Posts by PyroLobster
-
-
OS Q9 Tac Ornate Shield +30hp, +10 vs Ogres r/b
-
I like triples as well. Call me
-
-
-
A1 21ecto + 1 frozen ecto
-
-
-
SWS r/b 150e
-
Shadow Bow q9 15/-1 Dualvamp - B/O 40e
-
-
Found this in guru achieve. Dunno who posted or if they fake/real. Anybody know anything about these?
-
I was 99.9% sure 8% and 18% are prenef and as Red confirms then I'm 100%. A madlad calculation would be what were all the prenerf possibles.
I can say with certainty 16% was possible cause its on my fav wand in the game:
I don't recall seeing a 15% but have a feeling it was possible? perhaps even 14%? I know min on shield was 6vs so was 6% min for wand mods also? Red Fireball Pleikki will likely have that answer. prenerf caster stuff is not my area of expertise so will have to defer to somebody else on that. + all the lower bounds of other mods need to be figured out. If we could get clarification on that could run numbers for total possibles prenerf vs postnerf. What a giant nerdy waste of time that would be haha. Lets do it
-
I've tried to do similar calculations before mostly for shields, and did staffs once. It's crazy. Couple things in ur numbers:
1. Unless I've gone completely mad isn't an 8% and 18% on a gold wand prenerf? Please somebody call me mad if I am
2. Didn't see a mention of 15-1 and 14-1 mods as possibles
The final value gives you total possible combinations but when you make it into a ratio of 1:xxxx its using the assumption that all variables have an equal chance. We all know that chance of 2 mods is lower than 1 so there is a problem with weighting of variables just from that. So its not exactly accurate to represent them in this way. Taking it a step further I've always believed that different mods have a different drop chance. There is some mods (and mod combos) that from 15 years of observation just seem to be rarer than others and even a difference because of skin. There no way to account for these kinda discrepancies so targeting 1 combination might be even worse that the number your calculation gives lol. Total speculation, can't confirm without anet showing a drop table and the code behind it but its an assumption I've always held. Anybody else think this way?
All that withstanding I like the way ur mind works
-
-
-
I know I want the 10vs plants -5/20%
-
Captain Krompdown I love you but u made some mistakes here.
The argument for obliterating the PC forum is that PCs add nothing of value and are just noise.
One of my early suggestions was to remove the PC forum but not to remove its function of discussing prices. That function would be moved onto sell threads themselves. Leaving people to comment on price once there is more information known about market conditions via the bids received). Obvious has drawbacks I won't bother to outline. This suggestion is extreme, was based in my belief that PC thread was to toxic to bother reforming. After discussion and reading others opinions its now an option I don't support. There is a better way. IMO PC thread can remain for 3 separately defined purposes.
#1 Telling people when something isn't worth selling "merch food" - This already functions well fine under current structure.
#2 Telling people the current "standard price/range" of commonly traded items. - What falls into the category is another discussion to be had.
#3 When an uncommonly traded item comes up we "experts" admit we aren't experts at all on this and don't give guesses posed as prices estimates. Instead we inform the seller that only the market can tell you, after that perhaps we can advise you on if its a good time to sell using real data. In addition we provide advise on how to sell to get the best outcome (avoiding lowballs).
^ This is what I suggest. Not a change in rules of the forum that needs enforcing but instead anybody offering a response considers these guidelines and acts accordingly. There is also space for making #2 and the advise post auction of #3 more accurate with suggestions like Agent Chevy gave about keeping better track of sales.
Am I alone in thinking this is the appropriate way to approach PC Thread? If everybody is happy with the status quo and thinks this change is not a good idea id really like to know. PM if you prefer.
But the other side of the same coin (and several people have mentioned it in passing) is that the seller has to find the price acceptable before an item is actually sold. It's not just the case that the highest bid automatically triggers a sale.
