Thoughts on Trading

Good points on hyper-connectivity and social media Scrotie! This aspect of economic management may be out of GGG's control. It's reliability is brought into question.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I am not ready to surrender yet, but I know that the proper solution is of a "think outside the box" nature. The previous reliance on the "connecting traders" phase to prevent the game from turning into a market simulator simply isn't viable in today's highly interconnected, min/max gaming culture.

I'm not exactly endorsing this idea, but I keep thinking of CliveHowlitzer saying that non-tradeable currency would be intriguing. Crazy? Indeed. But let's imagine that GGG embraced the "connecting traders" spirit and implementing some interesting forum applications. Imagine you could offer some gear, and then log in later and see several bids (thanks to bidders being able to easily search for your item) -- all in the form of gear, some bids just one piece of gear, other bids consisting of them multiple pieces -- and could choose from any or none of them, and conduct a trade right in your browser, without the bidder needing to be online. Now you have a game that embraces the nature of today's internet, but makes trading actually pretty difficult. Just block on the obvious drop-trade work-around, and that's not actually that bad of an idea. Perhaps the problem we can fix isn't connecting traders, or taxation, but instead eliminating currency -- making it so there isn't a commodity which is of general use to all audiences, thus enforcing a true barter economy where specific interest drives trades rather than general profit.

Still not sure it's a winner though. Perhaps someone else will think of something.

Very interesting, I like your (Clive's) out-of-box thinking! Untradeable goods are kind of like the ultimate marketplace inefficiency (untradeable = 0% efficient trade), so they certainly encourage farming!

Bartering (barter-bidding?) items is another option, but my concern is that there is no way to move up the chain without liquidity (currency). It is challenging under a pure barter economy to make lots of cheap things worth one expensive thing. Currency helps out with that. I view barter being similar to the situation with Exalts (except instead of Exalts it's "good items")- if you don't have any you can't participate in the market, once you get a few anything on the marketplace is yours. From a certain perspective the currency orbs could be seen as a clever hybrid barter/currency system as they have attributes of both. I would hope that any changes to the economy do not involve removing them from it.

Reading what you said, perhaps I should have generalized "connecting traders" to "negotiating trades," so that bartering would fit under that umbrella. Although maybe negotiation should be considered as a separate 3rd category (I admit I have not thought it over carefully yet). What do you think? In what ways can negotiation be used to manage the economy?

"

This is really one of the main reasons why the Diablo 3 auction house didn't work. It was an almost perfectly efficient system, allowing players to have almost their entire stash in sell or buy status, as appropriate, with relatively little work. This meant that a rich player was having his entire stash working for him all of the time. And that's how it works with these efficiency systems; rich players will always utilize it more and easier than struggling players will.

While I agree with your conclusions, the statement "almost their entire stash" is overstated hugely. A more true rephrase of this is that you could have most every valuable item you own on sale at any given moment (most of the time). The situation might have been better had you only been able to auction 1 item at a time, maybe.

"

Mr_Cee wrote:

"

PolarisOrbit wrote:

having a marketplace which is too efficient shifts the focus of the game to being about playing the economy rather than playing the game

Thats already the reality, with the 'limitation' that its most use by players that can most profit from it. Read: if someone can nobble others, he will do, others probably dont participate that much in offering trades. (IMHO) I expect that better access to trades will lead into more offers, which can increase the availability of good non-endgame items and WILL increase the transparency of trading in general: if you have some (enough) offers to compare, the risk to get ripped of will decrease a lot. There are a lot of tactics to improve wealth just by trading (higher 'reward' than needed to get/create the same item for the next offer), once you have the right things to offer and enough time and patience to stay with the trades.

"

I will take it as a given that the game should motivate players to play more than trade.

If I have less hassle to trade, I have more time to play ^^

"

an inefficient marketplace is actually superior to an efficient marketplace

An inefficient marketplace only raises resignation/frustration on the buyers side: losse lots of time to search/transact; often not finding the item you seek anyway, sometimes (often?) ripped off from the (low amount of) sellers (maybe related to own missing knowledge, but doesnt matter)

I'm sorry that I have failed you. Revised version of what I said in OP:

"

The disadvantage is having inefficiency which is obvious to the player. It is easier to objectively calculate. Games need to meet people's expectations to an extent. Since we all start out ignorant, we must be open to challenging our assumptions. I think this could be resolved with 2 steps:
1) [Reason removed]
2) Education when expectations do not appear to match. The best way is to have a clear, concise explanation of the intent, justification, and expected result. Understanding does not come from nothing. If players do not understand something, it is someone's duty to teach in a way that promotes understanding.

Perhaps I am not that teacher. However I can say that most of what you said I find agreeable. Your tone implies that you think you disagree with me, and for that I have failed in executing Step 2 (partially) quoted above.

If GGG is against trading being "too easy" it means the economy is already fundamentally fucked up, and they know it.


Facilitative trading systems do not create new problems within an economy.

All they do is reveal problems that are already there.

"

tikitaki wrote:

If GGG is against trading being "too easy" it means the economy is already fundamentally fucked up, and they know it.


Facilitative trading systems do not create new problems within an economy.

All they do is reveal problems that are already there.

