[X] My Assistant

well well, but now take a look at the opening time of the auction, it is exactly the same thing.. everyone who can be online at such a working hour ( 4pm my time ) where most people are at work, can easily snatch away all materials with a instant high bid, which the next bidder cannot overtrump since he would go over the market price of that material.

so there should also be a solution for this then?

See here:

Anyone who is winning an item for at least half of the auction duration will receive the full discount. Someone winning an item for 1/4th of the auction duration won't be penalized, but won't get a discount either.

The discount amount between 1/2 and 1/4th is a linear function, as is the penalty between 1/4th and 0.

I think 1/4th (~18 hours) is a good separator between those who get discounts and those who get taxed; for someone who's going to bid the most for the item, winning it for at least 1/4th of the time shouldn't be hard, even if it's hotly contested. (and potential winners can try to get even more of a discount by winning it for longer, which they'll probably do at least for ease of mind)

I did think about how giving strong incentives to people who can bid as soon as the auction is posted would be as much of an (unfair) race as sniping towards the end was in the past - that's why you have a whole 36 hours from the beginning of the auction to submit your true maximum bid and still receive the full discount. No one should be concerned at not being able to log on at the exact instant the auction is posted - there's plenty of time, just don't delay too long.

it is exactly the same thing.

So how paying less than someone else would and winning the bid because of timing is same as paying exactly the same amount as anyone else would and winning the bid because of timing?
Well, same within a minimum bid increment, that is. And if you think minimum bid is too big, then, well, sellers can counteract that with bigger stack size.

just a opinion/suggestion:
when someone cancel any bid , then his/her all previous bid on that item should become invalid. even if they are through proxy bid.
and invalid their any further bid on that item

by doing this , it will reduce abuse of system.


This post has been edited by ALL_MIGHT: Apr 14 2018, 11:51

just a opinion/suggestion:
when someone cancel any bid , then his/her all previous bid on that item should become invalid. even if they are through proxy bid.
and invalid their any further bid on that item

by doing this , it will reduce abuse of system.

I just noticed that it looks like you had already implemented something similar?

This post has been edited by ALL_MIGHT: Apr 14 2018, 11:53

just a opinion/suggestion:
when someone cancel any bid , then his/her all previous bid on that item should become invalid. even if they are through proxy bid.
and invalid their any further bid on that item

by doing this , it will reduce abuse of system.

i think the best way to teach them something is to validate their last bid, rather than excluding them.

oh, and banning them if they don't pay, of course.

The (soft) banhammer came crushing down this week.

Just encountered this "oh my god! under 10% penalty!" (yes, I wasn't attentive enough and my case is no case) and all I want to say is - the only beneficiaries of this change is not majority of bidders, but auction sharks - those who monitor market beforehand, make market wise bids early and then monitor it everyday. The whole idea of punishing for bidding hours before the end is inadequate.

I don't get how this is "good" or "justice" to force bidders to follow auction everyday and research every item they might want to buy when there are many other things to do, but if Superlatanium thinks he is bidding supervisor it's more sad and worrisome than rule itself.

i think the best way to teach them something is to validate their last bid, rather than excluding them.

oh, and banning them if they don't pay, of course.

It shouldn't be an automatic rule, nothing automatic can be acceptable in any situation.

Let me tell you a story. In the previous auction I placed a bid on some bindings ... then I had a doubt and went to double-check in my inventory, amd lo ! I realized I had confused one kind of binding (of which I had enough) with another (that I lacked); I had bidded on the one I already had enough of.

So I immediately posted a Cancel, just minutes after my wrong bid. Consider that my (wrong) bid was the first bid on that item (it was bidless), and no one bidded on it between my bid and my cancel.

Unfortunately I had not noticed that it was a couple of hours after the last-24hour time window, and the system refused my Cancel order. (as per Super rules).