I completely agree. Here I think you are unintentionally conflating the results of the market pricing items with what the item must or will sell for. The point of sale is not tied to the outcome of this pricing mechanism. There is no forced commitment to buy or sell on legacy. The conclusion of a sell thread (done as outlined previously with marketing, kama ect) will give you the most accurate "fair market price" in the present that's achievable in this system. If anybody disagrees with that statement, please tell us the better existing alternative. What the seller decides to do with that result is a separate issue. I addressed this in a previous post where I suggest this is the better point for opinions on price (outline above in the 3 point plan also haha). That is to say once you have a number firmly based in reality, opinions on numbers become far more useful. Ultimately the seller has a binary choice: Right now do I want x or do I want to keep my item. Using experience of others and personal research at this stage is far superior method than before any real offered price is known.
I wont address most of rest of your essay directly because its criticism concerning psychology and sociology type stuff (which are mostly valid) but I think sprouting from the assumption I want to remove PC thread and point everybody at an auction all the time. While this is the only definitive way to find the "fair market price" at any given point in time in the real world there is a balance to be found between accuracy and convenience. My whole argument is when that balance is wildly swinging away from accuracy we stop and reconsider. In such circumstances I believe offering "minimum prices" and alike is simply dishonest and shouldn't be done even when it has no malice or ulterior motives attached.
Hope that's clarified my current thoughts.
Pyro
-
bladed dragons - 15e
-
^ This guy gets it. 100% agree on everything.
-
I know ur capable of merching these so put me down for 5e on each max armor shark and lets avoid that outcome
-
C'mon now, Pyro. You seem to be suggesting that nobody has any real idea what things may be worth. That's disingenuous at best. Are you trying to say that when a lot of the experienced collectors on Legacy get a nice drop, they don't instantly have a ballpark figure as to what it may sell for? Because frankly, that's horseshit. And not a small amount. A giant, steaming, smelly pile that you'd need a backhoe to manage.
Yes that exactly what I'm saying so lets put it to the test. From now on whenever such an item comes up for PC and publicly sells that's not been publicly sold for at least 6-12 months, let make a note of it.
I predict that the average projected price will be wrong by at least 50%. (That is to say an item with an average PC of 100a will sell for 50a/less or 150a/more.)
If you cannot predict a price to within a 50% margin of error its a pointless exercise. To use a previous analogy if a property assessor can't predict ur house value to with a 50% margin of error you would not use his services. Making the service more accurate / not using (FOR SOME ITEMS) the current inaccurate one is exactly my suggestion.
-
In reference to your 1st point:
There isn't a Van Gogh sold every year or even every decade. That doesn't mean that Christie's or Sotheby's are just going to wing it when a seller contacts them saying they want to auction one.
My argument is that there is no equivalent "Christie's or Sotheby's" type authority in the game. Perhaps as Chevy suggested with the resource of more valid sales records people would get closer to that level of expertise but I'm dubious that would have a substantial effect (owing to the fact past sales cant predict future results). The amount and scale of unknown variables is simply to high imo.
It could end up being off by a hundred million - that's a non-trivial margin of error. But I would still argue it's better than leaving the seller completely in the dark as to whether it's worth $5 or $350 mill.
I would claim that level of thought and research isn't reflected in PC thread opinions leading to a prediction that is based on so little its worth is likewise.
My idea of switching the process of attaining a price check is not to leave the user in the dark but to face this fact honestly and say:
Sorry, we cant say with a good enough degree of accuracy what price you will get. Sadly to find this information you will have to wait and see.
Once the sale has proceed there is a better opportunity for price opinions because there is a comparison to be made that isn't solely based on speculation. Advising the seller in such a way:
Looks like this may not be a good time sell this item. Comparing with past results the interest is low, maybe consider selling another time might be advisable if you want it to reach its full potential.
Or the reverse of:
This item currently has more demand that normal. This is a comparatively good price based on past results. I recommend selling now.
To me this is a better way of utilizing price opinions.
