@Jade_Wiggin
The volum of isk is at the moment is 1 quadrillion detained by players ( maybe 10% of the players)
It is not like this game is brand new, its past through all the isk generated but not consumed has a impact more important that the isk generated in a declining pool of player âŚ
The january money supply chart shows also that our capacity of creating isk has decreased ( https://webimg.ccpgamescdn.com/7lhcm73ukv5p/7mgXsXLwiHmrgy3434HS8Z/cb250b3969c3522086f6deacb2ed544b/9b_isk.float.3.png )
This game is saturated with isk and plex in number but not per player ( the 1M plex given for the australian cause is one example )
The isks are already present, just in the wrong pocket : not mine
ISK creation capacity is graphed in Sinks vs Faucets. Changes in money supply of active players is a combined statistic and can simply show wealthy players unsubscribing for good or waiting until Chaos era madness settles down.
The more artificial rules the worse. Because every time you introduce new restrictions, you narrow down the solution space for âoptimalâ play. Finally only one best solution will remain, and botted to perfection. Or no solution remains, and the game is dead.
EvE lived from the freedom of choice, different ways to success for the same problem. The new changes will certainly do three things:
Make TTT the only tradehub worth using for buy orders in Jita
Make humans and bots compete on the exact same strategy to profit
Kill the multi-buy feature for bigger volumes
At least I donât know any other strategy to compete with bots in the future.
Hu ? no.
Optimal depends on a lot of parameters. There are as many optimal solutions as there are parameters to define the optimum, in a static model. In a dynamic model, there are as many heuristics (that is, approaches to the best solution).
This wonât change. Before the patch the optimal algorithm was to spam 0.01 isk cuts. Now depending on the amount of orders you have available, on the profit you intend to make, more solutions are viable.
On the opposite of your claim, this change will broaden the âgoodâ solution algorithms. By making more choices relevant wallet-wise, it means that more human people will have room to act.
More than 6 month ( the last peak was in June ) even if there was like a small rebound after the blackout ,
the trend is on the decline.
The supposed low activity of one month ( even 2-3 ) does not explain this behaviours .
Changing inside your bot program 0.01 isk by 0.01% of the order is not an issue.
The behaviours in Jita is whatever the amount of isk of any order , there will be always someone to cut you off
when you try to sell at a peak, you donât care if it is really on the peak , you just dump your order.
Moreover it should not be a surprise to you that pure traders or trader( manufacturer) are ready to go the extreme way even if it means losses .
As if it is not the profit that guide those traders but the pride of being the one selling before others their items.
The âgoodâ traders ( manufacturer) dare saying that " as the ore was mined , I can retreive it from my manufacturer cost"
it is, when this change incurs a cost of 1% of the new value.
Do that too often and you lose much more.
Stuck liquid has a cost. If you can increase the exposure of your order (the % of time where this order will be considered when someone buys or sell) you effectively reduce the amount of time your liquid is frozen, therefore increasing the interest over time.
? Yeah when you manufacture you should know how much time, money, hauling you exactly spent in order to acquire that item and set your price accordingly.
No, it is not âprideâ but a time/profit motive. I want to sell items faster and move on to the next transaction. I donât want to keep my items/isk tied up for long periods. The longer your order has to remain up the less other things you can do and the more risk you incur.
The punishing change fees mean the choice is between the increased risk of leaving your order where it is or the punishing price to change your order. Spreads and profit margins will have to widen to make the new risk and costs worth it.
As an industrialist that buy billions of ISK worth of commodities to use in construction, this change has a significant negative effect on simply buying what is needed.