You don't have an "economy" without trade, so no. Non-facilitative trading mechanisms are per-se the economic break.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

This is a huge misconception. Struggling players often think of rich players the way people think of international corporations -- as somehow possessing more manpower than your average player. That's an illusion that I believe stems from the way most American retailers operate. The truth is that rich players are individuals, who perhaps dedicate more time per day to the game than you do, but who don't have endless time resources at their fingertips. As such, time efficiency is very, very important to them. (Which is why botting has such a sinister alure.)

Hmmmm, yes and not, maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm typical "struggling" player. I should play no more that 2 hours a day (although I play more on average ;)) and I recently don't have time to sort out items in my "1 alchemy everything" "shop". So I'm no start to player, who can be in game for 12-16 hours a day. So for me, trading is a big hassle and any inconvenience makes it almost impossible to trade. In case of player who can spend 12-16 hours in game it is also inconvenience, but proportionally, much smaller.

In D3, I was able to build some wealth (not much but there was a time when I was in 1000 best WD in EU) on hundreds of relatively small transactions. Here, I'm unable to do so. Still, it doesn't pain me so much, if I can achieve my goals and till now I was able to do so.

But I can't agree that it is "better". It the same and the only difference is time spent. After 4 months of OB and with emerging of indexing sites, we have tools almost as efficient as AH from D3.

For me AH in D3 is quite good tool. What I detested in D3 is that I had (or have) to use it from 1st level. So not bartering platform was/is the problem, but wrong itemization.

In PoE is much better, I can progress up to maps without trading (although I already traded on Anarchy) but when in comes to end-game I need to trade and even if not for better gear, but for orbs to fuel my maps rolling. But still as devs believe in "economy" drops can't be too good...

So summarizing, for me when comparing D3 and PoE from point of view of very casual player. In both games I have to trade. In D3 we have perfect platform and penalty is, that we have to use it. In PoE we have better itemization, but penalty is, that we still need to trade ;)

In total, comparing to D2, where I was able to play for few years, have plenty of fun and well geared charters and never, ever logging into Battle Net, I still miss something...

Regarding barter idea, it doesn't work and it will not work. People will always find some currency and currency have to be something with limited supply, with consistent stat and feasible to store. So almost for sure it will not be any gear piece, because it's stats are not consistent and even if are (like Voll's) it is not feasible to store. Maps are quit good equivalent of such items and I bet, that if GGG decide tomorrow to remove any orb from game, maps would be next currency.

"

In D3, I was able to build some wealth (not much but there was a time when I was in 1000 best WD in EU) on hundreds of relatively small transactions. Here, I'm unable to do so. Still, it doesn't pain me so much, if I can achieve my goals and till now I was able to do so.

As someone who is a very experienced buyer, but who has sold only two items in my entire time playing, let me tell you something. You don't really need to be able to sell all that good/mid level stuff in your stash. Here's the dealio:

1) Items capable of getting you through to about level 69 maps can be procured easily just on currency earned from drops. If you are a good buyer, items worth only 3-4 chaos are very good. 2) Items that are end game are ridiculously expensive; there is a hockey stick shaped curve in pricing occurring rather abruptly after the category of item I am referring to; these items can only be afforded if you happen to find an end game item to sell. These sell easily, and aren't a hassle to sell.

If one is really strapped for cash, one should level an IIQ/IIR alt (spork totem or summoner), and use that to farm. One should also learn to the rare set recipes.

If one had a lot of time on one's hands, selling is a great way to make currency, but this isn't the case with many.

Making it easier for one to sell stuff won't really get one closer to your objectives. One might think it will, but it won't.

"

Courageous wrote:

"

tikitaki wrote:

If GGG is against trading being "too easy" it means the economy is already fundamentally fucked up, and they know it.


Facilitative trading systems do not create new problems within an economy.

All they do is reveal problems that are already there.

You don't have an "economy" without trade, so no. Non-facilitative trading mechanisms are per-se the economic break.

this wasn't my point.

i don't think you understood.

=(

the more trading is facilitated, the more "honest" the economy becomes, because the prices line up close with where they "should be"

basically, if the economy is fucked, but you can't quite tell because the pulse of the economy is so slow from the crude barter system, you might not notice as much.

if trading is highly facilitated and the trading pulse increases....things are revealed.

"

Courageous wrote:

If one is really strapped for cash, one should level an IIQ/IIR alt (spork totem or summoner), and use that to farm. One should also learn to the rare set recipes.

And I'm bad buyer, if I can afford something I need i just buy it ;) I also have no problem with small currency (up to chaos level) I have it enough to cover map rolling (as I have summoner witch to farm LT for orbs).

For me, main conclusion is not that it is better in D3. It is worse or the same (considering emerging of indexing sites). What for me, player who tends to play as much self found as possible is better in much more time consuming trade?

It's not better, because having good barting platform doesn't (or at least should not) influence my self found fun. It is question of approach - when I dropped godly Resoning Fury, everybody asked when I put it on AH. And was greatly surprised, then I answered that I'm not going to :) I just used it on my alt for fun. And that the reason I'm chancing Glorious Plates here - not to sell Khaoms for 30 exalts but to keep it in stash to use it some day.

"

It's not better, because having good barting platform doesn't (or at least should not) influence my self found fun.

Well self-found is a whole separate issue, obviously. I can't recall if you've posted to the Self Found League thread (in my sig). That attempts to remove the economy completely, and replace it with "better drops".