Why Not Show Last Winning Bid on Guild Traders?

Grabmoore

Americans <----> reasonable economic decisions


Choose one.

AlnilamE

vamp_emily wrote: »

Anyone know where I can find a cheap guild trader at? Preferable one near a Wayshrine.

We only have 100k to spend.

The trader in Davon's Watch used to go for 25-27k when the now dead trading guild I'm in was bidding on him.

Not sure why people didn't like that trader, since all the new people in EP where in that area.

alexkdd99

Giraffon wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Guys. Time for us to avoid posting in this thread. OP has shown he is not interested in your thoughts and only means to tell you that it his his oppinion that needs to be considered for change in the game.

He has ignored the most detailed part of the discussion since the logic twice and I guess it's due to the inconvenience it brings into the discussion.

Well I'm just not interested in the "logic" presented so far.

The whole system is too entrenched. Guild traders are held by the same guilds week after week. Start showing the previous winning bids on those traders. Let economic forces take over instead of the semi-organized trade cartels that seem to be controlling this aspect of the game.

That would be more fair to all players than what we have now.

You can't expect to have a conversation on a forum where your opinion is the only one proposed. Especially when you are attempting to make changes to a game that others don't agree with. That is posting a controversial topic whole not defending your own viewpoint.

You keep saying let economics take over but what part of economics will be taking over. Economics is a very broad subject. The prices will undoubtedly go way higher than what they currently are. The biggest losers will be those who don't have as much gold as there traders will be the one targeted.

So the trader cartels as you call them would still have the same traders while the smaller guilds would constantly be knocked off their traders.

It seems I remember zos putting in some system to combat other guilds from knowing what the winning bid was. Like making it harder for guild members to know the winning bid.

I am pretty sure anyone in a guild use to be able to look and easily see what there guild paid for a trader and they changed it to stop guild spying.

Now it is still possible but they have to actually put forth effort to figure it out.

Giraffon

Economics is the explanation. It's pretty textbook stuff.

idk

Giraffon wrote: »

Economics is the explanation. I'm sorry if it doesn't make sense to you.

Yet you still ignore logic presented in this thread because your argument doesn't hold up to it. Ignore it all you want because it speaks loudest.

Giraffon

Rats. You quoted me before I could get the "sorry it doesn't make sense to you" statement. I revised it as realized after posting that it came across in a way not intended.

So...sorry for that. Please note I revised it to say something different.

Annalyse

I get what you are saying about economics, but the fact is that prices will go WAY higher and stay there because a lot of guilds can afford it. This will drop other guilds out of the competition altogether.

So say right now someone is bidding on a trader in a main area for 5 mil.

Next week, Guild B sees that figure and bids higher just to be safe. But Guild A guesses this will be coming and bids even higher than that, hoping nobody else will jump up that high.

The week after, Guild B now knows that Guild A will go pretty high so they jump up even higher in price.

The week after, Guild A wants its trader back and bids more again just because they can afford it. And on and on and on...

It will only stop when it gets too pricey, which is of course what you seem to want. But the point is, what is too pricey for these guilds? Will this system set a new price of 8-10 mil for traders in top cities? And now that means that a lot of traders are out of luck in even trying to get a good trader and it will get to the point where the same guilds will always have the same traders because not enough guilds can afford to outbid them.

The system sucks now; I agree with that. But I also think this change would only hurt guilds more in the long run.

idk

code65536 wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

alexkdd99 wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

And then prices would eternally go up.

No they wouldn't. Economics would take over. Once the true value was realized, then the prices would stabilize. If they are too high, then they would come down.

It's a nice hybrid solution. I wouldn't want the real time price displayed because then it becomes a situation where the players would be up bidding at the last second. Nobody wants that. Last week's price would be sufficient to help everyone.

And what if you are in the guild that won the trader and they've been misleading you about how much the guild trader has been costing? Wouldn't you like to know that?

I don't see a downside.

No the price would definitely go up. How is it not fair? The other guilds can't see what anyone is bidding either. It's not like you are the only one unable to see the winning bid.

It is invisible for everyone. If you knew what the winning bid was then you could just come in and win it for 10k more the following week. Everyone is on equal ground, nobody knows what won the bid that they lost. Unless they were doing some spying.

And honestly I don't care what my guild bids or if it doesn't match up with what they say they bid so long as they always win the bid. If they started losing then I might be concerned.

That's exactly the point! The next week, the bids will be higher. So yeah, everyone is going to bid over last weeks bid. But by how much? Eventually everyone will hit a break point where it's not worth it to them and then go somewhere else. That's EXACTLY what I'm looking for. I want everyone to be able to assess the general price range of a guild trader without wasting that week's bid on something that they have no chance of getting at all.

The end result is that we'll end up at a steady state that is higher than what it is now. And much more stressful. And far more chaotic. It's an absolutely terrible idea through and through.

