Can we get retainers with 1000+ sell slots, please?

[Gilwaethwy]

2. Can we have buy orders as well as sell orders? For those unfamiliar with the concept: A buy order means an item will automatically be bought when listed for a certain price. For example, if I want to sell widget X for 300 gil, I can also put a buy order up for 200 gil. Any time someone lists for 200 gil or below, it will be bought (up to a funding or # limit).

I like this idea however done differently :
Basically you place a buy order for an item X for an amount of Y and a price of Z (ex: 9 peacock ore for 5k each)
When putting an item on the mb it lists the orders and the seller can choose to make the deal directly.
In my example the seller finds the order interesting and select and validate the order, the deal is made and the order is removed from the mb.
The seller gets the gil immediately and the items are placed in the buyer's retainer's inventory.

[Risvertasashi]

While you have a good point that any way to make money is "supporting" rmt, the goal is to not make it any easier. It's always a tug of war. That post does have good suggestions, we'll have to see what SE decides to do. RMT is always a problem, and would also maintain a bigger problem with a cross server market.

The biggest issue right now with a cross server market is that while you have the same "ways" of making gil, each server right now has a separate economy with different ups, downs and trends.
Take a look at the prices from one server to the next and you'll understand what I'm talking about. Eliminating that ruins the distribution of gil for that self contained economy to only the groups that have the time to organize larger sales, it also promotes the ability to charge whatever you want for things that are needed as other servers will have the gil to buy it. This locks out people from smaller, less profitable economies from purchasing some crafting items as the prices are now at the demand of who has the most gil, not supply and demand.

Any way you make the market system more friendly, it will be 'easier' for RMTs too. Yet there are games that have all of these suggestions and much more stable markets that move far more in game currency... yet they have far less RMT problems.

It's all in how the company fights it.

And, I have to disagree about individuals controlling the markets. That's what's happening right now, because they're so small. Doing this is stupidly easy right now. A cross server market would make it much harder for individuals like that to make their "banana republics."

Don't get me wrong, right now the market is very profitable for me... but I think these things would be better for the game overall, and even better for those of us playing the market, in the long run.

1. You can give only 1 buy order per retainer.
2. You need to specify a max amount of items or gil spent. Possibly max 99 items

#1 is fundamentally incompatible with my suggestions. The point is to free up the markets. Your suggestion, and the limit of 20 retainer slots we have now, favors those with lots of time to constantly adjust stuff. And has the issues mentioned before where people focus on the most profitable items, while other markets go unserviced. With more slots of all kinds, it gives us marketboarders reason to actually participate in even pretty slow markets.

#2 should be there, but it should be a player imposed limit. "I only want to buy 10 widgets at 200 gil" for example. The system should allow for them to be as large as it can reasonably support.

This means add at least a cooldown to avoid :
- Loosing all your gold if someone put 9999999999 of your item
- Fix the example, assuming the first to put the "Buy order" get the first item and can't get more for 15-30 min etc...
- If you ask to buy every item under your "buy price", you will lose your buy price and not the price the item is set to be sold

A good thing would be to allow people sell more than 20 * 2 "stacks" at the same time, we could use the market to store some items since we don't have enough slot on retainer put an item you want to keep @ 99 999 999 gil xD

To answer the "who wins" thing... who really cares? There'd be some way to decide that but that's a trivial detail to worry about.

Players would impose a limit. For example, they only want to buy a maximum of 10 widgets for 200 gil. No destroying someone's retainer account by trying to dump more than they can handle.

And lastly... people are already doing that with their retainer market slots. Some of those items are 100,000,000 gil when the going rate is 6000 gil for a reason, and it's not to sell it. Inventory storage is a separate issue and not one I'm trying to address with this post.

I like this idea however done differently :
Basically you place a buy order for an item X for an amount of Y and a price of Z (ex: 9 peacock ore for 5k each)
When putting an item on the mb it lists the orders and the seller can choose to make the deal directly.
In my example the seller finds the order interesting and select and validate the order, the deal is made and the order is removed from the mb.
The seller gets the gil immediately and the items are placed in the buyer's retainer's inventory.

I'd be OK with this implementation.

But... I'm not sure the devs ever read or respond to anything outside of the general discussion and lore forums. :/

[FriendlyUncle]

The market isn't hobbled. Being able to place buy order, I'm okay with to an extent. You have to specify the number you wish to buy and at what price. All costs and market fees withdrawn from your account at posting. As for buy order posting, its pretty simple the first buy order placed would win the items first until that order reached the desired quantity. I am of the belief buy orders should be blind, a seller shouldn't be able to look at the buy orders listed. They can see all sell orders and make the call to either try and sell themselves at a set price or gamble setting too low and it being eaten by a Buy Order.

