StarGateWars Forums

i feel like while not a finished idea this overall plan is a good one, it adds more of a trade and business aspect to an overall militant game. Diplomacy is what you make it now as well as a more or less free for all militarily a way to sell resources on an open market as opposed to a set amount like the market in place now would even things out by the basic concept of supply and demand.

Ifrit wrote: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.

I didn't say I had answered all your questions - what I'm intimating at is why shopuld I answer yours when you continually fail to answer mine.

Head - brick - wall.

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.

I don't think I did say it was wholly based on scamming - although I did indicate it seemed to be mainly based on. Difference.

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.

*sigh*

When I said 'invalid' - it was in response to your point 4. Which you stated was due to points 1-3 - I said 'NO, because they are invalid' - and I had indicated in my direct response why they were, or for point 3 asked 'How' - which you again failed to respond to.

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.

You know that's funny - complaining that I don't answer your questions when you have yet to answer my first query as to why you think scamming should not be allowed. You have agreed it is a perfectly legal tactic, and have agreed that it is within all players ability to stop it happening, yet you still say it shouldn't be allowed - but have yet to give an adequate reason as to why! Your only half decent response was:

Its not good business, players should not be manipulating others for their own growth.

But, frankly, that's rubbish because manipulation of players is all part of the game - and as we have said many times before - every player has the ability to stop themselves being scammed - it is not my fault, or anyone elses, if they are too lazy to do so. You might as well say that players are not allowed to attack each other!

You seem to forget that I don't have to prove why the suggestion is bad - I've listed reason upon reason why it is not needed, and have countered your arguments. YOU have to prove how it would benefit the game - and so far you haven't said anything that can't already be done in and around the game already. Repeating the same old statements that have already been countered does not make the idea better.

Frankly, I'm sick to the back teeth of suggestions to make the game 'easier' or 'safer' (of which this one doesn't really do either except to save the ever so massive effort of having to look in the forum or check your brokers properly - pfft!). It's already easy and it's already safe - it's just that some people are far too lazy and want it even easier and even safer!

Finally, as mentioned previously, this was also suggested long ago, and was rejected - nothing has changed since then to suggest it would be more beneficial now, or any more reason why the Admins would implement it.

Until you can come up with a definate benefit that will actually add something to the game instead of just making it easier or safer, then there's really no point in us continuing to discuss it.

because of your redunancy I will continue to ignore you till you can anwser my questions. And yes I did anwser your questions.

smity_ANV wrote: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.

Now this is a neat idea, so now we could have a planet market inside the Auction House, as long as we owned the planet for awhile. Very clever, I think this needs some attention.

Ifrit wrote:because of your redunancy I will continue to ignore you till you can anwser my questions. And yes I did anwser your questions.

That's a joke. How have you answered my questions? You may have provided a feeble response, but I've countered it every time!

You demand I answer your questions when you cannot state even one benefit this will bring to the game that is not already achievable, and cannot answer my original question as to why scamming should be removed?

Here's the facts - this has been suggested before (more than once) and rejected by the Game Admins.

- you cannot state a sensible reason why scamming should be removed.

- you cannot state any additional benefits that this would bring that are not already achievable.

I'm laughing at your blind determination not to answer questions and to just repeating the same old, already countered, claims.

And leave remarks like 'you're redundant' out of it - no need for it!

Ifrit wrote:

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?

ok here it goes..
1.) seems like your asking my opinion, I anwser with a opinion, regardless of the anwser, I ANSWERED!! Perhaps not the best of anwsers, but Ill show something more bellow.
2.) seems like I was pretty through in anwsering that question.
3.) same as 2.
4.) if you look there are people who seem to like the idea, they see valid points, so yea its your perspective.
5.) again, seems I was pretty through with an anwser. Also avoid my question when I contered a statemnt made by yourself.

Also lets point out, not only this thread, but above ones everytime I countered you, you didnt reply to my questions, you avoided the context and continued with your "devils advocate" view. Hence why I have called your actions redundantcy.

Also while we are at it lets show another tid bit, while im making a post anyway.

