Up-Coming Multi-bidding Changes

wenchmore420b14_ESO

The new up-date is around the corner.
Several threads and PTS feedback thread later, we have only heard one response.
They told us that the new multi-bidding changes are to address ghost guilds, insure availability, etc. The full response is here...

Spoiler

ZOS_PhilipDravenZOS_PhilipDraven
✭✭✭
The guild trader system is a cornerstone of the in-game economy in ESO, but over time the enormous pressure on trading guilds to have a guild trader every single week has led to behaviors which reduce competition and negatively impact trader customers. Tactics employed to ensure guild trader ownership each week, such as the generation of alternate “shadow” guilds to bid on additional locations as well as guild trader speculation and resale through guild dissolution, often lead to fewer traders populated with goods and massive amounts of wasted gold.

The multi-bidding feature is part of an initiative to provide in-game supported methods for players to have fallback trader bidding options without the associated drawbacks for both guilds and their customers. In addition to multi-bidding, we are also removing the ability for guild traders to be transferred through guild dissolution in an upcoming PTS update for Update 23. We avoided making that change prior to the multi-bidding feature because we wanted to ensure trading guilds weren’t entirely dependent on winning their one single bid each week, which puts even more pressure on them to place exorbitant bids.

We appreciate the concerns being raised regarding this change and we are absolutely committed to monitoring the impact of this feature, as well as potentially making additional adjustments as necessary to ensure the ongoing health of the in-game economy.

Once we had "The Council of Nirn", a round table group of GM's that ZoS would communicate with on ideas, etc. ZoS used to listen.
So, this is a last chance effort to show ZoS that IF they are going ahead with the bidding system, that 10 is WAY too many, IMO.
Yes, we want a solution to "ghost guilds", we need more tools for GM's to operate with, but this needs to be looked at BEFORE live.
Just my 2 Drakes.... What are yours?
Huzzah!

wenchmore420b14_ESO

No, 10 is too many. How about 2-3

As a GM of a small social guild that has been able to keep the same trader for over 2 years, on a limited budget, with out dues or fees, this is gonna hurt. Any Trade Guild GM KNOWS the time and grief of a "Bid War" that happens occasionally, but I see this as becoming a bid war every week. Maybe I'm over thinking it.
But 10 is TOO much, I vote 2-3 if we have to do this....

Ackwalan

A guild can still only win one bid, and a guild can no longer disband and sell their spot, so I don't see the larger guilds buying up multiple spots. The ghost guilds can still buy a spot, but without the ability to sell it, that gold is just gone.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

Ackwalan wrote: »

A guild can still only win one bid, and a guild can no longer disband and sell their spot, so I don't see the larger guilds buying up multiple spots. The ghost guilds can still buy a spot, but without the ability to sell it, that gold is just gone.

But they can BID on more Kiosks, driving prices UP and driving smaller guilds out.

There are guilds out there with more than enough gold to buy up a Kiosk and not use it, just to deny market access to their competitors - thereby increasing footfall at their own Kiosk.

These are basic principles of trade really.


All The Best

Androconium

I vote Cake

If you are too lazy or too time-consumed to farm your own 700 k motif, then you will be forced to pay whatever that motif is being sold for, when you go to buy one.

Even if someone else got to it before you did and marked the price up to something that you don't agree with.

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

These are basic principles of trade really.


All The Best

Urigall

Don't know what to think.

Ten bids has probably been chosen because of how the various scenarios are projected to play out.

Even top guilds might have to start being selective about whether they make one, massive bid with one or two very high bids, or one massive bid with four or five high bids, or one massive bid with nine lowish bids spread evenly. The risk of being sniped for the preferred spot, and then losing out, if nine, lowish bids are submitted, might be quite high. There are also risks associated with one massive bid and a small number of high bids.

