Rejected Trading and the push rule

[DeletedUser15169]

NO no and NO to this idea. I believe the the market in-game should be purely driven by a free market capitalistic system. If a certain item in game is able to bring a large amount of money, then so be it. People will buy the cheapest items available; therefore posting an item of 10x the price of the other offers on the market definitely isn't very wise on the part of the seller, since no one is going to buy it for that much (you would think). On the part of the buyer, if they really want to buy an item of low value at a highly inflated price, that is their fault and not any of our business.

Example1: Lets take the example of a fairly easy to find 'strange lump of dirt'. I know people on different world that sell these sort of like a business. They will take them and sell them for anywhere from 5-10K and make hoards of money, even through it would be really easy for everyone to find it in like 20 hrs or so if they bothered to. The truth is not everyone wants to spend the time looking for it, therefore they will spend a large amount of money to buy one. (I already know the debate is not about selling these)

Example2: Precise Winchester - These are currently sold in the shops, but only (lets say 15%) of towns sell this item in their shops. In this case this item will be in high demand and those who have access to a shop that sells the precise winchester may want to increase their supply of money by buying it in their shops and selling it for a hefty price of $30,000, or maybe more. If someone is willing to buy this instead of spending the time to 'shop' let it be so.

The whole point is, players should decide how much they want to buy and sell for and set the market price of ANY given item.

The moderator tools already in existence should already be able to tell the moderators if a trade is potentially a breach of rules. Also players who find someone breaking the rules should simply report suspicious activity and take it from there.

 

[Deleted User - 1278415]

NO

Example1: Lets take the example of a fairly easy to find 'strange lump of dirt'. I know people on different world that sell these sort of like a business. They will take them and sell them for anywhere from 5-10K and make hoards of money, even through it would be really easy for everyone to find it in like 20 hrs or so if they bothered to. The truth is not everyone wants to spend the time looking for it, therefore they will spend a large amount of money to buy one. (I already know the debate is not about selling these)

Example2: Precise Winchester - These are currently sold in the shops, but only (lets say 15%) of towns sell this item in their shops. In this case this item will be in high demand and those who have access to a shop that sells the precise winchester may want to increase their supply of money by buying it in their shops and selling it for a hefty price of $30,000, or maybe more. If someone is willing to buy this instead of spending the time to 'shop' let it be so.

Which was the conundrum we came up with Dahl... we said that store items only should be capped... not special items as you have posted in example 1.

As for example 2... precise Winchester does 200-312dmg... sell it low for $7700, member price 15400 and 4x street price is $61,600.

As, trojon, pointed out to me who is going to pay 4x the price of a store sale-able item. I don't know who is going to pay more that $61,000 for the fort gun weapon in example 2 let alone $30,000 for a weapon that is sold in shops would be my breaking point... unless I just wanted a challenge to save up more money.

So if this could be done to cap only store items. This would not include special items such as lump of dirt or sleepyhead items... other rare items that could potentially achieve >$50,000 and have a low sale price of like $1 I believe.

 

[DeletedUser25632]

If this is to only include store bought items and not special items such as Wyatt Earp's Colt Buntline or Lump Of Dirts ect ect then I am fine with this. However, how would they implement that without putting too much effort into it? I'd rather their hard work go elsewhere towards the future of the game.

 

[Deleted User - 1278415]

If this is to only include store bought items and not special items such as Wyatt Earp's Colt Buntline or Lump Of Dirts ect ect then I am fine with this. However, how would they implement that without putting too much effort into it? I'd rather their hard work go elsewhere towards the future of the game.

Well they already have a system in place to state that has a low value set.. so setting a high value shouldn't be much different. The issue is applying it to each item is the time staking issue that we have 100's of items that are sellable that would need to be modified with the high price it cant be sold over.

Then the question is would it be 4x or 5 x the member price? The reason in bring that up is that people would want to go 4x plus their posting fee etc.

 

[DeletedUser]

4x home town price is already a *massive* profit on what current market price is and, let's face it, 8x what a player can get if they sell it to the store.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

you don't have a shot at a limit of 4x passing.

5-6x maybe.

 

[DeletedUser]

Once again, there brings up the issue of why people would pay more than 4x? Even 4x +(Market fees) is (Market fees) more than the highest possible Public price from a shop. I think 4x or would be more than needed.

But really any cap at all would limit the amount able to be pushed in one transaction and force the pushers to repeat the transaction, paying more market fees, and hopefully deter them, at least out of inconvenience.

 

[DeletedUser]

Im for the idea. 4x times is a nominal limit, but 4,5x also wouldn't hurt.

 

[DeletedUser]

Right now all I've seen spoken of is the buy it now prices. What about the auction prices? No one has to put a purchase price if they don't want to, so what if an auction starts off at say 2x home price but continues up to 5x or 6x. I personally haven't seen such a situation arise, but it's still a feasible situation. Would you want to automatically cap auctions as well? I'm neither for nor against the idea at this point. I just want some clarification.

 

[DeletedUser]

no, because you seem to be missing the idea behind the auction system.

its pretty simple, dont like the price dont bid.

 

[DeletedUser]

no, because you seem to be missing the idea behind the auction system.

its pretty simple, dont like the price dont bid.

Kofi - it seems like you are the one that has missed the idea - the thread is about pushing cash and that can also be done through auction.
I guess the 'buy now' price would default to 4x if not user entered if the proposed amendment were accepted.

