Are Hero & Villian Market the same?
By
Another_Fan,
Posted on: 2009-11-09 06:25 in The Market and Inventions
Quote:
Well, yes, influence traded for infamy or vice versa, will buy the same items from vendors at the same prices. However, the same is clearly not true of the markets. Explain, just why is it that a certain proc sells for a few million blue side but for tens of millions red side? Or vice versa?|
Originally Posted by Catwhoorg
Check your SO venders, the invention tables, the contacts.
1 Influence = 1 Infamy at all of those places. 1 Inf (either) today doesn't necessarily equal 1 inf tomorrow on the markets. Besides the 'natural' daily and weekly variations, the shake out from the Halloween event will take at least 1-2 weeks before the market is again 'stable', just in time for the Winter event to shake it up again. |
The only things that differ between the sides are 1) the population size of players and 2) the archetypes and power sets that those players choose. For one reason or another, certain items are in greater demand on one side than the other, in spite of equal drop rates and (presumably) nearly equal price-behavior elasticity. Referring to your earlier post about supply, demand, and elasticity, if drop supply and elasticity are equal between the two markets and yet the prices are significantly different (and they are), then clearly the demand for specific items are different between the two sides, based on preferred AT's and power sets which require those items. In short, inf on one side will buy less, or more, than inf from the other side, depending on what item is sought on that side.
So, I have to disagree. 1 influence is not equal to 1 infamy, based on what each can currently buy.
Quote:
... Heroes have TF's or trials at level 15, 20, 25, 28, 30 x2, 33, 34, 35, 38, 41, 44, 45, and 50. Not counting the shared TF's. Villains have, umm, 20, 35, and 40 plus the three respecs? I might be missing something.| The only things that differ between the sides are 1) the population size of players and 2) the archetypes and power sets that those players choose. For one reason or another, certain items are in greater demand on one side than the other, in spite of equal drop rates and (presumably) nearly equal price-behavior elasticity. |
... Heroes have Kora Fruit (a small point, to be sure.)
... Heroes have different requirements for their Accolades.
... Hero respecs involve defeating a larger number of bosses than Villain respecs, I believe.
... Heroes have, it is commonly believed, better farm missions. (I have no personal opinions on the topic.)
These are all potential sources of hero/villain differences in size or amount of stuff for sale at the Auction House, entirely aside from AT differences.
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Quote:
The same can be held true for a single side at different times.|
Originally Posted by perwira
Well, yes, influence traded for infamy or vice versa, will buy the same items from vendors at the same prices. However, the same is clearly not true of the markets. Explain, just why is it that a certain proc sells for a few million blue side but for tens of millions red side? Or vice versa?
|
I don't know for if the patient to BUY IT NAO fluctuation on any item is smaller or larger than the difference between 'on average' red and blue.
Alternatively examine the differential between recipe + ingredients and crafted IO. There is a huge markup within a side for laziness.
My suspicion is that on many items it is larger.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Quote:
Yup, there's a lot more than just players and archetypes and powers that differ between blue side and red side, including the missions themselves, all of which gives reason why there is a difference between the markets.
|
Originally Posted by Fulmens
... Heroes have TF's or trials at level 15, 20, 25, 28, 30 x2, 33, 34, 35, 38, 41, 44, 45, and 50. Not counting the shared TF's. Villains have, umm, 20, 35, and 40 plus the three respecs? I might be missing something.
|
Quote:
Good point about inf either side not being of the same worth over time. If anything, it seems that influence and infamy has declined in purchasing power over time. Part of it comes from the readier availability for player characters to earn increased influence and drops through new offerings (AE, super side-kicking, custom difficulty settings and the now-fixed rare recipe drops).|
Originally Posted by Catwhoorg
The same can be held true for a single side at different times.
I don't know for if the patient to BUY IT NAO fluctuation on any item is smaller or larger than the difference between 'on average' red and blue. My suspicion is that on many items it is larger. |
I agree with you that the NAO factor (and more specifically what item is sought 'NAO!') differs between sides. One reason why there might be more NAO factor on one side than the other for a certain item is the relative availability of and the demand for the item sought after. Some time-conscious players tend to go into NAO mode where there is a relative scarcity of an item, wherever it might be.
