Min. 1% price-difference

#1 - April 6, 2014, 12:15 p.m.

I find it a bit weird that, especially when selling an expensive item worth multiple Gold, you can be undercut by single Coppers.

I think it would be reasonable if there was a minimum price-difference of 1% for undercutting.

So if someone is selling an item worth 10 Gold, you can’t undercut him with 9 Gold, 99 Silver and 57 Copper. Instead you’d have to go down to at least 9 Gold and 90 Silver. Someone undercutting him would also have to maintain at least a 1% price-difference.

Obviously items worth less than 1 Silver would not be affected by this change. But I think it would make trading a little more transparent and user-friendly, especially if you add an automatic “undercut” option.

Thoughts?

How would a minimum price-difference of 1% affect trading?

John Smith

#198 - April 8, 2014, 4:30 p.m.

Let’s simmer down a bit, this is getting necessarily heated. I believe the issue in question is, does a minimum increment of of 1c effectively represent a different willingness to pay or willingness to buy from the original price being compared against, and does that answer change relative to the end price of the item.

Obviously, in some cases 1c is just fine, but is that true in all cases? Why or Why not?
It’s much harder to prove that it is the same price because “technically” it’s a different price, so the origin lies on those who believe that it’s not an effective difference. I think an argument can be made somewhere, but lets do it as academically as possible. have to run, but I’ll be back to check on this shortly.

John Smith

#223 - April 8, 2014, 6:16 p.m.

Let’s simplify the debate a bit. We have a lot of variables in discussion, let’s say that TP Fees are still a factor, but controlling inflation and gold sinks are not.

Furthermore let’s assume that we all agree that 1c holds a virtual non-value on goods above X price. How do you determine a system that effectively chooses what an appropriate value is that doesn’t
1. Injure the market 2. Discourage use of the TP
Note: this value may be algorithmic, but you must PROVE the values are effective. You may assume you have perfect data of the TP if you need it to support a hypothesis.

John Smith

#226 - April 8, 2014, 7:26 p.m.

I like your thought process and it’s a smart idea to attempt to introduce n-testing into the TP to find the values. The downside is it would be a lot of work to implement without any evidence that we wouldn’t end up keeping the same system we have.

John Smith

#303 - April 9, 2014, 7:04 p.m.

It’s unlikely that you’ve ever traded on a market that hasn’t sold an item in the last 2 hours.