In reference to your 2nd point:
I don't have that information, but the PC forum gives me access to it, however flawed it may be
My opinion is if the information is as flawed as I believe it to be then its better to not have it. It only serves to encourage people to make flawed decisions. This is even more of a problem when people don't admit how much of a guess there PC really is and or don't give details on how they have arrived at that number. Perhaps accompanying a measure of certainty along with numbers would help in this regard (I'm 80% sure item x will get offers above 50a). That would at least give users some measure of clarity to how reliable the PC might me. Also serves to keep track of how good peoples estimates are over time. Who is an authority on the subject and who isn't.
In the end the degree to which the data is flawed and at what level data becomes so flawed it shouldn't be used I think is what we are arguing over. A subjective matter that is probs best left with a friendly "lets agree to disagree". You think it has value and I do not. Everything else I think we agree on
PS. All of the above relates to the price checking of rarely traded items.
-
I love ur response.
Stores don't just price items based on what they want to get, they have to price them so people buy them
^ Think me and you pretty closely agree how price systems work. The store effectively predicts what a customer is willing to pay then adjusts (if required) after it has sales data because it isn't using an auction style mechanism. In practice this prediction is made long b4 the product is created and the result is the justification for the viability of that business to create that good or service. This is the basic demonstration of how ultimately consumers drive prices in a free market even when the seller is setting the price.
Your suggestion of actively keeping price records is fantastic. (I do this myself as you do). It would provide a resource on which future predictions could be more accurately derived from. Like the hypothetical assessor me and yakslapper where discussing, the more information you have on the market the more accurate your estimates should be and thus the more useful it is to somebody seeking advise. Open to abuse like all things but giving everybody access to more data = GREAT IDEA!
-
Pretty clear that me and Pleikki disagree on most things but I think this is an improvement. If estimates are going to be given in this way personally id still like to see at least a caveat message underneath:
These are just my opinions. Ultimately they only way to find out what offers you will get is to ask for them. Utilize a sell thread.
Should be standard advice given in all price checks really
Also "PM me for more information."? Questions should be asked and answered on the thread imo. Public and transparent.
-
I could go into detail on how I disagree with PyroLobster that the only time value is ever determined is at point of sale. I could argue that even in his straightforward view that markets are the only "true" deciders of price, there is a market for assessors in a lot of industries, some of which are reasonably analogous to the Guild Wars high end market. If there is, as Pyrolobster hyperbolically claims, no way to gauge value until a sale, that all estimates until then are literally air in the wind, why do auction houses employ people to assess the value of items? Why do mortgage banks? Are they all completely irrational actors? Are they literally throwing their money away when they pay those people? I mean, yeah, I get that people like the straightforward view, but straightforward all-or-nothing interpretations rarely fully capture nuanced realities. Thinking beyond the PC forum here, the statement that "no price assessments before actual sale have any value" is almost ludicrous.
I'll clarify previous statements about pricing. The true price (a representation of value) of any given item is absolutely only determined at the point of sale. That price is not open to interpretation or opinion it is totally static. That item sold for x, its price was x.
An assessor is not unlike people price checking things on legacy but with an important difference. An assessor is specialized to a certain asset class and regularly sees that assets being bought and sold and thus has a very good understand of current market conditions. That persons opinion on pricing is of course valid and there estimate is useful information to both parties and should be relatively accurate. This is the situation with commonly traded Guild Wars Items (The q9 vs I gave in my examples). Any estimate by the assessor will be correct to within some margin of error (if hes gd at his job), this margin will only be discovered when the item is sold.
Contrast this with a rare unique item that hasn't been traded for say 1 year. There is no knowledge of current market conditions is relation to this item because for all intensive purposes the market does not exist. With zero or very little information to base an estimate on, what value can that estimate have other than zero or very little. This is what I am talking about when I say "no price assessments before actual sale have any value".
If you wana have a further ideological discussion on how markets work lets take it to the PM's
In relation to my comments about removing PC thread entirely as an option. That comes from my sincere belief that all things considered in its current form, PC thread does more harm than good.
I'll leave the nefarious agenda stuff with what I've said previously and just add this:
If there is to be a PC thread I would want it to be more honest, transparent and accurate. That is the motivation for all suggestions.
