640 replies to this topic

[Gilles VI]

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

You know what is reality? Current price of abyss dye. Current price of lodestones. Current price of dusk, black dye, white dye, celestial dye.... There are more items that changed price. That's reality that show how much gold they make. I follow market closely and I notice how price shift.

Nerfed dropped rate might influence that too.
Or the fact more and more people got much gold (it's a video game, there is a constant influx of gold) and want cool dyes for their characters.

[Reikou]

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

Read and try to understand this first lol http://i.imgur.com/xXXrd.png

So finding a loop that can play the market is an exploit of a bug?

No, its the exploit of stupid people.  Please, at least get your facts straight and stop standing up for Anet in a situation in which they are obviously wrong.

[duncanmix]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

Nerfed dropped rate might influence that too.
Or the fact more and more people got much gold (it's a video game, there is a constant influx of gold) and want cool dyes for their characters.

Its actually opposite, each fractals group gets lots of cores for example, that should have lower the price of lodestones but it didn't. This have nothing to do with buyers. Groups that are monopolizing market dictate price its simple as that. You cant effect it in any way. U put low price? They just buy it off. What happen with new items that come in market? U think someone put abyss dye for 5g now that is 15g+ or something. This method is making groups very rich is all I can say. And you can do nothing to stop that. Only one who can is anet if they want.

edit @Reikou: Sorry but you didn't understand I guess. I'll write you the part that is key to this: "but finding the loop that PRODUCES more and more items in a cycle is an exploit." People produce items = produce gold out of nothing in short time = bug not intentded = you should report = don't abuse it = ban if u do. I'm not gonna respond to you again.

Edited by duncanmix, 03 January 2013 - 12:22 PM.

[Thunderhead]

Exactly what duncanmix said. Say you have 2000g, and considering the listed legendaries in the TP, some have, you can afford to monopolise a market easily. Someone undercuts you, just buy him off. The profit you get from the monopoly far outweights the cost of buying out undercutters. Once you have a good butch of gold in hand (the method you got it is irrelevant, although gold buyers do exist, considering the ban waves of the past months) you can play the market every way you want with no fear of loss.

[chullster]

Why they let some of the dirtiest parts of humanity from real life (speculation) run rampant in a game I'll never know.

[Ritualist]

zwei2stein, on 03 January 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

This was at height of duping - of course profit margin by then would be so thin that. This little qq does not prove anything was "OK"

But it does showcase a problem with A.Net's selective bans.

All these messes remind me of the whole GW1 "bans of reputation botters", when folks used bots to farm asura ranks. A.Net, in their hunt for profit, is creating a situation where people just don't care anymore about what "right" and "wrong" is. It does not excuse people for doing dumb-ass shit, but the same way that GW2LFG isn't a replacement for an ingame search tool, it doesn't change that something is rotten in the state of Tyria.

[Perm Shadow Form]

Dumb people, If I ever find a bug/exploit, I'll use it and I wont tell it to anyone.

[Gilles VI]

chullster, on 03 January 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Why they let some of the dirtiest parts of humanity from real life (speculation) run rampant in a game I'll never know.

What exactly is dirty about speculation?

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

Its actually opposite, each fractals group gets lots of cores for example, that should have lower the price of lodestones but it didn't. This have nothing to do with buyers. Groups that are monopolizing market dictate price its simple as that. You cant effect it in any way. U put low price? They just buy it off. What happen with new items that come in market? U think someone put abyss dye for 5g now that is 15g+ or something. This method is making groups very rich is all I can say. And you can do nothing to stop that. Only one who can is anet if they want.

edit @Reikou: Sorry but you didn't understand I guess. I'll write you the part that is key to this: "but finding the loop that PRODUCES more and more items in a cycle is an exploit." People produce items = produce gold out of nothing in short time = bug not intentded = you should report = don't abuse it = ban if u do. I'm not gonna respond to you again.

Ofcourse they just buy it of when a person puts his dye for sale at 5g.. cause then they make a profit if they resell it..
If you however put it for sale at 1c less than them they make a big loss.