Wolf359 wrote:In which case the question is: Do we really want to make it completely safe, so that trades are completely protected from stupidity and or lack of communication?

To which the answer is, undoubtedly, NO.

The market was created to make trades safer - to stop scamming - because previously you had to rely on people sending you resources after you sent them resources - but those resources were not protected once they were sent, and neither should they be now because someone accepts a broker at an inconvenient time - does it really need to be completely idiot proof?

Wolf359 wrote: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?

First what does easy have to do with scamming, now that done. Safer....hmmm now I see a statement about why the market was orignaly created you knowing full well what its intentions at creation where suppose to be now you are saying that they shouldn't be, nice opinion, i respect your opinion, but i dont agree with it.

Personally if this is the intention at creation now I have completly valid reasons, which only by your opinion and perspectives are not valid. So please lets continue...

Ifrit wrote:

Ifrit wrote:

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?

ok here it goes..
1.) seems like your asking my opinion, I anwser with a opinion, regardless of the anwser, I ANSWERED!! Perhaps not the best of anwsers, but Ill show something more bellow.
2.) seems like I was pretty through in anwsering that question.
3.) same as 2.
4.) if you look there are people who seem to like the idea, they see valid points, so yea its your perspective.
5.) again, seems I was pretty through with an anwser. Also avoid my question when I contered a statemnt made by yourself.

Also lets point out, not only this thread, but above ones everytime I countered you, you didnt reply to my questions, you avoided the context and continued with your "devils advocate" view. Hence why I have called your actions redundantcy.

Also while we are at it lets show another tid bit, while im making a post anyway.

Wolf359 wrote:In which case the question is: Do we really want to make it completely safe, so that trades are completely protected from stupidity and or lack of communication?

To which the answer is, undoubtedly, NO.

The market was created to make trades safer - to stop scamming - because previously you had to rely on people sending you resources after you sent them resources - but those resources were not protected once they were sent, and neither should they be now because someone accepts a broker at an inconvenient time - does it really need to be completely idiot proof?

Wolf359 wrote: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?

First what does easy have to do with scamming, now that done. Safer....hmmm now I see a statement about why the market was orignaly created you knowing full well what its intentions at creation where suppose to be now you are saying that they shouldn't be, nice opinion, i respect your opinion, but i dont agree with it.

Personally if this is the intention at creation now I have completly valid reasons, which only by your opinion and perspectives are not valid. So please lets continue...

You can't use my own arguments back against me to cover up that you haven't said anything substantial......

How have you countered anything I said? Repeating the same old statement, or banging on about it being easier, safer and more user friendly is not countering.

And who said anything about easy having anything to do with scamming? I suggest you either start actually reading what is posted, or seek clarification of misunderstanding before you make sweeping statements.

And what do you mean 'me knowing full well what it's intentions at creation were?' If you'r referring to what I said in another thread that one of the things was to stop scamming, then maybe you should read the pm I sent you, which gives my explanation, repeated below for the record:

Wolf359 wrote:No I haven't contradicted myself - part of the reason the market/brokers were brought in WAS to reduce the amount of scamming - what I'm saying in the other thread is that it shouldn't be eliminated completely and that the existing market gives players the ability to ensure they are not scammed - it's just laziness that people want it idiot proof.

If you are just going to ignore things I say, then please don't post at all - otherwise, stop being cryptic and actually say what you mean!

The bottom line is, what you are suggesting does not really add anything to the game that isn't already already achievable - you seem to keep missing that one point - and have definately, 100%, failed to come up with anything that says it does add something new to the game. Yes, yes, yes, it makes things safer and it makes things easier - but it doesn't need to be safer and it doesn't need to be easier. Please tell me why it does!

As for your question about how does a more readily supply of ATs make it worse - well I admit, I missed that earlier - but the answer is simple. There is already a virtually unlimited supply of AT within the game, therefore a need to increase movement of that supply is unwarranted - furthermore, it is the over-abundance of AT in the game that is currently one of its downfalls and has led to a lot of the current 'problems' especially when coupled with other certain updates.

