I don't see the point to this idea since the overbidding isn't an issue...

First off, I'm not sure how practical implementing a % as the minimum bid factor is.  For the purposes of explaining why this is a bad idea, I'm going to leave it as a set # of .5 increases.

For some reason, you're assuming that the same people underbidding by .01 would stop just because they have to go from 10 to 9.5.  If you're online with lots of resources, need cash quick, you're going to drop in the lowest market bid.  If 5 people happen to be online at the same time, either a. they won't bid decreasing overall market activity and leading families to produce more resources in house decreasing the possible income from the market, or b. the market is going to drop 2.5 gc instead of .05-.5 gc.

If anything, take the hundredth's away from everything but food.

There are other ways to play S/S.

the same way that SN was played without a market.

Lol... I'm qurious how you both thinking. SN is success because all use the same race, even at -30% all will always success except everything get slower.

In normal galaxy, SS player should be able to use all available aspect, it doesn't mean SS player must build everything. Was when market active enough, SS player can use race with -30% income and focus only on resources, even at that time no resource planets and research on resources.

What I want to highlight in here not only SS ways, but how to make market more reasonable. Every changes in game must be balanced. Like this:

1. was CF=6 gc, and LQ=500 pop, at that time LQ have much advantage over CF. Then CF increased to 10 gc with inflation risk, but because complexity to most people and advantage to some other then CF reduced to 8 gc without inflation. This turn to make LQ not interesting anymore, then LQ increased to 650 pop. This is a good balance in game change.

2. was no decay on resources, then resources decay introduced, then also resource planets, and also research on resources. This make resource banking as important as cash banking, this also a good balance in game change.

3. was no fraction, market price in integer, and everyone like to put bid either buying or selling, so supply and demand work very well, also no decay and selling cost, so seller have no penalty, market can be a good dynamics in IC galaxies. But then fraction introduced, decay, selling cost. People don't like to place bid anymore, and I don't see good balancing for this. So I propose to make a new change, a litle step to give another balance in changes made. One of it is to reduce "SILLY OVER/UNDER BID" which make people don't like to place bid or more likely to buy/sale directly -which affecting price to more fluctuative and not really based on supply and demand-.

Well, I think I already try to raise this idea and hope that real brained response, not from people thinking for short terms.

I think the real issue is, 0.01 has no significance, and it's just being annoying.

Much better to get rid that extra degree of accuracy and perhaps keep it at 1 decimal place.

I'm not against 'queue jumpers', cos that's natural, if they're willing to pay a higher price.  The only problem we have in IC is that "a higher price" is not 0.01 of a resource.

So yea, I like this idea.  Make it 0.1, or to be radical and to see how it works, perhaps even try getting rid of the decimals (except for food) altogether.

I'm not an expert, but I believe that way, we'll see more variation and movement in the market, imo.

Food can/should be put on the market in bundles of 100. That's what 1 farm produces. This makes it comparable to 1 iron or 1 endurium or 1 octa.

And yes, try for a round to get rid of decimals on the market. If that's too harsh, allow only steps of 0.5gc.

Optional idea:
Would it be interesting to make it public what amounts of stuff are on the market? Not everything, just the total amount of stuff offered/sought at the present price and for the next 1 or 2 price steps.
But to be honest, I don't know how this is handled on real stock markets...

While I think discrete's reasoning for getting rid of the decimal places is dumb, I think it would be a good idea to get rid of them anyway.  IF we also get rid of the market cap.  If you get rid of decimal bidding but leave cap at 50, or even 100, you'll just see small players being completely locked out of the market.