-
I do agree. Well said. Perhaps my views on where responsibility of ensuring accuracy falls in this dynamic were to focused on the guy providing the PC.
An attitude of "fact check the fact checker" is certainly advisable if you are going to utilize Price Check opinions.
Would still rather let a sell thread tell me a price. That is reality, no fact checking required.
Appreciate the constructive debate
-
I'll try and keep it short
People give their own opinion and the person asking decide themselves what to believe/make out of the information they received, end of story.
Sounds good but the people requesting advice are ignorant of the price or they wouldn't be asking. The people that are responding are presumed somewhat of an authority (they at least no more than the requester) so there is the implied trust that the information given is somewhat accurate. I'm saying that the information is nowhere near accurate enough to honestly put forward. You're asking people to decide if they should believe an answer to a question they asked. I hope you can see how that's a problem.
"This price check may or may not reflect the current market, so keep in mind that the suggested prices may or may not be reached if you do decide to sell/buy the item."
If you have to apply that warning like that then you are conceding the numbers given are basically worthless (which they are). So why bother having them at all?
-
Basically pyro you exacly stated the 99% yes, but you left out the 1% youre also in, if we would call it "the rich 1%, the people who know better and dont sell items if the bids dont reach their minimum expected price as we discuss here.
That's in a sell thread and my own item. We are discussing others opinions on expected future prices. Me not wanting to sell at the price the market gave me has no relevance to the validity of somebody else opinion on that item b4 the price was determined. Weather or not the person wants to sell the item once the price has been discovered is an entirely different question.
luxury basically privilege you have for being older, more exprienced collector of being able set up minimal price
^ THIS RIGHT HERE is exactly the problem. YOU not I want to set minimal prices via PC thread. I want people to 1. not get lowballed and 2. not be deceived into thinking that have something more valuable than they do and let buyers decide prices. You want people to not sell unless it reaches a value YOU assign to it. I didn't want to sell the enambled for the price offered because the personal value I place on it is greater than what I was offered. That is quiet a different thing to you putting minimum prices on other peoples items. Let the market tell them what the price is then allow them to make the decision to sell or not, uninfluenced by you nonsensical opinions. This is exactly what i did and exactly what I'm suggest everybody else do. 100% consistent.
why cant we allow the same right of knowing minimal price to everyone by telling them that in price check section?
People have a right to know YOUR subjective hypothetical "minimum price" do they? what complete and utter drivel. If you had understood anything I've written in this thread you would know YOU don't know the price of something that hasn't been sold yet and trying to convince people otherwise is dishonest (Especially when its done for you own insidious agenda). This is the reason I've stopped price checking things and am constructively suggesting an alternative method. You want to continue the same system so you can influence prices. Support ones of similar items you own with "minimum prices" and lower ones you wish to buy made up numbers or no response at all. I want to do neither and am asking for more public transparent auctions to determine prices rather than let people like you manipulate things for ur own gain.
Thanks for showing ur true colors yet again.
-
But not all sellers are motivated that way. For example, imagine a collector with a large store of presumably valuable items who has decided on a new direction for their collection. To start moving in that new direction, they decide to sell off some of their stash in order to stockpile some cash just so they can be ready if something they like suddenly appears.
In this example the individual has some knowledge of what his items are worth. He either paid for them or exchanged them for another item he bought. He is working with the assumption his items are at least above the threshold of "merch vaule". It's implied that this knowledge is limited hence the desire for a "price check" or at a minimum wants clarification. So he post several items for review and presumably gets responses about them. What addition information were these "price checkers" using to create the response they gave?
Did they know:
- How many potentially buyers would be interested at the present time
- How much cash these people had to commit to a purchase
- How motivated they were in buying (Level of interest of potential buyers have).
These are arguably the 3 most important factors that will decide the sell price and I would summit that almost every "price checker" has very little if any of that information. They cant know every possible bidder and there intentions or how future events will affect there actions. As such they can't weigh those variables to predict the outcome correctly (obvious exceptions for fortune tellers). This leaves us with the question. What information do they have to make a prediction? The list of things they might know is like the list they don't, long. But here some that are commonly given as justification of purposed prices.