I believe Ifrit has a good point, however is going about it wrong. By calling it an Auction House, it gives the impression that people will bid to make the prices higher. Really, those selling their resources should set a price they would like to sell at, get charged a % of their sale price, and then have it on an in-game players market for say 3 days. By having an in-game players market, people wouldn't have to use a forum every time they wanted to buy or sell some resources, leading to faster, easier trades. Some say, well why does it have to be faster or easier? In real war, whoever has more resources can obtain other necessary resources fast. This would increase activity by allowing more resources to obtained during wars or while farming/raiding. Inactivity is this games worst problem, and this idea could do something to help increase action in a war game. BMMJ13

BMMJ13 wrote:I believe Ifrit has a good point, however is going about it wrong. By calling it an Auction House, it gives the impression that people will bid to make the prices higher. Really, those selling their resources should set a price they would like to sell at, get charged a % of their sale price, and then have it on an in-game players market for say 3 days. By having an in-game players market, people wouldn't have to use a forum every time they wanted to buy or sell some resources, leading to faster, easier trades. Some say, well why does it have to be faster or easier? In real war, whoever has more resources can obtain other necessary resources fast. This would increase activity by allowing more resources to obtained during wars or while farming/raiding. Inactivity is this games worst problem, and this idea could do something to help increase action in a war game. BMMJ13

I understand that - but my point is that it doesn't need to be easier than it already is - is it such a great hardship for people to go into the forum and read the list of trades - and how is an in-game list that much easier than a forum list? I've seen exactly the thing that is being proposed in another game, and believe me, you still end up with pages of lists to sift through. Okay, it can be made slightly easier because you can sort the list - but why do things always have to be easier? As said above - it's not a massive hardship as it is. As it happens - in that other game, the forum market was still the most active - and the in-game market could still be used to scam people, as it was quite easy to hide a dodgy deal amongst all the others - and then all that happened was that players screamed out for the Game Admin to get their resources back!

I mean, what makes people so sure that they will check an in-game auction or whatever, such as this, anymore closely than they would a broker?

Everything suggested is already achievable somehow, and so what does it actually add to the game? I don't believe it will increase trading - and even if it does, is that what we want? In my 3 years experience of the game, trading encourages stat building, and not war.

All I honestly see this suggestion doing is making things easier than they already are (and the game isn't difficult). I don;t agree that things should be made easier, and I don't agree that further measures should be implemented to make the game safer than it already is - the things suggested are already in the game, it's just some people don't think about what they are doing.

Most suggestions I vehemently oppose are suggestions which make things needlessly safer and easier - because these suggestions ultimately reduce the lack of thought, strategy and planning that go into the game, reducing it to simply clicking a sequence of commands that, frankly, a chimp could do. I have seen nothing so far within this thread to say that this suggestion is anything more.

wolf359 wrote:The bottom line is, what you are suggesting does not really add anything to the game that isn't already already achievable - you seem to keep missing that one point - and have definately, 100%, failed to come up with anything that says it does add something new to the game. Yes, yes, yes, it makes things safer and it makes things easier - but it doesn't need to be safer and it doesn't need to be easier. Please tell me why it does!

acually I have provided reasons as to what it would add and how it would benefit, also I stateded another agrrement about possibly adding a planet market.

Here let me show you what is adds;
2.) A more competive market then there already is. Its more competeive because now all trades are visable you can see the trades in one screen together, so now the market is more dynamic and comepetive.
3.) More players will be trading then before, thus applying more so to #2. Ive already stated why this would be.
4.) Players would feel more comfortable trading through the auction house due to all of the above reasons. As well as a safer more civilized trade system, no need to wait for brokers and take the risk of being setup.
5.) Larger quanities of ATs, UU and Naq available for everyone, also applying to #2.
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 wasn't bid on and cleared their would be less worry as to any players having knowledge of this.

smithy_ANV wrote: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.

this is an awesome idea, another addition to the game, now you can still have an auction/selling of planets and can still abadon and not take away from the war trait of it.