Well, I didn't even mailed Super to protest, after all the price was the market price so no real loss, and even if I don't need them at the moment I could need them later on. Or I could just submit the same pack in a future auction as seller.

But that was just luck.
If it would have not been such case, I would have vehemently protested. And if asked to pay anyway, I would have preferred to be banned.
I suppose such cases are why Super also put in his rules that "obvious mistakes can be exceptionally canceled".

That's a wise guy writing. Situations must be considered in their entirety and with a bit of reasonableness and flexibility, imho.
Talks of "rules are rules" and such are dangerous, they can do just as much damage through rigidity as absence of rules do through abuse.

Again: the auction block is not a place for discounts.

The auction block is not a place for discounts.

If one actually uses the proxy bid to set the highest price they're willing to pay, then it doesn't matter what anyone else does. If you're really worried about rarity or overpaying, you have several days to post in at least three threads to ask for help from. If you want a deal, make a WTB.

You can buy low, or you can buy fast. You cannot buy low fast (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Just encountered this "oh my god! under 10% penalty!" (yes, I wasn't attentive enough and my case is no case) and all I want to say is - the only beneficiaries of this change is not majority of bidders, but auction sharks - those who monitor market beforehand, make market wise bids early and then monitor it everyday. The whole idea of punishing for bidding hours before the end is inadequate.

if you allow me, you just faced one of those "survival of the fittest" situations. there are random bidders who just try to go for an item they need, and professional bidders who quickly adapted to this new method. on the positive side, such a way to prodeed is quite time- and effort-consuming, so they may kick the bucket quite early.
mind you, i'm not in any way legitimating them.

I don't get how this is "good" or "justice" to force bidders to follow auction everyday and research every item they might want to buy when there are many other things to do, but if Superlatanium thinks he is bidding supervisor it's more sad and worrisome than rule itself.

do mind the context. you know you're playing in latanium's playground, right? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

It shouldn't be an automatic rule, nothing automatic can be acceptable in any situation.

of course. that was meant for alleged proxy disclosers, not genuine mistakes. shit can happen, afterall. but here i'm just making a suggestion like anyone else, as long as nothing too bad happens i (don't want to) have a word in latanium's playground since he's wise enough to run this thing on his own imho.

on the other hand, if people want to randomly ask the results of his new way of dealing with things, why not?

This post has been edited by Scremaz: Apr 22 2018, 12:24

do mind the context. you know you're playing in latanium's playground, right? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

What do you mean? This is discussion thread and my point is that I like Super's auction, but in not only my opinion this rule is more about repressing late "snipers" in favour of early "snipers" than making auction better. I'd understand if it was credits-wise decision (bid more earlier + "tax"; I don't think Super care about it), or was associated with overtime bids, but it's more like punishing people for not being "ideal" bidder.

Define "better auction."

Ultimately there is no clear conclusion, it's just a different system that some people like and some people don't. Discussion and debate may be welcome especially if the sides can clearly articulate the specifics of their opinions. My thoughts are that even if you don't like it, the new system is not so unfair that you can't just adjust to it.

I'll add that some "professional bidders" have elected to ignore the new system and keep sniping away. We just had a 100m example of that the previous week. In some rare instances I believe sniping is still worth it at the current penalty levels, though I've yet to try it myself.

What do you mean?

check what you wrote, please:

if Superlatanium thinks he is bidding supervisor it's more sad and worrisome than rule itself.

i don't know whether it's barrier language or what else, but it seems that, uh... your ideas are a bit confused at best. hence i reminded you that if you play a game, you have to agree with rules.
in other words, if you bid in latanium's auctions you have to agree with his terms. you are not even forced to use proxy bid system (i don't, for example), but there are some commodities for those who do it.

in not only my opinion this rule is more about repressing late "snipers" in favour of early "snipers" than making auction better. I'd understand if it was credits-wise decision (bid more earlier + "tax"; I don't think Super care about it), or was associated with overtime bids, but it's more like punishing people for not being "ideal" bidder.

apart for "better auction", what's an "ideal bidder"? latanium doesn't like late snipers, and developed this system and set of rules to deal with them as far as he can. of course he cannot change people's minds - and he knows it quite well - so the only thing he can do in the end is to deter people to bid late. mind you, in his system bidding earlier, being outbidded and then raising again at last minute *may* be a very different thing than a mere sniping bid at the end.