And you overestimate the influence of cores in fractals, people used to farm cores in dungeons, now they do it in fractals, part of the earlier supply is gone but replaced by another part, we can't say for sure which is bigger.

[duncanmix]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Ofcourse they just buy it of when a person puts his dye for sale at 5g.. cause then they make a profit if they resell it..
If you however put it for sale at 1c less than them they make a big loss.

And you overestimate the influence of cores in fractals, people used to farm cores in dungeons, now they do it in fractals, part of the earlier supply is gone but replaced by another part, we can't say for sure which is bigger.

I don't understand this part because they bought abyss dye for 5g and are selling it for 15. So if you put 14.99 they lose nothing. Someone will buy your dye and then they will continue buying theirs. Also price of dye is raising and not dropping, and thats effect of them removing all of it from market so demand and supply shifted.

[zwei2stein]

Protoss, on 03 January 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

But it does showcase a problem with A.Net's selective bans.

What is problem there?

Honestly, i do not get what it was supposed to illustrate - that they also banned late adopters which earned very little with this exploit?

[ayoblame]

Seems this thread turned into a trade post QQ I'm poor type of thread rather quickly. Honestly, I think banning people for salvaging a crafted item is ridiculous and I don't care about how it could have effected the economy. There was no point where I thought that this could be remotely considered an exploit. It's not like the typo karma prices back a week after launch. If i was one of those people who got banned for something like this I definitely wouldn't plan on coming back. I'm not a Quality checker I shouldn't have to constantly think "Oh could this be construed by Anet as an exploit?".


EDIT: Not to mention all those people who already flooded the market since well... you can't pull the ectos back. Seems like the bans really accomplish nothing.

Edited by ayoblame, 03 January 2013 - 01:29 PM.

[Ritualist]

zwei2stein, on 03 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

What is problem there?

Honestly, i do not get what it was supposed to illustrate - that they also banned late adopters which earned very little with this exploit?

Compare that to this post A.Net made:

Quote

I’ve seen the numbers, and the damage to the economy could have been substantial, if the exploit wasn’t closed down and if these people were allowed to use their ill-gotten gains. People whose accounts were terminated were the worst offenders. I’m talking a lot of ill gotten gains, and a significant risk to the economy.
Any time you take one thing and can make two, and then four, and then sixteen… ya gotta know that’s just wrong. (I won’t quibble on the odds, overall, doubling was not outside the rules of probability.) And to perform that action hundreds and hundreds of times? That’s call “exploitation,” my friend, and that’s against the User Agreement, the Rules of Conduct, and all that is holy.
I know the OP will disagree. But we’ve been more than kind, in the past, and everyone needs to own up to his/her errors and recognize: We all are part of the game economy, and those who exploit it are hurting the rest of us.
Exploit closed.
Worst offenders terminated.
That’s what has to happen to make things right for all of us.

[Gilles VI]

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

I don't understand this part because they bought abyss dye for 5g and are selling it for 15. So if you put 14.99 they lose nothing. Someone will buy your dye and then they will continue buying theirs. Also price of dye is raising and not dropping, and thats effect of them removing all of it from market so demand and supply shifted.

Unid dyes are dropping so there is something weird then.
I mean for the monopolist, if you put it on 14.99 you will undercut, and then again, and more and more, it's how supply and demand come to a mutual price.

[Naevius]

The key statement about these bans from Gaile was: "People whose accounts were terminated were the worst offenders. I’m talking a lot of ill gotten gains, and a significant risk to the economy."

It's hard to say how unfair these were without knowing the exact numbers, or who was banned for it versus who wasn't banned.

I would tend to agree that they could use a more fine-grained punishment system.

[duncanmix]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

Unid dyes are dropping so there is something weird then.
I mean for the monopolist, if you put it on 14.99 you will undercut, and then again, and more and more, it's how supply and demand come to a mutual price.

Yes this is how naturally it should work, but people who monopolize shift it. Price of dye was 5g and there was a lot of them, but after they bought all of its now price is 15g+ and raising. This method is working and proof is price. Your theory is not working as clearly if it did price would drop which is not case.