Much will depend upon whether the top guilds can maintain a big enough war chest, to consistently facilitate a large number of high bids across the board. If the cost of top kiosks keeps on rising, top guilds might find their war chest depletes, thus making high bids across the board more difficult. Much will depend on whether top guilds can maintain their war chest at a consistent level.

At face value, it does look like financial firepower will be the key to winning in the short term. Unless that financial firepower can be maintained all the time, the outcome of the bidding process might become more varied.

Reducing the number of bids would probably advantage the big guilds, because they could then always concentrate their resources on the spots they really want to secure.

But ten bids probably has ramifications lower down the pecking order.

Don't know whether the changes are good or bad all round.

randomkeyhits

See this as being way better for smaller guilds

where before if a ghost guild bid on their preferred trader they'd 100% lose it and maybe get it back if the ghost dissolved. Now they are only affected if the bigger guild bidding on the spot didn't get their main or any other higher priority bid.

Doesn't matter how many big bids a big guild makes they can only ever collect on one of them. In fact the more potential bids the more coin is tied up if a guild feels it has to cover all bases. As has been said above the guilds have to decide to focus and risk being sniped or spreading across a number of traders and reducing their bid amounts. I doubt most guilds would stretch to 10 bids each week.

Also I'm guessing that if all bids on a trader are backup ones and all bidders get a preferred location then it will become available as we have it now? So there would still be the Sunday evening panic run around and hope to find something or do we lose this?

darkblue5

I vote Cake

Can't resist a good troll option on a poll.

MandyMae

I vote Cake

https://youtu.be/rmuudxyM0t4

Fiktius

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

Usually I would've voted right away that cake option at the bottom, but not this time.

generalmyrick

Yes, I think it it a great change as is

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

The new up-date is around the corner.
Several threads and PTS feedback thread later, we have only heard one response.
They told us that the new multi-bidding changes are to address ghost guilds, insure availability, etc. The full response is here...

Spoiler

ZOS_PhilipDravenZOS_PhilipDraven
✭✭✭
The guild trader system is a cornerstone of the in-game economy in ESO, but over time the enormous pressure on trading guilds to have a guild trader every single week has led to behaviors which reduce competition and negatively impact trader customers. Tactics employed to ensure guild trader ownership each week, such as the generation of alternate “shadow” guilds to bid on additional locations as well as guild trader speculation and resale through guild dissolution, often lead to fewer traders populated with goods and massive amounts of wasted gold.

The multi-bidding feature is part of an initiative to provide in-game supported methods for players to have fallback trader bidding options without the associated drawbacks for both guilds and their customers. In addition to multi-bidding, we are also removing the ability for guild traders to be transferred through guild dissolution in an upcoming PTS update for Update 23. We avoided making that change prior to the multi-bidding feature because we wanted to ensure trading guilds weren’t entirely dependent on winning their one single bid each week, which puts even more pressure on them to place exorbitant bids.

We appreciate the concerns being raised regarding this change and we are absolutely committed to monitoring the impact of this feature, as well as potentially making additional adjustments as necessary to ensure the ongoing health of the in-game economy.

Once we had "The Council of Nirn", a round table group of GM's that ZoS would communicate with on ideas, etc. ZoS used to listen.
So, this is a last chance effort to show ZoS that IF they are going ahead with the bidding system, that 10 is WAY too many, IMO.
Yes, we want a solution to "ghost guilds", we need more tools for GM's to operate with, but this needs to be looked at BEFORE live.
Just my 2 Drakes.... What are yours?
Huzzah!

this is my small guilds chance to finally get a chance to consistently have a trader...cmon...don't use the system if you don't like it...

generalmyrick

Yes, I think it it a great change as is

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

show previous quotes

Ackwalan wrote: »

A guild can still only win one bid, and a guild can no longer disband and sell their spot, so I don't see the larger guilds buying up multiple spots. The ghost guilds can still buy a spot, but without the ability to sell it, that gold is just gone.