- Previous sell prices
- Previous sell prices of similar items
- Previous sell prices of items with a similar rarity
(or a combination these)
All of these are for lack of a better term out of date. They are the result of a different time with different variables that are likely not fully understood even with hindsight. With just the 3 variables I listed formerly everybody can see how past sales info cannot accurately predict future prices (especially with using so few data points in the case of high end items). This is born out in practice, I am reminded of the blue q8 magmas as an example. They 2nd one that came for sale only got half the price of the first. An extreme example but anybody who has spend time trading know this phenomenon to be true. Past sale are a guide or "ballpark" but ultimately cant be relied upon to reflect future transactions and can be wildly wrong.
All of this and much more is why the only true way to know the price is to sell, I think we agree on this. I am also in agreeance with you that peoples predictive prices can have some measure of accuracy. This is pretty obvious because most price checks aren't insanely wrong. This is a function of them having some information with which to work with even if its incomplete compared to market forces. I think where we are differing is what value this somewhat accurate predictive ability is and how/if it should be used.
I went into some detail in the previous post of how irreverent a price check is if you intended to sell regardless of the opinions. In your example a person wants to sell 1 of a number which is different but in my eyes warrants the same response. If the accuracy of the price check cannot be known until the sale then the guy looking for which item to sell based on that price check is essentially making a decision upon flawed data. To me listing all his selected items for sale and then deciding, (once the numbers are in) what to let go is of benefit to him. This course of action absolutely goes on successfully. Sellers list dozens of items for sale with no intention of selling all but to gauge interest and find real price information. I submit this is to be encouraged instead of using PC Thread.
Yes we don't need a sale to know a feather will fetch less than a Q8 sephis. Likewise we don't need a sale to know that a Q9 Voltaic Spear will currently get bids of 4a+. If inexperienced players need to be informed of current prices of these types of frequently traded items then fine, PC thread can accommodate that if other methods cant. The kind of price checks that started this discussion are high end ones. Items that are not frequency traded and therefore little information can be know about the variables that will effect its sell price. In this scenario I believe personal opinions amount to nothing more than a guess, something that's not helpful information in my mind. I would prefer somebody say "I just don't know" rather than give me an answer engaging in conjecture. If the trading community wants to keep the guessing game going then so be it. What I am suggesting is a viable alternative to that system which improves accuracy and reduces confusion, frustration and in some cases dishonesty.
As previously outlined I believe there is room for "ballpark" figures to accompany the default advise of not selling via pm & list publicly for sale. But only really as context to know what a "lowball" looks like or perhaps if its not worth the effort to sell. Information on previous sales ect can be provided for the purpose or validating the "ballpark" figure given but not much more. I will add to my previous suggestion and summit below my ideal solution (apart from scrapping the whole thing lol). Price checkers have 3 choices (essentially votes) with the option of giving additional info to include: "ballpark" price ideally accompanied with past sales info and alike to substantiate it.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Item has some value, auction and find out how much"
(Auction meaning a sell thread supplemented by taking bids from kama ect)
We Advise you to:
Not sell to private messages
Allow adequate time for you're auction to take place (At least a week recommended)
Not expect any price given here to be the price you sell for
"Item has value, is regularly sold for.."
(Option for adding a current commonly accepted price)
"Item is merch food"
(Regarded as less than 10k)
-----------------------------------------------------------
I believe this simple and transparent voting mechanic would result in more people participating in price checks and give better results for users. It prevents "lowball" offers taking place and adds some uniformity to price checking instead of the free for all we currently have. Ultimately it pushes more rare items to be put for sale where the true price can be found which should be the goal. Apologies for the essay and all the typos.
-
First off great name!
I do however disagree with almost everything you said. A price check has no purpose for a seller other than to stop lowballs apart from if the result itself discourages people from posting for sale because its merch food. Getting a "ballpark" figure serves only to act as an guessed benchmark to retroactively mark against an eventual sell price.
