Why do we still have prices under 0.05?

[٠•● Pollen Zest]

This is generally a price from crates/cases, and while I understand that cases/crates are generally worthless, having prices like 0.02-0.05 are in my opinion a bit stupid, simply because 0.01-0.04 are impossible as a price point. in this economy with have Refined (1) Reclaimed (0.33) and Scrap (0.11) and weapons fall onto half of that (0.05) crates/cases are this weird exception to that rule for some reason, So I ask should we put 0.05 as the lowest any item can go? 

[Woifi The Viking]

Would you rather have them unpriced? People buy those crates still for like 5 crates for 1 wweapon.

[٠•● Pollen Zest]

11 minutes ago, Woifi The Viking said:

Would you rather have them unpriced? People buy those crates still for like 5 crates for 1 wweapon.

 

Maybe, since the prices in use, are impossible.

[Woifi The Viking]

5 crates for 1 weapon is 0.01, not impossible.

[٠•● Pollen Zest]

2 minutes ago, Woifi The Viking said:

5 crates for 1 weapon is 0.01, not impossible.

 

Not entirely what I meant, but that is true.

 

Perhaps we should price crates with USD instead, similar to crates, It might be a bit closer to actual pricing (of nothing)

[Woifi The Viking]

Or maybe we leave it as it is cause it's such a small fraction of items that barely anyone cares about.

[٠•● Pollen Zest]

2 minutes ago, Woifi The Viking said:

Or maybe we leave it as it is cause it's such a small fraction of items that barely anyone cares about.

 

Sums up this site doesn't it? we don't change for shit.

[Woifi The Viking]

We changed many things recently, but this doesn't seem like an important nor widely supported change (first time someone ever complained about this), let alone our dev has other things to do that are more important.

[Vrakos Anthrakir]

4 hours ago, ٠•● Pollen Zest said:

 

Not entirely what I meant, but that is true.

 

Perhaps we should price crates with USD instead, similar to crates, It might be a bit closer to actual pricing (of nothing)

so we're either pricing it as near worthless in metal or near worthless in real world currency?  sounds like a kinda pointless change...

 

edit: just noticed, you said "we should price crates"... "similar to crates"

[Lord_gamer_17]

I don´t see any reason to price crates in other way, than thay are now. They barely sell and both halt Steam community market in thousands as well as they barely catch someone´s interest. I am not even surprised you have that many listed on the secondary market like backpack.tf, marketplace.tf and many, many other trading sites.

 

Pricing it in USD would result in 0,01$ and in some record high key to refined ratios value could be rounded to 0$ (to display value in cents), making it confusing even more.

 

Jsut leave developers and moderators alone, as they have others stuff to do, such as changing item prices, or expanding this website.

[regi]

3 hours ago, Lord_gamer_17 said:

Jsut leave developers and moderators alone, as they have others stuff to do, such as changing item prices, or expanding this website.

 

I'm personally not in support of this change. I think pricing things under 0.05 has its uses occasionally. 0.00 is dumb, though. However, nothing will ever get changed if no one raises any concerns and it's very telling when people are unwilling to accept someone else's opinion because it goes against the norm. You're well within your right to disagree, but developers and moderators are here to serve the community. If they don't listen or don't get told anything, what's the point?

[Woifi The Viking]

1 hour ago, regi said:

 

I'm personally not in support of this change. I think pricing things under 0.05 has its uses occasionally. 0.00 is dumb, though. However, nothing will ever get changed if no one raises any concerns and it's very telling when people are unwilling to accept someone else's opinion because it goes against the norm. You're well within your right to disagree, but developers and moderators are here to serve the community. If they don't listen or don't get told anything, what's the point?

Thanks for pointing that out, removed that price. And of course it's good if people raise concerns, that's how many changes started, we might be more willing to listing tho if the attitude is pleasant, the arguments good and if the concern is a real problem.

[regi]

1 hour ago, Woifi The Viking said:

Thanks for pointing that out, removed that price. And of course it's good if people raise concerns, that's how many changes started, we might be more willing to listing tho if the attitude is pleasant, the arguments good and if the concern is a real problem.

 

No worries. I've got nothing against any of the mods/admins here individually, I just dislike the way that proposals are brushed off by everyone. It's sort of contradictory to the idea of the site; we suggest prices but can't wrap our heads around modifying the process. It would have been insane years ago to base an entire price on one link. Perhaps that's why prices are so conservative nowadays. We simply cannot provide enough proof to warrant the removal of small ranges. The slow demise of TF2OP and the eventual death of Bazaar.tf has forced us to rely on loose bot statistics. A suggestion like this or this being accepted now is unheard of. The links in those two were representative, basically, of the entire relevant market. It took time to find out everything. Now we base it on backpack.tf buyers, sellers, and a site we take as gospel because that's all we've got. The site simply doesn't have enough manpower to respond to all these boilerplate suggestions, and I think that the entirety of what I take issue with could be resolved through having more mods. With more mods, suggestions could be looked at sooner and the problem of ".11 ref changes isn't worth our time" would be entirely mitigated. But that's just my 2¢.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

I think prices are more accurate than they used to be, not less. We used to regularly price based on sellers and buyers rather than actual sales. That "one link" shows more sales stats than 1-2 outpost sales or sellers.

[regi]

21 hours ago, Teeny Tiny Cat said:

I think prices are more accurate than they used to be, not less. We used to regularly price based on sellers and buyers rather than actual sales. That "one link" shows more sales stats than 1-2 outpost sales or sellers.

 

We still do actively update prices based entirely on sellers and buyers. I've got nothing against bot.tf, but it's taken the need to investigate all possible sites out of the equation. Some may think that's good (it's easier now) and some may think it's bad (all the skill is gone). I sit somewhere in the middle.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

1 hour ago, regi said:

 

We still do actively update prices based entirely on sellers and buyers. I've got nothing against bot.tf, but it's taken the need to investigate all possible sites out of the equation. Some may think that's good (it's easier now) and some may think it's bad (all the skill is gone). I sit somewhere in the middle.

 

No we don't. We do it rarely, when there's no sales data, that's it. You are more than welcome to include data from other sites in your suggestions. Outpost is used less because it's less actively used by traders and simply less relevant than it used to me.