But they can BID on more Kiosks, driving prices UP and driving smaller guilds out.

There are guilds out there with more than enough gold to buy up a Kiosk and not use it, just to deny market access to their competitors - thereby increasing footfall at their own Kiosk.

These are basic principles of trade really.


All The Best

ROI?

Ri_Khan

No, 10 is too many. How about 2-3

10 is definitely waaaay too many. It's nice to see the issue of ghost traders being addressed but I'd say 3 bids max or it shouldn't happen. Even then, I only see this driving up the cost of isolated, back-woods kiosks that're already ridiculously expensive to maintain for the amount of traffic they receive. It really looks like something that is only going to benefit the bigger established guilds.

Also, I don't think it's healthy to have such a frequent turn-over with which guild is in each kiosk every week. Allowing so many bids will probably increase this to very annoying levels. It's like having your local grocery store constantly change it's inventory. Sellers will have a harder time maintaining a consistent income and buyers won't be able to depend on certain locations for what they need.

Regardless of what happens, I fully expect the trading system to continue to suck.

danieldewoeste

Yes, I think it it a great change as is

Its about time to do multi bids now days strong guilds can lose high bids ,so they need ghost guild to protect te guilds ,not all can bid 10x high so 10x is np because you only can win one, if guilds bid 20m while guilds make 3m then this great news for maincity guilds and lower guilds have more trader because no ghost guilds needed

danieldewoeste

Yes, I think it it a great change as is

Best update for guilds in long long time
Now only automatic donation track would be awsome

danieldewoeste

Yes, I think it it a great change as is

There wil be allot more free traders also this way because alliance of guilds wil be broken ,so wil be a huge increase of free traders

Urigall

generalmyrick wrote: »

ROI?

Yes, ROI. Important implications arise from paying over the odds for a few weeks in a row.

And there's more to it than that. There are strategy issues arising from bidding, even with a budget of 60 million.

At first sight it looked like 10 bids would spell doom for small guilds. I'm not so sure. Initially, yes. Later no - might not be so clear cut as it seems to be.

10 bids could create problems for top guilds too. Not initially, but somewhere down the line.

Work out the bidding permutations, the need to cover bets (at cost) and the capital depletion effect of ROI...it gets less clear cut than we might think.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

Androconium wrote: »

If you are too lazy or too time-consumed to farm your own 700 k motif, then you will be forced to pay whatever that motif is being sold for, when you go to buy one.

Even if someone else got to it before you did and marked the price up to something that you don't agree with.

show previous quotes

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

These are basic principles of trade really.


All The Best

You keep referencing the laws of supply and demand (not that they are laws), but they are irrelevant in the in-game economy because BOTH Supply and Demand are controlled and manipulated by processes external to the in-game economy in a way that doesn't happen in real economies.

This too is a basic principle of trade, but you seem to not understand that; which does explain why so many of your posts on this issue are just plain wrong.

All The Best

Gandrhulf_Harbard

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

generalmyrick wrote: »

show previous quotes

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

A guild can still only win one bid, and a guild can no longer disband and sell their spot, so I don't see the larger guilds buying up multiple spots. The ghost guilds can still buy a spot, but without the ability to sell it, that gold is just gone.

But they can BID on more Kiosks, driving prices UP and driving smaller guilds out.

There are guilds out there with more than enough gold to buy up a Kiosk and not use it, just to deny market access to their competitors - thereby increasing footfall at their own Kiosk.

These are basic principles of trade really.


All The Best

ROI?

Well if the return you get by denying your direct competitor access to the market is greater than the investment required to do so, then it is very much a worthwhile and reasonable ROI.

The real issue is whether or not that investment will bring sufficient returns over extended periods of time.

Because once the "10 time bidding war" starts I expect many small and medium Trade Guilds will need to merge to be able to cover the risks. At that point the guilds denied market access may be able to, collectively, stump up bids that make it non-viable for the current large guilds to invest to deny access.