Quote:
I agree with this as a marketeer and would take advantage of it (having all ready done some research on where to make the best investments) but "most" players aren't marketeers and this would give us as marketeers yet another advantage over the "poor purpless casual Warshade" that we probably don't really need.|
Originally Posted by perwira
One way to alleviate the obvious impact of merging the markets is to provide long-term notice. If, for example, the devs indicated that a merge was impending in 6 months time, I think there would be little short-term to mid-term impact on the market on both sides as they play themselves out, with both of them gradually adjusting to each other up to the date of the merge. A few days or few weeks is clearly too short a time frame for players and marketers to adjust their short-, mid- and long-term holdings and positions. Something like a three or six month time frame would allow the trends in each side to gradually work themselves towards a merged dual side market. So, here, I don't see a problem, provided adequate notice and a large enough time frame is given to rework their market positions in line with a merger.
|
As a player I believe that the best way for the devs to proceed would be to "tell us" that a merger isn't happening and then hand us a merged market as a fait accompli.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
Ok, that does it. Anytime someone suggests that the devs 'tell us' one thing and then do the opposite thing 'fait accompli' is the time to think otherwise.|
Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
As a player I believe that the best way for the devs to proceed would be to "tell us" that a merger isn't happening and then hand us a merged market as a fait accompli.
|
At this point, I support the position that the devs do *not* merge the market.
Both markets have a flavor of their own and it's good to see both flavors in play rather than them being homogenized into mush. Swirled together, yet distinctly apart, chocolate and vanilla.
Quote:
So long as one market is decidedly inferior to the other as an actual tool, I will continue to consider this opinion wrongheaded. Which is "better" is not simply a matter of opinion. One is qualitatively inferior as a utility. The "flavor" is a matter of opinion. The functionality is not.
|
Originally Posted by perwira
Both markets have a flavor of their own and it's good to see both flavors in play rather than them being homogenized into mush. Swirled together, yet distinctly apart, chocolate and vanilla.
|
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
This. Nuff said.
|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
So long as one market is decidedly inferior to the other as an actual tool, I will continue to consider this opinion wrongheaded. Which is "better" is not simply a matter of opinion. One is qualitatively inferior as a utility. The "flavor" is a matter of opinion. The functionality is not.
|
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
Sorry, I don't get it. They operate with the same functionality, the only difference is the player/character base using them.|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
So long as one market is decidedly inferior to the other as an actual tool, I will continue to consider this opinion wrongheaded. Which is "better" is not simply a matter of opinion. One is qualitatively inferior as a utility. The "flavor" is a matter of opinion. The functionality is not.
|
Can you explain how one is functionally different than the other? Is it really?
Quote:
An ATM in Mogadishu is not as functional as an ATM in mid-Manhattan even if they both have the same capabilities. The Mogadishu one will do a hell of a lot less business. | Can you explain how one is functionally different than the other? Is it really? |
There have been cases where a reasonable bid fills in a couple days blueside and takes more than a week redside. The one I remember, I happened to be buying low-30s Thunderstrikes (after a 2XP weekend- don't remember if it was LAST 2XP though) both blue and redside. I clearly remember seeing, redside, that on one of them the last transaction was one of mine, and it was five days ago. (I end bids with 908.) I already had all my blueside Thunderstrikes, and I'd maybe resold some extras.
This was recent [last 3 months maybe]- but I've experienced variations of "On blueside, I'd have it by now" since the market opened. Redside has always been hollow- you get it at level 50 or you don't get it any time soon.
Oh, here's another example: I've started doing some generic crafting redside. Last night, at one point, between level 30,35, and 40 there were three [3] EndMods for sale. Two level 30, one level 35, and zero level 40. How's that "supply and demand" working out for you?
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Quote:
The gist of the overwhelming support in this forum for a merged market, then, seems to be the resulting increased player/character base using the merged market as opposed to a split (red-side/blue-side) player/character base using separate markets. It has less to do with functionality than it does the increased size of the player/character base using it. As a player, I understand why this is the case and I also understand how a merged market might help the supply situation for items that are more rarely available on one side than on the other.|
Originally Posted by Fulmens
An ATM in Mogadishu is not as functional as an ATM in mid-Manhattan even if they both have the same capabilities. The Mogadishu one will do a hell of a lot less business.
