Coming 7.4 GTN changes on the PTS

[Darkestmonty]

26 minutes ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

 

Again, to be clear, the tax is coming out in the same place in both systems. You can keep repeating this math all you want, make the calculation for 50 years, whatever, it doesn't apply here. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the two systems if you think it does.

 

The tax is still there, taken out in the same way, and sellers are the only ones that have to pay attention to it. Sure, sellers can factor it into their pricing, but they can do that in today's system by increasing their prices by 8%. That doesn't happen for most items, though, because the market will determine the prices.  That, as it's already been pointed out, will then force sellers to account for the current lowest buyout price when listing. So your unit price becomes the post-GTN commission credits in the 7.0 system. It's the same.

The tax is not coming out of the same place.

Place S = Sellers

Place B = Buyers

Taxes pre-7.4 are being paid by Party S

Taxes in 7.4 and beyond are being paid by Party B

Your fallacy is that you think items have a set price in SWTOR and if they exceed that set price no one will buy said item.

If an item in 7.3 sold once for 350,000 credits, in 7.4 it better be a total of 350,000 credits or no one will buy it?

A dye two days ago was selling for 350,000 credits and today that same dye sells for 475,000 credits (real prices on Star Forge for the White and Light Gray Dye Module). You believe buyers (Place B) are going to care if the price jumped from 350,000 to 371,000 credits because of a buyers tax in 7.4 when they are already willing to pay 475,000 credits now?

Prices are not static.

Please, name one item on the GTN that retains the same price without fluctuating multiple times a week.

Edited November 4, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

First off:

 

1 minute ago, Darkestmonty said:

If a dye selling two days ago goes for 350,000 credits today sells for 475,000 credits (real prices on my server for the White and Light Gray Dye Module), you think buyers (Place B) are going to care if the price jumped from 350,000 to 371,000 credits because of a buyers tax in 7.4?

 

Please, name one item on the GTN that retains the same price without fluctuating multiple times a week.

 

"Sure, sellers can factor it into their pricing, but they can do that in today's system by increasing their prices by 8%."

 

Already addressed this. What's to stop prices from jumping now to account for the current tax? Why would that have not happened before now and suddenly happen in 7.4? What is new?

 

3 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

Your fallacy is that you think items have a set price in SWTOR and if they exceed that set price no one will buy said item.

 

I literally never said this, and in fact said, quite clearly, that the market will decide the price, which inherently means I know it fluctuates. That fluctuation, by design, means that sellers can't unilaterally increase prices to account for a new tax. If the price drives lower, because people undercut you, you're listing lower or, under 7.4's system, you will not sell. People literally can't buy items that aren't the lowest buyout price anymore.

 

6 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

The tax is not coming out of the same place.

Place S = Sellers

Place B = Buyers

Taxes pre-7.4 are being paid by Party S

Taxes in 7.4 and beyond are being paid by Party B

 

And this is the heart of it. This is where your misunderstanding is coming from. In order for your premise to work, this has to be true, and what I'm telling you is that it's not.

 

In the current system, the buyer sees a buyout price for an item, they pay it. The GTN takes the tax out in the middle and the seller receives the buyout price minus the tax.

 

In the new system, the buyer sees a buyout price for an item, they pay it. The GTN takes the tax out in the middle and the seller receives the buyout price minus the tax.

 

The difference is that the seller is specifying the after tax part as their "unit price" now instead of specifying the buyout price the buyer sees, which was almost necessary due to the change to a progressive tax rate. The place where the tax comes out from hasn't changed. It's fine if you want to say the buyer pays it, but like I said before, if that's the case, then the buyer always paid it. Because the tax is in the same place.

 

Nothing has changed functionally. If you want to argue that the sellers paid it before and don't pay it now, then explain how it's different and how sellers were paying the tax in the old system, and aren't now. Back up what you're saying.

[Darkestmonty]

26 minutes ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

First off:

 

 

"Sure, sellers can factor it into their pricing, but they can do that in today's system by increasing their prices by 8%."

