Trader swap issue - EU server

Dont_do_drugs

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

"It was just a handful" does not sound like 95% to me. If you know otherwise, encourage those guilds to report their situation to ZOS promptly.

i dont know, what that handful is referred to. maybe to all formed guilds ever in the game (lol)...i really dont know. but yeh, even if its not 95%....it might be 90% of the won bids....at least might be a number which fits, since the last 10% managed to hire a trader before the history info went in, that they actually won the bid and started blocking them from hiring.

i mean were u around that evening? yes most guilds which won were blocked by the guild history from hiring. and nearly all traders were unoccupied. i guess, as i heard, only stormhaven(/wayrest was regular.

The handful refers to those guilds that won a bid but did not get the trader because of the bug AND did not get a refund from the system for not getting the trader. So it is a handful because many guilds that won a bid and did not get a trader because of the bug got their gold reimbursed for the bid.
So, yes, I was there that night and the majority of guilds did not get the trader they won because of the bug, BUT there is a difference between guilds that in the aftermath received the gold back (also much in excess) and guilds that did not receive any gold back. So the handful of guilds means those that placed a bid, won it, gold was deducted, but the trader was not available due the bug and there was no gold back from the system, ergo a big loss. That is why it is fair that the excess gold be removed AND that the gold spent on a winning but not available trader be refunded as well.

So how and when did those guilds get reimbursed? Nobody communicated that. Is it the gold that some guilds are reporting to be too much? I am really confused. Zos, never communicated having given back gold from the win bids, but only taking gold from the dupe.

Aragorn79

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

"It was just a handful" does not sound like 95% to me. If you know otherwise, encourage those guilds to report their situation to ZOS promptly.

i dont know, what that handful is referred to. maybe to all formed guilds ever in the game (lol)...i really dont know. but yeh, even if its not 95%....it might be 90% of the won bids....at least might be a number which fits, since the last 10% managed to hire a trader before the history info went in, that they actually won the bid and started blocking them from hiring.

i mean were u around that evening? yes most guilds which won were blocked by the guild history from hiring. and nearly all traders were unoccupied. i guess, as i heard, only stormhaven(/wayrest was regular.

The handful refers to those guilds that won a bid but did not get the trader because of the bug AND did not get a refund from the system for not getting the trader. So it is a handful because many guilds that won a bid and did not get a trader because of the bug got their gold reimbursed for the bid.
So, yes, I was there that night and the majority of guilds did not get the trader they won because of the bug, BUT there is a difference between guilds that in the aftermath received the gold back (also much in excess) and guilds that did not receive any gold back. So the handful of guilds means those that placed a bid, won it, gold was deducted, but the trader was not available due the bug and there was no gold back from the system, ergo a big loss. That is why it is fair that the excess gold be removed AND that the gold spent on a winning but not available trader be refunded as well.

So how and when did those guilds get reimbursed? Nobody communicated that. Is it the gold that some guilds are reporting to be too much? I am really confused. Zos, neclver communicated hailing given back gold from the win bids, but only taking gold from the dupe.

Ok. So what happened that night was that guilds placed multiple bids on different traders. Then the system calculated the winning bid and assigned a trader to the winning guild. At the same time the system reimbursed the money for the bids placed on the different other traders in the multi-bid system that logically did not win since the guild already got a winning bid assigned. Now, different guilds placed more or less bids on the system: some bid on only one trader, other on multiple. The system reimbursed the guilds if and when they placed a bid that did not get a trader assigned. If a guild only placed one bid and it won a trader, then there was no reimbursement because the guild won the trader. So far so good. Now...enter the BUG. Because of the load on the server and the bad hardware resistance (sorry ZOS but it has to be said), the system got overloaded and it all BUGGED. What happened was that the guilds that won a trader could see that they won it (the system registered the assigned trader) but the actual trader was free for all of Tamriel to get, which actually happened. So other players could snap the "free" traders (due to BUG, assigned to winning guild but free in Tamriel to snap). That was problem #1, guilds not getting their assigned trader. These guilds could also not snap the free traders for themselves because the system registered that they already got a trader (and believe me how hard we all tried). Now enter problem #2. The system overloaded and did not calculate the refund for the many other losing bids in the multi-bid system correctly: that way the money spent on bids that did not officially get a trader got refunded with BUGS, meaning lots more or the wrong amount. This is the dupe we are all talking about. It is the money guilds spent on placing bids for multiple traders that has to be normally refunded, but it got refunded in the wrong amounts. Problem #3: some guilds that only placed one bid and won the trader did not logically get a refund BUT because of the BUG the trader was also not available to them. So after the patch on Monday when the traders de-registered from the faulty system, these handful of guilds did not have a trader nor the money they spent for it.
So to directly answer your question: how and when...on Sunday the bids not been used for a trader got reimbursed (but faulty system... so in excess...BUGGED) => this is the gold that guilds are reporting to bee too much, because it is too much and it would ruin our whole economy. You are right that the gold from the winning bids has not been reimbursed as far as I know. This is the point that guilds are making now, especially if they only placed one bid and therefore did not get any gold back. I hope this clears the mud a bit.