Define "better auction."

Simple and convenient.

Ultimately there is no clear conclusion

But you said it yourself

I'll add that some "professional bidders" have elected to ignore the new system and keep sniping away. We just had a 100m example of that the previous week. In some rare instances I believe sniping is still worth it at the current penalty levels, though I've yet to try it myself.

If it doesn't work why this even exist?

i don't know whether it's barrier language or what else

It's just a matter of perspective of public space - if Super is having open auction than bidders have certain liberties, if you violate them without reason it's not supervising auction, but supervising bidders (which is bad).

Culture-wise it can be compared to bureaucrat who creates additional barriers to someone or something not out of common sense, but because of personal preference and his position.

hence i reminded you that if you play a game, you have to agree with rules.
in other words, if you bid in latanium's auctions you have to agree with his terms.

I don't know why you thought that I think otherwise. You do realise that this is discussion thread and I don't demand anything from anyone?

you are not even forced to use proxy bid system (i don't, for example)

Proxy is great, you should try it out.

apart for "better auction", what's an "ideal bidder"?

If you rephrase this system - we are both 8% worther posters because we answer in more than 30 minutes interval and we must send extra 8% of our post letters to Snowflake as excuse.

latanium doesn't like late snipers, and developed this system and set of rules to deal with them as far as he can. of course he cannot change people's minds - and he knows it quite well - so the only thing he can do in the end is to deter people to bid late. mind you, in his system bidding earlier, being outbidded and then raising again at last minute *may* be a very different thing than a mere sniping bid at the end.

As mentioned earlier - 8% is annoyance, not a dealbreaker, and not healthy practice (at least in my honest opinion). I might be wrong, but that's how I see it.

Are we really having this discussion based on the bid of 50000 chows?
A bid that went

Wed 17:03 mundomuñeca 100k
Wed 23:38 Undeadboner 140k
[nearly 3 days later]
Sat 11:50 Benny-boy 170k

I'm sorry but if you didn't remember to use 2 minutes of your time to check the thread and put the bid earlier it's definitely your fault that you get +7% instead of the -0.6% you would have got had you submitted the bid on Thursday.

All the "auction shark" doesn't make sense, all the materials have an average price that is super-easy to get (and Super wrote the SmartSearch script for a reason, and he also have all the auction results in his site just in case someone wants to check the past results of a material/item).

Also I think we are going a bit too far if we bring to the table the meaningless term "early snipers".
It's also blatantly false since Super has the lowest Minimum bid increment (3%, Kedama has 5%) to prevent the first bid to be the final bid unless the later bidder wants to overpay the item.
You have two whole days to increment by 3% and get the full discount.
(it's also easy to see that materials in Super's auctions gets a lot more bids that in Kedama's auction thanks to both the proxy bids and the lower bid increment)

The discussion only works if the people actually try to post factually accurate objections to the current system. Saying the system is bad because it favors *category of bidders* for *unexplained reasons* really sounds like a whine, non a critique.

This post has been edited by Sapo84: Apr 23 2018, 00:43

It doesn't get simpler than "set proxy, wait."
Once again, the auction block is not a place for discounts. So what's with the QQing? If someone wants an item, they're going to win it and there's nothing you can do about it except put up more money. Tax, or any other system, just means they'll win at ( last minute - tax date ) instead of ( last minute ). In fact, such systems raise the average price of an item (assuming no "snipers") since anyone who could potentially want an item will put up the lowest bids possible on day one just in case. So people who still think auctions are for discounts are making things worse for themselves!

