A Fair Middle Ground for the Barter vs AH Argument
The Barter vs AH debate has been going on since long before PoE even existed, but it has been a real issue for the entirety of this game's life so far. The short versions of each argument are as follows.
Pro-Barter: I like to exchange items as a mutual agreement without having some outside "authority" or "commonly accepted" price dictating what my items are worth. Pro-AH: I like to quickly and convenient buy and sell items without the hassle of trying to haggle with someone. There's a third factor in play here as well: There is no good trade system in place. There are tons of other facets to each side of the argument, but ultimately they boil down to these in most cases. With the groundwork laid, I introduce my idea of a solution. 1. There must be a common market that all players in the same league can access to sell their items. 2. This market must have a search function to allow sorting by item type, rarity, ilvl, req lvl, # of sockets/links, stats (and numeric ranges for these stats), etc. (This is where the pro-AH players get what they want.) 3. Next to each item, have a link to the seller (to easily whisper them), their online/offline status, and a note from that seller (to name what they want in exchange, or leave blank if they wish). No built-in buyouts or anything, so that it's easy to implement. This is important since there are so many types of currency and some people may want to exchange items (sword for a quiver, for example). Instead: Players may post an offer to the player (with a mini-inventory to place items into the offer window), and send it "half way" to the player. 3a) If that player accepts, the items are exchanged automatically (no need to meet in town). 3b) If that player rejects, the offer is returned to its sender. 3c) If an offer is not accepted/rejected, offers may be rescinded at any time (so your currency/item doesn't remain tied up with unresponsive people). This retains the Barter aspect (and is where the pro-Barter players get what they want). This is a compromise to make all players as satisfied as possible without favoring either party in the extreme. ----- Before you insert any ideas/objections/suggestions, I want to head off the chief argument I can hear already. " This is possible, but not required. As it is, people already do this via poe.xyz and the trade forums, so the real point of this system is to simply stream-line it into the game in a convenient manner. In my personal opinion, just the ability to quickly and conveniently search for an item while still in game, and to whisper/offer the seller would be a huge upgrade compared to the current mess of things. This aims to also make trading between off-line players much easier. One other very significant benefit of this is that it nullifies the need for $pam Chat, so players don't have to deal with that irritating mess either. ----- Please keep the comments constructive. Instead of simply nay-saying about how it's a bad idea (if you think so), post what it needs to work, or what system you think would work better. In the end, I'm sure most of us agree that the current way of doing things has to go. I don't know what, if any, plans GGG has for their "amazing" new trade system, so I offer up this suggestion to say, "Hey, at least use this for now." At least give us something to work with in the mean time. Most of us have waited long enough. Last edited by AlbinosaurusRex#6133 on Jul 26, 2014, 2:05:29 PM
|
|
Sounds like a pretty perfect solution.
+1 |
|
" I don't know if it's "perfect," but I do think it's fair for as many people as possible. |
|
There needs to be something done about trading and acquiring upgrades at a decent rate. Progressing is too tiresome and stressful right now. The cost of making your own items should be lowered as well. It's pointless to waste currency for gambling on items unless you are super rich. It's not fun!
|
|
Didn't read after first so called pro-barter line... we don't have barter. And never did. If GGG wanted barter they wouldn't have made orbs tradable. Orbs are gold with prices set (or at least influenced) by RMT sites, GGG imposed vendor rates and the top 1% - if anyone still believes in market regulating itself (not only in poe) - I can only laugh at them.
IGNs GroovyBeard JooJooFromTheWell Last edited by Allnamestaken#7661 on Jul 26, 2014, 4:15:34 PM
|
|
" I think making trading more accessible like this would ease a lot of that burden. Trading doesn't have to be a "bad" thing if they just make the process easier and more convenient. You still have progression gated by your items/currency and build, but this would give them a platform from which to make meaningful progression/economy balance changes without seemingly doing so in a "vacuum." |
|
Your suggestion is basically what I'm expecting from them anyways. It is a nice suggestion, and as you said, about the only fair way to go about it and still have trade improve.
My only thought is, it IS kind of nice to offer three different people 10 Exalted on the forums and sell to whomever responds the quickest. In this new model, my currency would be tied up until I chose to remove it and use it elsewhere or they responded. So I would need 30 Exalted to make the same three 10 Exalted offers. Team Won Last edited by ggnorekthx#0419 on Jul 26, 2014, 4:19:42 PM
|
|
One of the main issues that I have noticed are:
1) items sell slowly 2) items are overpriced 3) item found on poe.xyz.is but player hasnt login in 2 weeks With the implementation of an AH like in WoW or previously D3. items sell more rapidly at better prices. PLayer will tend to undercut other players. Also we can avoid the great hassle that it is of selling items. I find it annoying this dance. Also player will tend to play more instead at siting at base spamming trade chat looking for a buyer or trying to buy. |
|
" I can see that. Maybe there's room to improve that aspect of the model, but whispering is a good option. Assuming they are online to even accept the offer, a whisper might work just as well in the first place. I do see your point, though, if all three of them are off-line (for example). It may not be a perfect solution, but it would certainly alleviate a lot of issues. From there, GGG would be in a position to further improve on the system. |
|
" I understand where you're coming from, but there's a fair portion of this game's player base that is adamantly against the idea of a "traditional" AH (with buyouts, especially), so this aims to find some common middle ground where both sides give up a little to get something more valuable than they lose. |
|