Ex. I place a buy order for 500 Electrum ores, I will pay no more than 80 gil per unit. Player 2 places a Buy order for 200 Electrum, no more than 100 gil per unit.
Seller 1 decided to unload 80 electrum at 75gil. That sale immediately goes to me. I now have an order for 420 ore at 80 gil.
Seller 1 comes back deciding he liked that price but wants a bit more this time. He sells 100 ore at 90 gil. Player 2 pays the 100 gil for each of em and now as a 100 ore/100 gil order.
Seller 2 comes along, with no knowledge of the buy order history unloads 150 ores at 70 gil each. He gets Player 2's offer first, 100 gold per unit but the buy order is now exhausted. The remaining 50 would be sold to the next highest order, 80 gil per unit.

The issue with being able to buy items out of a stack, everything will just be the same price regardless of stack size. What crafter would want to buy 86 HQ Rivets when they might only need to use 3 or 4. People that want to be smart will sell small quantities of items for a higher price and people trying to unload a huge number of an item at a lower price. They had this buy from stack in 1.0 if I recall and it sucked. Why waste the time selling smart, and selling in reasonable amounts that a given crafter would use when you can just dump the load up there. As it stands I can make more money buy selling smart than with a system that you can buy set numbers out of any given stack, this fosters undercutting imo.

For a single person to be able to load up the Market with 4000 stacks of items is only going to make pricing drops even worse. As of now this creates a hard cap on demand, without it I can promise prices will be dropping pretty quickly and quite often.

[dspguy]

Adding more sale slots is a bad idea. The average player right now has 40 slots (assuming they haven't purchased more retainer space. If you want more slots, pay the extra gil). Since we only have 40, it puts an opportunity cost on those slots. If you have 60 items to sell, but only 40 slots, you have to choose which items to sell. You may list your items lower on the market so you can get them sold and then get the remaining 20 items on the board.


Limited market space allows for some players to fill niche markets. The other day, I harvested a bunch of button mushrooms. Only a few stacks were on the broker. They were listed pretty high too. Why is that? Since they sell slow. The market board history showed the history back to Aug 1st. That means only 20 transactions of button mushrooms happened this month. Players with lots of items to sell (including button mushrooms) may NOT list theirs since they only have 40 slots. Whereas, I didn't have much to sell. I put up my button mushrooms and they all sold for some ridiculous price. It took a week or so, but when you have nothing else to sell, you sell what you got. And because it was an "unpopular item" I cashed in by being patient.

If you had 1000 slots... along with every other player... you'd just list all your stuff and it would sit on the market and stagnate. It would remove those niche markets. In other words, it wouldn't help the server economy.

[Adler]

All the OP suggestions would lead to even higher prices for absolutely everything on market - everything put up for sale on reasonable price would be auto-bought instantly and resold for 2x, 3x, 10x? more. Don't fuk the market.

[Wintersandman]

No partial buying of stacks especially with the way we have limited slots in retainers. When I sell a stack I want it all gone. Not partial. It is buy whole or nothing. So if a feature like this was added I would expect that you could have a feature to allow partials or complete.

[JonBigwood]

Cross-server markets is not a good idea. Some worlds have more money in circulation than others, and higher prices. The overall prices would tend to the average, so people in worlds with more money would find cheaper prices, and those in worlds with less money would find higher prices, which may be unaffordable.

[Xystic]

Cross-server markets is not a good idea.

Correct.

Some worlds have more money in circulation than others, and higher prices. The overall prices would tend to the average, so people in worlds with more money would find cheaper prices, and those in worlds with less money would find higher prices, which may be unaffordable.

Each server produces gold and goods at different rates. Some servers may have a huge population in which consumes more than they produce. In this scenario, in which you consume more than you produce, you drain a huge amount of gil from this server and so when you release very expensive features like FC lots, these servers will suffer as all gil generation methods are the same thru out all servers.

[JonBigwood]

Each server produces gold and goods at different rates. Some servers may have a huge population in which consumes more than they produce. In this scenario, in which you consume more than you produce, you drain a huge amount of gil from this server and so when you release very expensive features like FC lots, these servers will suffer as all gil generation methods are the same thru out all servers.

I don't understand what you mean. Gil is created by many ways: dungeon rewards, guildhests, quests, etc., any gil that does not come from other player. Depending on how people play and how many people there are, a world may be more rich "per capita" and prices are higher or lower. Older worlds with players that have been playing longer will have normally more gil per player, and prices will be usually higher. That's why housing is more expensive in some worlds than in others, the system knows how much gil is available in each world and decides land prices based on that. Market board prices, logically, shouldn't be the same.

[Xystic]

Yes gil is created in many ways but the pay out of gil is the same every time. Meaning if you do a certain quest, you will never get a variance of 1 to infinite gil.