Alkirin

-To hit on the Lich and Dark Servant. Additionally, Achille's Heel goes well with Grave Knights, as I believe it can stack.

I don't know if my experience is unique or not, but my pets still soak damage when I place them on attack/defensive. Granted, they don't necessarily stick to their target for long, but they still soak damage for me.

This.

Bonus points for jumping fiteclubbers and wrecking their ****.

Well, nothing new. This has already been done, repeatedly. Sure, people can deny it. The people doing the disrupting (even those managing some profit from it) will comfortably sit back and laugh I figure.

I'll sooner expect more bar-raising fallacies in response. It's been done before. Wake has lasted for a week or more in some cases to boot. We'll see what's next.

You want me to flip and/or corner a piece of common salvage and show how prices can be raised as a result?

Might want to think on this one.


Firstly, I'm not accusing him of intentionally misleading people. I hadn't questioned the data, only it's (lack of) significance - partially due to it's poor methodology. Reason I drove the point home is because of the ridiculous 'It's only your standards' defense of it.

I actually conceded this point somewhat earlier in the thread.

I stand by that. If he's just dodging the burden, then my criticisms are legitimate, I think.

If there's honestly nothing of significance being claimed or implied, then my criticism is misplaced.

I'm not the one labeling this as an experiment of any significance.


People attempt this with the real world economy all the time with modest margins of success. If an attempt were to be made in the smaller system of an MMO market?

Well...Yeah, it could be done. Alot of hinging factors involved, but yeah. A valid attempt could be made.

What's a '4chan' and why is that even related to this?




I think I'll actually pick through some of this wall of text, though.

Kent Hovind poses similar rhetoric with his 'prize for anyone that proves evolution'.

Between flipping and cornering, the effects of both have been discussed through the course of this topic. Before demanding anything, try addressing the points against your position first.

You can't possibly have read half of what you're responding to (more likely, you're ignoring it or hoping other people won't read) in order to honestly believe this.

At this point, I'm unsure that you even know what you are arguing against, or what people are raising against you. You have this sense of throwing everyone under the rug of 'them' and thinking that any kind of whining or ham-fisted appeal will hold it's weight.

As if it weren't enough that you prove my point. I've done a thorough breakdown more than once, but since you don't respond to that kind of criticism well, I'll scrunch down to one simple sentence for you.

- Poor procedure and a weak data collection show nothing of merit or significance in this experiment.


Hah. You don't even know what you're arguing against. You even seem to bother with why people disagree with you. It seems that you just identify people as 'them', generally against you for whatever reason, then rail against them.

May as well start asking me 'what are your crimes?'

This is where I'd say that ToT isn't the do-all, end-all blanket answer to what is happening to the market, as opposed to a blanket trend. Salvage is still being produced and is still pushing through the market. How did the supply rise again? Plenty of causes. Fact is that there's supply now.


Hmm...I had to take a minute to think on this. I can't honestly say that I 'object' to it. I just can't. I've actually participated in or otherwise taken advantage of attacks when they happened. Most importantly, the spikes have a negligible effect on me, as I can circumvent any such issues in less than 5 minutes' time. In the end, I think I'll avoid being a hypocrite about it.


Well, in the sense that 100k is pennies to people, yeah I can see how it could be written off. I'd argue that this is still a far cry from 'no effect', though. We're looking over 2 days past the spike and prices are just now beginning to consistently hold near 100k by my reckoning.

I've nothing to say on matters of morality. Perhaps in the real world, on other economic topics, but not on this. I don't see it as applicable.

I'm not labeling 'good' and 'evil' on anything here. I'm simply drawing correlations between actions and effects on the market.



I'm speaking specifically of common salvage. The prices are generally volatile and very vulnerable to manipulation. As a result of how fast it moves, however, the wake following after the spike is notably significant in the cases where it doesn't subside immediately.

In this case, I'm defining the 'spike' as the brief period where prices are driven to extremes, and the 'wake' as the period afterward, where prices settle and average above what they were before the spike.

For instance, Alchemical Silver was averaging between 50-75k before it spiked at several million when it was hit. As of this morning, it was averaging between 150-200k, even though a healthy supply has returned to the market.

Likewise, Ancient Bones were also hit yesterday and also spiked for multiple-millions. However, it's wake was relatively weak (for a period, around 50k or so), and eventually subsided a few hours later, before the end of the night.

A more dubious case, much longer ago, would be circuit boards. They rose from 20-40k averaging to a gridlock at near 200k that held for over a week.

Even in the worst case, the fluctuations are temporary. So the claim that this is 'ruining the economy' can't be sustained. Likewise, however, I scoff at people who say that this kind of thing has no noticeable or significant effect on the market. It's annoying at worst for people who are scrounging for salvage.

Though, personally...If I ever feel that it's that bad, and I need something right now; I just burn some tickets in AE.


I'll forego the irony of this statement in light of not addressing the point of my last post.

I'd point to here...
...Where you seem to infer a particular significance to your findings. I contend that there's no significance at all. To answer the question directly, 'No'.

Throughout the thread, you dance about the direct assertion without actually stating it in order to retain a plausible denial. Which is fine. I accept that. If you aren't making any assertions, then my claim doesn't apply to you. That aside, the experiment is nice but otherwise unremarkable.

Hmm...Well, I just simply look to the very first word of your first post.


Yeah. I see it now. I'm a real ****** for criticizing an experiment that proves nothing and otherwise doesn't fit within the method, then pretends to harbor some measure of significance.

I guess that's why I'm fat.

Not so much. To say that something is possible, doesn't infer that it is probable. Even to infer probability doesn't properly assert that something must be.

The only difference between the two cases presented and "whoops, I'm going after field crafter" is the motive, frankly. The mechanism and the effect is the same.