1. First, transparency works only if parties have time to react. There is no reaction until the next week. If the bidding system is to be blind, then it should commit to being truly blind. You are lifting the veil on a blind bid without giving people the necessary means to respond to it.
2. Your argument also assumes that everyone is bidding for the same reason--that they are seeking to hold one particular spot week to week. It's fine for two guilds vying for the same spot and both guilds are looking at what they can afford week-to-week. There are guilds that jump around places week to week. And there are troll guilds and joke guilds with nothing for sale that just jump in for a week for fun. If you can see what the "steady state" bid is for a spot, what's to stop you from adding 1K to that bid the next week if you just want to mess with someone? And as the person holding that spot, you'll always live with the knowledge that someone could beat you by just 1K at any given time.

If you want to argue for a transparent system, fine, whatever, but it must be fully transparent where all bids are open and where you get an instant notification that you've been outbid so that you can react. A Frankensteined system of the worst of both worlds like that you propose will be nothing but disastrous.

@Giraffon

This is what you have ignored. My guess is it's a bit inconvenient to face this since it explains why your idea should not be considered.

To everyone else. It's a thread we can ignore. I think the OP is really all that interested in the idea he proposes. Especially since he avoids the serious discussion on the topic.

Merlin13KAGL

Last thing, Giles, then I'll let it pass into history, where it belongs.

@Giraffon Here's some more economics: If you're being outbid by $200k each week by one of these 'cartel' guilds, how will you be any more able to outbid them the following week.

The only thing your method will do is punish the current holder, having to keep sinking more and more $ into the bid the following week, knowing another guild will try to bid higher.

When you submit a bid but lose it, you're out nothing but time. Perhaps along with your transparent system, perhaps 15% of your bid should be non-refundable?

Chilly-McFreeze

Yeah, make it public. Then I can see all these pricey traders kiosk, so it's super easy to make a few dummy guilds and snatch them with more money than these casual newcommers bid on them last week util they can't afford 'em any longer, stop to grow and competition shrinks. Just to *** you up because I can.

Sheuib

It is a blind bid. Blind bidding is a part of real world economics. What you are asking for totally defeats the purpose of a blind bid.

Titansteele

Giraffon wrote: »

Any other auction that I know of shows the winning bid after the fact. Why aren't we doing that here?

This is for the rest of us so we can see where we might be able to compete and where we are priced out.

Most auctions are a one off purchase price, knowing the end value is no big deal to anyone.
This is for a one week rental, knowing the previous price would only result in increasing the costs.

Slurg

Honestly, the original request seems pointless, because ZOS changed the system a long time ago so that guild members of the guild who made the bid can't even see the bid amount unless their guild leader grants permissions. I don't think they would make winning bids a free for all for everyone to see after deliberately making a change to make it more blind.

Giraffon

Honestly I just don't care about rising prices on guild traders. If the market will support the higher price than that is the true value. This is meant to be a gold sink to get gold out of the system. If the market will support 20 million gold bids on traders then let's get on with it. The sooner these guilds run out of money the sooner the prices come down.

Showing the last winning bid is the quickest way to get this done.

Guambodian

Lol. The guild leaders of the established trading guilds in the more desirable locations already know what the other guilds bid within minutes of the winning bid becoming official. YOU may not, but they do. That's the way it is on Xbox NA anyway. I doubt it's too much different on the other platforms. If they want to know what guild paid what for whatever spot, they find out. It's part of being a successful trading guild. They know what the other guilds have in their bank, who their best donators are, etc etc. The more successful guild leaders make it a point to know and try their best to hide their own info. It's all very cloak and dagger.

idk

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Last thing, Giles, then I'll let it pass into history, where it belongs.

Here's some more economics: If you're being outbid by $200k each week by one of these 'cartel' guilds, how will you be any more able to outbid them the following week.

The only thing your method will do is punish the current holder, having to keep sinking more and more $ into the bid the following week, knowing another guild will try to bid higher.

When you submit a bid but lose it, you're out nothing but time. Perhaps along with your transparent system, perhaps 15% of your bid should be non-refundable?

@Merlin13KAGL

You failed to address the points. At least @Giraffon has admired he doesn't care about the negative affect his idea will have.

Then again this idea will not be added to the game for the obvious issues it would cause as code pointed out.

Merlin13KAGL

Sorry, @Giles.floydub17_ESO , I should have been more specific.

The "I'll let it pass into history" was for you.

The remaining points were directed at Giraffon.

You and I are quite in agreement.

Chilly-McFreeze

Giraffon wrote: »

Honestly I just don't care about rising prices on guild traders. If the market will support the higher price than that is the true value. This is meant to be a gold sink to get gold out of the system. If the market will support 20 million gold bids on traders then let's get on with it. The sooner these guilds run out of money the sooner the prices come down.

Showing the last winning bid is the quickest way to get this done.

What do you think will happen when:
a) kiosk prices rise
and b) therefore small guilds aren't able anymore to get a kiosk

Don't you think that only the big guilds will get kiosk? And don't you think they will compensate the risen costs by higher prices for the items?

But since you said you don't care about the downsides of your idea, this has no point to discuss.

Giraffon

From my perspective there are no downsides. :-P

Chilly-McFreeze

I guess you have a lot of gold?^^

Giraffon

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

I guess you have a lot of gold?^^

Not really. I've struggled with landing guild traders since Homestead rolled out. The introduction of Master Writs caused inflation and basically the cost of guild traders is too high for me now.

