auction increment

[Zarkozukhuz]

5k increment is far too small when the bids are several million each.
If you are at a real auction and the current bid is $1000, you would never just raise to $1001.
It should be proportional to current bid, say 10%.

Makes more sense that way. You are actually willing to pay a meaningfully higher price, not just resetting the clock hoping the other person has stepped away

[FairyLite]

that might be ok for a small lot but on say a 150 gem lot with a bid of 50000 per unit that would be an increase of 750000. it seems very high. there is also one bidder I see who always pays about 75000 per unit. to out bid her on a 150 gem lot you would need to increase your bid by over a million. am no auction expert but I think only very rich people in the real world would be increasing their bids by a million plus at a time

[mermaid]

I prefere to buy it with real money, so I would not be effected by this increment
still.... the auction, theoretical must be accesible to all players, from esquire to suzerain, and this increment would prevent the lower rank player to bid, because they not have the opportunity to gather so mutch gold (even because they cant have perfect warehouses and their resources are plundering). it would be unfair, in my opinion

[FairyLite]

just a second thought. if you do not want, or have time, to play the auctions why not just bid more per unit to decrease the chance anyone will outbid you

[ontariomoderate]

I think that it is fair to give the first holder an advantage. So not everything is focusing on the last hour but take late slots and it runs through later or cost bigger amount to bid by others.

[Zarkozukhuz]

am no auction expert but I think only very rich people in the real world would be increasing their bids by a million plus at a time

if current bid is already 10 million, then reasonable to raise by a million to 11 million. You just don't see many auctions that expensive in real world.
But raising 5 million gold by another 5k is like raising $1000 to $1001. Can you imagine doing that in a real auction? (you would be embarrassed)

This won't exclude smaller players: if they already can pay 5 million, then 5.5 million isn't a big stretch. If they really can't pay an extra 10%, then all they have to do is bid before the other person.
Maybe 5% is more reasonable? Either way, I think we can all say that 5k gold is nothing. You are essentially matching the same price. There should be a first-come-first-served preference like ontariomoderate is saying.

[Hexxus]

If it becomes too favored for first-come-first-serve, then it is no longer an auction and just a gem store and that's not the intention.

I agree bidding last hour/minutes can be a tedious game, but it keeps players logging in and that's most likely another intention or way to "defeat" someone at gem auction.

[Zarkozukhuz]

I would imagine gem stores just have fixed prices determined by the seller. No bidding. Very different setup.

The idea behind auctions is to see who's willing to pay the highest. And if 2 people shout the same price, the first bidder gets it -- the other person must raise higher... so raising by just 0.1% defeats the whole idea. It's almost like not raising at all.

Having a higher increment won't stop last-hour bidding -- you can still bid and hope the other person is offline.

[mermaid]

but nobody prevent you to bid from the beginning a higer price
when I bid, rarely, like I already told, I did it only for pleasure of the game. after all, is a psychological game. who gives up first, bid first a higer price.
dont tell me, you hope to gather 15k-20k pearls, for a good artifact, from auction
if it is, I admire your patience, because, in my opinion, it would be like you hope to see how run a snail

[Zarkozukhuz]

You can still bid higher and play psychological games either way. I’m just pointing out that auctions don’t typically work like this. No matter how you put it, why don’t other auctions work like ours?

You could argue maybe this isn’t meant to be like typical auctions. but the fact that game designers set a minimum increment at all (5k, not just 1) suggests otherwise. Perhaps 5k was meaningful early on with much smaller bids, but not anymore.

Again, I get that we could just “bid higher” with the current system (making this change won’t stop anyone from doing that either). I’m just saying this is not “auction-like”

[Hexxus]

I think a 1% minimum increment would be appropriate starting point. Possibly even 3% or 5%, maybe at higher amounts the higher rates kick in.

[mermaid]

auction (about DEX) = Sale of a good made to the public, according to special rules, resulting in the assignment of the object of sale to the person who offered the highest price
so, we have a starting price= from 10k to 150k ( 1k gold/ pearl)
we have a bid = 5k gold (from 50% to 3,5% from starting price)
the ,,good" is assigned to whom offers the highest price.
why isn't an auction?
2)
a lot with 100 pearls
starting price = 5M (50k/pearl)
first bid = 5,5 M ...
2nd bid = 6.5 M ....
3nd bid = 7,15 (71,5k/pearl)
sorry, but the pearls are virtual value in a virtual game, not the Blue Diamond

[ontariomoderate]

sorry, but the pearls are virtual value in a virtual game, not the Blue Diamond

So is gold, no reason then to complain about higher virtual costs...

2.5% sounds fine for me: 4M bid -> 4.1M instead of 4.005M