All I see in price history here is that Ber is about 8 Ist.
That's the same what I've seen in game recently.
So where is that 28 Ral for Ber coming from? Or is that your offer?
If this is an offer I would take 20 Ber. For everyone means for everyone available but I can't see any offers that go in this direction. Maybe you were lucky? Current default price is ca 8 Ist for Ber.
Timezone GMT +2
I buy your Hel runes and Token of Absolution. Check my WTB stash! Also have some free stuff available.
That suggests that the value of Ber is very volatile right now, and smart traders with a high risk appetite can find ways to trade up (e.g. buy Perfect Amethysts with Ist, sell Perfect Amethysts for Ber, Sell Ber for Ists, repeat.)
Lanceor's FoH Zealot Guide Farm everything.Wreck Ubers. ■ Currently on a break from D2, but occasionally log in for a bit of monster slaying.
■ Sydney timezone: UTC +10.
Lanceor wrote: 1 year ago
Any idea what's causing this crash in Ber value?
Semi-educated guess:
- Botters continue to run rampant, resulting in massive rune inventory
- Streamers largely shifted to D4 (at least for now), resulting in (significantly) less offtake of the above inventory
- Excess inventory is being dumped at next to nothing prices just to get rid of it
- Historically low pricing results in more and more folks shifting to RM-buying, resulting in less and less offtake of the same runes in "normal" trading economies
- Normal supply paired with less offtake in non-RMT economies results in significant deflation across the board
I just sold 10 Ral for an Ist on traderie. The usual rate (as stated by Necrarch not long ago) is 20. The prices are clearly shifting. For someone who never saw a Ber or Jah dropping himself, these are good times to have a chance to build a more than good char for sure.
Why do you think this might collapse the economy? It just makes the usually more expensive stuff more accessible to people with less Wealth and devaluates the worth of runes that people keep sitting on.
Feel free to make alternative offers. Runes or Perfect Gems are always welcome.
If you agree with my price suggestion, add me on BattleNet.
Right now, perhaps the most profitable way to farm is to go for Ral or Hel in countess. I have seen trades go as low as 10 Hel for Lo, an absolutely brutal rate. Perhaps because botters are focusing on re-rolling weapons like crazy to get High Runes or that forbidden currency, who knows.
davme_mcreg wrote: 1 year ago
At this rate you will earn more currency doing normal cows for Ral and gems then farming for HRs. This could lead to a collapse of the economy
And I though D3 and D4 with difficulty sliders so you play not the highest difficulty, but the one with highest loot/h ratio were already bad...
Sirius Delta wrote: 1 year ago
Why do you think this might collapse the economy? It just makes the usually more expensive stuff more accessible to people with less Wealth and devaluates the worth of runes that people keep sitting on.
If more people start farming crafting materials rather than farming HRs, eventually there will be fewer and fewer HRs and everything will dry up. This will likely cause an increase in price once the HRs do start to dry up, so maybe it come out in the wash. Maybe this is just the economy balancing itself out from ladder chars coming over to non ladder and more people going to play D4. I haven't yet gone to see if the trades have decreased by a significant amount since D4 launch, but based on my searches I would say it has.
I am available for trading every other week, limited trading on my off week.
Thanks for understanding.
List trades and earn trust
Level up as you post
Give and Receive Likes
Discreet Notifications
Avatar & Profile customisation
Private Messaging
Bookmark Pages & Posts
Use Drafts & Revisions
Attach Images
Squelches this trader, making their offers on your trades invisible to anyone except themselves. Their trade listings will also be hidden from your marketplace.
Your squelch list can be managed and edited from Top right dropdown > Account Prefs > Squelches.
d2jsp
117