Chriffer

I don't understand how what you are saying is any different than things are now. Players can post an item now and be screwed over. The only different is under a system that displays the current best bid price and best list price they'd know they would be getting "screwed over" before posting it.

For example, under the current system the last 5 might display: 50, 50, 50, 50, 50. It may display 100 bids and 2 items listed for sale. The current highest bid may be 10. If you can only afford to post your item for 2, and you do so, you would get 10. If the best bid and best list were displayed then you would know that you would receive 10 before you posted your item for sale.

The entire act of posting an item for sale and setting a reserve price is an explicit statement of "I am willing to accept this much Inf for my item." If you can't afford to post the item for the value you want then don't. The display of best bid price and best list price doesn't screw any more people over.

I don't understand why people would take things off market with this system in place. I honestly have no idea in anyway, shape or form how this could possibly be true. Please, provide me with some details of any kind.

I'm offering no opinion whether I think this suggestion should or should not be implemented. I'm merely stating that both of you unsigned this suggestion for reasons that don't make any sense.

I should have been more clear, honest, and straightforward in my post that I quoted here.

My point was that anyone who has an opinion that this picture demonstrates that flippers raise prices is incapable of rational thought and if you know such a person please do not think that rational discourse will sway their misguided opinion. Further, if you are going to give a noble attempt to educate such a person please don't quote them in your posts so that those people who put them on ignore can refrain from reading their ridiculous misguided opinions.

I suspect that people who have such an opinion are also of the opinion that Equilibrium Price is a concept that does not exist. Equilibrium Price is a difficult concept to properly quantify due to its ever-changing nature and value that is virtually impossible to accurately describe. However, the simple concept that somewhere exists a balance point can give one enlightening information. Such an example is when an item in City of Heroes constantly sells for a certain price, sells very quickly for that price, and when almost none or none of that item stay listed as "for sale". One can ascertain from such a situation that "the equilibrium price must be higher than this price listed in the last 5" and know that items listed for sale above this price are likely to sell in a reasonable amount of time. Equilibrium Price is just a bunch of fancy words for "that's too hot", "that's too cold" and somewhere in the middle is just right.

A person may ask me a question like "How has the talking up of respec recipes gone?" Perhaps they were making an honest inquiry. In that case the answer is "very well", but not as well as the people who invested immediately after I did due to drop rates being changed. Perhaps they were making a mocking statement showing that by talking up an item one can get more people to buy such an item and thus raise the price and profit. In such a situation I am flattered to think that someone believes my mere word can alter the course of the market.

Perhaps they were making an insult referring to the obvious nature of what Respec recipes were going to do and that I only have the ability to point out the obvious. Forum-goers have said this about me before. I must concede that this point is true. I only am able to point out the obvious. Obviously, an item like Respec recipes fall in price when Respecs are given away freely with releases of new Issues and obviously they rise in price when they are not given away freely. This knowledge or prediction is nothing to brag about nor compelling, nor surprising, nor enlightening. I have made many other obvious statements. Such statements include: Equilibrium Price exists and is helpful, and people who think the picture shown above demonstrates anything about flippers in anyway are irrational.

Let me summarize my post to hammer home the point I am trying to make:
1) Some posters are incapable of rational thought.
2) Here are some qualities of those posters and some minute level of detail of why opinions they posses are irrational.
3) If you can identify such a poster, please stop quoting them.

I'll use my magical powers to tell you that when Issue 17 comes out, the price of Respecs will go down. After that, Respec recipes will rise in price. When Going Rogue comes out, Respec Recipes will go down in price. Several weels later they will rise again.

Clearly, my divine word alone will cause these changes.

Are these two back to back posts that both point out how one is "An ebil marketeer solely speaking in self interest and only hoping to make more money and have more wealth than anyone else"? Also, are these two posts each referring to different sides in a compare and contrast?

In the original post Selling Merits for Inf is compared with reducing Inf rewards. The first quoted post explains how selling Merits for Inf benefits those who already have money. The second quoted post explains how reducing Inf awards rewards those who already have money. Virtually any idea that will combat inflation will benefit people who have money other than "take money directly from people who have money." That's pretty much a basic facet of "deflation" and "inflation".

The only reasonable conclusion, and only universal truth in the markets, is that Ebil Marketeers always win.

No matter what one does or says, one is always in support of Ebil Marketeers.

Cease thyne acts of greed. Bask in the glorious illumination of War Witch and allow though holy radiance to percolate through thyne life ichor. Grasp thyne Inf from the raised seat of avarice and cast it forth among the masses of Casual Players. Only through removal of thyne's own repository of wealth can knowledge be wrought and thus allow though to speaketh and acteth in a manner not born of the greed of Ebil.