Yes I keep repeating myself, because I get the feeling you can't see that it does add, that it would have more envolvement, that it should be a direct in-game option, that having the thought people should use the forums (both offical and alliance) for trading is just absurd. As I said before anything that can be added as a direct in-game option should be. And you just said yourself it wouldnt eliminate scamming, that it could still happen, which isn't what I hinge this on, I hinge it on more participation in trading and more readly available resources in an instant. This update would benefit both large and small players, why? because large players could afford higher prices and small players could get required resources needed to build accounts to catch up to the larger player. And this type of market could stirke more competetion and action in wars and in the game all around.
Also Im not saying that brokers should be removed I just think that the Auction House should be another form of trading in addition to the current method.

Wolf359 wrote:How have you countered anything I said? Repeating the same old statement, or banging on about it being easier, safer and more user friendly is not countering.

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.

Ifrit wrote: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.

Ifrit wrote: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.

still havent anwsered these quetions, you don't have to Im just wondering why?

Wolf359 wrote:And who said anything about easy having anything to do with scamming? I suggest you either start actually reading what is posted, or seek clarification of misunderstanding before you make sweeping statements.

you did in your post, read what I quoted from you again, perhaps I misinterpetted the quote but it sounded like you were talking about scamming at frist and then commented about war.

Wolf359 wrote:And what do you mean 'me knowing full well what it's intentions at creation were?' If you'r referring to what I said in another thread that one of the things was to stop scamming, then maybe you should read the pm I sent you, which gives my explanation, repeated below for the record:

Wolf359 wrote:No I haven't contradicted myself - part of the reason the market/brokers were brought in WAS to reduce the amount of scamming - what I'm saying in the other thread is that it shouldn't be eliminated completely and that the existing market gives players the ability to ensure they are not scammed - it's just laziness that people want it idiot proof.

If you are just going to ignore things I say, then please don't post at all - otherwise, stop being cryptic and actually say what you mean!

I didnt post the PM because my reply was for the reason to make it aware that it is a valid, point. Im sorry I left you PM out of my statement, if it offends you that I did Im sorry, not my intention I just didnt see the point to add it where it contained the same contexts as the already used quote.

Ifrit wrote:

wolf359 wrote:The bottom line is, what you are suggesting does not really add anything to the game that isn't already already achievable - you seem to keep missing that one point - and have definately, 100%, failed to come up with anything that says it does add something new to the game. Yes, yes, yes, it makes things safer and it makes things easier - but it doesn't need to be safer and it doesn't need to be easier. Please tell me why it does!

acually I have provided reasons as to what it would add and how it would benefit, also I stateded another agrrement about possibly adding a planet market.

Here let me show you what is adds;
2.) A more competive market then there already is. Its more competeive because now all trades are visable you can see the trades in one screen together, so now the market is more dynamic and comepetive.
3.) More players will be trading then before, thus applying more so to #2. Ive already stated why this would be.
4.) Players would feel more comfortable trading through the auction house due to all of the above reasons. As well as a safer more civilized trade system, no need to wait for brokers and take the risk of being setup.
5.) Larger quanities of ATs, UU and Naq available for everyone, also applying to #2.
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 wasn't bid on and cleared their would be less worry as to any players having knowledge of this.

Okay.....

2) does there need to be a more competitive market? From what I can see it is already pretty competitive and I note recently that one trader has upset others by dramatically lowering his prices - and I know that even though I don't do that much trading. Just because all the trades are together in one screen, doesn't make it more dynamic and competitive - in fact from what I saw in another game, it can actually encourage people just to post the same prices. Additionally, again from the other game, it doesn't make trading any clearer and dodgy trades can still be hidden amongst the honourable ones.

3) I disagree that more players will be trading - and if they are only because previously they were too lazy to look elsewhere (forums/MSN) then why are we helping lazy people? Additionally - I don't believe that more people trading is necessarily a good thing as trading tends to be (but not always) used as a means of growing, instead of attacking - thus encouraging more stat building and less attacks.

