Make this step and POE will be better than D2.

Sorry, Moeeom, if I put to much focus on that particular aspect of your post. It does, however, stick out to me and is clearly something I have some difficulty reconciling. My apologies if I derailed you discussion with my focus on that. I did not intend to start anything between you and I or you and anyone else.

As for improving trade, I do agree that there is room for improvement. How best to go about it I have no idea. I'm not smart enough to answer that question, hehe.

I'll but out of your thread now, though, and just continue silently hoping the suggestion in my sig some day comes to fruition in a way that satisfies the concerns expressed by The Anuhart while still remaining within the realm of GGGs vision for PoE.

I think the idea of a bazaar is good, but town instances are a negative, not a positive, and tying something up into them would be a waste of time.

Town instances should be reworked altogether. Rather than displaying a random group of people that you can interact with and having to find specific instances to group up with people, it should simply be one instance on the player's end with an amount of players visible that makes the town look alive enough. Towns in different difficulties could also be merged for this purpose alone. Grouping with somebody would automatically make them visible to you, removing the need to try to find their town.

As for a bazaar function, I see no reason why it shouldn't function similar to an auctionhouse in terms of searching for things. Maybe players erroneously believe that an auctionhouse made D3 worse. What made D3 worse was a combination of a poor item system and a poor skill system with very little room for customization. They got the idea in their head that no choice is better than being able to make the wrong choice or a choice that isn't optimal but provides its own unique benefit. That and the conflict of interest on both ends that the RMAH provided destroyed the game for me, but at least I made $300 back. A simple auctionhouse without any RMT conflict is fine, all it does is facilitate trade. If the trade system is cumbersome the game suffers for it.

Forgot to mention: What casuals really want is inflation control. You want to be able to log off for a weak, come back, and see trade values relatively unchanged from when you left; you don't want to find out that Chaos:Exalted went from 20:1 to 30:1 when you have a stack full of Chaos Orbs you'd been saving up.

Making trading easier is the exact opposite of what you want. It leads to more rapid inflation, as those at the top get what they need even faster than before, and thus have moved on to bigger-ticket desires even faster.

Increasing drop rate also leads to more rapid inflation. However, it's not as bad, because if you abstain from trading completely and use farming as your sole wealth generation system, you gain wealth faster. It also, in general, promotes farming over trading. So this one's kind of a mixed bag, with pros and cons.

The worst-case here is that inflation increases faster than casual players have time to farm. They play for a few hours when they get a chance, then when they check prices they have less trading power at the start of that session than the start of the session before. If you want that to happen, all we need to do is implement non-RM auction houses with a buyout system.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Here's how it really works: the easier trading is, the less farming happens. The less farming happens, the less likely that wealth is random and the more likely that it is a pure function of time input. The more it's a pure function of time input, the more the no-lifers control the economy, and the more casuals are marginalized.

So what you're saying is that if I flip a coin only 5 times I'm less likely to have 100% heads than if I flipped the coin 1000 times?

Math does not agree with you.

Well, you might just as well read my thread. Please give it a shot, its rather short as well.

Which is the easiest, less code and time consuming way to get a decent trading system in game.
90% Copy & Paste of existing mechanics.

Which is important, especially then the Dev team is focusing on new content. the proposed idea offers a working intermediate solution, until some fancy over-dressed/design solution with real item indexing, like those 3rd party community driven item-indexer sites offer, is realized.

IMO trading is an important aspect of the game, as there exists no vendor recipes for the exchange of every currency.
you can grind items. but without trading you will fail to get your simple 4l done, even if in networth of currency you have the possible means to do so.

"

Bergtau wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Here's how it really works: the easier trading is, the less farming happens. The less farming happens, the less likely that wealth is random and the more likely that it is a pure function of time input. The more it's a pure function of time input, the more the no-lifers control the economy, and the more casuals are marginalized.

So what you're saying is that if I flip a coin only 5 times I'm less likely to have 100% heads than if I flipped the coin 1000 times?

Math does not agree with you.

No, math agrees with me, you just fail at interpreting it. It's not about getting 100% heads, it's about getting 5 heads. Obviously a lot easier with 1000 attempts than it is with 5.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

No, math agrees with me, you just fail at interpreting it. It's not about getting 100% heads, it's about getting 5 heads. Obviously a lot easier with 1000 attempts than it is with 5.

It's also a lot easier to get 100 heads or 500 heads.

The people playing more will have more flips regardless of whether they get their flips trading or farming.

"

Bergtau wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Here's how it really works: the easier trading is, the less farming happens. The less farming happens, the less likely that wealth is random and the more likely that it is a pure function of time input. The more it's a pure function of time input, the more the no-lifers control the economy, and the more casuals are marginalized.

So what you're saying is that if I flip a coin only 5 times I'm less likely to have 100% heads than if I flipped the coin 1000 times?

Math does not agree with you.

No, he's saying that if you flip a coin any amount of times, it is less likely to be 100% heads than the guys who are sat with their coins all already turned heads up.

Very nice idea, indeed

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

No, he's saying that if you flip a coin any amount of times, it is less likely to be 100% heads than the guys who are sat with their coins all already turned heads up.

That isn't what he's saying at all. If he's attempting to then he's using the wrong words and arguing the wrong point.

Also, there is a misunderstanding about inflation. People don't want things to inflate when it's hard for them to buy things because the longer they spend buying something the more they have to spend. In a more facilitated trade system, they don't care about inflation if they can buy things before they further inflate. I care about my stack of Chaos being worth less after a week if I'm unable to use it to buy anything, but if I was able to do it, I wouldn't care anyway because I would have spent them.