Dont_do_drugs

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+10m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Aragorn79

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Sorry dude I honestly thought I was answering your question. I think I just don't get what you are getting at. But it's okay. Have a great weekend.

daemonios

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Sorry dude I honestly thought I was answering your question. I think I just don't get what you are getting at. But it's okay. Have a great weekend.

Losing bids were incorrectly refunded. Winning bids were not refunded at all. But they should have been if they didn't actually result in the trader being hired, which in many cases didn't happen.

Dont_do_drugs

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Sorry dude I honestly thought I was answering your question. I think I just don't get what you are getting at. But it's okay. Have a great weekend.

okay then let me explain again:

zos communicated having removed the dupe gold. while that jess is talking about a handful of guilds getting reimbursed for getting no trader despite winning bid - which i do agree, is more important for small guilds than bigger ones. but the amount of guilds getting no trader despite winning bid werent a handful, but most of the 218 winning bids. u agree. so i am sure its fair to ask what this handful is referring to.

thats the theoretical part.

in practical a lot of guilds mentioned, that they are still having "too much gold" on the bank from dupe. while that zos might adress this weekend those guilds which didnt have backup bids and didnt get their main bid reimbursed. sure.

if you say, a handful of guilds is only referring to those smaller guilds, which didnt get duplicated gold, then still, after removal of all duplicated gold, most of those mentioned 218 (minus some) guilds didnt get their main winning bid refunded?

OR that refund was within that gold, that guilds reported as looking a bid too much and zos forgot to mention that.
but how are we supposed to know, communication isnt very clear, and actually i think its not very clear, bcs zos doesnt have a any idea about bidding maths....

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_GinaBruno and yes, you are free to hire me to manually calcule through all guilds balances, if ure not able to. i just hope u also keep track of what u already removed. 40$/hour.

Aragorn79

daemonios wrote: »

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Sorry dude I honestly thought I was answering your question. I think I just don't get what you are getting at. But it's okay. Have a great weekend.

Losing bids were incorrectly refunded. Winning bids were not refunded at all. But they should have been if they didn't actually result in the trader being hired, which in many cases didn't happen.

I know, which is exactly what I explained above in the second paragraph. Thanks

Dont_do_drugs

Aragorn79 wrote: »

daemonios wrote: »

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Sorry dude I honestly thought I was answering your question. I think I just don't get what you are getting at. But it's okay. Have a great weekend.

Losing bids were incorrectly refunded. Winning bids were not refunded at all. But they should have been if they didn't actually result in the trader being hired, which in many cases didn't happen.

I know, which is exactly what I explained above in the second paragraph. Thanks

yeh but after guilds have been reporting having still too much gold, bcs zos only communicated, that they removed the gold, zos is doing a second dupe gold swipe on monday. u are just guessing, that the plus gold is the reimbursement for the won bid, but no dev ever mentioned that.

Aragorn79

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

...dude, why are u explainjing that to me. it doesnt even answer my question?

i will make it easy for u to follow up:

---> guild makes bid and backup bids, doesnt get trader and duplicated gold back. the dupe gold is equal to the backup bids which didnt win multiplied x.

