Search results

Oh really? Cool. That's good to hear since I don't feel the need for NT8 for any particular reason, either. But it's possible that the package would work on it as-is. Who knows, tbd on that I guess.

Roger that. I guess you don't intend to upgrade to NT8 but at some point I assume NT7 will no longer be supported. I assume that'll be quite a while, though.

Oh ok. Does that mean you're one of the many who stopped using these tools? I like a couple aspects to it even if the method itself isn't used.

Ok, thanks for the reply. Generally, would you expect the existing package to work on Ninja 8 or is that a total unknown?

Hi Stepan, do you know if the package will work with NinjaTrader 8? I saw that v8 is ready for general availability now.

Ok, got it, thanks

Hi Stepan7, why did you remove the volume "annotation" (up/down arrows) in the new version? Was it too resource intensive or something like that? Or did you figure with the 4 color price bars, no need to annotate up/down vol in the volume pane also?

Great, thanks a lot!

Thanks Stepan7. How about the current version but split Volume off from price again? I like a lot of the revisions in the new version, but having volume separate in its own pane (or even just volume & nothing else) was really nice in the old version. The PRV seems a little different now too...

Anybody else notice that version "Price/Volume Tools Version 2015.10.16.618" suddenly stopped working on June 16th 2016? Was fine the previous days/months before that. Specifically, I was only using the !Volume indicator. I wasn't using the newest version because I'd prefer volume to be...

Hi Stepan, along with the custom colors editing, what about adding % transparency editing for the degap bars? That would come in handy when the real price bars overlap with the degapped bar objects. When do you think the new version will come out?

Ok sounds good, thanks.

Thanks Stepan. Is there any way to edit the Chart Bar 4 Colors? I assume that property is in the .dll, but not sure how to modify it. The pink is difficult to distinguish from the red. One shade lighter of pink would be great.

As far as general feedback, in real time it's not possible to have clarity sometimes. This method, nor any method, covers all bases in real-time. That's impossible. Some don't like to admit that, but it's the reality. A fair amount of the time, the clarity someone presents is due to EOD...

That's the catch, though. If not tracking subfractals, then the slower fractal may have met all it's requirements long ago as a trend runs on. And identifying several valid FTTs (and SOCs) that end up failing can suck out all the profit that we made while riding the trend. That's the reason for...

Hmm, ok fair enough! I'd love to observe someone making more and more money by trading faster and faster. I know there's a limit to which speed we can trade, but you know what I mean. I notice a lot of the subfractals can majorly overlap, which foils my positioning (as in the cycle or container...

Sure, but we can't heed every fractal or we'd never be able to stay in a trade. Based on what you said, to exaggerate it...we could conceive that on some fractal every bar or two has a full volume cycle. We have to decide "which" fractal we're going to heed, and can't mix and match in real time...

One thing I forgot to mention about that chart...it appears that person was not requiring "equal weight" BBTs, right? Because BBT1 has a vol cycle while BBT2 does not. Ok. But, all three BBTs, as the final annotation of that chart, are complex. So, that's all I can come up with...maybe that tape...

Thanks. None of that is foreign to me. My questions are intended to address the idea some give, that they do have such answers with this method. Do they or don't they? If yes, it would be valuable. If you've been around a while, maybe you'd have an idea, and based on your comments I'd say those...

Great idea, but didn't I already do that for the annotated chart you found, which heroic said he completely agrees with? I explained my rationale and why, more than once, act's tried to start a discussion about it. Recently, vertex seconded my question in the same chart.