There have been cases where a reasonable bid fills in a couple days blueside and takes more than a week redside. The one I remember, I happened to be buying low-30s Thunderstrikes (after a 2XP weekend- don't remember if it was LAST 2XP though) both blue and redside. I clearly remember seeing, redside, that on one of them the last transaction was one of mine, and it was five days ago. (I end bids with 908.) I already had all my blueside Thunderstrikes, and I'd maybe resold some extras. This was recent [last 3 months maybe]- but I've experienced variations of "On blueside, I'd have it by now" since the market opened. Redside has always been hollow- you get it at level 50 or you don't get it any time soon. Oh, here's another example: I've started doing some generic crafting redside. Last night, at one point, between level 30,35, and 40 there were three [3] EndMods for sale. Two level 30, one level 35, and zero level 40. How's that "supply and demand" working out for you? |
I didn't mean to be argumentative, but as I mentioned earlier, I wanted to play devil's advocate to clarify why the markets should be merged, how it would improve game play, and how it would be done without drastic impact on player characters' already existing holdings and positions. These are issues that the devs would have to address and prioritize before deciding to move forward with all else that they are working on.
Quote:
This analogy doesn't work. When I have to go to a gunfight, I always take a ripe banana instead of a gun because:|
Originally Posted by Nethergoat
Oh definitely- bringing an RP rationale to a serious discussion is akin to bringing a ripe banana to a gunfight.
|
1) With the banana, the other guy looks at me, laughs, and walks away shaking his head. If I had a gun, it's highly probable he'd shoot me.
2) I might get hungry. Bananas are way better in that department. Sure, you can use a gun to get food, but there's all the noise and blood and running away from the 7-11. It's just much more direct with a banana.
3) You might be tempted to bring an unripe banana. Don't. It's not nearly as good a weapon as a gun, and not nearly as good foodwise as a ripe banana.
4) I know what you're thinking: better to bring the gun and just take the other guy's ripe banana because then you end up with both a gun and a ripe banana, and it really doesn't get any better than that. But if both guys think that way you're back to the noise and the blood again. Don't get fancy, just stick with the ripe banana.
I guess this really proves that using RP as a rationale against merging the markets make sense, but that wasn't my intent. I just get so tired of all the noobs bringing guns and/or unripe bananas to gunfights when it's so much better to go the ripe banana route.
Freedom: Blazing Larb, Fiery Fulcrum, Sardan Reborn, Arctic-Frenzy, Wasabi Sam, Mr Smashtastic.
Quote:
To try and clarify, the functional utility of a player-based market where drops are (primarily) random is intrinsically linked to the number of people using that market. We want better utility by virtue of a larger (merged) user base.
|
Originally Posted by perwira
It has less to do with functionality than it does the increased size of the player/character base using it.
|
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
While we're clarifying points for the audience: The functionality of a market is BECAUSE of the player base. If the base is too small, people don't use the market because nobody uses the market. You can't buy stuff if nobody's selling, you can't sell stuff if nobody's buying. | The gist of the overwhelming support in this forum for a merged market, then, seems to be the resulting increased player/character base using the merged market as opposed to a split (red-side/blue-side) player/character base using separate markets. It has less to do with functionality than it does the increased size of the player/character base using it. |
Increased player base produces increased functionality; you cannot separate the two.
Edit: Uberguy is faster. He wins.
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Quote:
There are many ways that having a smaller player base affects the supply of goods on the market. I think that not all of them are obvious. Simply because the mechanical actions of using the market are identical does not mean that the use patterns of differently-sized populations are the same.|
Originally Posted by perwira
Sorry, I don't get it. They operate with the same functionality, the only difference is the player/character base using them.
Can you explain how one is functionally different than the other? Is it really? |
The first, probably most intuitive difference is that price is likely to be higher, because lower per-capita supply and simialr per-capita demand suggests a higher equilibrium price. What may not be immediately obvious that lower population implies lower per-capita supply. After all, many people assume for simplicity that supply should be simply directly proportional to player population. However, I think that's an overly simplistic model that doesn't hold true.
I believe that there the hero side's higher population gives it the folloing non-proportional benefits for per-capita market supply of and demand for IOs.
- A larger proportion of players who team because teaming is both easier and more obviousy beneficial to more hero ATs. This increases the per-capity supply of merits and thus pool C/D recipes.
- A larger proportion of players who sell drops without being serious consumers. This is linked to the bullet above - team players have less forces driving them to seek IOs, because teams provide many of the same benefits, and teaming is considered easier and less onerous than IOing by many "casual" players. This effect decreases per-capita market demand.
- A larger pool of players getting drops, increasing the sampling across levels, meaning more non-capped recipes are generated and listed, creating more bargain opportunities for those willing to shop across levels.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
Merging the databases is not that big a deal.|
Originally Posted by perwira
As much as I like and agree with the idea of the merged market, it may not be as easy as it might seem at first glance. Even after coding changes to merge the markets, the market database(s) would still have to be merged without flaw.