 

Already addressed this. What's to stop prices from jumping now to account for the current tax? Why would that have not happened before now and suddenly happen in 7.4? What is new?

 

 

I literally never said this, and in fact said, quite clearly, that the market will decide the price, which inherently means I know it fluctuates. That fluctuation, by design, means that sellers can't unilaterally increase prices to account for a new tax. If the price drives lower, because people undercut you, you're listing lower or, under 7.4's system, you will not sell. People literally can't buy items that aren't the lowest buyout price anymore.

 

 

And this is the heart of it. This is where your misunderstanding is coming from. In order for your premise to work, this has to be true, and what I'm telling you is that it's not.

 

In the current system, the buyer sees a buyout price for an item, they pay it. The GTN takes the tax out in the middle and the seller receives the buyout price minus the tax.

 

In the new system, the buyer sees a buyout price for an item, they pay it. The GTN takes the tax out in the middle and the seller receives the buyout price minus the tax.

 

The difference is that the seller is specifying the after tax part as their "unit price" now instead of specifying the buyout price the buyer sees, which was almost necessary due to the change to a progressive tax rate. The place where the tax comes out from hasn't changed. It's fine if you want to say the buyer pays it, but like I said before, if that's the case, then the buyer always paid it. Because the tax is in the same place.

 

Nothing has changed functionally. If you want to argue that the sellers paid it before and don't pay it now, then explain how it's different and how sellers were paying the tax in the old system, and aren't now. Back up what you're saying.

An item sells for 350,000 credits now and a seller nets 322,00 credits.

An item sells for 371,000 credits in 7.4 and a seller nets 350,000 credits.

How is the seller not making more credits in 7.4?

26 minutes ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

The difference is that the seller is specifying the after tax part as their "unit price" now instead of specifying the buyout price the buyer sees, which was almost necessary due to the change to a progressive tax rate. The place where the tax comes out from hasn't changed. It's fine if you want to say the buyer pays it, but like I said before, if that's the case, then the buyer always paid it. Because the tax is in the same place.

You expect buyers to tell sellers "hey, pre-7.4 I was paying 350,000 credits which included an 8% GTN tax. Now that you aren't paying taxes in 7.4, I demand you sell that dye for 322,000 credits because you aren't allowed to make more than 322,000 credits per dye!"

Buyers are already willing to pay 475,000 credits for that same 350,000 two days later. Why do you think sellers are going to drop their prices lower to compensate for the 8% taxes they no longer have to pay when buyers are already willing to pay more?

Again, what you are saying only works if items have a static price or sellers are only allowed to make a set profit of which neither are true.

Edited November 4, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

Just now, Darkestmonty said:

An item sells for 350,000 credits now and a seller nets 322,00 credits.

An item sells for 371,000 credits in 7.4 and a seller nets 350,000 credits.

How is the seller not making more credits in 7.4?

 

If they're the only ones listing it and can choose any price they want, sure, they can make more credits that way. Again, though, if you're the only one listing an item, then in the current system, you could price it at around 380,000 and receive 350k. You can account for the tax in the current system. There's nothing stopping you from doing that right now.

 

The fact that the market fluctuates, like you pointed out, is what makes this not work, because you're probably not gonna be the only person selling this. Again, in 7.4, you cannot buy items that aren't the lowest buyout price, so somebody else lists that same item. They're going to list a buyout price below yours. Then maybe somebody else, then somebody else, then somebody else. The price is 350,000 buyout for the item now after all of that.

 

That doesn't go away in 7.4, and in 7.4, as some people have already complained about, when an item is already listed and you want to list for lower, you have to work backwards from the buyout price, because that's all the buyer (and you, as a seller looking up the item to see the current prices) sees. So you don't list it for 350,000. You list it for whatever unit price reaches 350,000 as a buyout price.

 

6 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

Have you used the PTS GTN for 7.4?

The seller in 7.4, at least for now, isn't specificing the "after tax part as their unit price".

Sellers type in a unit price and the GTN adds the tax on top of it.

