Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Calypso Land Deeds in the Auction

How would you like Calypso Land Deeds displayed in the Auction?

  • Please list them as a stackable item: TT+%

    Votes: 26 31.7%

  • Please leave them as-is, listed as TT+MU

    Votes: 56 68.3%
  • Total voters
    82
NevadaJake

NevadaJake

Elite
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Posts
2,859
Location
Nevada, USA
Avatar Name
Drake Slade Corbett
I really don't care for the CLDs being shown as a TT+ MU item now. They are stackable, so the TT+% should be used.

How does everyone else feel about this new way of displaying them?
 
TT+MU is pointless. Lol. Should go back to % (people that disagree- you can mouse over the 999999999 and the first 4 digits is the MU. 1495xxxxxxx, etc)
 
Last edited:
KlowN said:
TT+MU is pointless. Lol. Should go back to % (people that disagree- you can mouse over the 999999999 and the first 4 digits is the MU. 1495xxxxxxx, etc)

It's almost as pointless as apartments and shops sharing the same mark up box. Lol.
Click to expand...
Mousing over the % is exactly what I used to do to see the MU. It worked great and made for very simple sorting by MU%.
 
NevadaJake said:
I really don't care for the CLDs being shown as a TT+ MU item now. They are stackable, so the TT+% should be used.

How does everyone else feel about this new way of displaying them?
Click to expand...


TT+% is for amateurs but works better for some kind of players)) looks like many players didnt take this fact into consideration and trying to sell their 10 or 20 stacks with higher MU than single CLDs. What surprising me is that noone of the current 10 or 20 stacks sellers didnt consider that (with set B/O price). The question is if they just think they are too smart for this game or they just cant count? sorry, I cant see any 3rd reason.

So, I votet for % just to help the other players sell faster their stacks of 10 or higher :cool:


PS: Its not correct to say TT+%, its just %MU imho :scratch2:
 
NevadaJake said:
Mousing over the % is exactly what I used to do to see the MU. It worked great and made for very simple sorting by MU%.
Click to expand...

Also the new way could really screw over some noobs greatly (such as one listed on there by a name not allowed to say, but is a sweet chocolate, vanilla, butterscotch treat lol)
 
Deleted......
 
Last edited:
I should have used better terminology in my poll. I think it is confusing.
 
displaying something with a 0TT as a % is daft, stackable or not.
 
NevadaJake said:
How do you figure?
Click to expand...

er, because any % of 0 is still 0. they have to fudge around with a hidden mirco value of 0.0000001 to get anything to display. clearly +MU makes much more sence.
 
aridash said:
er, because any % of 0 is still 0. they have to fudge around with a hidden mirco value of 0.0000001 to get anything to display. clearly +MU makes much more sence.
Click to expand...
What ever do you mean? Clearly It's much quicker to see to difference between 9999999999 and 999999999 than it is between 1500 and 1510! (end sarcasm)
 
aridash said:
er, because any % of 0 is still 0. they have to fudge around with a hidden mirco value of 0.0000001 to get anything to display. clearly +MU makes much more sence.
Click to expand...
every item in game has at least 0.00001 PED value, except maybe the sweating tool(probably still do but no way to know)

so as it's stackable it should be %
 
aridash said:
er, because any % of 0 is still 0. they have to fudge around with a hidden mirco value of 0.0000001 to get anything to display. clearly +MU makes much more sence.
Click to expand...

While I do agree with you, it makes it extremely difficult to calculate the cost of each item for stackbles. I guess that's why we have calculators.
 
I also don't think this new way of listing them at auction adds much value to the auction history. I know CLDs sell for about 1500 PED (give or take)...not +3354. I don't get why this seems like a good idea to anyone. Can someone please convince me? :scratch2:

cld_mu.jpg
 
NevadaJake said:
I also don't think this new way of listing them at auction adds much value to the auction history. I know CLDs sell for about 1500 PED (give or take)...not +3354. I don't get why this seems like a good idea to anyone. Can someone please convince me? :scratch2:

cld_mu.jpg
Click to expand...
But, again - how is this less helpful than >9999999%? I'm not necessarily saying it's better, but how do you figure >9999999% IS better?

The only real compromise I can think of would be to give the CLDs an actual value, say 1 PED.
 
RobBuona said:
But, again - how is this less helpful than >9999999%? I'm not necessarily saying it's better, but how do you figure >9999999% IS better?

The only real compromise I can think of would be to give the CLDs an actual value, say 1 PED - and then maybe make them un-TT-able? I don't know.
Click to expand...
Agreed, seeing 99999% is somewhat useless as well. However, I like to sort the CLDs by % MU when browsing and I sometimes purchase a larger stack based on what I find if the cost per CLD is significantly less. Now we have to do a lot of manual calculations to determine the lowest priced CLDs.

If you are only purchasing one CLD then this new system is good. Maybe CLDs need to be made non-stackable.
 
cld are sold with tt+ values, so it is what we players actually use. Having said that it would really be benefitial to have the price displayed per item (i.e. 8 deeds would still show +1500) instead of per batch where 8 deeds show +12000.

e.g. displayed like "8 x +1500 = +12000"
 
PaulCrystal said:
cld are sold with tt+ values, so it is what we players actually use. Having said that it would really be benefitial to have the price displayed per item (i.e. 8 deeds would still show +1500) instead of per batch where 8 deeds show +12000.

e.g. displayed like "8 x +1500 = +12000"
Click to expand...