It's been a bit more difficult to drive home than I would like. But this point leads further back to the base of my argument...Which is really just more of a criticism of the OP that some are severely butthurt about.

• There was a moment of clarification between "Flipping" and "Cornering" (what I referred to as 'attacking').
  
• At the risk of sparking a tangent on what marks 'meaningful impact' on the long term, my expression on this matter is that the impact is significant. It's not single-handedly ruining the economy or anything (I rendered it down to 'annoying' more than anything), not by a long shot, but it's dishonest (or just ignorant) to say that there is no notable impact or that some cases have had a long-term impacts (which I would imply that further cases spark the chance of a longer 'wake' - the period for which prices are inflated).

My original intent in this topic is as I stated in my previous post. Mostly a criticism of the 'experiment', and a bone to pick at the conclusion.

- Never claimed that it was the common cause.
- Never claimed definitive 'proof'. Only mathematics does 'proofs'.

- My claim was that manipulation should be called for what it is, when it happens, as opposed to crying 'tin foil hat' and pointing to any and all other variables as responsible - no matter the stretch, simply because they are present factors.

The irony being that people defended the cases of Alchemical Silver of Ceramic Plates in just that fashion before the confessions were made.


I'll bullet point this. So no excuses in not following it.

1.) Your assumptions are irrelevant. Your data sample is abysmally small and inconclusive.
2.) The point of contention was your conclusion (thus: Non-sequitur, this isn't difficult).
3.) I've detailed more than once why your conclusion does not follow from the data and argument you've presented. If your best retort is to attack me personally, or otherwise strawman my stance...Well, it doesn't speak much for your stance. No amount of ad populum will change that.


a.) Not in response to your data. learn2context
b.) 'My' standard? Scientific method is grade-school level stuff. How pretentious of me to criticize an experiment for not even measuring up to that. I'm such an unreasonable ***.
c.) The two recent attacks were demonstrated proof of how manipulation affects prices - Very counter to your implied conclusion that they don't.

No, I persist in asking for very specific points to be addressed. In general, my posts are being replied to. Thus the pages-long arguments. Seriously. To just strawman the position is one thing, but you're just being lazy with it now.

- My criticisms to your argument haven't been addressed. Just whining and crying about how they're 'My' standards, or that they're otherwise unreasonable. That, and attacking me as if that has any bearing upon the point made.(1)

- Your conclusions do not follow from the experiment and argument you have presented. [The replies: Anywhere from 'yes they do, they totally do' to 'where's your experiment?']
- Additionally, the experiment is of such poor quality that, even if the conclusion was correct - it would not follow from what you presented. [Your reply: Whining about 'unreasonable' standards, strawman of the position against you]
- I've presented two recent instances that demonstrate the implications of your conclusion wrong. [At best, replies seem to insist that these are the only cases in which this has happened, which is laughable]

- See point (1)

My conclusion, given the above. Humor me with something of substance in your reply. Please.

Naturally, I'm going to challenge you on this point.

Even if his conclusion was valid, even if...Then what he has done does not support that in the slightest. That's the problem.

You can whine that I haven't gone though the trouble that he did in an experiment all you want, but that has no bearing upon the flawed methodology of the experiment presented.

Additionally, what relevance does an experiment of my own have to do with this? That's a childish retort with no bearing upon the point. I could give my advice on how to better run this experiment, sure, if that's what you're wanting. Though, I've already given the brush of my criticism in an earlier post. Feel free to actually address any of those.


I can't help but chuckle, given that the two items I've mentioned (Alchemical Silver and Ceramic Plates) were the result of malicious manipulation, in which the authors were kind enough to step forward about.

...Which pretty much just stresses the point I made.

Now that's just dishonest. You've either not read a line of my criticism regarding the whole of things wrong for the conclusion given, or you're intentionally just disregarding it.

Disagreement = Trolling is just a far-reaching cop out.

His experiment shows that his one inane attempt at anti-flipping failed. That's it. Sadly, that you like the non-sequitur at the end of it has no bearing upon that fact.

Hell, this experiment could have been about almost anything and it would be just as inconclusive given how it was conducted alone.

That is what I was trying to clarify with my earlier post. Except, I called cornering 'attacking' the market. Particularly because of how aggressive it was.



Well, that's just the thing. I understand the desire to be rational and to analyze a particular cause as opposed to jumping off to point fingers. Alot of people that do this don't particularly follow this pursuit all the way through.

Granted, there's an understandable reluctance to attribute such causes in a grandiose, conspiracy-theory web of explanation. But that's not quite the case here.

It's easy to look at what happened with Alchemical Silver and Ceramic Plate and say 'oh, that's just because of ToTing' or 'that's just because people use Alchemical Silver alot'. Don't get me wrong, those two factors are at play, surely. But that alone didn't drain the supply of specific common salvage to drive prices into the multi-millions for a short time. Contrary to some claims, the wake isn't always a 30 second window that sees prices dropping to the levels they were at - or even lower (exaggeration, but still).

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and shares the same genome as a duck...


OP's post attempts to refute the effects of cornering on the market through a half-hearted attempt at 'anti-flipping'. Yeah, nothing of consequence happened, nor was established.

Actually, this helps. Greatly.

Though...We seem to be diverging from a point here, which is why I've wanted this noted.

The distinction between cornering and flipping isn't one that I alone am guilty of skimming over (see: OP and following posts).

This is what I meant to clarify in my prior post with respect to the effect on the market.

While I appreciate the pages-long diatribes concerning how cornering is only short-term gain, I don't see how any of it is relevant to the effect that cornering has on prices on the market. Not every wake ends within an hour or overnight - hell, some don't even settle down after a week.