If a seller posts a dye for 350,000 credits, the buyer will see the price as 371,000 credits.

There is no option for sellers to input a price that already includes taxes.

 

I sure have used it, and this really makes me think you don't fundamentally understand what they've changed.

 

As I mentioned above, you're correct, there is no option for a seller to input a price that already includes taxes, but any price data you use to set your price will include it. If you search for an item on the GTN? It shows you the buyout price (ie, including the tax). The historical data it shows and recent sales? Buyout price, includes the tax. Everything that you see to guide your price includes the tax, because as far as the buyer is concerned, that tax doesn't exist, there's only ever the buyout price, in the current system and 7.4.

 

So yes, if the seller posts the dye for 350,000 credits, they'll see the price as 371,000. If the current lowest buyout price was 350,000, though, their listing isn't the lowest buyout price and it won't sell (at least not until all of the lower priced listings sell first, that's how 7.4 works). In order to be lowest and actually sell, they have to lower their unit price until the buyout price becomes lower than 350,000. So instead of setting a buyout price and finding out what the tax is after the fact, you're listing a unit price and the GTN shows what the tax is right there, adds to it, and creates the buyout price.

 

That's what I meant by "after tax". The tax was in reference to the current system's tax. Your unit price in 7.4 is what you would have gotten in the current system "after tax". In both systems, the seller almost always still has to care what the buyout price is first and foremost, because like I explained, that's what all of the data comes back to. You're not listing based on a unit price alone unless you're the only seller for an item and you're listing blind, at which point you could mentally divide your desired price by .92 in the current system and get the same effect as listing by "unit price" in 7.4 (see my 380,000 credit example above). If you're not, then you're working backwards from a buyout price. You can't set it directly, that's correct, you just have to play around with the unit price until you get it close enough. You're still aiming for a specific buyout price in the end.

 

With that in mind, I ask again, how is the new system different as far as the tax is concerned? In both systems, you're setting a buyout price. At what point does the tax become the buyer's burden in a way that it wasn't before?

[Darkestmonty]

43 minutes ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

 

If they're the only ones listing it and can choose any price they want, sure, they can make more credits that way. Again, though, if you're the only one listing an item, then in the current system, you could price it at around 380,000 and receive 350k. You can account for the tax in the current system. There's nothing stopping you from doing that right now.

 

The fact that the market fluctuates, like you pointed out, is what makes this not work, because you're probably not gonna be the only person selling this. Again, in 7.4, you cannot buy items that aren't the lowest buyout price, so somebody else lists that same item. They're going to list a buyout price below yours. Then maybe somebody else, then somebody else, then somebody else. The price is 350,000 buyout for the item now after all of that.

 

That doesn't go away in 7.4, and in 7.4, as some people have already complained about, when an item is already listed and you want to list for lower, you have to work backwards from the buyout price, because that's all the buyer (and you, as a seller looking up the item to see the current prices) sees. So you don't list it for 350,000. You list it for whatever unit price reaches 350,000 as a buyout price.

 

 

I sure have used it, and this really makes me think you don't fundamentally understand what they've changed.

 

As I mentioned above, you're correct, there is no option for a seller to input a price that already includes taxes, but any price data you use to set your price will include it. If you search for an item on the GTN? It shows you the buyout price (ie, including the tax). The historical data it shows and recent sales? Buyout price, includes the tax. Everything that you see to guide your price includes the tax, because as far as the buyer is concerned, that tax doesn't exist, there's only ever the buyout price, in the current system and 7.4.

 

So yes, if the seller posts the dye for 350,000 credits, they'll see the price as 371,000. If the current lowest buyout price was 350,000, though, their listing isn't the lowest buyout price and it won't sell (at least not until all of the lower priced listings sell first, that's how 7.4 works). In order to be lowest and actually sell, they have to lower their unit price until the buyout price becomes lower than 350,000. So instead of setting a buyout price and finding out what the tax is after the fact, you're listing a unit price and the GTN shows what the tax is right there, adds to it, and creates the buyout price.

