before and people DO complain about it in game. stop trying to undermine the issue by saying it isnt an issue, its an issue to me and u need to respect that

I just checked all 4 pages in this topic and not a SINGLE poster, apart from you, agreed with you that its a good idea in general and thought that Anet should spend any resources on implementing it.
This might be an issue for you but if you think that the mayority of players wants to see this, you´re dillusional.

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Your proposal is a false inference to begin with. Those thousands of people simply do not existand did not post in this section expressing their feeling to buy a more expensive listing.

haha no, they absolutly exist and people HAVE made threads on this before and people DO complain about it in game. stop trying to undermine the issue by saying it isnt an issue, its an issue to me and u need to respect that

I just checked all 4 pages in this topic and not a SINGLE poster, apart from you, agreed with you that its a good idea in general and thought that Anet should spend any resources on implementing it.
This might be an issue for you but if you think that the mayority of players wants to see this, you´re dillusional.

i see plenty of people on these 4 pages suggesting SOME kind of change, some are suggesting a minimum change required for undercutting instead but atleast they admit SOMETHING is wrong.

its also important to notice that this is the forum where the TP barons hang out not the common man. so the opinion we see here is unrepresentative of the majority of the game….but im sure some of the posters here would like to forget that =)

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Your proposal is a false inference to begin with. Those thousands of people simply do not existand did not post in this section expressing their feeling to buy a more expensive listing.

haha no, they absolutly exist and people HAVE made threads on this before and people DO complain about it in game. stop trying to undermine the issue by saying it isnt an issue, its an issue to me and u need to respect that

I just checked all 4 pages in this topic and not a SINGLE poster, apart from you, agreed with you that its a good idea in general and thought that Anet should spend any resources on implementing it.
This might be an issue for you but if you think that the mayority of players wants to see this, you´re dillusional.

i see plenty of people on these 4 pages suggesting SOME kind of change, some are suggesting a minimum change required for undercutting instead but atleast they admit SOMETHING is wrong.

its also important to notice that this is the forum where the TP barons hang out not the common man. so the opinion we see here is unrepresentative of the majority of the game….but im sure some of the posters here would like to forget that =)

I already stated earlier that i would have no problem, if Anet implemented your change because it will have next to no effect towards my earnings on the TP because the mayority of players simply wont use it. So your arguement that the users in this forum are biased because they fear for their profits cantbe applied to me.
I just have a problem with you claiming that whole maps and thousands of people demand this change, while we have only seen evidence of your opinion and nobody else´s supporting your suggestion.
If you want to ingore the fact that Anet simply wont spend any ressources on implementing a change that has little to no effect on how the player base uses the TP, go ahead.

People who posted here and demanded changes to undecutting has nothing to do with your suggestion of letting people choose to buy at a higher price than the lowest listing.

Duke Nukem.6783:

its also important to notice that this is the forum where the TP barons hang out not the common man. so the opinion we see here is unrepresentative of the majority of the game….but im sure some of the posters here would like to forget that =)

Is this supposed to be some kind of inverted appeal to authority? “Hey, don’t listen to these guys because they know what they are doing!”

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Obtena.7952:

Here is a reason: Waste of resources to implement a solution to a non-problem.

see comment 5 on my long post on this page (false inference).

and lets stop saying its not a problem, as you can see from thousands of posts throughout this section of the problem , many people DO find it to be a problem, and so it is a problem and thats a fact.

Your proposal is a false inference to begin with. Those thousands of people simply do not existand did not post in this section expressing their feeling to buy a more expensive listing.

haha no, they absolutly exist and people HAVE made threads on this before and people DO complain about it in game. stop trying to undermine the issue by saying it isnt an issue, its an issue to me and u need to respect that

I just checked all 4 pages in this topic and not a SINGLE poster, apart from you, agreed with you that its a good idea in general and thought that Anet should spend any resources on implementing it.
This might be an issue for you but if you think that the mayority of players wants to see this, you´re dillusional.

i see plenty of people on these 4 pages suggesting SOME kind of change, some are suggesting a minimum change required for undercutting instead but atleast they admit SOMETHING is wrong.

its also important to notice that this is the forum where the TP barons hang out not the common man. so the opinion we see here is unrepresentative of the majority of the game….but im sure some of the posters here would like to forget that =)

The TP Barons are the experts who understand how the economy works. Thus, if they don’t see a problem, there isn’t one. As with my analogy, who would you believe more when asking a science question – an innocent child (common man), or the experienced scientist (TP Baron)?

Again, nothing is wrong. The mistake you’re making is that you only perceive there to be a problem, but one that doesn’t exist. Sort of like how children believe there’s a Santa Claus, when in fact it’s their parents buying their Christmas presents.

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the innocent child, or the one who profits from said system?

To be intelligent or proficient at something is one thing, to be objective or as objective as a human being can be, is another.

Let’s just agree that each party (pro-/anti-TP) has it’s own bias.

Rouven.7409:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the innocent child, or the one who profits from said system?

