Market Wards Suggestion

[Answa]

I get what your saying, but I don't get how it is a problem that I sell my items cheaper then you, so your angry that my names on top. Reguardless of anything else, if I have a lower price on the same item you are selling, and its on my retainer, my retainers name should be ahead of yours. Period, hands down, no questions asked. Just because I have other items and/or other stacks of the same item, at various prices, is my business.

You are a bit off kilter to suggest they need to make a change in the game because my name is ahead of yours, when I have 1 or more of the same item, at a better price.

That you'd think I'm angry is proof enough that you don't get what I'm trying to say.

[Xoo]

Coglin, it's not about people undercutting - it's about people working/manipulating the seller list in order to get their names highest on the list regardless of price.

[Era]

The economy of MMOs is something I have a lot of fun and spend a majority of my time playing around with. OP brings up one of the most common complaints about the current market wards and how items are displayed when doing an item search. One of the biggest problems, that was mentioned, was that only a set amount of items are shown (the cheapest) and this pushes the HQ items/equipment with materia off the page due to them being priced higher BUT for a legitimate reason: higher quality.

I do understand where OP is coming from, but as someone else said, it's a free market. Anytime someone brings up the fact that they were undercut they're usually upset that someone else is willing to sell the same item at a lower price thus they wont be making the same profit they are used to or thought they would make.

Saying that the current way the items are listed is the cause for "rampant undercutting" and abuse is where I disagree. While it is a free market, besides the HQ items mentioned above, NQ items are all exactly the same, thus selling items tends to rely less on building a dedicated consumer base and more with selling the items consistently and evolving with the very fragile economic environment.

Undercutting may seem unusually rampant but I believe this is due to the average player having only 20 slots to try and sell items on the market at a given time. With a system like this I personally like to list items that sell within a decent amount of time so that I can continue to sell new items and adapt with price changes. This being said, if an item that normally sells at a certain price is suddenly being heavily undercut I can assume that this item is suffering from either increasing supply or decreasing demand, or worst case scenario: both. Due to the fact that I am trying to sell a lot more items than the 20 slots given to us, it might be fiscally prudent to simply settle for the new "low" price and move on to another item.

Now what I described above is an over-analyzed version of supply and demand as I've experienced it in this specific game. I did this to provide a possible reasoning behind what OP and others may describe as undercutting for the simple sake of being first on the list, aka:

it's about people working/manipulating the seller list in order to get their names highest on the list regardless of price.

-Xoo

I don't even understand what the point of doing that (disregarding price and just aiming for the top of the list) would be since if you are disregarding the price then there's no point in being high on the list, i.e. you wouldn't be making enough of a profit to continue doing it. So, rather than this, I think some of these reactions are people experiencing the fast paced economy that FFXIV has cultivated.

I'm not sure if that helps explain anything, but I hope it at least provides some kind of reasoning as to why it happens and even though this is just my personal experience, it explains a situation where your items might be undercut but not while disregarding the price, but rather "cutting your losses" so to speak to move on to other stock.

[Crica]

the reason no one else's names show is because no one else is selling the item as cheaply as those that are showing...

the sort order is the the 20 cheapest items show up - therefore if YOUR items are not one of the 20 cheapest then YOUR name is not going to show...

no one WANTS to see your name OR items UNLESS they are in the top 20 cheapest list - working as intended...

[Answa]

the reason no one else's names show is because no one else is selling the item as cheaply as those that are showing...

the sort order is the the 20 cheapest items show up - therefore if YOUR items are not one of the 20 cheapest then YOUR name is not going to show...

no one WANTS to see your name OR items UNLESS they are in the top 20 cheapest list - working as intended...

You're totally forgetting about all the other people that just have retainers with names further down the alphabetical order with the item at the exact same price.

And HQ items.

And materiad items.

[Crica]

You're totally forgetting about all the other people that just have retainers with names further down the alphabetical order with the item at the exact same price.

And HQ items.

And materiad items.

Ok, I think I understand what you are saying - if I place an item up for sale and its the 21st item, then the 20th item gets bumped off the list, regardless if its the same price as mine?

Hmm... even in WoW it works the same way - if you choose to sort the item list by lowest price first, the most RECENT lowest priced listing will be displayed first in the list, regardless of how many listings there are for the SAME price.

How ELSE would you suggest the game sort the listings?

SOMEONE has to be first on the list - what is wrong with the most RECENT lowest price listing being first?

I am NOT saying that all other listings should not be shown - if it is possible to show all listings, like WoW does, then by all means show them all - but that does not negate the fact that there are going to be 20 listings that are FIRST in the list no matter what.

[Answa]

Ok, I think I understand what you are saying - if I place an item up for sale and its the 21st item, then the 20th item gets bumped off the list, regardless if its the same price as mine?

Hmm... even in WoW it works the same way - if you choose to sort the item list by lowest price first, the most RECENT lowest priced listing will be displayed first in the list, regardless of how many listings there are for the SAME price.

How ELSE would you suggest the game sort the listings?

SOMEONE has to be first on the list - what is wrong with the most RECENT lowest price listing being first?

I am NOT saying that all other listings should not be shown - if it is possible to show all listings, like WoW does, then by all means show them all - but that does not negate the fact that there are going to be 20 that are FIRST in the list no matter what.

That is exactly what I'm suggesting. Right now it's alphabetical.

[Crica]

That is exactly what I'm suggesting. Right now it's alphabetical.

Oh.. I did not realize this.

Erm... wow...

[Peptaru]

Ok, blah blah.

The complaint is not over pricing or date of listing. Its about an unfair alphabetical system runnin the wards. If character named "Aaaaaaaaaaaarthur" has the top ten listings, all for 40 gil..... his name only REALLY needs to be up there ONE TIME. He doesn't need to be, or deserve to be, taking up 50% of the list. it prevents others who might also be selling at 40 named "Zzzzzzzzarthur" from ever even having their items appear on the list.

This is a seperate, and at the same time identical, issue that affects +1 or melded items which are obviously listed at higher/much higher price and thus get dropped off the bottom of the list for the pricing reason.

If you want to argue for a SOMEONE being first on the list, let the oldest listings take priority but reset them once a week... "Sorry, you had your week at the top, you'll be kicked to the bottom now." The problem with this is people would, as with all things, exploit that with friends to control and overprice the listings for many items. Price gouging instead of price cutting.... at least it would be a change of pace.

[Jinko]

SOMEONE has to be first on the list - what is wrong with the most RECENT lowest price listing being first?.

To be fair it should be the oldest lowest price don't you think ?

As Peptaru says if a player has multiple stacks of items at the same price a retainer name should only have to appear once and not take up 5 or 6 lines.

Easiest solution would be to display the person who has had the item up for sale the longest be at the top of the list if the prices are the same.