 

That's what I meant by "after tax". The tax was in reference to the current system's tax. Your unit price in 7.4 is what you would have gotten in the current system "after tax". In both systems, the seller almost always still has to care what the buyout price is first and foremost, because like I explained, that's what all of the data comes back to. You're not listing based on a unit price alone unless you're the only seller for an item and you're listing blind, at which point you could mentally divide your desired price by .92 in the current system and get the same effect as listing by "unit price" in 7.4 (see my 380,000 credit example above). If you're not, then you're working backwards from a buyout price. You can't set it directly, that's correct, you just have to play around with the unit price until you get it close enough. You're still aiming for a specific buyout price in the end.

 

With that in mind, I ask again, how is the new system different as far as the tax is concerned? In both systems, you're setting a buyout price. White and Light Gray Dye Module

Do you know what the suggested price for that 350,000 credit White and Light Gray Dye Module is now for Star Forge? 399,500 credits. That is after the 475,000 credit and 500,000 credit ones sold out earlier tonight.

Sellers already ignored the suggested price, posted higher amounts and the dyes sold. They sold because supply ran short. They sold because there is always a buyer out there willing to pay more when supply runs low.

Wait, nm, the 2,000,000 credit White and Light Gray Dye Module just sold as well. That is also gone so now there are zero White and Light Gray Dye Module listed.

43 minutes ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

With that in mind, I ask again, how is the new system different as far as the tax is concerned? In both systems, you're setting a buyout price. At what point does the tax become the buyer's burden in a way that it wasn't before?

Because in 7.4 sellers no longer pay taxes like they do currently.

If I sell a dye now for 350,000 (or hell even 2,000,000 because someone apparently just bought that over priced dye) my net is 8% lower than it will be in 7.4.

I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 credits now I lose 240,000,000 credits. I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 in 7.4 and I lose the posting fee.

Edited November 4, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

1 minute ago, Darkestmonty said:

Do you know what the suggested price for that 350,000 credit White and Light Gray Dye Module is now for Star Forge? 399,500 credits. That is after the 475,000 credit and 500,000 credit ones sold out earlier tonight.

Sellers already ignored the suggested price, posted higher amounts and the dyes sold. They sold because supply ran out. They sold because there is always a buyer out there willing to pay more when supply runs low.

Wait, nm, the 2,000,000 credit White and Light Gray Dye Module just sold as well. That is also gone so now there are zero White and Light Gray Dye Module listed.

 

Okay?

 

So you're showing the prices fluctuate up and down for an item in today's system. We've established this, yes. I never said prices were set. Your idea that there's always a buyer out there willing to pay more is dependent on demand for the item, but that's also part of the market, supply and demand.

 

That's going to happen in both systems, though, and it doesn't impact the functionality of the tax, or anything else I said. Prices fluctuating doesn't mean sellers will be able to unilaterally increase prices across the board. If the item is competitive, somebody will undercut you, and somebody will undercut them, etc. Unless the demand is outweighing the supply to the point where you can get to low population on the item like that and set a price, you still have to pay attention to the buyout price other people have set, which means you're taking the tax into account.

 

And again, in the current system, you can also change your price to be what you want to receive if the item is low population like that. Take what you want (your "unit price" in 7.4 terms), divide it by 0.92, and put the result as your buyout price. Done. If you hit an item like the above, that's certainly possible right now, in the current system. So this isn't the smoking gun difference you think it is, it's the same, it's just easier in 7.4 due to how the listing price is set up (you don't have to divide anything), in exchange for listing prices for competitive items being more complicated (see the whole spiel I explained about the current buyout price being the only data you see).

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

15 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

Because in 7.4 sellers no longer pay taxes like they do currently.

If I sell a dye now for 350,000 (or hell even 2,000,000 because someone apparently just bought that over priced dye) my net is 8% lower than it will be in 7.4.

I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 credits now I lose 240,000,000 credits. I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 in 7.4 and I lose the posting fee.