 

[DeletedUser]

Kofi - it seems like you are the one that has missed the idea - the thread is about pushing cash and that can also be done through auction.
I guess the 'buy now' price would default to 4x if not user entered if the proposed amendment were accepted.

there is already a rule about pushing through the market and from my memory an early example was given that say ' a tobacco leaf being sold for $1000' this would be deemed as pushing.


if people want ceiling prices brought into the market for items then its no longer an auction and its becomes a race for people to buy items sold for maximum price set by 'the game'... when in theory it should be what an individual values that item at and is therefore willing to pay. take a tequila bottle for example, early in a world or for a low level player, the true value to them of being able to wear an extra bit of the mexican set is worth more than $120...

what this thread is really about in my opinion is people wanting the game 'policed' in a better way, because they have seen some market transactions they dont quite agree with, when really they should have just reported the transactions and asked for them to be investigated.

 

[DeletedUser15169]

lol Good Feather, like I pointed out, it the player is stupid enough to buy an items for 100x the regular price, then let them do it. This does nothing for cutting back on 'push marketing' because it does not address the issue that players can STILL buy and sell allot of items for 4x the price and still transfer the same amount of money as they could have at 100x the price. The only difference would be a little bit more market fees but that can be minimized....

The bottom line to my argument is that this would not be good for the capitalist market nor would it cut back on cheating.

To build on what Kofi Anon said, The former auction becomes an 'immediate buy price' sort of buy. The first person to offer 4x the price simply becomes the proud owner of the item. In addition, I do know the mods and devs want to 'take money out of the game'. Am I right that revenues to the 'general server fund' would be decreased under this proposal?

 

[Deleted User - 1278415]

lol Good Feather, like I pointed out, it the player is stupid enough to buy an items for 100x the regular price, then let them do it. This does nothing for cutting back on 'push marketing' because it does not address the issue that players can STILL buy and sell allot of items for 4x the price and still transfer the same amount of money as they could have at 100x the price. The only difference would be a little bit more market fees but that can be minimized....

The bottom line to my argument is that this would not be good for the capitalist market nor would it cut back on cheating.

To build on what Kofi Anon said, The former auction becomes an 'immediate buy price' sort of buy. The first person to offer 4x the price simply becomes the proud owner of the item. In addition, I do know the mods and devs want to 'take money out of the game'. Am I right that revenues to the 'general server fund' would be decreased under this proposal?

I would say if your able to make 4x the cost of an item productively then that is within the game limits. But making 100x the price is taking advantage of the game and abusing it.

To make 4x means your able to make a profit and we want to encourage using the market to make some profit for your pockets, but when cheap items are sold at outrageous prices just to transfer money that is abusing the system.

That is why I would support price caps. 4.5x (to include those posting fees) also dont combine the mods in that statement of getting the money out of the game... Just Zet said that one time in the roadmap. The Mods were surprised to read that if I remember correctly.

 

[DeletedUser]

4x home town cost isn't just a little bit of profit for your pockets, it's already a rip off when compared to the current prevailing market prices. And still 8x what you'd get if you sold it to the trader. So you can hardly complain about losing a minimal trading fee for that much profit.

j dahl, there is no 'rush to buy' such items and it has absolutely no effect on the capitalist market. Please re-read some of the earlier posts on unlimited availability of town sold items for clarification of this. All it would be doing is providing an upper limit which would be equal to what you could buy it from at a foreign town.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

there is already a rule about pushing through the market..


if people want ceiling prices brought into the market for items then its no longer an auction and its becomes a race for people to buy items sold for maximum price set by 'the game'... when in theory it should be what an individual values that item at and is therefore willing to pay. take a tequila bottle for example, early in a world or for a low level player, the true value to them of being able to wear an extra bit of the mexican set is worth more than $120...

To build on what Kofi Anon said, The former auction becomes an 'immediate buy price' sort of buy. The first person to offer 4x the price simply becomes the proud owner of the item. ..

Says it all.

Voted NO.

 

[DeletedUser]

As I said in my previous post - the marketpush rule should be removed by any means and prices a player can set on the market should depend on his trading skill.

So sorry, but I vote no here.

 

[DeletedUser]

Selling something at 4x would still be pushing. If someone wanted to buy something for 4x, they would do so by paying out of town prices at a store. The only reason to pay 4x at the market would be to give cash to another player.

 

[DeletedUser]

Selling something at 4x would still be pushing. If someone wanted to buy something for 4x, they would do so by paying out of town prices at a store. The only reason to pay 4x at the market would be to give cash to another player.

Not quite true, distance aswell if the closest town selling an item is 3hrs but for the same price on the market is only 30 mins away (less than 3hrs) What are you going to do ?
Buy the closest one, even if it's on the market no difference then from a shop selling it except distance. Especially when you double the distance as all round trip soon takes up best part of the day.
Which is counterproductive

 

[DeletedUser]

I like the idea of trying to limit the market push but i don't think this would work that well as they are too many "rare" items that can be gotten easily (either thru jobs or in market itself).For example Figaro Razor blade is a rare and excellent weapon for both dueling and stats yet it sells regularly on most server for cheap (relative to other rare weapons).
Players could easily use some of these non-rare "rare" items to do their pushing.

This proposal might help do its stated purpose in conjunction with other anti-pushing measures but it wont be able to do it alone.