people currently online
The amount of stupid suggestions on this thread's startling no wonder Libra hasn't been here in months.|
But again, the price of a Half full wine jug still needs adjusting.
|Dragon Hatchets need to go up!|
Buying Prayer Potions (4)|
add me/join friends chat to sell
Item: Half full wine jug |
Current Price: 227.7
Expected Price: 1227.7
Reason for expected price: Half full wine jug has been valued between 1.2-2.1 bil for the last 6 months and because it is traded so infrequent it gives the ge price no chance to catchup.
'Guide prices are calculated by the Grand Exchange. They exist to help you judge what you might like to offer to buy or sell an item for, and to give you a sense of an item's value to help you protect yourself from scams.'
^Copied from front page. Half full wine jug is currently traded 1100m+ above its guide price.
'We are specifically interested in items which you think you can't buy or sell on the Grand Exchange for around the guide price, or where you think the guide price is widely different to the market price in player to player trades.'
^Copied from front page. Half full wine jug fits this description.
'The guide price of party hats has been given more freedom to move to allow them to adjust in value to represent the market price better.'
^Copied from front page. Half full wine jug has been trading at prices slightly above and below red partyhat for the last 6 months and also needs more freedom to move.
|Still waiting faithful on a response on the issue of half wine|
|The contents of this message have been hidden|
Ix-Devil-xI (page 78) - You make some good arguments about negative consequences of the GE on gameplay. I too liked some features of the original system, such as tempering the profits of merchanting more with time and skill invested. I'm not sure that the arguments you present though are enough to justify the upheaval and dis-satisfaction that removing the GE would cause to other players. Even when the overall gameplay might be better by removing some element, we generally have to consider how people will feel about that removal (you could also apply this to why we have some weaker old skills in the game). Perhaps we need to look at intermediate improvements- these days we design quests with more consciousness of whether items can be obtained on the GE, so more items that you need in quests are untradeable; we can and do extend this to "fixing" some older quests to have quest-specific untradeable items, but there's always a balance of how much we can put time into those sort of changes compared to putting time into new content that will be of benefit to a wider audience.|
I'd also like to see more items aimed at player to player trade and interaction, items that aren't on the GE. That's probably more contraversial than the quest change, and I'm not sure quite what sort of items in terms of their end-use would be appropriate.
At Rs, Inheriter - no need to repeat an item that's been reported in the post above you.
There have been a few posts about sets, we're aware those are failing to maintain equivalent prices, and that in some cases the sum of the parts and the value of a complete set aren't the same thing anyway. We're looking at a change to address this problem, particularly for the less common items which seem to be the ones with more problem.
H Rassy - Will try to take a look at the 3rd age druidic again.
Elysiaanna - Hi yeah those shields. I had a look at those recently. I looked at the value the game has for the item (which affects what they alch for, what they sell to shops for) for each half, and for the combined item.
The dropped half has quite a low value. The shop-sold half has a higher value. The combined item has a value set which is lower than that of the shop-sold half. Obviously this is not how things should be! The two halves should have an equal value, and the combined item should probably be the sum of the two halves (basically).
Can we fix any of that?... If we raise the value of the dropped half, then anyone who owns these items would gain a load of value (which they'd release by alching the items). If we reduce the value of the shop-sold half, then anyone who owns those items would lose a load of value (we could temper this to some extent by compensating the first ten, and causing a loss if people owned more than this). If we change the value of the completed item, similar issues occur, though I think the problem is more with the halves. After rather a lot of hassle with the climbing boots, I'm conscious of what happens if we re-value items.
Hertug, thanks for your post, but it'd be really helpful if you give more detail. You probably have some idea why you think there's a problem, and sharing that allows me to prioritise what we investigate and spend less time looking for the problems.
Finally, post above is hidden for advertising websites that probably aren't safe. That certainly doesn't belong here.
"If we reduce the value of the shop-sold half, then anyone who owns those items would lose a load of value"|
I would be surprised if almost anyone owned one of those halves. I'm sure you can query to see who - if anyone - owns those. Can't you?
This may be just me but i am a clan owner and i have alot of f2p and p2p players in my clan and i always get the same question, "why did the market change for limpwruts?" I do not have answer, besides " too many people were selling limps at one time and there is an overload at the GE of them, thats why they are not selling". And there are many more items such as:|
prices for smaller things for my new players, that just started runescape, having to buy armour that is 15+% higher
Herbs or my p2p, some herbs such as spirit weed, has not sold in ge for the current price, we have lower the price by t least 10%
|The contents of this message have been hidden|