 

This shows, once again, a severe misunderstanding of what the new system actually is. If you sell an item for 3 billion in 7.4, you're not listing it for 3 billion, you're listing it for 3.4 billion. These numbers aren't the same, you can't compare them.

 

The 3 billion in the current system is a buyout price, the 3 billion in 7.4 is a unit price. They're not the same. Again, if you're talking about a low population item where you're the only one listing it, in the current system you can inflate your price by 8% to account for the tax, which would be the same as listing by unit price alone in 7.4 (go back to my 380,000 credit example again for your 350,000 credit example). But if the item is competitive and you're going by existing sales data or listings and not just coming up with a price off the top of your head, the price you use as a reference will be a buyout price, which means it has the tax included, which means your unit price will be derived from a buyout price with the tax accounted for. The same as it is now.

 

To be clear, if you sell an item such that the buyer pays 3 billion in 7.4, you won't get 3 billion back. Your whole point here relies on an item where you have free reign on price and even then there's an equivalent example in the current system.

[Darkestmonty]

1 minute ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

 

This shows, once again, a severe misunderstanding of what the new system actually is. If you sell an item for 3 billion in 7.4, you're not listing it for 3 billion, you're listing it for 3.4 billion. These numbers aren't the same, you can't compare them.

 

The 3 billion in the current system is a buyout price, the 3 billion in 7.4 is a unit price. They're not the same. Again, if you're talking about a low population item where you're the only one listing it, in the current system you can inflate your price by 8% to account for the tax, which would be the same as listing by unit price alone in 7.4 (go back to my 380,000 credit example again for your 350,000 credit example). But if the item is competitive and you're going by existing sales data or listings and not just coming up with a price off the top of your head, the price you use as a reference will be a buyout price, which means it has the tax included, which means your unit price will be derived from a buyout price with the tax accounted for. The same as it is now.

 

To be clear, if you sell an item such that the buyer pays 3 billion in 7.4, you won't get 3 billion back. Your whole point here relies on an item where you have free reign on price and even then there's an equivalent example in the current system.

If I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 in 7.4, I'm getting back 3,000,000,000 minus listing fees.

If I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 now, I'm getting back 2,760,000,000 credits.

I'm going to earn more credits for my item in 7.4 than selling it now.

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

1 minute ago, Darkestmonty said:

If I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 in 7.4, I'm getting back 3,000,000,000 minus listing fees.

If I sell an item for 3,000,000,000 now, I'm getting back 2,760,000,000 credits.

I'm going to earn more credits for my item in 7.4 than selling it now.

 

You completely missed the point. You're not selling the item for 3 billion in 7.4, you're selling it for 3.4 billion. You can't compare a unit price in 7.4 to a buyout price in the current system, it's not the same number. Read the post.

Edited November 4, 2023 by The-Kaitou-Kid

[Darkestmonty]

2 minutes ago, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

 

You completely missed the point. You're not selling the item for 3 billion in 7.4, you're selling it for 3.4 billion. You can't compare a unit price in 7.4 to a buyout price in the current system, it's the same number. Read the post.

considering that the GTN cap is 3,000,000,000 before and after 7.4, I don't care about the additional taxes buyers pay because that same 3 billion sale is netting me more profit in 7.4.

Edited November 4, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

Just now, Darkestmonty said:

considering that the GTN cap is 3 billion in both circumstances, I don't care about the additional taxes because that same 3 billion sale is netting me more profit in 7.4.

 

But then the example only works for 3 billion. If you're only considering 3 billion, then yes, 7.4 gets you more credits, but that's not a matter of the tax not being applied, it's because the buyout price cap is effectively raised in 7.4 by 400+ million credits due to the change in what's being capped.

 

Once you drop to lower prices where you can have an equivalent buyout price in both systems, your example falls apart.

[Darkestmonty]

Just now, The-Kaitou-Kid said:

 

But then the example only works for 3 billion. If you're only considering 3 billion, then yes, 7.4 gets you more credits, but that's not a matter of the tax not being applied, it's because the buyout price cap is effectively raised in 7.4 by 400+ million credits due to the change in what's being capped.

