StarGateWars Forums

Great Scott.. some people just have this single picture of what they think is right, and cannot accept ANY change to that idea, except along their own lines of thinking. I believe that's referred to as a control obsession..


Updates shouldn't be brought in just because they sound fun.. they should be brought in because they bring something good to the game. This idea does not do that, in its current form.
Wolf asked a good question.. which you haven't answered, Orion. The counterquestion you pose "Give me 3 reasons why it is bad for the game" is bad thinking. The game needs to benefit. If you need to resort to asking whether people can name anything against your idea.. If you need to be on the defensive, your idea doesn't have the support to become good.
So.. good luck! Current idea doesn't work. Maybe a fixed version will.

Acually I really think this would make larger quanities of ATs, UU and Naq available for everyone. Because you would have players who are not using the forum conducting trades in the auction house.

Also people shouldn't be forced to go to the forums to view contents about the game, all the information or game mechanics needed should be provided inside the game and its menus.

Ifrit wrote:Also people shouldn't be forced to go to the forums to view contents about the game, all the information or game mechanics needed should be provided inside the game and its menus.

Ah.. and there we have the basic difference of ideas regarding the role of the forums for the game..

when trading why should players be foreced to use the forums?
Also I did state clear and valid reasons, choose not to accept them if you wish, and choose to make opinions about my replies, I repect that but don't have to accept it.

And again everyone of you avoid the question, you say that updates should be made for reasonable ideas, and for ones that make a change to the game. So tell me what makes this suggestion a bad one? why and how would it make the game worse?

You have yet to state with any conviction hwo this would benefit the game.

Nobody has said that people must use the forums or are forced to use the forums for trading - you can trade in the game already without using the forum (whether via the in-game market or not) - but it's like anything else - stock brokers and auction traders in real life don't just go by what they see in the actual exchange or auction house - they gather info from elsewhere. It shouldn't all be provided in game - simply because all game aspects CAN'T be provided in-game.

If I'm correct (and I am) there are numerous ways to trade in-game already. People can also advertise trading on the forum and I'm willing to bet that 99.9% of all alliances have their own trade section on their own forums.

Wolf359 wrote:You have yet to state with any conviction hwo this would benefit the game.

1.) Reduce the risk of scamming (which yes is a legal tactic but shouldnt be available for players to do).
2.) A more competive market then there already is.
3.) More players will be trading then before, thus applying more so to #2.*
4.) Players would feel more comfortable trading through the auction house due to all of the above reasons.
5.) Larger quanities of ATs, UU and Naq available for everyone, also applying to #2.

* additionaly because the current method requires players to use the forums to trade this method would cause more trades through a larger participation.

so these aren't good reasons?

Wolf359 wrote:Nobody has said that people must use the forums or are forced to use the forums for trading - you can trade in the game already without using the forum (whether via the in-game market or not) - but it's like anything else - stock brokers and auction traders in real life don't just go by what they see in the actual exchange or auction house - they gather info from elsewhere. It shouldn't all be provided in game - simply because all game aspects CAN'T be provided in-game.

why can't all aspects be provided directly in game, is that because no ideas have been brought forth for some aspects? Ones that have shouldn't be applied because there are current methods that are already being used, and regardless of how ineffective they are compared to new method's, these can't be applied? I mean seriously you don't see how a auction house would open up a new market and have more players trading then the current method of which is being used?

Wolf359 wrote:If I'm correct (and I am) there are numerous ways to trade in-game already. People can also advertise trading on the forum and I'm willing to bet that 99.9% of all alliances have their own trade section on their own forums.

Yes your correct many if not all alliances have a trade section in their forums, again why only use this method for trading? There are several players not in alliances nor participating in forums which have trade threads, so again your only limiting the quanity of trades that could be possible. And again you say numerous ways to trade in game, but I've only seen one aspect, being forums weather they are alliance or the offical SGW forum. What other in game methods are you not listing? Planet advertising, thats hardly effective, in comparision to an auction house. I can't think of any others so please share.

Auriel Aryamehr wrote:Great Scott.. some people just have this single picture of what they think is right, and cannot accept ANY change to that idea, except along their own lines of thinking. I believe that's referred to as a control obsession..

Is this because of me ? because if it is then i most tell u that while some remains here arguin i did talk with him trough msn and im checkin other gameshow this auction houses works and if any of them had the short amount of turns this game have, a lil time to compare i am taking! I explained a lil ti Ifrit why im not changing my mind about it, and once he answer Wolf359 question im damn sure ill change my mind!

Ifrit wrote:1.) Reduce the risk of scamming (which yes is a legal tactic but shouldnt be available for players to do).
2.) A more competive market then there already is.
3.) More players will be trading then before, thus applying more so to #2.*
4.) Players would feel more comfortable trading through the auction house due to all of the above reasons.
5.) Larger quanities of ATs, UU and Naq available for everyone, also applying to #2.

* additionaly because the current method requires players to use the forums to trade this method would cause more trades through a larger participation.

so these aren't good reasons?

1 - Why shouldn't it be available?
2 - More competitive than already being able to sell/trade at any price you want?
3 - How?
4 - No - because the points are invalid.
5 - How? besides, large amounts of AT is not good for the game.

Wolf359 wrote:

Ifrit wrote:1.) Reduce the risk of scamming (which yes is a legal tactic but shouldnt be available for players to do).
2.) A more competive market then there already is.
3.) More players will be trading then before, thus applying more so to #2.*
4.) Players would feel more comfortable trading through the auction house due to all of the above reasons.
5.) Larger quanities of ATs, UU and Naq available for everyone, also applying to #2.