I assure you, speaking from vast amounts of experience in this field **touches his nose twice, winks once**, the harassment is a sign that you are doing a good job and that many people are very appreciative of your work. I found the harassment quite amusing and at many times was the highlight of my day. I found the best way to handle it was simply to keep asking the person questions trying to get them to explain their point. They vent their steam, you read some funny logic, and nobody gets hurt.

Lower prices means more availability.
If everyone worked together we'd all have purpled Warshades.

Oh great War Witch, reach down thyne holy hand and smite the evil marketeers, the flippers, and the arbitrators. Only through your mercy may the Casual Player accoutre in purple raiment. For onceth the players behold the glory of lowered prices then all may enjoy the fruits of your labor.

The Merit system was specifically made to satisfy those City of Heroes players who have this opinion. The Devs read your opinion, thought it merited action, and action was Merit Rewards.

And how does that pertain to what I said?

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about nor have any idea how it pertains to what I said. What I said was "getting around the Inf cap has no adverse affect".

I think it has no adverse affect. Thus, why not leave in the loophole.
*EDIT*
I misspoke. It has no adverse affect.

In my experience there are stupid people on every side in every argument and every side, no matter how ludicrous, has people. I'd be more afraid if something was universally supported. Finding one crazy person to oppose a topic would make me feel quite reassured.

"Go hunt. Kill skulz." That's pretty much all the understanding one needs. That statement can be understood a different way as "Play the game. Shoot the bad guys. Find stuff. Sell what you find. Buy as much of what you want as you can."

This topic is being worked on and changed in at least minimal ways.

The whole thread is quite enlightening on the topic of "Every single idea".

I'm not sure who you are referring to when you say "I find it somewhat amusing and sad that the people that are arguing against the idea are long time market people with an obvious bias for keeping the status quo." Most of the people I read opposing the idea in this thread have proposed alternative solutions to reduce prices or support various alternative solutions to the one proposed.

I'm sorry, I don't understand this opinion. I consider this opinion irrational, flawed, and simply ludicrous. I understand the concept that a person who has money can buy more stuff than a person who has less money. I cannot understand how a seller having more money can force someone to pay more money than they otherwise would. Players can't bid with more money then they have. Sadly, one can only be fleeced, cheated, and robbed for only so much money. Without a system of credit you can only force someone to pay so much. Buying up all the inventory does not guarantee the ability to sell those items at a higher price. My point is that when you say "This allows him to flip purples and other expensive non-purple IO recipes and then resell them at a higher cost" you are simply wrong. It does not allow him to flip purples in such a manner.

My understanding of your conclusion is even more baffling. My understanding is that by forcing players who have 2 billion or more Inf to spend money it would cause prices to fall. Spending more money would cause prices to rise. Money not spent is money not raising prices. Thus, money in bids for non-existent items aren't raising prices. You may attempt to counter with "but more money will flow through the market and thus more Inf would be destroyed". The money would travel to a "Black Market" where players trade off the market and do not pay any fees. Example of players trading off market. Your proposal would cause more items to rise in price and more items to be traded off market.

On a related note, players could simply place bids for items that cost 2 Billion or more. Either buying the item and selling it off market for more than 2 billion or having a storage place for their inf. Also, players could create alts to hold money or store their money in items traded off market (see link).

One could reduce the ability of level 50s to produce Inf and not affect the ability of other level characters. Do level 50 characters get a bonus to Inf earned? If so, perhaps a reduction in such a bonus is merited.

I am unsure of how to respond to such a statement because I do not comprehend. Could you please provide me with your reasoning so that I may further understand your opinion? Hoe does the Inf cap relate to "drives up demanded prices"? How do "market flippers" factor in?

1. Some people (like Smurphy) aren't still playing. It's not so much that he finds the rest of the game too easy and boring as much as it is the single most fun he has in game is blowing the snot out of people on +2 through +4 Task Forces with enemies buffed and players debuffed. He cares about that feature more than anything else.
2. Personally, I forgot to cancel the autopay before another 6 months were subscribed.
3. I do have faith that it will be fixed. Hence me posting here and asking about "how's this going" as opposed to "you stink and I hate you." The devs do a pretty awesome job. I just want them to be awesome in the Task Force difficulty direction.

It worked before any difficulty changes.
It worked after the -1 through +4 difficulty changes.
AND they said "we're working on this".