Example 1: You get a PC of 10a for an item and then decide to post for sale. You wait 2 weeks and get a few bidders, the highest bid is 5a.
(The market has discovered the price for you of 5a. That's as much as a buyer is willing to pay. The opinion given by an individual/ group consensuses resulting in the PC of 10a was totally irrelevant other than stopping you from taking a hypothetical low private offer of say 10e. The same is true of the reverse.)
Example 2: You get a PC of 10a for an item and then decide to post for sale. You quickly get an offer for 10a and take it. A few days on you get another offer for 15a. (You have used the subjective value somebody with assumed authority gave and ended up will less than was possible.)
Example 3: You get a PC of 10a for an item and then decide to post for sale. You quickly get an offer for 10a, a few days on you get another offer for 15a and take it. (The market has again discovered a price for you of 15a. The PC did not effect the price you got and was again wrong by 50% because nobody knew the price it would sell for. What value was the PC? none.)
In each example which covers 99% of scenarios of PC and Sell interaction you didn't need the number 10a and the 1 time it affected the outcome it did so at a loss to you. This is the problem with all current price checking. You cannot know it was accurate until you sell and at that stage you have the price and the PC was irrelevant. To me information you cannot judge the validity of is worthless. IMO PC Thread has a function but its not to give a number that people should put any stock into whatsoever. It is merely to prevent "lowballs". The phrase "as much as somebody will offer, sell and find out" is a cliche but is 100% accurate and should be used for near everything. Any ballpark figure then only serves as some vague reference of scale to compare "lowball" private offers to.
I would purpose standard responses be:
"Yes the item has some value, auction in public view and find out how much"
"No the item is merch food"
A consensus around this binary option can easily be reached and people can quibble about the definition of "merch food"
This is the only honest way to "Price check" high end items if not all. It prevents lowballs and stops all the bullshit of PC thread.
-
-
-
^ Excellent alternative to burning
-
Its a good point and one I have considered in my "burn it down plan". Buyers looking for a price check would have nowhere specifically to go. My response would be to point them at previous sell threads (and newly added comments sections). Legacy search function isn't terrible either to accompany this. True they wouldn't be able to find info on anything that hasn't already been sold but that's a sacrifice i'd willing to make to stop the endless shenanigans of PC Thread and the resulting discussion threads about PC thread lol
-
@jimbo32 I think we do agree for the most part
I would go way further than "every PC should be taken with a grain of salt". Been my position for a long time that PC thread is cancer and should be removed. The function of people commenting about price could be folded into sell thread somehow. A comments section underneath a thread is all it need be. That would serve the purpose of preventing "lowballs" which is all PC thread attempts (badly) to be in practice. Also solves the problem of people (including me) using posts on sell threads to banter / flame. With a comment section for all the cancer soup to swirl around in can be a strict enforcement that posts are bids only.
-
WHY???? I guess it will go into my Plant pile
This makes me really sad
Could have been this guys brother:
-
That sounds good in theory, but with the current state of the game economy, it isn't always possible.
I say It is always better to be honest and say "I don't know what the market values it at" rather than guess and potentially mislead people.
In practice the scenario you gave almost never happens, the market knows more than any given individual. People seeking profit will always naturally bid up an item they consider "under priced" so they can buy as an investment. This stops items in a transparent public forum being traded for less than they are worth because the price they can reach in that system IS the value the market has given it. In a private setting this would be a much bigger problem which is why people should be told to be careful of private offers / just selling in kama.
Obviously legacy + kama doesn't reach all the potential buyers and therefore its possible (if not likely in some cases) the highest possible price wont be reached buts its as good a price discovery mechanism you going to get in guild wars (short of an auction house where all trade is conducted). The solution to this problem from a sellers perspective is marketing. Advertising to as many people as possible the item is for sale so more potential buyers can participate.
"Personally I wouldn't sell for less than 60a, but it might take a while to find the right buyer"?
I seriously don't understand that value such a statement has even when it comes from an assumed authority on the subject (which most times it doesn't). Given with no other details is simply conjecture.