---> Zos announces/communicates to remove the dupe amount of gold

---> means guilds end up with having the regular amount of their lost backup bids, still the winning bid is gone, since they didnt hire

or easier in numbers. as example:

bid 1: 25m (won but didnt hire actually)
bid 2: 15m
bid 3: 10m

bank balance after dupe gold thing:
- 25m
+ 15m x 4 = 60m
+ 10m x 4 = 40m

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Sorry dude I honestly thought I was answering your question. I think I just don't get what you are getting at. But it's okay. Have a great weekend.

okay then let me explain again:

zos communicated having removed the dupe gold. while that jess is talking about a handful of guilds getting reimbursed for getting no trader despite winning bid - which i do agree, is more important for small guilds than bigger ones. but the amount of guilds getting no trader despite winning bid werent a handful, but most of the 218 winning bids. u agree. so i am sure its fair to ask what this handful is referring to.

thats the theoretical part.

in practical a lot of guilds mentioned, that they are still having "too much gold" on the bank from dupe. while that zos might adress this weekend those guilds which didnt have backup bids and didnt get their main bid reimbursed. sure.

if you say, a handful of guilds is only referring to those smaller guilds, which didnt get duplicated gold, then still, after removal of all duplicated gold, most of those mentioned 218 (minus some) guilds didnt get their main winning bid refunded?

OR that refund was within that gold, that guilds reported as looking a bid too much and zos forgot to mention that.
but how are we supposed to know, communication isnt very clear, and actually i think its not very clear, bcs zos doesnt have a any idea about bidding maths....

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_GinaBruno and yes, you are free to hire me to manually calcule through all guilds balances, if ure not able to. i just hope u also keep track of what u already removed. 40$/hour.

Ok. I think I get it. You are saying that all winning bids should be refunded if the guild did not get a trader and not only to the handful of guilds that only placed one bid. Yes, I agree. I think that at the moment they are going to refund the handful of winning bids from guilds that only placed one bid and did not have any gold reimbursed. But thanks for your insight.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Pssst... shouldn't the last "15m" be "10m".. ?

Aragorn79

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Thanks for the follow-up questions and reports of some duped gold remaining in-game on the PC-EU server. On Monday, August 26, we will be performing additional passes to remove the remaining excess gold from guild banks. If your guild is still in possession of duped gold, we ask that you please work with us by not touching it. If your guild has moved/traded the duped gold, this is your second chance to put it back so we can remove it in the next sweep.

We also have an update for small number of guilds who lost gold on Sunday night due to placing a winning bid but not getting the guild trader they should have won. Our Support team will be refunding the guild leader of any affected guilds 150% of the bid amount. Guild leaders will receive an in-game mail once this is done, letting them know on which of their characters we gold we deposited the gold. Our aim is to have all these complete within 48 hours, before the next guild trader bid cycle is over.

Thank you again for your patience. We appreciate your cooperation and understanding. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Here she is saying that a refund of the winning bid will be occurring.

Dont_do_drugs

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Zos removes dupe (should be bank balance according to their announcement)
- 25m
+15m
+15m

i hope i u slowly start getting what i'm pointing on? this is actually not hard to understand....

Pssst... shouldn't the last "15m" be "10m".. ?

thanks

Dont_do_drugs

Aragorn79 wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Thanks for the follow-up questions and reports of some duped gold remaining in-game on the PC-EU server. On Monday, August 26, we will be performing additional passes to remove the remaining excess gold from guild banks. If your guild is still in possession of duped gold, we ask that you please work with us by not touching it. If your guild has moved/traded the duped gold, this is your second chance to put it back so we can remove it in the next sweep.

We also have an update for small number of guilds who lost gold on Sunday night due to placing a winning bid but not getting the guild trader they should have won. Our Support team will be refunding the guild leader of any affected guilds 150% of the bid amount. Guild leaders will receive an in-game mail once this is done, letting them know on which of their characters we gold we deposited the gold. Our aim is to have all these complete within 48 hours, before the next guild trader bid cycle is over.