To be intelligent or proficient at something is one thing, to be objective or as objective as a human being can be, is another.

Let’s just agree that each party (pro-/anti-TP) has it’s own bias.

Actually, if you word your question like the following, you’ll have your answer:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the person who doesn’t understand the system, or the person who does?

Rouven.7409:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the innocent child, or the one who profits from said system?

To be intelligent or proficient at something is one thing, to be objective or as objective as a human being can be, is another.

Let’s just agree that each party (pro-/anti-TP) has it’s own bias.

Can you please explain to me how his suggestion, to let everybody choose at what price to buy and sell, negatively affects TP traders?
I dont think that anybody who opposed this change did so because he fears for profit loss.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Rouven.7409:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the innocent child, or the one who profits from said system?

To be intelligent or proficient at something is one thing, to be objective or as objective as a human being can be, is another.

Let’s just agree that each party (pro-/anti-TP) has it’s own bias.

Actually, if you word your question like the following, you’ll have your answer:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the person who doesn’t understand the system, or the person who does?

No, you are missing the point – in this context it very simply is who can you trust?

Let’s say you would buy a used car – you bring your own specialist. Same with a house, you don’t trust your realtor.

So no, I don’t accept your argument TP Barons versus “innocent children/normal people” in regards to posts on the forum.

Edit: Not saying the reverse is better either, which is why I said “let’s agree we all have our bias” – or just take the forums with a grain of salt.

Wanze.8410:

Can you please explain to me how his suggestion, to let everybody choose at what price to buy and sell, negatively affects TP traders?
I dont think that anybody who opposed this change did so because he fears for profit loss.

I wasn’t really talking about that.

[s]Without going through the hole thread again – are we not (with this patch) at a point right now where you can indeed sell to anyone lower than the highest bidder?

I might have understood that wrong and I’m not able to check in-game at the moment.[/s]

Edit: No sorry, wrong thread, forget it.

Not an expert on economics here but I would think OP’s suggestion would benefit flippers and speculators if enough people did it. If sufficient people were refusing to pay the lower prices and insisting on paying the higher prices then it would put upward pressure on prices which would allow flippers and speculators to get even more profit.

Rouven.7409:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Rouven.7409:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the innocent child, or the one who profits from said system?

To be intelligent or proficient at something is one thing, to be objective or as objective as a human being can be, is another.

Let’s just agree that each party (pro-/anti-TP) has it’s own bias.

Actually, if you word your question like the following, you’ll have your answer:

Who would you ask if there is a problem with a certain system, the person who doesn’t understand the system, or the person who does?

No, you are missing the point – in this context it very simply is who can you trust?

Let’s say you would buy a used car – you bring your own specialist. Same with a house, you don’t trust your realtor.

So no, I don’t accept your argument TP Barons versus “innocent children/normal people” in regards to posts on the forum.

Edit: Not saying the reverse is better either, which is why I said “let’s agree we all have our bias” – or just take the forums with a grain of salt.

In your example, the person buying the car would be the one who didn’t know anything, and the person selling the car is the expert. If you don’t trust yourself or the car salesman, then you’d want to bring in an independent 3rd party who doesn’t profit from the sale, which would be the specialist (i.e. John Smith).

If if you as the car buyer(common man) doesn’t trust the car salesman (TP Barons), then you ask the specialist (John Smith) if there’s a problem. If the specialist says there’s no problem, then you can trust him based on his expertise.

I can live with that, which already sound a lot different than “if they (TP Barons) don’t see a problem, there isn’t one”.

Coming from another angle, would you agree that there are cases where “experts” are looking at problem purely from their point of expertise, ignoring the potential that the actual problem might not lie not within their field?

I’m open minded enough to admit when there’s a problem. However, the complainers currently have not proved any problems exist, beyond their own personal preferences are not being met. John has challenged each and every one of them to come forward with a compelling argument against the system. Since then, we’ve had none.

danielrjones.8759:

got to love seeing exploiters get it put to them. Still laughing. Didn’t know about this exploit. But it certainly explains some things now.

Huh? What exploit? Are you sure you posted on the right thread?

Rouven.7409:

I can live with that, which already sound a lot different than “if they (TP Barons) don’t see a problem, there isn’t one”.

Coming from another angle, would you agree that there are cases where “experts” are looking at problem purely from their point of expertise, ignoring the potential that the actual problem might not lie not within their field?

I’m not a TP baron, and I dont see a problem. And no matter what, if there’s a problem that exists, I would sooner trust those who know more about the subject matter to be able to see it than some random person off the street. Even an archaeologist can tell if an engine’s running wrong without being a mechanic as well.

mtpelion.4562:

Duke Nukem.6783:

its also important to notice that this is the forum where the TP barons hang out not the common man. so the opinion we see here is unrepresentative of the majority of the game….but im sure some of the posters here would like to forget that =)

Is this supposed to be some kind of inverted appeal to authority? “Hey, don’t listen to these guys because they know what they are doing!”

“hey dont listen to these guys because they have their own hidden agenda”