That would work for me. Especially if it was sortable. And it would make the Auction History useful.
 
jenny ferr said:
every item in game has at least 0.00001 PED value, except maybe the sweating tool(probably still do but no way to know)

so as it's stackable it should be %
Click to expand...

thats a seperate issue, but imposed by MA, they shouldnt need to apply a nominal value.

NevadaJake said:
I also don't think this new way of listing them at auction adds much value to the auction history. I know CLDs sell for about 1500 PED (give or take)...not +3354. I don't get why this seems like a good idea to anyone. Can someone please convince me? :scratch2:

cld_mu.jpg
Click to expand...

thats a seperate issue due to multi deed lots. MA should calculate and split out the stack for the history to fix that.
 
aridash said:
er, because any % of 0 is still 0. they have to fudge around with a hidden mirco value of 0.0000001 to get anything to display. clearly +MU makes much more sence.
Click to expand...

rly?! it makes much mess with multi deed lots. Poor kids selling their stacks of 10 clds at much higher rates than single cld lots. And then check the CLDs market value graphs, does it make any sence to u when daily MU is tt+4500 or so? I would call it chaos!
 
RobBuona said:
But, again - how is this less helpful than >9999999%? I'm not necessarily saying it's better, but how do you figure >9999999% IS better?
Click to expand...

If you hover your mouse cursor over the >9999999%, you can see the actual percentage. So by doing that, you can get a real idea about the latest sales.
 
I think its a silly change, the only issue I had with the old way was the graph never panned out big enough. And the excess 9's, if they removed them for display all would have been good.

A side effect of this change is listing fees.

its 9 some ped to list one deed now.

its 9 some ped to list 100 also.

If you want to sell 10 deeds, and normally broke them into singles, you will need almost 100 ped to list them. but only 9 to list all at once.

When I listed before I could calculate the markup with the listing window in game, now I have to make sure I go out of game, do math and then verify when working with multiple stacks.

The new changes made the possibility of error much greater(on a high value item to boot).
From new people looking at the markup window and thinking a deed is 1/2 off, to the listing issues.
 
DISABLED said:
rly?! it makes much mess with multi deed lots. Poor kids selling ...
Click to expand...

poor kids selling $1000 of items should be able to work this out. the problem now is with the MU historyh, which should divide by the total number of deeds, not the transaction values. hey, its MA fix one problem and introduce an new one :rolleyes:
 
PaulCrystal said:
cld are sold with tt+ values, so it is what we players actually use. Having said that it would really be benefitial to have the price displayed per item (i.e. 8 deeds would still show +1500) instead of per batch where 8 deeds show +12000.

e.g. displayed like "8 x +1500 = +12000"
Click to expand...
Actually, I think this is the best solution. Even if they don't show how many were sold per transaction - say 10 are sold for 15k PED, that transaction could just be counted as +1500. I still think that is more useful than having some wacky % shown.
 
It's quite simple really.

I will give an example

Hi selling 10 CLD for 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%

Hi selling 10 CLD for +15,000
 
RobBuona said:
Actually, I think this is the best solution. Even if they don't show how many were sold per transaction - say 10 are sold for 15k PED, that transaction could just be counted as +1500. I still think that is more useful than having some wacky % shown.
Click to expand...

Good idea. This would be good for the history and make sorting the auction by MU (per Deed) possible again.
 
Art Jennifer said:
It's quite simple really.

I will give an example

Hi selling 10 CLD for 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%

Hi selling 10 CLD for +15,000
Click to expand...

well, its not really correct, mate. It should look more like this: 1499999999% if i understand your example right, that makes possible the correct indication of the current price. Here's another example: I'm selling my CLDs much much lower than current MU, say 500 peds cheaper than it is indicated in MU. Would u buy it from me? I have 81 for sale... My price is only tt+2800 PEDs per CLD, thats nothing compared to current MU.
 
Last edited:
Some method that allows sorting by "true-lowest-cost-per-deed" is needed. I have seen a few great suggestions if MU% is not ideal for everyone.
 
Art Jennifer said:
It's quite simple really.

I will give an example

Hi selling 10 CLD for 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%

Hi selling 10 CLD for +15,000
Click to expand...

yeah, it is simple. and which one do people use when selling in the street or on forum?
 
IF you go to buy a deed and list the lowest markup, it now lists all the single deeds first.
(regardless, even one deed selling for +2500 shows as cheaper than 2 at +1500 each.)
I see stacks of more than one CLD selling for less markup than singles by 10 ped or more a deed (vs singles) that sit all week long now.

This forces sellers who want to be the cheapest on the AH to list 1 deed at a time only, which of course costs almost 10 ped for each one.

If you decide to list bulk, it will only cost 9 some ped. but the bulk is not likely to sell nearly as fast, as you will never appear cheapest.

% was always accurate, always accessable. Today deed value shows as 6099 ped.

Idiocy imo, really no idea why they needed to change it.

If you are buying deeds, take the time to do the math on all of the stacks on auction, you'll probably save 50+ ped.

Why we need to take the time to manually calculate all of the stacks now I am not sure...but...that is what needs to be done.

Selling 17 CLD - +26644.5
--- if you can do that without a calc on the top of your head awesome.....I hope you didnt miscalculate.

Also nearly impossible to set prices in shops, without a market history that works.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top