 

Once you drop to lower prices where you can have an equivalent buyout price in both systems, your example falls apart.

if your theory doesn't work for all circumstances with in the parameters you are applying it to, your theory is wrong.

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

Just now, Darkestmonty said:

if your theory doesn't work for all circumstances with in the parameters you are applying it to, your theory is wrong.

 

Except it does work, because I'm applying it where buyout prices are equivalent, and it works in all circumstances there.

 

Your example falls apart when go to a buyout price that can be matched in both systems, so your point here applies to your own example.

[DeannaVoyager]

14 hours ago, Spikanor said:

 

like the devs can stop the credit sellers for good its more a cat and mouse game there playing.

 

That's why it would be good if players could do that part and just report what they find.

14 hours ago, Spikanor said:

you know that there are privet groups on facebook and discort where players sell and buy credits with real money since thats how it go's in the other MMO's and there cant stopt then also.

i give no damm about the credit sellers at all since i wane see there focus on other things what is more importent for the game then something like this.

I don't care about credit sellers either, but I care if I can only buy from them after 7.4.  I don't want to support exploiters and after 7.4 we can't choose the seller anymore, which is fundamentally stupid and wrong. 

 

14 hours ago, Spikanor said:

if there wane remove the sellers name from the GTN then let then do it for some reason there think its good.

More likely they haven't even thought what will happen if they do that.  They have a history of "thinking something is good" but for some reason only manage to lose players instead.  

[Spikanor]

1 hour ago, DeannaVoyager said:

That's why it would be good if players could do that part and just report what they find.

then you sent i think more fake reports then you hit the jackpot with it since not forgot that some normal players use some toons to sell there stuff so telling that char is a credit seller when its that players toon to sell stuff is sending a fake report more.

and whats the delay time now at custormer support to get a replay or not 3 weeks waiting limit?

 

1 hour ago, DeannaVoyager said:

I don't care about credit sellers either, but I care if I can only buy from them after 7.4.  I don't want to support exploiters and after 7.4 we can't choose the seller anymore, which is fundamentally stupid and wrong. 

thats something you need to explane to JoeStramaglia that adding no seller name's on the GTN is wrong.

 

1 hour ago, DeannaVoyager said:

More likely they haven't even thought what will happen if they do that.  They have a history of "thinking something is good" but for some reason only manage to lose players instead.

there have that idea all since 7.0 that things there inplant in the game is good when its back fire then really hard in the end so thats really notting new at all for a lot of players.

there is a reason the 7.X era is the worst era from this game that only have back fire then a lot with there ''good idea's''

[DeannaVoyager]

48 minutes ago, Spikanor said:

then you sent i think more fake reports then you hit the jackpot with it since not forgot that some normal players use some toons to sell there stuff so telling that char is a credit seller when its that players toon to sell stuff is sending a fake report more.

and whats the delay time now at custormer support to get a replay or not 3 weeks waiting limit?

Stop right there. You are assuming that I'm spamming them with "fake reports", when you don't have a clue what kind of things I report if any. Just because you don't know how to spot an exploiter, and are in denial doesn't mean other people can't. Unfortunately there are rules against naming and shaming, so I can't give you an example.  

 

 

 

[Spikanor]

10 minutes ago, DeannaVoyager said:

Stop right there. You are assuming that I'm spamming them with "fake reports", when you don't have a clue what kind of things I report if any. Just because you don't know how to spot an exploiter, and are in denial doesn't mean other people can't. Unfortunately there are rules against naming and shaming, so I can't give you an example.  

 

 

 

thats not what i mean.

what i mean more is how do you know that player is a credit seller or not.

lets use this as a good exemple for what i mean more.

if piet is my crafter and he craft something that i wane sell on the GTN and i let dave my seller char let it sell when you see its piet that has craft it do's not mean that dave is a credit seller since he sells stuff what piet has craft.

in that way i mean it more with it.

