Limit Quantity of Trade Offers

[hidude45454]

People should be only able to have a maximum number of buy or sell offers posted per resource before older trades are automatically removed. Preferrably, this number is limited to one buy and one sell maximum, but I understand there are periods when doing multiple may be resourceful. Anything past the cap is generally spammy and floods the market with dummy offers that are inconvenient to basically everyone and artificially inflate prices.

Additionally, if players post multiple buy/sell offers, they should be disallowed if the sum of all the resources or money is greater than what the player currently holds. I think this is a fair and reasonable suggestion.

This would:

-Make the market much clearer for casual and non-traders

-Saturate the market with less artificial prices

-Make it easier for most traders to not have to manually delete older offers

So, I see little to no downsides for this suggestion.

[Death LordSK]

Yes. Just yes. It'll make my life so much easier not having to delete offers after putting up a new one. I don't really see many downsides to this aswell.

[Jacob Knox]

I'm to assume you mean limits per resource and not just 1 buy / 1 sell period. I'm also to assume you meant the dummy offers artificially deflate prices.

 

But yeah, I don't see much harm in this idea tbh.

[Canbec]

22 hours ago, Jacob Knox said:

I'm also to assume you meant the dummy offers artificially deflate prices.

They can also inflate prices when people are putting up offers they don't have the cash to back

On the suggestion itself:

I understand where this idea is coming from, but I think the main issue isn't people posting multiple trades. It is people "spamming" trades so much that they end up leaving open trades that they can't back up with resources or cash on hand. That is definitely something I would support addressing and if we could have a mechanism to automatically remove trades that can't be backed up - other than manually clicking to accept each trade to have the game remove them - I'd support that. I know Alex has expressed a concern about the server load it would require to check every trade each turn, but perhaps instead the solution could be:

1. When creating a new trade to sell resources, the system should check all other offers by that seller for that resource to ensure the sum doesn't exceed quantities on hand.
2. Similarly, when creating a new offer to buy resources, the system should check all other buy offers from that buyer to ensure the sum doesn't exceed cash on hand.
3. When a buyer accepts a seller's offer to sell, have the system check all the other sell offers by that seller for that resource, and remove them all if the seller would no longer have the ability to back them up after the initial offer is processed.
4. Similarly, when a seller accepts a buyer's offer to buy, have the system check all other buy offers by that buyer, and remove them all if the buyer would no longer have the ability to back them up after the initial offer is processed.

In my opinion though, there is nothing wrong with having multiple offers for the same resource if you have the cash or resources to back them all up. For example, I sometimes find myself placing an offer at the best price on the market, but I might also keep an "aspirational" offer open for the same resource to buy/sell an additional amount of resources at a different price should the market fluctuate. If the person trading has the cash/resources to back all those trades up, then they're not artificially inflating or deflating prices. Their offers are validly influencing supply and demand just like any other offers.

Edited February 28, 2022 by Canbec
Submitted before I finished typing

[Jacob Knox]

48 minutes ago, Canbec said:

They can also inflate prices when people are putting up offers they don't have the cash to back

Oh, I'm thinking about the selling side of things (people placing lower PPUs than the dummy offer to compete, thus deflating) and completely neglected the buying side of things (the inverse). Haha, oops.

[Death LordSK]

5 hours ago, Canbec said:

When creating a new trade to sell resources, the system should check all other offers by that seller for that resource to ensure the sum doesn't exceed quantities on hand.

Yeah I agree with this. 

 

5 hours ago, Canbec said:

Similarly, when creating a new offer to buy resources, the system should all all other buy offers from that buyer to ensure the sum doesn't exceed cash on hand.

Either im bald or you did a typo this one. So I can't understand it so I won't comment on it. 

 

5 hours ago, Canbec said:

When a buyer accepts a seller's offer to sell, have the system check all the other sell offers by that seller for that resource, and remove them all if the seller would no longer have the ability to back them up after the initial offer is processed.

I also agree with this and point 4. 

 

5 hours ago, Canbec said:

In my opinion though, there is nothing wrong with having multiple offers for the same resource if you have the cash or resources to back them all up. For example, I sometimes find myself placing an offer at the best price on the market, but I might also keep an "aspirational" offer open for the same resource to buy/sell an additional amount of resources at a different price should the market fluctuate. If the person trading has the cash/resources to back all those trades up, then they're not artificially inflating or deflating prices. Their offers are validly influencing supply and demand just like any other offers.

I don't think there is anything wrong with having multiple offers if you have the money, but I would still an option that you can turn on and off, so that, when you are in a undercut war with someone you don't have to keep deleting your offers whenever you undercut. Since, I don't wanna oversell or overbuy anything. Knowing Alex it'll never happen but always worth a shot.

Edited February 28, 2022 by Death LordSK
Accidentally pressed sent while trying to type. Forums on phone bad.

[Canbec]

5 hours ago, Death LordSK said:

Either im bald or you did a typo this one. So I can't understand it so I won't comment on it.

Yeah my bad. The first "all" should have been "check":

Similarly, when creating a new offer to buy resources, the system should check all other buy offers from that buyer to ensure the sum doesn't exceed cash on hand.

[zigbigadorlou]

On 2/27/2022 at 12:51 AM, hidude45454 said:

This would:

-Make the market much clearer for casual and non-traders

-Saturate the market with less artificial prices

-Make it easier for most traders to not have to manually delete older offers

So, I see little to no downsides for this suggestion.

I really like this idea because it would force market traders to actually coordinate instead of unilaterally manipulating markets. Having market manipulation and trading require cooperation turns trading into something that can be politicized. 

This would be a big change that would kill some play styles/metas. For the better, I think, but the traders would likely disagree. 

[Eligos]

I don't see much use to reducing total quantity of orders allowed, orders are already sorted optimally for new players. I can definitely get behind not allowing people to place orders over what they can support though. As much as it is nice to trade on margins, it has pros and cons and in the end it exclusively hurts the casual user. Market changes should be made first and foremost to favor casual players then traders second if it doesn't harm the casual base.