The belief that "I could have won if it weren't for those meddling snipers *shakes fist*" is a [en.wikipedia.org] fallacy. Removing the act of sniping does not remove the person who has more money than you and is willing to spend it. The best way to spend your time and save your ego is to bid your max up-front and accept the loss if it comes. If you're absolutely determined to try and get a discount, you have no choice but to .01 it, hitting f5 every 5 minutes and bidding the minimum until you're the last one standing. What you're really doing is trying to out-snipe them, which in the end DOES NOTHING to stop the person who has more money than you and is willing to spend it from beating you anyway. The time spend .01ing could have been spent playing the game and getting more money to outbid with anyway, so there's no other way to look at it but QQing.

Don't worry, I'm not totally heartless (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/happy.gif) Most people don't like the stress of getting their hopes up day after day only to lose at the last second. But the sooner you accept reality, the sooner you can do something actually useful about it. Auction is not for discounts. Proxy your max. Make WTBs. There's no such thing as a sniper, only a person who has more money than you and is willing to spend it.

Are we really having this discussion based on the bid of 50000 chows?
A bid that went

Wed 17:03 mundomuñeca 100k
Wed 23:38 Undeadboner 140k
[nearly 3 days later]
Sat 11:50 Benny-boy 170k

i may be at fault for not having checked auction's results, but, uh... is it really this way? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Are we really having this discussion based on the bid of 50000 chows?

As I mentioned earlier

my case is no case

The discussion only works if the people actually try to post factually accurate objections to the current system.

Discussion works if you actually read it.

Saying the system is bad because it favors *category of bidders* for *unexplained reasons* really sounds like a whine, non a critique.

Saying that system change is good when it doesn't solve anything is opinion, not an argument.

It doesn't get simpler than "set proxy, wait."
Once again, the auction block is not a place for discounts. So what's with the QQing? If someone wants an item, they're going to win it and there's nothing you can do about it except put up more money. Tax, or any other system, just means they'll win at ( last minute - tax date ) instead of ( last minute ). In fact, such systems raise the average price of an item (assuming no "snipers") since anyone who could potentially want an item will put up the lowest bids possible on day one just in case. So people who still think auctions are for discounts are making things worse for themselves!

The belief that "I could have won if it weren't for those meddling snipers *shakes fist*" is a [en.wikipedia.org] fallacy. Removing the act of sniping does not remove the person who has more money than you and is willing to spend it. The best way to spend your time and save your ego is to bid your max up-front and accept the loss if it comes. If you're absolutely determined to try and get a discount, you have no choice but to .01 it, hitting f5 every 5 minutes and bidding the minimum until you're the last one standing. What you're really doing is trying to out-snipe them, which in the end DOES NOTHING to stop the person who has more money than you and is willing to spend it from beating you anyway. The time spend .01ing could have been spent playing the game and getting more money to outbid with anyway, so there's no other way to look at it but QQing.

Don't worry, I'm not totally heartless (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/happy.gif) Most people don't like the stress of getting their hopes up day after day only to lose at the last second. But the sooner you accept reality, the sooner you can do something actually useful about it. Auction is not for discounts. Proxy your max. Make WTBs. There's no such thing as a sniper, only a person who has more money than you and is willing to spend it.

This person gets it, I leave this thread to tax lobby since there is no actual discussion.

Saying that system change is good when it doesn't solve anything

But I'm telling you there's nothing TO solve.
Well, that's not entirely true. Taxes do solve one thing, which is stopping people from "sniping" for the purpose of getting a discount by leaving the opponent bidder no chance to counter. But 1) that's what PROXY is for and 2) it just doesn't solve what people want it to solve. If your max is 50k and the winner bids 50m, what difference does the time of his bid make? What kinda person bids at the last second and complains about tax? Does tax take away the feeling of success from outbidding someone?

Just get rid of manual bids altogether. Problem solved.