Suggestion for added market stability

I saw there have been some chances to enhance market stability in EVE, preventing 0.01 isking (which was a terrible thing). I think a few new features are needed to increase market stability and make prices highly dependent on the actual moving volume and product demand, and much less so on player “Quick Sell”, price dumping, rapid price slides. All negative factors with respect to EVE industry, loss of profit and giving one player control of the market basically, irrelevant of moving volume and actual demand for the product. Having been an EVE industrialist for quite some time, I noticed there are several major market problems that lead to price manipulation, market abuse and control by a single player, without any underlying mechanics to prevent it.

Before the conservatives jump on this, keep in mind that before the 0.01 ISKing rules, all the hub traders opposed that rule, their justification being “We make money but babysitting orders and 0.01 ISKing everyone”. It got changed because it was messed up.

The EVE open market should be a highly regulated environment with rules in place to prevent unjustified price volatility. By “justified” I mean price volatility driven by demand not by one guy.

Contracts should be reserved for quick selling items, discounted bundles of the same or different item bundles.

PRICE INCREASES should be driven by item demand. What I mean by demand is high purchase volume depleting inventory and causing a shortage. This is currently working fine.

PRICE DECREASES - SHOULD be governed by high supply (across the market), low demand, driven by a lot of players selling the same items and orders changing rapidly, with a A LOT of live orders and not enough buyers. Currently this is broken. Price decreases are not driven by demand or supply and can be abused by one single player crashing prices intentionally or not, independent of demand or market wide supply. This should not be allowed for game balance purposes. See below what the two major problems with how the market governs (or does not) price decreases.

  • PROBLEM 1: QUICK SELL ATTEMPTS MARKET CRASHES - One single player can trigger crash market prices for any given item at any time - If an item market price is 50 million, one player decides to put his two items on the market for 45 million instead hoping for a quick sell. Then another guy puts in a new order for 44.9, the next one 44.8. Thus, one guy created a 10% market price drop with a single order, creating a “sell panic”.

  • PROBLEM 2: BAIT SELL ORDERS - you will often see bait sell orders for some items, which are nearly the same price as the BUY price for current orders. This is an artificial, abusive way of using game mechanics to cause would-be sellers to inadvertently “Sell” their stuff to the highest buy order, which is the same guy who placed SELL order. For example: Item market price is 100 isk. Buy price is 80 ISK. The buy price guy will place a sell order for some of this stuff for 80.10 isk. This will result in the system automatically selling



Let me first say that I have no objection to price drops, even massive ones so long as they are driven by market forces, supply and demand, not by one or two people trying to quick sell item X. Often people who want to unload assets and don’t care about build costs, attempt to quick sell items via the market and cause market crashes.

  • New sales order min price no lower than 0.5% of the current market LOWEST price within 5 jumps of the station where the order is placed. This would accomplish two things. First – prevents price dumping orders in a market hub and prevents steep price declines not driven by demand but by “Quick Sell” attempts. Secondly – dramatically increases price stability, decreases volatility, and takes away market control from one player.
  • If you are more than 5 jumps away from a market hub you can set your sales price up to 10% lower than the smallest HUB price if you don’t want to haul your stuff to Hub. Hub sellers would not be able to compete against you as their price drops have to stick within 1%. This would allow for three things: First – Allow traders to buy your stuff and haul to the hub for a profit. Second – Prevent Hub orders from being lower than yours at least for a long time. Three – Allows for QUICK SELL option to people looking for a bargain, without severely compromising the trade hub prices and causing a price crash. So, if you want to quick sell your item or try to, haul it to 6 jumps away and set the order there without being undercut by market hubs, without them buying your stuff and then having to haul it to make that spread profit. This rule would also prevent discount price stacking. If you want to do that, CONTRACT IT.
  • Change orders regardless of location, subject to current rules of 0.01 Isking + fees.
  • CONTRACTS should be reserved for selling items at a discount, just like in real life, subject to the contracting party rules / bundles / location conditions. If you want to sell an Ikitursa or 10 of them at 650 million while the market price is 750 million, contract it.
  • LIMIT SAME ITEM SELL ORDERS PER PLAYER TO 3. Do not allow more than 2 orders of the same item per player. This prevents players form setting up 10 orders for 10 of the same ship, each 0.05% lower than the previous one or at the same price, allowing them do price changes on orders immediately, effectively eliminating the price change timer and flooding the market without risk. This way, if you have to sell 60 of the same ship, you either keep some in your hangar and sell them in batches or create 2 batches of 30 each or whatever. You should NOT be able to create 20 orders of 3 ships each. This should eliminate partial market control of one player. As putting all 60 ships on one order, would risk having to eat significant change fees.

All these rules are designed to facilitate good market order, stability and most of all, market prices to be driven by market wide supply and demand, not by individual players’. Price drops would inevitably be driven by the number of suppliers and not by the number of items available to a single supplier (without significant risk). These rules would also eliminate bait sell orders as mentioned above.

The basics of it are that the OPEN MARKET should be tightly correlated to supply and demand, and tightly regulated to prevent abuse, volatility (without underlying causes), facilitate income stability and be a reliable way for serious industrialists, traders, and manufacturers to sell their product. The CONTRACT market should be for everything else, like discount / bulk selling, quick selling, getting rid of unwanted assets (without selling to buy orders).

Below is an example of what I’m talking about but there are hundreds. Price tank triggered by a few players looking for quick sell and snowballed by those normal order changes.