* additionaly because the current method requires players to use the forums to trade this method would cause more trades through a larger participation.

so these aren't good reasons?

1 - Why shouldn't it be available?
2 - More competitive than already being able to sell/trade at any price you want?
3 - How?
4 - No - because the points are invalid.
5 - How? besides, large amounts of AT is not good for the game.

1 - Its not good business, players should not be manipulating others for their own growth. Why should it be available?
2- Whould have more people trading then now because there is a large % of players who are not in alliances nor participate in the forums, and are more likely unaware. Therefor more competition to sell merchandise.
3 - Whould have more people trading then now because there is a large % of players who are not in alliances nor participate in the forums, and are more likely unaware.
4 - Only from your perspective. How is having more people trading not a valid point? How are any of the 5 reasons I provided not valid?
5 - Through more participation in a market that would be visable and available in a game menu. You said yourself this is a war game, how does a more frequent supply of ATs make it worse?

Now that I have respectfully anwsered your questions please anwser mine.

Another benefit this would bring
6.) A more organized, easier to view, and safer system.
a.) More organized - Because its provided as a in-game menu, you dont have to travel else where to find trade, nor wait for brokers. Each type of resource would have its coresponding menu.
b.) Easier to view - Instead of scroll through threads looking for deals that have already been closed or have to wait for a broker cause the trader is offline, there is no need, trades are instant if bought out, and pending if bid on.
c.) Safer system - Names are annyomous, people won't be knowing who you are trading with, therefor if a auction expired or was bid on and cleared their would be less worry as to players having knowledge of this.

If your going to say something is invalid at least express an opinion as to why, likewise when I said your point was invalid I supplied a reasoning.

Also how come you have avoided every question I have asked? Is there some sort of reasoning as to why you can't supply an anwser?

Respectfully, you haven't answered my questions. Especially regarding scamming - on which you seem to hinge most of your argument. You have yet to come up with a good reason as to that question, which was one of my first - why should scamming not be available? This is meant to be a war game - and war games have tactics - and one tactic is to con more resources from someone than they think they are given - just because you do not like it, it doesn't mean that it is invalid or shouldn't be removed.

When I said it's invalid, it was in direct response to you saying 'due to all of the above reasons' - which I had answered (or countered with another question - in which case you have answered it with assumption, rather than fact), therefore I didn't see further need for clarification.

I haven't avoided your question - you just continually fail to answer mine or to provide a valid reason as to how this would benefit the game! To say it would make it safer and easier is invalid because (as stated many, many times now) scamming is a legit tactic, which should not be removed, and if you are naive enough to accept trades without checking, then it is your own fault - it is avoidable!) and who said war is easy?

"Excuse me Colonel, just leaving the front line to pop to the market to buy another load of troops."

"Sure Captain, go ahead and don't forget my extra naquadah!"

So the basic questions have not yet been answered:

1 - Why should it be safer, when it is down to the individuals own actions, or lack thereof?

2 - Why should it be easier? A lot of people would argue that it is already easy - and numerous people have proved it by starting the game and managing to ascend within 2 or 3 months. So, why should it be easier?

Not everything in life, especially war, is safe and easy - so why does an online roleplaying game need to be?

acually you havent anwsered all my questions, I can pull down at least 3 posts where I have asked several questions and not one of them was anwser which is why I made the statement in the first place.

Second now you make the assumption Im basing my whole idea on scamming, which it isnt. Clearly more of the time I have expressed the fact that it would generate more trading through more participation due to it being a direct in game menu.

Sorry that my anwser was an assumption, but its hard to gather anything from your response when you don't supply a reasoning for stating its invalid.

I'll anwser your questions, but first since I asked long before you and already have anwsered your other questions before my statement I would like it if you supplied anwsers to my posts previous to the statement of me saying "Also how come you have avoided every question I have asked? Is there some sort of reasoning as to why you can't supply an anwser?" I mean seriously, if your going to shoot down a suggestion at least express your reasoning to why you feel they are invalid. It just seems that your being more oppositinal, compared to having a debate and conversating the terms of this idea, your just flatout saying "NO". Serriously if you feel that way support what your saying, give some input and don't avoid parts. If you can't anwer them, or agree with them then say so.

I think this is a good idea. We should do it!

Well i think that this is really an organizational tool. With brokers it is possible to have people hold your... whatever and then give it back to you.

And for the whole "people will manipulate it" thing. People already do that with everything. Just be more clever then they are and put in some safeguards.

Posting stuff for X amount of time at X fee is cool cause its allowing for more civilized trade and can get you a better bang for your buck.

Also with planets specifically, it shouldnt be that you can go explore then post the POS you found hopeing for some fast cash. you should have to own the planets in question for some amount of time before you can put it up for auction.

And did anyone say anything about posting requests? Say "hay i need 200,000 UU and have a puppy for the one whoever wants it" then someone says yeah ill give you 200k but for two puppies. NOTE: I know puppies are not a part of the game so don't say anything about it or this thread will become rediculously long and off topic.

I think that is it for now.

Man, who would have thought that this topic I started would get so big.

Anyway, Wolf359, Ifrit has a point. You have not giving a good reason on why you don't want this. Now, I know my original idea wasn't that good, but Ifrit idea is. It solves most of the problems of my idea and gets the job done, even moreso.

As for the whole scamming thing, you say we need to check before we leap, now I don't know about you all but I don't see how we are to check them unless we know them personally.

no he is right, he means view all the data about the broker make sure its correct and then accept it.