Without the reliable methods on increasing buy order pricing to maintain most favorable position and acquire the commodities, the indy buyer is faced with a few options, none good:
Buy directly from sell orders - much lower profits or unable to produce final good at marketable prices
Set a large buy order and simply wait an indeterminate time and hope the order gets filled - ISK gets stranded on a upswinging market and no time horizon when commodities will be available
Set multiple small quantity buy orders to âladderâ the market and block competition for favorable position - time consuming and doesnât prevent higher buy orders coming on top, but perfect for running a market bot that can react quickly and maintain favorable position
As a result, I believe the markets will slow greatly in commodities, and trade will begin to occur outside the market via private contracts to meet needs and avoid fees. Prices will not reflect actual demand and the market will be even further manipulated by players with large wallets and multiple market alts.
You think too much with your brain , I saw so many traders thinking with their guts âŚ
If you want to optimize your time sell straightly to the BO ,
I will be glad to buy your stuff
the new system will incite you to do so .
@Dunk_Dinkle
My first reaction with the broker fee change was , xxxxx they are trying to transform an order into a contract-like thing .
contract :
- you canât adjust it
- if not honored you loose the deposit fund
- time limited ( now 1 month max)
- too limited ( only 21 personal contract and 60 corporation)
order :
- begin difficult to adjust ( we loose the fluidity)
- will be hard to execute for the good product ( demand = offer ) -> example tritanium
The direct trade is not a good solution , because of many scammer in Jita
( the scam is quite obvious changing the price when pretending putting the right item
ask a player whose name begin by serenity )
The order will be still used on my part , and you can imagine that the BO will reflect all the change
youâll get less isks for your loot because the option of the Sell Order will be a nightmare .
It is difficult to squeeze a trader, whatever nerf will be edicted we will pass it direclty to our dear customer
But we have to wait few months to have a stable market , if of course CCP does not intervene again .
CCP the invisible hand of the market
Yep, from my standpoint as a trader, buy orders will simply become much more expensive to execute. And I donât actually use anything, I just resell it. If you have manufacturing jobs contingent on your buy order being filled, your planning process just became a lot more complicated.
The impact on sell orders is less clear - if (when) buy orders become scarcer, more people may opt to create sell orders, but it remains to be seen how useful to this is to people with extended planning requirements.
Iâm not totally sold on the argument that more trade will be driven to private contracts, as there are huge non-ISK costs associated with finding these arrangements and managing security around them? People may adapt in this direction, but it would represent a pretty serious market failure in my view.
it is not exact, but, when I resell an item with a 30% margin and I have the buy order updated 10 times and the corresponding sell order updated also 10 times (that is 1 times a day for 10 days each, not uncommon for a ship), each with the minimum possible amount, I will make a tiny profit of ~3% .
I will need at least ~40% margin to have an acceptable profit.
As from this I expect it not to be uncommon to have items with 100% margin or more in future.
PS. Forgot to say, I have Accounting 5, Broker Relations 5 and Margin Trading 4. Someone with lesser skills will do worse.
PPS. corrected statement as I had found errors in my calculation
As from this I expect it not to be uncommon to have items with 100% margin or more in future.
More likely youâd just have less trade velocity as youâd be forced to sit and wait for the market to turn. I doubt there would be such a dramatic swing in the margins. If there were, it would just further depress buy orders as less people fill them.
This is basically a credit crunch and a depression all in one.
Contracts are a non starter, there isnât enough slots or flexibility. The market is where trade should happen, and for some reason CCP has decided to take a sledgehammer to one of the best systems in their game to solve a few minor annoyances (referring to the relisting fees and margin trading, the other two changes are just fine).
More realistic gross margins are in the 10% to 20% range, as these have proven fairly sustainable over time. And at 10%, you start losing money after only 2 or 3 updates. Youâre either going to make updates very rarely, or youâre going to lose money. As there have been no mention of any mechanism to make tracking relisting charges on individual orders even feasible, youâd be forced to make as few changes as possible or risk tanking whatever profit you had. Which seems to be by design, for some reason.
Large volume buy and sell orders are also a thing of the past with these changes, as adapting to changing market conditions will become prohibitively expensive, forcing you to keep volumes small. This will be an advantage for the bots and the 0.01-isk-like-its-my-job micromanagement crowd, as they can put in the time to keep replacing small volume orders as they are depleted at the front of the market. If youâre someone that prefers placing fewer, large volume orders that are updated once daily, youâre at a far greater disadvantage now.