TL;DR removing player agency because some people don’t know how or don’t want to play market shenanigans

You are aware that market manipulation is viable gameplay?


Yes, I am aware, but market manipulation should be done within the rules set. Like buying out all the inventory for one item and setting a new sales price. Not the crap we are seeing. I’m no stranger to market manipulation, I’ve done it, many times. The people who actually move markets are few and far between. They have enough liquid isk to do it and the will / desire to bother. What im talking about is something entirely different. A guy with one 250 mil ship for sale should not be able to tank a 1 trillion market item and cause the asset value to drop by 30% for weeks on end. I have done it, in the hopes of buying stuff cheaply only to spike the prices later, which I did. Here is what I did.

  1. Had 4 ships for sale of the same. 240 mil market price. Was selling for a normal manufacturing profit of 30 mil each.

  2. Put mine on the market in separate orders, each order 1 ship at 210 mil. Then competing against myself and others, I tanked the price until there was zero profit to be made from making the ship. My price drops were high, 3-4% each The sale price was BELOW the components required to build it.

  3. When prices hit 188 mil I bought out all inventory from the market and set the new price at 320 mil each.

I just think its bad game balance and a lot of cause for instability. Its fine to play the market but not to abuse it.

I dont know if you were around back when contracts were massive scams due to players putting in the word billions instead of millions while the numbers were different. It was a scam, people were pissed. But the scammers and shenanigan creators justified it by saying “Its not a scam, people should read.”

No. It’s player agency. We need more sand in sandbox not less. Instability means opportunity.

You are trying to turn viable gameplay into fake issue. What are the odds that you are simply angry trader/industrialist that hates being constantly outbidded?

ps. materials for iki, in jita cost 660 mil from sell orders. No wonder it dropped in price.

1 Like

I make my profit hauling raw materials from Jita to my location and building there. Sometimes if I see a value purchase in Jita and a scarcity in my local I will ‘quick sell’ as you’ve put it. You want to put in a mechanic that makes my pricing dependent on 'hub pricing and location? I need to price based on how much I incentive I can give capsulears to go out of their way to come to my system by pricing low low low. Sometimes much lower than 10%

I like having the freedom to decide how low tyvm.

You’re aware that this is eve?

1 Like

What does that mean, “this is Eve”? You are implying that since its a game it does not need to mimic real world economic rules? In that case, you are wrong. CCP has been trying to do that for ages, which is why they had an in house economist to try and create an economy driven by in game supply / demand, subject to real world economic rules.

So, we can say after reading the different responses, that causing a market crash on an item is another form of ganking. And thus normal gameplay.

I’m gonna just skip past how dumb your proposal is and try to educate you on what those “bait market orders” are.

If someone isn’t familiar with how broker fees work and they sell to buy orders with 90 days expiry instead of instant, they pay broker fees even though they want an instant fill, and if their stack has more items than the highest buy order, their stack will only partially fill and the rest will become a sell order at that price.

Traders love this if they notice someone did it because it’s usually a great opportunity to flip something while avoiding the buy side broker fees. Some trader will come along quickly and snatch it up and immediately relist at a higher price.

It’s not market manipulation. It’s just inexperienced players not understanding the UI, and it doesn’t hurt the markets.

I have to agree. This is basically a set of “I don’t like other people competing with me on their terms, I only want to compete with them on my terms and let my bot do the work” rules.

There’s just so much wrong with the OP proposal, aside from the fact that this sort of strict market ruling has never worked anywhere.

Some player selling a couple items at fire-sale prices doesn’t “crash” the market except against idiots or bots. Anyone else will just wait for those couple items to sell and let their orders stand. If a player needs fast ISK then dumping inventory is perfectly viable.

Players with mass wealth are supposed to be able to move markets, that’s what mass wealth is for.

All the OP sounds like is “I’m a small market player who’s lazy and doesn’t want to travel or compete with other people to manage my orders.”

In general I’m up for supporting speculative new ideas on changes that might benefit EVE, but this isn’t one of them.

I tend to think if costs were relative to order length then the market would be more ‘agile’ instead of people just punting 90 day orders because that is what they have paid for shorter orders would allow the market to adapt to changes a lot quicker .

As to the proposition of set market restraints I would disagree that is the way to go , its seems over complex and restrictive

I’m all for a heavily regulated market and big government. Especially since I’ve already gotten mine.

1 Like

Yeahhhh, market stability in a computer game. That sounds exciting…

I also have an idea that will eliminate all conflict within eveonline too.

This is a terrible idea. As others have said, the only reason this exists is because players don’t know how to use the market, which turns it into content for those of us who do. I have made a lot of isk just from margin trading, so maybe I’m biased. But I can’t see what benefit this would have for anyone except people who don’t know how to use the market

Changing order duration doesn’t have an effect on the market lol

If someone places a 30 day order and it fills, they will just place another 30 day order. If it expires, they’ll do the same. Changing the cost for order duration makes no sense.

If it doesn’t sell though he reposts at the new current price -1 . The market overall if 10’ s or 100’s of people do the same would change price quicker , be more agile as I said.

Most people don’t just wait until the sell order fills before reposting with an updating price, they update the price if someone has set one for lower, or buy from the person that did if there is a decent markup to be made.

Yeah, its called game balance. It is done all the time.

The duration of the order is the time it takes before you can change it. Secondly, of course it has an effect on the market.

What are you talking about? You can right click on an order to modify it. The only limit is you can only modify an order once every 5 minutes.