I think a more serious problem is the immediate fallout that would come because of the price disparities, even hundreds of millions of inf apart on some items, between the two sides. Even if we are given a few weeks notice of an impending merge, the player (or at least marketer) reaction would be immediate and in some cases fairly drastic depending on the item and level of disparity. What if you had already put up an item for sale that would typically sell low on one side but is priced much higher than the other side or vice versa? Would everyone be allowed to retract their bids at some point prior to the merge? What about the inf you had already sunk into items stored in base or on your character, which may be potentially be much worth less in a merged market? Or worth more? Would it be 'fair' either way to either lose or gain simply because of a market merge? Has anyone looked at whether 1 influence blue-side = 1 infamy red-side in terms of actual purchasing power? I have a notion that they are not equal and merging the market will also have a total-side impact on the value of the inf on that side. Frankly, as much as I agree with the idea (and perhaps it should have been done this way from the beginning) for merged markets, I don't see the problem with a separate WW and BM. It has not hindered my game play one iota. |
You have a 2 lists of bids and 2 lists of offers. When you are done you have single big list. Each character already has a unique identifier every item on the market is associated one way or another with the unique identifier. There is literally zero problems here. Probably one of the easier database merges you will ever see. The only issue how to resolve standing buy and sell orders, the simplest way to do that is just let them resolve. Give people a month or more notice and if they dont act accordingly they dont act accordingly. If you didnt want to risk buying something you shouldnt have bid if you didn't want to sell don't list
Retracting bids can already be done. Delisting can be done at a cost. As to the value/purchasing power is a giant so what.
The exchange for dollars to yen is about 90 ¥ to the dollar. I can get a nice steak in NYC for considerably less in equivalent currency than I can in Tokyo. Does that mean there is a problem with currency exchange ?
Quote:
You both win. Thanks you two and everyone else here for your thoughtful replies to the questions and issues I raised with merging the markets, something I originally supported (and still support, even if I sarcastically said in one post that I didn't support it based on how it was proposed to be done). I do use and play the market on both sides extensively and share your observations, as well.|
Originally Posted by Fulmens
Edit: Uberguy is faster. He wins.
|
So, the crux of it is that the red-side population (who use the BM) is too small to support the BM? If the red-side player/character population using the BM was the same size as or larger than the blue-side population using WW, merging of the markets wouldn't be as necessary? I can certainly see how there is a critical mass necessary to make the markets work, without which they are all but useless.
Quote:
I think the there would be far less interest in it. I suspect some people might still want it for a variety of reasons, but I think this one we've been covering is the most salient one.
|
Originally Posted by perwira
If the red-side player/character population using the BM was the same size as or larger than the blue-side population using WW, merging of the markets wouldn't be as necessary?
|
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by perwira
You both win. Thanks you two and everyone else here for your thoughtful replies to the questions and issues I raised with merging the markets, something I originally supported (and still support, even if I sarcastically said in one post that I didn't support it based on how it was proposed to be done). I do use and play the market on both sides extensively and share your observations, as well.
So, the crux of it is that the red-side population (who use the BM) is too small to support the BM? If the red-side player/character population using the BM was the same size as or larger than the blue-side population using WW, merging of the markets wouldn't be as necessary? I can certainly see how there is a critical mass necessary to make the markets work, without which they are all but useless. |
Its not just that the redside market userbase is too small, its that bigger markets in general are better markets. This is something that is so overwhelmingly obvious that it allowed a small organization that was meant to smooth out the Coal and Steel trade to become the E.U.
Quote:
Spot on.|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
I think one of the biggest effects come from the fact that there are non-linear behaviors introduced by the "prisoner's dillema" of market use. An active market can be treated as a sort of storage medium - if you sell something to an active market, you can have some confidence you can get it (or something else you value similarly) back later at a similar price. If this confidence is lacking, then we enter a negative feedback loop, because fewer people will use it, which helps ensure it does not function as well as a "storage" medium. (You may put things in and never get them back, or only at a higher price.) In a smaller population of market users, this confidence is harder to create and maintain. This decreases supply relative to the population, but not demand.
|
Blue side, I regularly sell stuff I may want/need at some point because I know it'll be around. If I'm crafty, I can sell it 'high' and with patience buy it back 'low' and turn a profit.
Red side, this is not the case.
The Goat has a handful of purples slotted that he got as drops. Blue side, I'd have sold them & bought them back later when I was ready for a respec. My villains are far more likely to craft-and-slot or stash 'the good stuff' in base storage for later than my heroes.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
The fact that hoarding goes on, and yes I do it as well, makes the market worse for all than it would be otherwise, encouraging further hoarding.