These changes just seem like willful stupidity to me at this point. It remains to be seen just how badly trading as profession will be affected. Trading is an ISK sink that puts no new ISK into the market, if there is less trade to be had people like me would just start krabbing in supers and become another ISK faucet.
I know you will, but too bad for you I wonât be taking a loss to sell you anything. Selling to a buy order in almost all cases incurs a straight up loss. Actively attending to sell orders means you both sell something in a timely manner and make profit. That is the point - someone whiling to put in the effort is rewarded by their orders being timely and profitable. Someone who isnât is not rewarded by one or both of those.
Instead of taking a loss as you say I should do, I just wonât participate in the activity until the market reaches a new equilibrium and much larger spreads, while still enough volume. If that never happens, then so be it. There is no point in wasting time / tying up resources in stagnation.
Ah, I see my statement was wrong, I make a loss with only 10 updates (1 update per day for 10 days )
And I have a found an error with makes me still have a little profit for a 30% margin, that is a profit of 2.63% with a 30% marginâŚ
Assumptions:
Buying in a Player station: Broker Rate there 1.1% (it will be never less than 1% remember)
Selling in a NPC trade hub, Broker Rate there 3.31% (my current rate due to BR5 and good standings)
Initial Buy Price: 10 000 000 ISK, Minimum update: 10 000 ISK, 10 updates per buy and sell
Initial buy cost (set up the order): 110 000 ISK
Update cost per update: 83 165.75 ISK (this is where it is not exact, for simplicity I take this as constant. As the item prices raises over time, the update cost will raise too)
Overall cost to buy the item: 941 637.5 ISK
Selling the item with a start price of 13 000 000 ISK
Initials sell cost (set up the order): 430 300 ISK
Update cost per update: 107 492.25 ISK (taken as constant, same simplification as above. As the price lowers over time the update cost will lower too)
Final sell cost (sell tax): 290 250 ISK
Overall cost to sell the item: 1 795 472.50 ISK
Overall cost to buy and sell with a 30% margin: 2 737 110 ISK
Profit: 3 000 000 ISK - 2 737 110 ISK = 262 890 ISK. That is 2.6 % of the starting buy price.
Wise reaction
What happens if all your isk is blocked in orders ?
After a week , after two weeks , after a month , I know few traders that can wait that long .
You could lose your marble waiting and doing no trade during this time
No leverage = mostly all your isks is invested in order that need to be refresh more than 3 time a day .
When a shark canât move, it drowns
When a trader canât invest, it is over
My fear is how I am going to sell big volum and trying to optimize the margin âŚ
The windows will shrink too quickly , I have to wait that the majority of the trader put their order
to gain at least one move ( a change order spared) in rush hours or do I rush it during the quite hours.
I have to think about a new strategy.
I would have no choice but to go to Jita where mostly the traders are
Reaction to the new market :
That exactly what I am going to do, wait 2-3 month before the market settled down with its new configuration
Iâve been playing EVE Online for the last 3 years updating my orders maybe once a week.
Iâve had orders sitting both sell/buy for 9+ months, getting filled here and there.
No order âneedsâ to be refreshed more than 3 times a day.
Price your junk at a price thatâll move.
If you want to squeeze out as much margins as you can, thatâs your problem. You have no one else to blame other than yourself if it takes too long to sell. CCP said part of the reason of this change was to encourage smarter and better decision making in markets instead of just updating 0.01 isk at a time. Take that lesson to heart and use smarter and better decision making. Easy.
Leaving your orders for 9+ months waiting to be filled doesnât count as good decision making. It counts as you have nothing better to do with your money/items so you are fine letting it sit there forever gambling it will be filled.
Some of us with brains not full of cement have better things to do with our resources.
)