4) I've already stated that the system does not need to be safer. Scamming is not an illegal tactic and people get scammed through brokers simply because they do not check the broker properly, or are too lazy to check it at all! There has to be some element of risk in the game - and trying to enturely remove all in-game scamming removes more of that risk. besides - as I already said, the system you propose does not make it safer (as proved by the other game) - it is easy for a trader to set up a number of honourable trades, and then just slip a dodgy one in - on the off chance that anyone who accepts it won't notice - and they won't because just like the brokers, they won;t check them properly.

5) Larger quantities of UU, naq and AT (particularly AT) is not necessarily a good thing. There's already a virtually unlimited supply of AT available in the market - which is a major flaw in the game for reasons I have cited time and time again in these boards. Again, why should we be making a game that is already a lot easier than it was even easier still?

6)

a) - more organised - not necessarily - instead of going through trades in the forum (which are organised into types of trade) you'd be flicking through pages of trades in-game (and experience tells me there will be pages) - additionally, because of the tabular format advertising these trades are likely to take, there will be less information available than in the forum, and it will be easier to hide dodgy deals.

b) - easier to view - again, not necessarily, see my response to 6)a). Plus, because it is an open trade to anyone (I presume with SS?) people are less likely to take the time to check them than they already do with brokers (which are 1 to 1), for fear that someone might beat them to the deal - which again potentially increases the chances of dodgy deals going through.

c) - safer - once more, why does it need to be safer? My philosophy is that if you don't know or trust the person you are trading with, or know that they are unreliable or may be away for a certain amount of time, then it is better to pre-arrange something or not to trade with them at all. What you are suggesting with safety, is the complete removal of scamming and risk - but scamming is just a method of gameplay, it isn't wrong, and it isn't right - and there should always be an element of risk with all aspects of this game - if there wasn't, what would be the point in it at all?

smithy_ANV wrote: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.

this is an awesome idea, another addition to the game, now you can still have an auction/selling of planets and can still abadon and not take away from the war trait of it.

Yes I keep repeating myself, because I get the feeling you can't see that it does add, that it would have more envolvement, that it should be a direct in-game option, that having the thought people should use the forums (both offical and alliance) for trading is just absurd. As I said before anything that can be added as a direct in-game option should be. And you just said yourself it wouldnt eliminate scamming, that it could still happen, which isn't what I hinge this on, I hinge it on more participation in trading and more readly available resources in an instant. This update would benefit both large and small players, why? because large players could afford higher prices and small players could get required resources needed to build accounts to catch up to the larger player. And this type of market could stirke more competetion and action in wars and in the game all around.
Also Im not saying that brokers should be removed I just think that the Auction House should be another form of trading in addition to the current method.

Hmm - this is old ground that I don't have time to go over right now. However, I don't think an auction house (and I don't think you mean auction as that would imply bidding) would benefit newer players. If anything, because older players have more resources, they can control the prices. There are other ways to hand a certain amount of control back to newer players (and one is to get rid of auto-generated AT in the market) - but they've been discussed to death elsewhere. You keep saying it's not about scamming - but have said before it would get rid of scamming, which you believe shouldn't be allowed.

Bottom line is I just don't think the benefits are as beneficial as you think they will be - and ultimately it would only really help those too lazy to open another browser window and look in the forum.

Wolf359 wrote:How have you countered anything I said? Repeating the same old statement, or banging on about it being easier, safer and more user friendly is not countering.

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.

Ifrit wrote: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?

All aspects of the game can't be provided in-game because there simply isn't the capacity to do so. Take Intelligence for example, the best players/alliances have numerous sources of intelligence - SGW forum, other alliance forums, spies placed in other alliances etc - that can't be placed in-game - and even if it could, there isn't a strong enough reason to do so - which I believe is also the case here - there isn't a strong enough reason to add an auction/trading house, because a lot of what is being suggested already exists in one way or another, and some of the reasons why it might work have shown in practice that actually they don't and can have an adverse effect (such as in the other game).

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.

Ifrit wrote: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.

still havent anwsered these quetions, you don't have to Im just wondering why?

