Map vendor formula: should add "2 unidentified maps of same base = +1 level map"

Another good example of your example in the post up but one, Scrotie.

When Zana sold chisels for 16c for 20 I bought them every day (if I could). I didn't at first, but then decided that in the map system at the time I needed the chisels more than the chaos, I even needed the chisels more than regals. So a lot of my regal recipes would be given a single <75 item to turn the recipe to chaos in order to make the 16 chaos per day to buy the 20 chisels.

That master deal was pointless to someone who uses trade, nobody would use it when they could easily buy chisels at a fraction of the cost all day. I was probably the only person to use the deal, lmao :D.

The deal was changed to 12c, of course I still used it, every, single day. Without fail. Did it change anything at all for the vast majority? Have a dramatic economical effect? Crash the value of chisels? Nope. Did it make more sense as a deal? Yes.

Caveat, I rarely do the deal in 2.0.0 (I don't think I have once) but that's because of various other factors, I had 500 chisels saved up (which have now gone), I actually need to use chaos on maps (until they fix fracture crash), I'm saving chances for something (my normal source of pseudo chaos) and jewel crafting demands a lot of regals. I'm not entirely sure how I'm going to manage chisels from here, but that's all besides the point.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

The thing is that the very highest tier of maps don't really need the protection.

I think GGG might disagree, I probably do too tbh.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

In every mapping economy ever, looking just at the top four maplevels, there has never been a (>2):1 ratio in trade values of maps for a single maplevel.

ya but thats because of the 3:1 vendor, its always cheaper than vendoring, if the price was 3:1 on maps no one would sell lower maps and buy higher maps they would just vendor. Its only worth a guy selling his 77s and buying 78s if he can afford a 78 for less than 3 77s sold.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I mean, let's put it this way: let's say we introduced Chaos Orbs for sale, at NPC vendor, for a price of 3 Alchs each. How much impact would that have on min/maxers who exchange currency? Pretty much none; right now, all the ratios in all leagues are better than that. Such a formula would be used exclusively by non-traders. For the exact same reason, a 2:1 map vendor formula would barely be used by active traders for any map above 77... Furthermore it would take a weird future economy for Alch to ever be (>3):1 Chaos, it would be a warning in and of itself that things are off. In the sane way, the only time maptraders would actually use a 2:1 map vendor formula is when droprates for progressing to the next level were naturally fucked up enough that the economy would otherwise use an extreme value ratio.

I dont agree with that at all I think it would be used pretty much all the time if they had enough maps. Alchs are around 4:1 chaos in standard btw.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I mean, let's put it this way: let's say we introduced Chaos Orbs for sale, at NPC vendor, for a price of 3 Alchs each. How much impact would that have on min/maxers who exchange currency? Pretty much none; right now, all the ratios in all leagues are better than that. Such a formula would be used exclusively by non-traders. For the exact same reason, a 2:1 map vendor formula would barely be used by active traders for any map above 77... Furthermore it would take a weird future economy for Alch to ever be (>3):1 Chaos, it would be a warning in and of itself that things are off. In the sane way, the only time maptraders would actually use a 2:1 map vendor formula is when droprates for progressing to the next level were naturally fucked up enough that the economy would otherwise use an extreme value ratio.

I dont agree with that at all I think it would be used pretty much all the time if they had enough maps.

You are going off of pretty much nothing except your gut feels on how you think people would do things - mostly, that they would do as you would. I'm telling you, using actual trade values as evidence, that using even a 2:1 vendor formula would be a value-losing proposition in normal situations, and thus usually limited to niche use.

The instances where use of the formula would become widespread are the abnormal situations - essentially those where map sustainment is somehow fucked, such as with 74-76 maps currently. Is it possible that high maps could, in some future patch, have fucked droprates like 74-76s do now? Sure it is. But I would rather protect the players from fucked droprates using the formula, than protect high maps from the formula so players can suffer.

Im going off the fact that I have a lot of experience and watch a lot of streams, I have seen people like etup vendor 79s into 80s on his stream even at 3:1. Id trust my gut more than Id trust your interpretation of xyz rates because ultimately thats still a guess as to how people will act, you posted those rates, I saw them, we both have the same info, I still think significant amounts of people would vendor. Time is money, high players dont usually trade unless there is significant profit to be made, the only reason you sell lower maps and buy higher ones is because you dont want to spend the time running the lower maps, trading takes time. I vendor trans to aug, aug to alt, I could get better rates in trade, and it would take longer to bother doing that than it would take to find the same value playing so I vendor them and then run a map with that time instead, xp has value to me, potential map drops, I dont get xp from time spent trading. It doesnt even always come down to maximum efficiency, if the difference is marginal people will just do whatever is easiest in a lot of cases.

And I've seen a streamer use a Mirror to get an extra Chromatic item, then vendor it for a Chromatic. But I'm not so easily distracted that I allow a ringmaster to make me believe poe.trade is anything other than a powerful force in the game.

*slow applause*

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

And I've seen a streamer use a Mirror to get an extra Chromatic item, then vendor it for a Chromatic. But I'm not so easily distracted that I allow a ringmaster to make me believe poe.trade is anything other than a powerful force in the game.

Are you by chance talking about ZiggyD, who got a Mirror from someone while playing on the BETA version of 2.0 where everything was getting wiped and nothing was being kept into the actual game?

"

Tanakeah wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

And I've seen a streamer use a Mirror to get an extra Chromatic item, then vendor it for a Chromatic. But I'm not so easily distracted that I allow a ringmaster to make me believe poe.trade is anything other than a powerful force in the game.

Are you by chance talking about ZiggyD, who got a Mirror from someone while playing on the BETA version of 2.0 where everything was getting wiped and nothing was being kept into the actual game?

The point was that streamers have a unique advantage. They market and benefit from their personality, something regular players don't do, and therefore they get to do things just for show.

The point was that "because a streamer did it" is a bad argument, because unless you also have celebrity, their motivators differ from a regular player's.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

"

Tanakeah wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

And I've seen a streamer use a Mirror to get an extra Chromatic item, then vendor it for a Chromatic. But I'm not so easily distracted that I allow a ringmaster to make me believe poe.trade is anything other than a powerful force in the game.

Are you by chance talking about ZiggyD, who got a Mirror from someone while playing on the BETA version of 2.0 where everything was getting wiped and nothing was being kept into the actual game?

The point was that streamers have a unique advantage. They market and benefit from their personality, something regular players don't do, and therefore they get to do things just for show.

The point was that "because a streamer did it" is a bad argument, because unless you also have celebrity, their motivators differ from a regular player's.

I wasn't needing a point explained to me, CHP, but thanks all the same. :) I'm well aware of everything that you have said, but I was simply asking if that it was Scrotie was specifically referring to. Simple question, nothing more, nothing less. :)

Oh XD Sorry, then.

I'm not a betting man but I'd wager that's what he's referring to. Otherwise the only "mirrorlul" video I can think of was from the original beta, where somebody mirrored a white rustic sash or something (maybe it was a gauntlet?)