The viscious cycle then continues.
At 50 the Black market is slow, but usually there is enough supply that you can get what you want.
Sub 50 the Black market is a barren wasteland, that I generally have given up on for anything but salvage trading and selling my crafted common IOs.
As for the population discussion:
The reason the markets are cross server is that its pretty clear some servers wouldn't have a viable population. (Especially the EU ones)
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Something else that no one has yet pointed out directly but ties into Uberguy's earlier post.
The market is entirely player operated. There is no bid or offer in existance that is not posted by a player.
This means that the size of the market is entirely limited by the number of total transaction slots available. Per capita may be the same (caveat to follow) but over all goods are not in large enough supply.
It is very similar to a real life situation I ran into recently. I live in a Midwest town of 12,000 people. There are a total of 2 grocery stores in town and one super store that sells a limited amount of groceries. I went looking for a star fruit for a special dinner I was making and found none in either store even at a time when they should have been in season. When I lived in Salt Lake City there were multiple stores that offered star fruit when it was in season and even a few markets entirely devoted to selling fresh fruit which carried them even when they were out of season.
In the small market I will "never" be able to find a star fruit and if I do the one store that carries it will be able to charge a premium for it. That's the comparative situation of the red and blue side market.
Now the caveat. The per capita size of the red side market is most likely smaller. Why is that you might ask? Sales badges. Certain sales badges allow more transaction slots. The player base tends to roll alts. Someone playing just one or only a very few characters is not the norm. In a sluggish, under supplied market, sales badges that increase both offers to buy and offers to sell are harder to come by and are slower to be earned. This means that the phenomenon is self sustaining and further drags the red side down. Many red side toons may have fewer total transaction slots than their blue side equivalents due to this and may even be made worse by the apathy that may be triggered by this.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
You can get more of what you want with a kind word and a gun than you can with just a kind word. - Al Capone
|
Originally Posted by Sardan
This analogy doesn't work. When I have to go to a gunfight, I always take a ripe banana instead of a gun because:
1) With the banana, the other guy looks at me, laughs, and walks away shaking his head. If I had a gun, it's highly probable he'd shoot me. 2) I might get hungry. Bananas are way better in that department. Sure, you can use a gun to get food, but there's all the noise and blood and running away from the 7-11. It's just much more direct with a banana. 3) You might be tempted to bring an unripe banana. Don't. It's not nearly as good a weapon as a gun, and not nearly as good foodwise as a ripe banana. 4) I know what you're thinking: better to bring the gun and just take the other guy's ripe banana because then you end up with both a gun and a ripe banana, and it really doesn't get any better than that. But if both guys think that way you're back to the noise and the blood again. Don't get fancy, just stick with the ripe banana. I guess this really proves that using RP as a rationale against merging the markets make sense, but that wasn't my intent. I just get so tired of all the noobs bringing guns and/or unripe bananas to gunfights when it's so much better to go the ripe banana route. |
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Open the floodgates and whichever faction is at a theoretical disadvantage will rapidly make it up thanks to the world of new opportunities presented by a merger.
As I suggested earlier, it makes good sense to consolidate the two currently separated markets and I am in favor of it. Had it been consolidated to begin with, I doubt there would have been any substantial impact on game play or market play. However, as it is, there is clearly a disparity between the two markets simply because they operate separately, with the only link between them being player-initiated transfers.
One way to alleviate the obvious impact of merging the markets is to provide long-term notice. If, for example, the devs indicated that a merge was impending in 6 months time, I think there would be little short-term to mid-term impact on the market on both sides as they play themselves out, with both of them gradually adjusting to each other up to the date of the merge. A few days or few weeks is clearly too short a time frame for players and marketers to adjust their short-, mid- and long-term holdings and positions. Something like a three or six month time frame would allow the trends in each side to gradually work themselves towards a merged dual side market. So, here, I don't see a problem, provided adequate notice and a large enough time frame is given to rework their market positions in line with a merger.
But even as a proponent of a merged market (like most of us here), I'm also playing devil's advocate, asking questions about the potential consequences, both short-term and long-term, in the view of all players who have a vested interest in their characters, either or both sides, marketers or not.
And nobody has really answered the question of why it's necessary or even so desirable to enough of a large player base for the devs to dedicate time to this over other equally if not more valid requests made by the player community. At worst, it's a minor inconvenience to me, and really, it's not even that as my heroes and villains operate separately and have no need to exchange resources. Even if the markets were merged, I doubt it would change anything (significant) that I'm doing now.