 

Edited November 4, 2023 by Spikanor

[TrixxieTriss]

3 hours ago, DeannaVoyager said:

Stop right there. You are assuming that I'm spamming them with "fake reports", when you don't have a clue what kind of things I report if any. Just because you don't know how to spot an exploiter, and are in denial doesn't mean other people can't. Unfortunately there are rules against naming and shaming, so I can't give you an example.  

 

 

 

How do you personally identify an exploiter or credit farmer selling stuff on the GTN from someone legitimately playing the market by buying & selling items? 

[DeannaVoyager]

1 hour ago, TrixxieTriss said:

How do you personally identify an exploiter or credit farmer selling stuff on the GTN from someone legitimately playing the market by buying & selling items? 

Sorry Trixxie, not gonna answer that here because if I do, someone will take one word of the answer and make it a separate argument without having a clue what they are talking about and this thread really isn't about spotting credit sellers. I will answer you with a PM because I believe your question is sincere.

[LD_Little_Dragon]

It's not one specific problem it's a cumulation of all the changes that I still think will end up driving the casual sellers off the GTN.

The new system with 'forced to buy the lowest listed price' combined with fees, wonky tax so you can't just list without going through hoops to make sure you're the lowest on the board, ect means that the market will end up controlled by the GTN players who constantly monitor the market and keep undercutting so THEIR listings are always lowest.

These GTN players will also periodically buy up all the listings when they get below a certain price, and then start the 'list high, then constantly undercut anyone else who lists'.

By undercut I don't mean by 10%, 5% or even 1%, which is what most casual listers will do (or even more if they want a fast sale).  The GTN players are the 'undercut by one credit' type, and the new system will encourage AND reward for them doing so.

You may think this will lead to lower prices overall.  I doubt it.  I've driven GTN player prices down by 30% to 50% just by listing one item considerably lower, waiting to be undercut, then listing another one considerably lower again.  MOST TIMES MY ITEMS DO NOT SELL DUE TO RAPID UNDERCUTTING BY THE GTN PLAYERS.

Fewer casual sellers = GTN players controlling the market = higher prices.

[psikofunkster]

They should reset all the credits to 0, also they should sell those old exclusive rewards like the master crest on GTN for Cartel Coins.

From that point generate new content under BS wing and everybody enjoy the game again and be happy. 😊

A  new begining...a new hope...

[Darkestmonty]

1 hour ago, psikofunkster said:

They should reset all the credits to 0, also they should sell those old exclusive rewards like the master crest on GTN for Cartel Coins.

From that point generate new content under BS wing and everybody enjoy the game again and be happy. 😊

A  new begining...a new hope...

that's the best way to make every single player that currently spends real life money on the CM to leave this game permanently.

I know players that spend hundreds a month on the Cartel Market to keep their account legitimately filled with credits. Players like that are the only reason FTP and subscribers like me (who never buy CC) enjoy this game and everything the CM has to offer. Resetting the credits to zero basically tells players "if you spend real life money on this game, we'll randomly decide to wipe all those credits you earned selling CM items."

Credit economy wise, the only real solution to fixing inflation is credit sinks. If the devs can not find a balance between generated credits and outgoing credits, inflation will always be an issue no matter how often they delete all credits.

[JakRoanin]

I would just like more things to craft! Oh and the ability to sell armor as a complete set.

[TrixxieTriss]

3 hours ago, psikofunkster said:

They should reset all the credits to 0, also they should sell those old exclusive rewards like the master crest on GTN for Cartel Coins.

From that point generate new content under BS wing and everybody enjoy the game again and be happy. 😊

A  new begining...a new hope...

It would kill the game over night as the majority of players abandoned the game in disgust. 

[OlBuzzard]

1 hour ago, TrixxieTriss said:

It would kill the game over night as the majority of players abandoned the game in disgust. 

Agreed!  100% !!

That being said ... I'm not so sure but what we're not almost there now as it is!

BTW... I'm out on this one!  The team will release what they will (How many times have we seen that unfold?).  Afterwards we can spend the next 8 to 12 months begging for change (at least those who are still around).