[XPhiler]

Protoss, on 03 January 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

But it does showcase a problem with A.Net's selective bans.

All these messes remind me of the whole GW1 "bans of reputation botters", when folks used bots to farm asura ranks. A.Net, in their hunt for profit, is creating a situation where people just don't care anymore about what "right" and "wrong" is. It does not excuse people for doing dumb-ass shit, but the same way that GW2LFG isn't a replacement for an ingame search tool, it doesn't change that something is rotten in the state of Tyria.

I think you're wrong in pinning the motivation of this ban on a desire by arenanet to maximize profit. I bet when they do mass ban like these it costs them money. The exploit itself generated Arenanet money for starters. I am sure the majority of the exploiters used the black lion salvage kit. Now I am not saying they all used real money to buy the salvage kit but I am sure some did. More then that there is the support cost of people contacting support over the ban and perhaps even someone going legal on them, you never know. Thats not all the people banned will not be using the gemshop anymore. Sure some might buy the game again but I am not so sure thats a lot of people.

On the other side of the argument the only way this was something that might have resulting in arenanet loosing money is because people who exploited made profits and thus didnt convert gems to gold to make the same amount of in game gold. Now you said it yourself the profit wasnt that big to begin with. Not only that but if these people are used to converting gems to gold wouldnt simply closing the exploit and removing the profits they made be a better financial decision? they'd still have to convert gems to gold and you're leaving them with the game so they keep doing it in the future.

It just doesnt compute. Any way I am looking at it this will definitely not result in more money from Arenanet. Seems to me like the reason they did this was more in line with protecting the game. This exploit resulted in a mass infusion of ectos into the economy. Thus the price dropped with the result that people who didnt exploit lost value of their stack of ectos which they aquired legitimately.The reason for the perma ban is just to ensure the people who exploited dont do the same when the next exploit hits. Its more premptive. Its extreme yes, but its either that or you will have an exploitation epidemic on you. I mean we already knew Arenanet are strict on this issue yet people still tried to exploit even knowing they might end up banned, Does anyone think if they simply had their gains removed and banned for a couple of day they'd think twice before doing it again next time?

[Naevius]

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

I don't understand this part because they bought abyss dye for 5g and are selling it for 15. So if you put 14.99 they lose nothing. Someone will buy your dye and then they will continue buying theirs. Also price of dye is raising and not dropping, and thats effect of them removing all of it from market so demand and supply shifted.

Simple - if you sell at 14.99 and they buy it to re-list at 15, they lose the listing fee/tax, so they have a net loss (from 15.) But if you listed at 5, they would buy it and re-list at 15, making a profit.

[cyclopsje]

stupped to exploid period. Economy in GW2 is bad anyway if you ask me.

[chullster]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

What exactly is dirty about speculation?

In RL? what does it accomplish? how does it help the human race? it doesn't from what I can tell, it is just benefiting the few while harming the majority.

Seriously, I'm trying to think of a good reason for it or how it helps people, but I'm coming up with nothing.

That's why I can't understand it being in a game. If you can think of some pros then it'll change my mind on that.

Edited by chullster, 03 January 2013 - 02:10 PM.

[ReMarkable91]

I also have been perma banned for this bullsh1t!

I did it with Ori ores wich was not profitable at all. I even lost money on it only gained some the first time when I used my own Ore stacks and Snowflakes + Globs. I saw some1 saying it was an obvious exploit you could make  an avarage of 2 globs using 1. Well then perma ban all people creating lvl 80 rares with t5 mats to salvage em for Globs. That is making an avarage of 1 glob using 0. And the other mates cost the same. Around the price of 1 glob for the rares with t5 it is the 15 t5 and other materials such as leather and silk. Cost is around 20-25(depends wich crafting station). For the Jeweler you allways needed a setting and a earingthing. Cost are 8 Ori ores. Wich costed close to 3 then so also 20-25.

I was confinced they did it on porpuse cause ever since the fractals update (which made alot new recipes require alot of globs) and the fact that alot more ppl are chasing legendary since karka made the price of ecto sky rocket to over 30. I was confinced that with this new event item they wanted to make the price lower like what happend. And give avarage players who do ori runes every day to make some gold a chance to actualy get some more gold. But that was just stupid to think.