All The Best

Ackwalan

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

show previous quotes

Ackwalan wrote: »

A guild can still only win one bid, and a guild can no longer disband and sell their spot, so I don't see the larger guilds buying up multiple spots. The ghost guilds can still buy a spot, but without the ability to sell it, that gold is just gone.

But they can BID on more Kiosks, driving prices UP and driving smaller guilds out.

There are guilds out there with more than enough gold to buy up a Kiosk and not use it, just to deny market access to their competitors - thereby increasing footfall at their own Kiosk.

These are basic principles of trade really.


All The Best

It won't work that way. For example, a large guild bids on two spots. They bid ten million on a spot in a prime area and eight million on a remote area. They win the prime spot for ten million and then automatically lose the second spot. The second spot won't go for eight million it will go for whatever the next bid was for. That second spot may sell for 300K, and the bidder won't ever know there was an eight million bid on it.

zaria

Other

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

As a GM of a small social guild that has been able to keep the same trader for over 2 years, on a limited budget, with out dues or fees, this is gonna hurt. Any Trade Guild GM KNOWS the time and grief of a "Bid War" that happens occasionally, but I see this as becoming a bid war every week. Maybe I'm over thinking it.
But 10 is TOO much, I vote 2-3 if we have to do this....

10 sounds to many 2-3 a bit low 5 perhaps but you don't need to bid on all 10 either.

I see 3 downsides, the major one is long bid wars and this might happen much more easy now as one high end guild is kicked down the ladder displacing other guilds who displace yet others. This could easy result in lots of bit wars upsetting the balance.

Its also easier to just bid for some traders on an better spot hoping for an cheap and good trader without risking your safe main trader, this is the main issue here and will cause most disruption.
However at least on PC-EU its an agreement between major trade guilds to limit bid wars as they just cost gold.

second is that kiosk prices will go up because its easier to bid on better kiosks while keeping an safe base.

3rd downside is more work for the guild master, also it require more gold in bank to bid for more traders.

Main upside is that you still have an trader even if bumped.

Second is no more ghost traders. Yes they will patch that hole but even if existing you might be bumped from rawl to wayrest, in that case you will not pay the ghost trader that he spend for the kiosk as its not worth it, all other major trade guilds will also have pretty decent kiosks so you will not be able to sell kiosk for the bid.

Last it will be easier to advance, however this will drive bids up. This might be ZOS way to counter the inflation we see in the game.

OsManiaC

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

danieldewoeste wrote: »

There wil be allot more free traders also this way because alliance of guilds wil be broken ,so wil be a huge increase of free traders

I quoted this as I will laugh hard when this guy realizes there will be no free kiosk run on sunday

Ackwalan

OsManiaC wrote: »

show previous quotes

danieldewoeste wrote: »

There wil be allot more free traders also this way because alliance of guilds wil be broken ,so wil be a huge increase of free traders

I quoted this as I will laugh hard when this guy realizes there will be no free kiosk run on sunday

A guild can still only win one bid. It doesn't matter how rich that guild is, even if they bid 100 million on every single trader, they still only win one of them.

Kiralyn2000

I vote Cake

I don't care one way or the other about bidding systems, because I don't participate in your economy.

So.

Cake!

OsManiaC

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

Ackwalan wrote: »

A guild can still only win one bid. It doesn't matter how rich that guild is, even if they bid 100 million on every single trader, they still only win one of them.

oh really? a guild can still only one bid? .... seriously? wow mind blown

do you know what is chain reaction or domino effect? so since you clearly missing a point lets compare today and future.