The in game economy needs a corrective action and this is it.

idk

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

Honestly I just don't care about rising prices on guild traders. If the market will support the higher price than that is the true value. This is meant to be a gold sink to get gold out of the system. If the market will support 20 million gold bids on traders then let's get on with it. The sooner these guilds run out of money the sooner the prices come down.

Showing the last winning bid is the quickest way to get this done.

What do you think will happen when:
a) kiosk prices rise
and b) therefore small guilds aren't able anymore to get a kiosk

Don't you think that only the big guilds will get kiosk? And don't you think they will compensate the risen costs by higher prices for the items?

But since you said you don't care about the downsides of your idea, this has no point to discuss.

He doesn't care about any affect this would have. He doesn't care what anyone has to say or what their oppinion is. It's why he ignores logic and reason. He just feels entitled to this because he is challenged in game.

He just wants what he wants regardless of the consequences.

Giraffon

Nope. I don't care about the effect it has on the trade cartels. Not one bit.

Let's make it fair for everyone. Let everyone see what the last winning bid was so they can decide if they want to compete for that location or look for a less expensive site.

Grabmoore

Giraffon wrote: »

Nope. I don't care about the effect it has on the trade cartels. Not one bit.

Let's make it fair for everyone. Let everyone see what the last winning bid was so they can decide if they want to compete for that location or look for a less expensive site.

Your suggestion would kill the market for non organised trading guilds. Do you understand that?

Guild cartels would rule every notable spot, because the rest couldn't keep up with the huge increase in cost. Ok?

idk

Grabmoore wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

Nope. I don't care about the effect it has on the trade cartels. Not one bit.

Let's make it fair for everyone. Let everyone see what the last winning bid was so they can decide if they want to compete for that location or look for a less expensive site.

Your suggestion would kill the market for non organised trading guilds. Do you understand that?

Guild cartels would rule every notable spot, because the rest couldn't keep up with the huge increase in cost. Ok?

@Grabmoore he doesn't care. He is not interested in any negative impact in the game as long as he gets what he wants.

Can we say entitlement?

mesmerizedish

Giraffon wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

I guess you have a lot of gold?^^

Not really. I've struggled with landing guild traders since Homestead rolled out. The introduction of Master Writs caused inflation and basically the cost of guild traders is too high for me now.

The in game economy needs a corrective action and this is it.

So do you just not accept that your proposal will cause prices to rise, or do you honestly want literally the opposite of a solution to your problem?

wenchmore420b14_ESO

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Grabmoore wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

Nope. I don't care about the effect it has on the trade cartels. Not one bit.

Let's make it fair for everyone. Let everyone see what the last winning bid was so they can decide if they want to compete for that location or look for a less expensive site.

Your suggestion would kill the market for non organised trading guilds. Do you understand that?

Guild cartels would rule every notable spot, because the rest couldn't keep up with the huge increase in cost. Ok?

@Grabmoore he doesn't care. He is not interested in any negative impact in the game as long as he gets what he wants.

Can we say entitlement?

Totally agree @Giles.floydub17_ESO .
I wish we could just write it off as they are new, but they have been here since launch, so I will assume they are new to "Kiosk Bidding".
I personally am responsible for bidding on 3 traders a week. (Yes, I'm crazy )
1 is my social guild (250k - 500k bid range), 1 is my PvP guild (40k-75k bid range) and 1 is a large trading guild (1mill-4mill bid range), so I cover all area's of guild size and kiosk bidding, and I can say, IMO, that the OP's idea is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a long time.
I won't even begin to explain why because as you said, they don't want to hear anything except what they want to hear.
On a side note, I think it's cute that they are "On Strike" because of Master Writs. (See signature of OP).
Huzzah!

SirAndy

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Showing the winning bid would not serve any purpose other than to drive kiosk prices up.

Giraffon

mesmerizedish wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

I guess you have a lot of gold?^^

Not really. I've struggled with landing guild traders since Homestead rolled out. The introduction of Master Writs caused inflation and basically the cost of guild traders is too high for me now.

The in game economy needs a corrective action and this is it.

So do you just not accept that your proposal will cause prices to rise, or do you honestly want literally the opposite of a solution to your problem?

I'm after a long term solution. This is it. Prices go up. Guild traders spend all their money. Prices go down to true market values. Or they don't because the true market values are not yet achieved. Honestly I don't care. Either way there is no reason for this to all be a secret.

ArchMikem

redspecter23 wrote: »

ArchMikem wrote: »

Giraffon wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

And then prices would eternally go up.

No they wouldn't. Economics would take over. Once the true value was realized, then the prices would stabilize. If they are too high, then they would come down.

How is a "true value" even established though? The first person makes up a number and that becomes it's true value?

You think a Trader is worth 100k. Well I think it's worth 50k. Who's to really say which is true?

If you're both bidding on the same trader, 100k wins so it's true. That trader right next door might only be 35k or completely unbid though and that one on the other side might have gone for over 500k.

So then it's all just complete Bull.