What I was stating was that you can already do what you are suggesting through existing in-game trading functions. It isn't as complex - but it is equally effective if you check what you are doing and only trade with people you can trust. Isn't that the key to good business? Understand what you are doing, and check out thr person you are trading with?

Wolf359 wrote:And who said anything about easy having anything to do with scamming? I suggest you either start actually reading what is posted, or seek clarification of misunderstanding before you make sweeping statements.

you did in your post, read what I quoted from you again, perhaps I misinterpetted the quote but it sounded like you were talking about scamming at frist and then commented about war.

You'll have to be specific in which quote because you've quoted me quite a lot!

Wolf359 wrote:And what do you mean 'me knowing full well what it's intentions at creation were?' If you'r referring to what I said in another thread that one of the things was to stop scamming, then maybe you should read the pm I sent you, which gives my explanation, repeated below for the record:

Wolf359 wrote:No I haven't contradicted myself - part of the reason the market/brokers were brought in WAS to reduce the amount of scamming - what I'm saying in the other thread is that it shouldn't be eliminated completely and that the existing market gives players the ability to ensure they are not scammed - it's just laziness that people want it idiot proof.

If you are just going to ignore things I say, then please don't post at all - otherwise, stop being cryptic and actually say what you mean!

I didnt post the PM because my reply was for the reason to make it aware that it is a valid, point. Im sorry I left you PM out of my statement, if it offends you that I did Im sorry, not my intention I just didnt see the point to add it where it contained the same contexts as the already used quote.

[/quote]

It didn't offend me, it just suggested something without giving the full story.

(Need a rest now! )

Wolf359, I think you are looking at this from the wrong direction. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but you are a player like us right, and you are ranked... lets say 41, that means you are a one of the big guys. Well, that would mean that you like how it is, where you're safe from the lower guys. With this idea, the little guy will have a better chance of getting big and you would be in danger of losing your place. I believe that because of the danger to you, you do not want this idea put into place.

I'm sorry if you're offended but thats what it looks like to me.

One last thing, what is your rank?

5,521
also i wouldn't call him one of the bigger players, there are people out there with army size 30 times his. Sorry Wolf if that makes you feel bad

Dang, your the first admin. that I 've seen thats not in the top 500. My bad!

i think wolf 359 started back in game a few months ago, thats why..... i think that have nothing to do with been a mod, and btw, why instead an auction house dont we get a pet shop , we could start selling all dudes here with accounts named as animals and stuff........
Lets see how much i get in the auction for Wolf 359 ( besides getting banned from forum just for the idea )

Demon Lord Razgriz wrote:Wolf359, I think you are looking at this from the wrong direction. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but you are a player like us right, and you are ranked... lets say 41, that means you are a one of the big guys. Well, that would mean that you like how it is, where you're safe from the lower guys. With this idea, the little guy will have a better chance of getting big and you would be in danger of losing your place. I believe that because of the danger to you, you do not want this idea put into place.

I'm sorry if you're offended but thats what it looks like to me.

One last thing, what is your rank?

As others have pointed out - I'm not ranked as high as you think!!!

The reason being I quit the game back in December 06 (having played since 12 Feb 05) (at which point I was generally in the top 100) , took a break for a few months and then started a new account in September last year. Although ranked in the 5000's at the moment - the reason is because I'm on PPT - but in reality it is around 1600(ish) when off PPT.

And I was a Forum Admin until certain events in early 2007, which led me to quit my mod duties in April 2007. I was asked to come back as a mod when I started playing again - at first I declined, but they kept begging and blubbing, so what can you do? (j/k).

Bottom line is, the argument that I like it how it is and I might lose my place isn't valid - as I am one of 'the lower guys'!

Besides, I fail to see how this would make it any easier for the little guys to get bigger? And, I would add to that that it is already easy for new accounts to get reasonably big and into G&R range - I mean within a couple of months of starting my new account I was in or around G&R range, without doing anything very much - including losing more naq than I stole and very little raiding - and I can maintain myself in the vicinity of G&R range, despite being away from the game for around 3 months total (on vacation mode) since I started back playing.