Today's status

• X and Y fights over rawl, Z bids in Grahtwood, Q bids in greenshade
• X wins the bid in rawl, Y loses and waits for a next week, Z and Q is happy as they won

Future status

• X and Y fights over rawl, X and Y also bids grahtwood, Z bids in Grahtwood and greenshade, Q bids in greenshade
• X wins the bid in rawl, Y loses but since he has power to bid in rawl, z in grahtwood will be no match
• Y wins grahtwood, good thing z knows this and wins against greenshade
• Q loses and goes QQ as it is a small guild now no one cares

Gandrhulf_Harbard

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

Ackwalan wrote: »

That second spot may sell for 300K, and the bidder won't ever know there was an eight million bid on it.

Yes they will, you can see what Bids have been logged.


All The Best

Ackwalan

OsManiaC wrote: »

show previous quotes

Ackwalan wrote: »

A guild can still only win one bid. It doesn't matter how rich that guild is, even if they bid 100 million on every single trader, they still only win one of them.

oh really? a guild can still only one bid? .... seriously? wow mind blown

do you know what is chain reaction or domino effect? so since you clearly missing a point lets compare today and future.

Today's status

• X and Y fights over rawl, Z bids in Grahtwood, Q bids in greenshade
• X wins the bid in rawl, Y loses and waits for a next week, Z and Q is happy as they won

Future status

• X and Y fights over rawl, X and Y also bids grahtwood, Z bids in Grahtwood and greenshade, Q bids in greenshade
• X wins the bid in rawl, Y loses but since he has power to bid in rawl, z in grahtwood will be no match
• Y wins grahtwood, good thing z knows this and wins against greenshade
• Q loses and goes QQ as it is a small guild now no one cares

Each guild still only wins one bid. Those two large guild will continue to fight over their preferred spot. Those large guilds rarely lose their primary bid locations. The large guild leaders have unspoken as well as spoken deals.

therift

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

show previous quotes

Ackwalan wrote: »

That second spot may sell for 300K, and the bidder won't ever know there was an eight million bid on it.

Yes they will, you can see what Bids have been logged.


All The Best

Can you share with us how we can see "what Bids have been logged"? Thanks in advance.

OsManiaC

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

Ackwalan wrote: »

Each guild still only wins one bid. Those two large guild will continue to fight over their preferred spot. Those large guilds rarely lose their primary bid locations. The large guild leaders have unspoken as well as spoken deals.

let me fix that.

Big guilds will now always wins the bid. Those two large guilds will continue to fight over their preferred spot. Those large guilds rarely lose their primary bid locations. Even they lose, they will win a next good thing. The large guild leaders have unspoken as well as spoken deals. now they also now every area every point.

Small guilds will now rarely win the bid, as they now have more competitors - not the ones on their level, now the losers of middle levels.

This change has no good side for small guilds, and if I was a big guild, I thank ZOS for this- with this, it probably eliminates %5 chance big guilds losing spots.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

No, scrape whole idea and find another way to deal with said issues

therift wrote: »

show previous quotes

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

That second spot may sell for 300K, and the bidder won't ever know there was an eight million bid on it.

Yes they will, you can see what Bids have been logged.


All The Best

Can you share with us how we can see "what Bids have been logged"? Thanks in advance.

Fairly sure there were screenies of it in the PTS Multi-Bidding thread.

All The Best

therift

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

show previous quotes

therift wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

That second spot may sell for 300K, and the bidder won't ever know there was an eight million bid on it.

Yes they will, you can see what Bids have been logged.


All The Best

Can you share with us how we can see "what Bids have been logged"? Thanks in advance.

Fairly sure there were screenies of it in the PTS Multi-Bidding thread.

All The Best

I lurk that thread and haven't seen anything that reveals non-winning bids on a kiosk to the winner of that kiosk.
I double-checked, because I thought perhaps PTS revealed information that is normally secret. That is how I understood your comment... that non-winning bids were revealed, which would be a complete about-face for ZoS, since that removes blind bidding from the game.

You may have in mind the discussions on how a guild manages and tracks the (up to) ten bids it may place. This has nothing to do with revealing a competing bid, of course, either prior to or after bidding is closed.

You did get me worried for a moment, though