Should (L) Armours be listed on peauction as % rather than TT+?

Cheers,
Paul

my opinion yes.
(and actually I would like to see the % relative to the usable part; this also holds for weapons).

I don't understand what you mean by % relative to usable part. It is always % of TT value (usable part).

I think that possibly he means the % if you take off the minimum TT value from the current TT value. Say we have a gun that has a max TT value of 3.2 ped and then a minimum usable TT value of 0.09 ped. Well if the gun sold for 8 ped, I think what dutchie is saying is it should be recorded as 8 / (3.2 - 0.09) = 257% as opposed to 8 / 3.2 = 250%. Anyway... thats just my take on what he is saying, could be completely wrong .

I believe he's referring to some of the limited items that are listed only in tt+ so if a 48 ped armor sells for 56, it is listed as tt+8, not a percentage.

There are 2 things and sorry if I contributed to the confusion by adding the 2nd one.
Let me clarify:

plandon suggests in the initial post that the value of L armor should be expressed in % rather than in +
Example:
Aurora arm-guards (F,L) (TT+3.96 PED)
As this is L it should be % based.
I think he is totally correct on this one.
Guess this would be one for travis.

The issue I brought up (and maybe should have given its own thread is exactly what MeggaMortY brings up:
Should the % be of the usable value instead of the total value.

Let's take the breer p2a as an example:
The last completed transaction at the time of writing is:
May 24th 2007 03:17 PM 1 17.78 PED 18.00 PED 1 101.24%

but the minimum usable value of the P2a is 0.89 ped so if I empty it I am left with a 0.89 ped gun that has no markup any more and is tt food.
So the effective markup for this one would be (18.00 (the actual bid) - 0.89 (value at the end) ) divided by ( 17.78 (current TT) - 0.89 (empty TT))
so (18.00-0.89)/(17.78-0.89) = 101.30 %

Another example: the last 3 completed auctions from korss h380:
May 26th 2007 04:50 AM 1 39.26 PED 46.00 PED 1 117.17%
May 25th 2007 11:26 PM 1 45.09 PED 53.00 PED 2 117.54%
May 25th 2007 11:26 PM 1 50.33 PED 59.00 PED 3 117.23%

korrs 380 has a minimum usable value of 3.08 ped (pe-wiki)
so this gives as effective markup for these three pistols
( 46-3.08 ) / ( 39.26-3.08 ) = 118.63 %
( 53-3.08 ) / ( 45.09-3.08 ) = 118.83 %
( 59-3.08 ) / ( 50.33-3.08 ) = 118.35 %

So basically what we see is that if you take the effective use of an item the markup % increases (as currently the markup is also applied on the unusable part).

And for items where the price is closer to the minimum usable value the difference between the markup over the usable part and the markup over the effective part is going to differ substantially. E.g. should there be a 380 in auction for 3.58 ped and being sold for 4 ped then the markup according to the current formula would be 111.73 %
This would look like a good deal if you look at the figures above (and see that the average markup is 114.07)

However if you look at this case a little bit closer then this is quite misleading. The guy would have paid 42 pec markup for a gun that has only 50 pec usage left so the real markup is a whopping 184 % ! (assuming the guy would not scam someone with an empty gun).

My suggestions based on the above:
- for L armour use % as well (that was what this all started about)
- for L items in the item listing mention the minimum usable value below the line stating the unit TT value
- for individual prices give two percentages: the % toward the TT value and the % when looking that the actual usable value
- for the average also give two percentages, one compared to TT, one compared to the effective value).

I hope this makes sense. If not please let me know

Dutchie.

Great idea dutchie however I think that some auctions would force the effective value % up. Say someone actually sells a korrs 380 which has a tt value of 4 ped for 4 ped. Normally this would be recorded as 100% sale but the effective value markup % would be 435%... so unless these are counted as outliers, they could throw it out a little. I just see the only problem with effective value % being the sales of low tt value items. Because although my example is extreme, there will be others that arnt quite so extreme that might move the % around a bit more than we want if they arnt quite outliers. Anyway, I'm all for listing two percentages for limited items. Good suggestion, we just need to find a safe way to implement it.

Arg, scrap most of what I said about it putting the %'s up... i forgot to take the minimum TT value off the bid value like you did here:

korrs 380 has a minimum usable value of 3.08 ped (pe-wiki)
so this gives as effective markup for these three pistols
( 46-3.08 ) / ( 39.26-3.08 ) = 118.63 %
( 53-3.08 ) / ( 45.09-3.08 ) = 118.83 %
( 59-3.08 ) / ( 50.33-3.08 ) = 118.35 %

Doing this it makes it a much nicer %. I'm all for this being implemented. Great idea!