I also saw a support team member calling it an loop that keeps creating globs. But how is creating 80 rares with t5 any other kind of loop to create more and more globs?

Well gonna write the support team with this I realy can't believe if they keep the perm ban for something i lost gold on and was more looking like a good way to safe the economy then exploting a bug to destroy it on porpuse.

I would even suggest them to bring it back cause it makes the economy more stabble.

[XPhiler]

Protoss, on 03 January 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

Compare that to this post A.Net made:

It was not about the profits made, it was about the exploiting. This wasnt about making gold, this was about making ectos. There is a difference. Sure the ectos can be converted to gold. That coversion isnt fixed. Consider the following.

Lets take the instance you quoted. The guy said he only made what 4s per salvage and he said he did a total of about 500 salvages. That made him about 20g. But first of all he used the price of ectos after the market fall, ie 25s, before the fall ectos sold for as high as 35s. So no one stops the clever exploiters to wait for the massive supply to die down, the price to rise there by incrementing the profit from about 20g to 75g which is already substential. The ectos could be used to create gear which might provide an even higher margin. Then there is the issue of the pristine snowflake. sure buying one directly might have cost 28s but 28s also gets you around 35 large presents. There is quite a good chance to get quite a few snowflakes from there. That can further increase the 75g more and more.

But even that wouldnt really be a problem if it effected just that one person but it doesnt. Price of ectos fell by 10s because of the influx in the market this exploit created and that was just in the few days it was running. What about people who worked hard in farming ectos to make a profit off the TP legitimately. Is it fair they got all undercut by exploiters? Should Arenanet let them take the hit? What about those people to spent a large amount of time earning the ectos necessary for their ascended gear only to have exploiters achieve it in just 2 days of exploiting?

Its not about the gold, its about the harm explotiing creates. Its about putting a deterant that when someone comes across an exploit they'll report it rather then abuse it.

[Gilles VI]

chullster, on 03 January 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

In RL? what does it accomplish? how does it help the human race? it doesn't from what I can tell, it is just benefiting the few while harming the majority.

Seriously, I'm trying to think of a good reason for it or how it helps people, but I'm coming up with nothing.

That's why I can't understand it being in a game. If you can think of some pros then it'll change my mind on that.

You don't seem to understand that speculating is always a part of any economy.
If there are goods to be traded some people will buy them, stock them and re-sell them with the purpose of getting a surplus.

How do you want Anet to handle it? Make everything you buy on the TP to be account bound?
Yes that would fix speculation but also ruin the entire economy.

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

Yes this is how naturally it should work, but people who monopolize shift it. Price of dye was 5g and there was a lot of them, but after they bought all of its now price is 15g+ and raising. This method is working and proof is price. Your theory is not working as clearly if it did price would drop which is not case.

Simple, everyone should just list their dyes 1c under the monopolist, after a while the net loss for him will be huge and he will be forced to give up his position.

[ReMarkable91]

XPhiler, on 03 January 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

It was not about the profits made, it was about the exploiting. This wasnt about making gold, this was about making ectos. There is a difference. Sure the ectos can be converted to gold. That coversion isnt fixed. Consider the following.

Lets take the instance you quoted. The guy said he only made what 4s per salvage and he said he did a total of about 500 salvages. That made him about 20g. But first of all he used the price of ectos after the market fall, ie 25s, before the fall ectos sold for as high as 35s. So no one stops the clever exploiters to wait for the massive supply to die down, the price to rise there by incrementing the profit from about 20g to 75g which is already substential. The ectos could be used to create gear which might provide an even higher margin. Then there is the issue of the pristine snowflake. sure buying one directly might have cost 28s but 28s also gets you around 35 large presents. There is quite a good chance to get quite a few snowflakes from there. That can further increase the 75g more and more.

