question about matching logic

[catharsis71]

scenario:

3 copies of card 5, 0 copies of card 3, 1 copy of card 1/2/4

assume no 5->3 trades are available

in this scenario, trading away one copy of card 5 for an extra copy of card 1, 2, or 4 is beneficial because it brings the inventory closer to balance (i.e. 1/1/0/1/3 becomes 2/1/0/1/2) , and creates additional opportunity to find matches for the missing card on subsequent runs

however, I feel like ASF-STM will not recognize 5->1, 5->2, or 5->4 as good trades

but I'm not 100% certain

can you clarify how the matching logic will react in this situation?

[Rudokhvist]

Yes, you are feeling correctly - ASF-STM don't show such matches, and there is a reason for this: First of all, ASF-STM, unlike "MatchActively" in ASF itself, checks available bots consequently, one at a time, and show results immediately, instead of showing them at the end (so that user could trade as fast as possible). Because of that we can't know:

1. Which cards are rare an which are not. If your card 5 is rare, and nobody but you have it, it isn't wise to change it to card 1, which everyone have plenty.
2. If there are better trades on other bots. If some bot is ready to trade card 3 for your card 5 - it would be not wise to trade card 5 to card 1.

I actually thought about collecting data during scan and suggesting a 2-step or 3-step trades for cards that don't have direct trade (something like "you can trade 5 for 1 with bot A, then trade 1 for 3 with bot C"). But even if I'll find time to implement it - it gonna be a separate feature, not part of main matching process.

However, ASF-STM consider such matches from BOT's side - if some bot have one card 5, but three cards 3 - script will show it as a match for trading our 5 for for their 3, because bot allows it and that's beneficial for user.

Hope I answered your question in full.