[request feature] Off market trade

[Mango]

Trading in-between 2 player are pretty good. unlike D3 where scams are all over.

Requesting that items that are traded will be shown in the chat log.

Senario:

Player1 trade ingredients/materials to Crafter1 for purpose of crafting a few high level craft.
lets say ingredients/materials are a lot, a few trades are needed. Showing items traded allow both players to do proper checks.

Problem in current trade system:

Senario:

Player1 supposedly to send 10,000 Gils together with materials to Crafter1. They are dispute as if the Gils are transferred.

Showing all materials traded in the chat log would solve it.

Please look into this.
Regards,
Mango Gelato
-Tonberry

[Saevel]

While I'm not necessarily opposed to this, I do wonder who this solution serves. No single craft requires more than 8 components, which is allowed in a single trade, along with gil. And the trade system currently requires not one, but two confirmations of the exchange by both parties. I realize you said a few high level crafts, but why can't you split this into several transactions between you and the crafter? I.e. materials for item 1 plus agreed upon gil, materials for item 2 plus agreed upon gil, etc.

[ChameleonMS]

... high level crafts, but why can't you split this into several transactions between you and the crafter?

Because the Crafter can rip you off after transaction 2 of a 4 part high level craft. Where parts 1 - 3 are creation of the mats required in part 4.
Since the there is no current log (audit trail) of the transactions; it become a he said / she said disagreement if you try and report said crafter.

Additionally, a quick review of User Agreement does not explicitly prohibit the crafter from doing this. There is a lot of grey area text about dispute resolution with SE being the arbitrator.
While the crafter is being a jerk, it is not against the rules. If I am wrong here please provide citation, I want to read it.

[Mango]

Not only crafter can rip u off. customer may rip u off too.

If any one was careless to click on OK, u may miss one or a few materials like shards/clusters or the small tips promised.

[Riepah]

Not only crafter can rip u off. customer may rip u off too.

If any one was careless to click on OK, u may miss one or a few materials like shards/clusters or the small tips promised.

Huh? A crafter won't generally hand the product over without payment, but someone who requests something to be crafted may have to hand over the materials on good faith. After which the crafter could just run off with them.

[Saevel]

The point I'm trying to get at though is that from a GM perspective, regardless of any oral contract, both involved parties have twice explicitly given consent to the trade. That is more than sufficient to deem the trade fair.

A certain amount of risk is involved in directly trading with other players, most particularly strangers. I fully agree that in the scenario that the crafter runs off with the materials, the crafter is being a jerk. It’s not cool; it’s not even okay.

The User Agreement section on disputes addresses litigation that arises through use of the software. And honestly, if a player is prepared to file a real lawsuit against another player for the theft of virtual goods, then they are well outside the scope of this discussion anyway. At best, a case can be made that a scam took place, as defined by the Prohibited Activities in Final Fantasy XIV addendum, and you could report on that.

However, in the report of scam, a screenshot or cut-and-paste of the chat log is not sufficient, reliable, or necessary to prove it happened. The GM is going to use their own game logs in determining the truth. Just because a log or audit trail is not exposed to the player does not mean it doesn’t exist.

So, we arrive at my original question: who is served by the proposed solution? The more I consider it, the more I am drawn to the conclusion that this change serves only to provide the cheated player with the means to prove he or she was cheated to other players, and for the purposes of damaging the cheater’s reputation.

While I would agree, in principle, that the duplicitous player in question should suffer some social repercussions, what we really have to ask is whether or not this reason alone is justification for the proposed redesign of the of the trading feature. In my opinion, it is not.

[Mango]

Lets say both players forgot how much materials traded for crafting.
It happens, to me.
a log chat will clear things up.


where a lot of materials with gils a chat log allows easier life for both players to trade.


Chat log may not be feasible on every scam on a GM perspective.
Its never feasible to contact GM just because i forget how much gils were transfered.

For players are trading among themselves imho its worth it to add items traded in the chat log without redesign the trade feature.

[Sensu]

Its not even that hard to implement, they already did it for the ingame mailing system (Mat 1, 2 and 3 have been attached to the message). Regardless why people would want this, I think its good because I sometimes click too fast aswell (got an Apkallu egg instead of a Rosegold Nugget) and this may happen to other items that look alike or have the same thumbnail (Snurble tuft and Cashmere Fleece, the Growth furmulas and many more).

So yes, I would definately want this.

[Niwashi]

Quite a while back, I traded for a set of DoL gear, and for one of the pieces got a DoH item of the same level, same icon, differing in the "... of Crafting" rather than "... of Gathering" suffix on the item name. I'm sure it was just an accidental error, but if we'd both seen the item names listed in chat rather than just the icons listed on the Trade window, one or the other of us might have spotted the error.