trade in poe2 - TL;DR - DEVS TAKE NOTE!!!

hello _N0ctus_#6387,

are you saying that you would only play the game if you could continue to buy your way to victory?

have you been so indoctrinated by lootbox and microtransaction games that actually playing the game is only ever a "grind" to you?

why even bother fighting monsters if you don't care about the loot they drop? or are you so scared of how hard the game is when playing normally, that you have to buy over-levelled gear just to get past it?

i'm not being sarcastic, i'm autistic, so i sometimes come across that way. please just consider these questions and ask yourself, "what is 'fun' about this game?".

is it 'fun' when fighting monsters is hard, or is it only 'fun' when you can breeze through the game and ignore the difficulty?

do you play this game sitting forward on the edge of your seat, or do you play this game slouched back in your chair with a weak, bent back?

because watching other players run end-game maps with top-tier equipment just looks like they paid for a "you win" button, and this makes me sad for the future of gaming.

thanks.
-az

If you want to find the best gear by killing monsters then go kill monsters.

Gather orbs and then craft. Thats what I do mostly but I also trade some. Why should the devs change the game just to suit you?

"

Liondrawing#0797 wrote:

"

Redthorne82#3177 wrote:

This destroys trading. Like, kills it. Someone gunna pay 20 divines for a god tier belt that loses a random affix on trade? Or what, they get it traded to them, then instead of 20d, they give whatever they feel is the new price?

hello Redthorne82#3177,

if you read my entire original post, you'll see i'm responding to what a developer said in a youtube video.

the developer said that "easy trading" is why they have to nerf loot drops and crafting. there are also PLENTY of user posts stating that loot drops and crafting are bad in poe2. thus, my response was to suggest nerfing trading so the developers can increase loot drops and improve crafting.

like, why would you "pay 20 divines for a god tier belt" when you could play the game and either find a similar item from a loot drop or else craft it yourself? if you still want to buy it you'll probably get it for just 1 divine orb in that kind of economy, and with proper crafting you'll be able to replace the missing affix with maybe something even better. thus, players will spend more time engaging with the game than with the third-party trading systems.

thanks.
-az

The developers Jonathan and Hrishi mention in the video "INSTANT BUY-OUT TRADING in PoE2 & Itemized Aisling and other services in PoE 1?!?!" https://youtu.be/RskRFwgoQ5g?si=EaHId06GwhMzErbs&t=6515

They acknowledged the need for an auction house with instant buyouts and a proper search function.

They aren't against trade but want to control it with gold as a limiting factor, preventing excessive flipping while keeping it accessible.

So, the idea that 'easy trading is why loot and crafting are bad' isn't entirely accurate. The devs are designing a system where trade exists but doesn’t overpower loot drops or crafting. Instead of removing or limiting trade, they're integrating it in a way that maintains balance.

You can check these timestamps for verification:

1:56:27 – Discussion on auction house and trade improvements.
1:57:20 – How gold will act as a limiting factor for trading.
1:58:51 – Auction house plans and restrictions to balance trade.

The devs are moving with the times, making sure the system works without ruining progression.

hello Halligan2092#7694,

i tried, but couldn't, because loot drop rates are dismal, and "crafting" is just RNG that usually ends up with bricked items.

i bet you only traded items because you failed to get enough decent loot from monster drops and from crafting. that's my point, the game doesn't give you what you want, so you have to resort to buying it. and the game can't give you better loot or more sensible crafting, because it would flood the trading market and force the developers to reset the economy again.

and it's not just for me, it's for all the players who are complaining about the current loot system. nearly every youtube video on this game has players clearly stating that the current loot system is broken, and i think it's because the trading system doesn't include any "value sinks", which results in the trading system just getting more and more powerful over time.

try watching this youtube video about how to level up a warrior class:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNnOl4G-_1c

he obviously knows what he's doing, yet he clearly says that the only way to level up a warrior is to buy over-levelled equipment, because drop rates are so low and crafting is so unreliable.

anyway, if you want to continue buying your way to success, then fine, but SSF league players shouldn't be penalised for it. that's why i also suggested that the SSF league should get a massive buff to loot drops, and the standard league can be protected by restricting migration from one league to another.

a LOT of people admit that the current loot system is broken. i'm just offering suggestions that might help the developers improve things. after all, that's what this "early access feedback" forum is meant for, right?

thanks.
-az

hello Sirius_Man#0785,

i was talking about this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVOfwMWhMvU

but it looks like you linked me to the longer version, so i'll watch that later today and see if there's anything more that clears things up for me. thanks for posting the link.

and yeah, i'm not against trading, i'm just trying to offer a suggestion that might help nerf it enough to let the normal loot drops and crafting shine.

the developers already nerfed merchant trading by using the normal "gold sink" strategy that other games use, so i'm trying to suggest a similar strategy that might work for player trading.

on a personal note, i think the proliferation of microtransactions and lootboxes in many modern games have been a detriment to gaming in general, and i thought the developers of poe2 agreed, in that they specifically made their microtransactions mostly cosmetic-only, rather than pay-to-win.

but gaming companies are making so much money from "whales" these days, that it's hard for legitimate developers to profit from games that don't have any pay-to-win mechanics. this is why players have been indoctrinated to think that playing the game is a "grind" and that buying things is the only way to "win" at a game.

i miss the days when everybody paid the same price for a game and the most popular players were the ones who played it the best. now it seems that games spend most of their time begging me for money and punishing me for not spending, rather than offering me a fun experience.

thanks.
-az

I have never, in my whole life, on any gaming forum, read something as idiotic as this take. Sad part is , I'm not even joking or exaggerating. Just because everyone has freedom of speech, does not mean everyone should be heard.

"

DigiTT#5038 wrote:

I have never, in my whole life, on any gaming forum, read something as idiotic as this take. Sad part is , I'm not even joking or exaggerating. Just because everyone has freedom of speech, does not mean everyone should be heard.

Yeah, I don't see how introducing RNG into the ONLY non-RNG part of the game would fix anything XD

"

Redthorne82#3177 wrote:

"

DigiTT#5038 wrote:

I have never, in my whole life, on any gaming forum, read something as idiotic as this take. Sad part is , I'm not even joking or exaggerating. Just because everyone has freedom of speech, does not mean everyone should be heard.

Yeah, I don't see how introducing RNG into the ONLY non-RNG part of the game would fix anything XD

Me neither. This whole take is like a Neanderthal trying to explain to scientists how he can make better rockets. Sure, in his primitive mind it makes sense, but in reality, it's just plain stupid.

Somehow does replys feel like from a chatbot. Also there is no point in arguing when the style of argument focuses on a in my opinion dishonest discours and obvious framing.