But even that wouldnt really be a problem if it effected just that one person but it doesnt. Price of ectos fell by 10s because of the influx in the market this exploit created and that was just in the few days it was running. What about people who worked hard in farming ectos to make a profit off the TP legitimately. Is it fair they got all undercut by exploiters? Should Arenanet let them take the hit? What about those people to spent a large amount of time earning the ectos necessary for their ascended gear only to have exploiters achieve it in just 2 days of exploiting?

Its not about the gold, its about the harm explotiing creates. Its about putting a deterant that when someone comes across an exploit they'll report it rather then abuse it.

How is creating lvl 80 rares with t5 mates any different? Why are u so 100 % sure it was only this "exploit" that made those new ectos. There are thousands of ppl comming back for wintersday event getting t5 mates or rare/ecto drops into the game. They are not die hard so not going for legendary or ascanded backpiece or any other things. Ppl that bought 250 Ectos for 35 S a week before wintersday are just plain stupid.

And last of all how can you even not agree that this was a good thing for the market putting prices of easy obtainable items such as ori ores going up in price and Globs going down? Maybe the Mithril thing was bad never made it don't know exact recipe but believe it was made of the lower tier snowflake(wich went to 15 S I believe? wich is not the correct price.) But if you look at the currect price of it I belive it was 1 s 22 or so. And why that is the current price? Cause you can still create level 80 rare clothes/weapons with it with 10 of them. Wich is the same as any normal t5 mat wich take 15. How is making those non stop what probaly ppl are doing now any different?

[this a pointed]

I dont see the problem to be honest

Edited by this a pointed, 03 January 2013 - 02:32 PM.

[chullster]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

You don't seem to understand that speculating is always a part of any economy.
If there are goods to be traded some people will buy them, stock them and re-sell them with the purpose of getting a surplus.
How do you want Anet to handle it? Make everything you buy on the TP to be account bound?
Yes that would fix speculation but also ruin the entire economy.

You just asked why I considered speculation dirty, and I answered, I think; it has no redeeming qualities.

It's a game economy; it can be fixed anyway they wish to as it's anets property, and as it's not RL, nobody can be harmed by anything they do no matter how draconian/liberal they decide. As there is no redeeming quality in speculation in RL, I am mystified why they included it in a game you would assume was made to entertain.

Edited by chullster, 03 January 2013 - 02:35 PM.

[Gilles VI]

chullster, on 03 January 2013 - 02:34 PM, said:

You just asked why I considered speculation dirty, and I answered, I think; it has no redeeming qualities.

It's a game economy; it can be fixed anyway they wish to as it's anets property, and as it's not RL, nobody can be harmed by anything they do no matter how draconian/liberal they decide. As there is no redeeming quality in sprculation in RL, I am mystified why they included it in a game you would assume was made to entertain.

How could they not include it is my question?
As I said before, you want everything on the TP to be account bound when bought?
Cause that seems to be the only solution to it.

And yea they can fully decide about it, but if they * up the economy so bad nobody plays anymore I guess they'll have a problem in a couple of months.

[chullster]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

How could they not include it is my question?

No idea, believe it or not I like your idea, though I can't be bothered thinking through the ramifications.

I'm don't like suggestions or thinking up game solutions, they're never implemented and are thus a waste of time, I never go to that forum on guru for that reason, someone has awesome idea: doesn't matter, it's got same chance as a bad idea, none.

[duncanmix]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

Simple, everyone should just list their dyes 1c under the monopolist, after a while the net loss for him will be huge and he will be forced to give up his position.

Your theory is not working, again check price of abyss dye or other items i named.

[Gilles VI]

duncanmix, on 03 January 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

Your theory is not working, again check price of abyss dye or other items i named.

I never said prices would drop..
I actually believe prices would rise, and even more than they are right now.

I just don't believe it's because of the monopoly, that is what I'm saying.

[duncanmix]

Gilles VI, on 03 January 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

I never said prices would drop..
I actually believe prices would rise, and even more than they are right now.

I just don't believe it's because of the monopoly, that is what I'm saying.

How does that make even any sense... u wanna put price of abyss 1c lower and expect price to raise? And on top of that this raise of price somehow hurt people who bought it all for 5g and now reselling for those high prices?