Lets say you claim you wouldn't sell for less than 60a, you spend 6 months trying to sell and only get an offer for 30a. If the first statement is true then you haven't sold, so the price you allocated it was not valid. If you sell 6 months later for 60a you have not proved it was worth 60a at the time of the price check but rather 6 months later. These are not the same, any number of market dynamics could have changed in that time period. Prices in a free market are constantly changing. The only way to find the price in the present is to sell it. Hence this is the advise people should be given for items that are not continually traded + cautions about selling. Ultimately I believe the request for a price check has an implied condition of time. "What is my item worth at the moment" "what can I expect to get for it if I sold now". If people ask "I'm looking to sell next year, any guesses on price?" then such predictive statements are a reasonable response but absent of that its nonsense.
I'll refer to my previous statement with a slight alteration:
"Yes previous sales numbers and traders opinions can be a guide but ultimately cannot be relied upon as a measure of current value.
-
Iv'e got to chime in here, some of whats been said cant be left unchallenged. Pleikki
The price of an item is a subjective number put forward from a buyer and accepted by the seller. If the seller wont accept the buyers offer there is no sale and thus that price he wanted was not valid. In a nutshell prices are driven by consumers (buyers). To post something for sale on legacy is to allow in a transparent and public setting buyers to place bids and the price to be discovered. There is no better way to find the current value for something than this system. Saying it doesn't work "since only 1/5 cases or less the prices actually reach to number items can with time and ingame selling" is complete nonsense. Yes if you increase the number of potential buyers by changing effective time an item is for sale it can reach a different price, this however is irrelevant. People don't want a hypothetical guess of what an item could sell for at some unknown time in the future with some unknown buyer. This price it can be sold for in the present is the price.
If after 2 weeks the highest bid is 20a and 1 year ago the same item reached 100a then the price today is still 20a. It's not going to cheap and somebody isn't being ripped off, its the highest amount somebody is willing to pay. There is a long list of variables to account for this discrepancy, perhaps there was 10 interested buyers 1 year ago and now there is 2. It's self evident that the price today should not be reflective of a higher demand pressure from the past that at present doesn't exist. When people say "given enough time you might get "x" they are making a prediction. A prediction that in the future you will get a different price than you can today given the current market conditions. This is also ridiculously unhelpful to somebody who wants to know the value of there item now. I notice nobody has ever said "given enough time you might get "x" with x being lower than the value they assign in currently. However this is just as likely as the reverse. It's readily apparent that prices move up AND down, sometimes drastically in such an illiquid market.
I could go on for pages about this but I'll just address one more thing. You seriously have the idiocy say "the market is dead." then defend why people should expect to sell at an elevated price imagined by you to exist because why? because that is what you would aspire to sell for if the item where yours. By no measure can this by considered a price check. That's like telling somebody the housing market is dead (prices are down, lack of buyers compared to sellers) ...but if I were you I wouldn't sell that house for less than double your current offer or 2 years ago when the market wasn't dead your neighbor sold for "x". How is that helpful to somebody who a) wants to know what there house is worth now and or b) wants to sell there house now for as much as they can get currently. You're subjective minimum number is of no value to anybody but yourself, sharing it with sellers only causes frustration when that price cannot be attained because is was completely disconnected from the as then unknown fair market price.
This approach to price checking is the "better way" : Prevent ignorant people getting low balled. Not by picking a number you wouldn't sell below but very simply telling the owner they have something of high value, warn them to be weary of pm offers, be patient and perhaps gives a rough ballpark figure based on experience. Then point them at the sell thread (can take offers from kama ect also) as that's the only true way to find the current value. IMO this is the only way to deal with high end items that are not readily bought and sold so no price can be known. Yes previous sales numbers can be a guide but ultimately cannot be relied upon as a measure of current value.
Basically do not give price checks that cant be given with any degree of accuracy.
-
Unconditional weps are as they sound, that is to say have no condition attached to the dmg mod. (Like The Axe shown above).
Dual zeal and vamp are not considered "unconditional" because they come with a constraint (condition) of -1 degen.