Thank you again for your patience. We appreciate your cooperation and understanding. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Here she is saying that a refund of the winning bid will be occurring.

yeh and she says its a small number. and somewhere else she used the word handful. i just want to know the reference system in which that amount of guilds is a small number or handful. *headscratch* is referenc system the right term in english? i guess u use that word in statistics or so.

Aragorn79

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Aragorn79 wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Thanks for the follow-up questions and reports of some duped gold remaining in-game on the PC-EU server. On Monday, August 26, we will be performing additional passes to remove the remaining excess gold from guild banks. If your guild is still in possession of duped gold, we ask that you please work with us by not touching it. If your guild has moved/traded the duped gold, this is your second chance to put it back so we can remove it in the next sweep.

We also have an update for small number of guilds who lost gold on Sunday night due to placing a winning bid but not getting the guild trader they should have won. Our Support team will be refunding the guild leader of any affected guilds 150% of the bid amount. Guild leaders will receive an in-game mail once this is done, letting them know on which of their characters we gold we deposited the gold. Our aim is to have all these complete within 48 hours, before the next guild trader bid cycle is over.

Thank you again for your patience. We appreciate your cooperation and understanding. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Here she is saying that a refund of the winning bid will be occurring.

yeh and she says its a small number. and somewhere else she used the word handful. i just want to know the reference system in which that amount of guilds is a small number or handful. *headscratch* is referenc system the right term in english? i guess u use that word in statistics or so.

You are right that it is not clear if all winning bids without trader are going to be refunded or only for guilds that only had that one bid. We don't have an answer for that.
But you are not right in saying above that I am guessing something that was stated, as I showed here.:)

Wir werden mal am Montag sehen, was genau passiert.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Here she is saying that a refund of the winning bid will be occurring.

Yes, but she refers to guilds that actually won a bid but ended up with nothing. There are many guilds in that situation (albeit ZOS may call it "a handful") because you couldn't hire a trader manually when the system thought you already had won one via bidding.
However, many guilds managed to hire a trader manually IN SPITE of having already won one via bidding. However, in most cases, that manually hired trader wasn't the one they bid for. Let's say, you bid 25m for a trader in Craglorn which you won but didn't get, and then manually hired a trader in Hew's Bane.
If I understand ZOS' statements correctly as they stand right now, that guild will NOT be reimbursed the 25m, because "they got a trader". But a trader in Hew's Bane ain't worth 25m. So what do they do with those... ?

Dont_do_drugs

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Here she is saying that a refund of the winning bid will be occurring.

Yes, but she refers to guilds that actually won a bid but ended up with nothing. There are many guilds in that situation (albeit ZOS may call it "a handful") because you couldn't hire a trader manually when the system thought you already had won one via bidding.
However, many guilds managed to hire a trader manually IN SPITE of having already won one via bidding. However, in most cases, that manually hired trader wasn't the one they bid for. Let's say, you bid 25m for a trader in Craglorn which you won but didn't get, and then manually hired a trader in Hew's Bane.
If I understand ZOS' statements correctly as they stand right now, that guild will NOT be reimbursed the 25m, because "they got a trader". But a trader in Hew's Bane ain't worth 25m. So what do they do with those... ?

i agree on that, even tho i dont think its that many guilds which hired despite winning bid. tho i dont have actual numbers. the rest is right as well. i dont think anyone in the zos office has an oversight about such questions. so i am still raising my hand finishing the tickets of guilds still complaining about too much or too less gold and making the calculation for their bank balance manually. 40$/h

there are a lot of weird cases...
* lets assume zos refunds all winning bids without testing wether guild actually now has a trader: guilds like ttg, pvt and the ttma one in mourn or nirn traders end up with getting reimbursed the bid while having the taxes of their life this week.
* lets assume as u did, guild hired trader but one which isnt as "good" as the one they actually would have won but zos wont refund all guilds which hired...

i mean we are already over that point where we think, that zos is able to handle it fair and restore the gold balance situation between all affected guilds anyways.... so well...

anitajoneb17_ESO

Aragorn79 wrote: »

Wir werden mal am Montag sehen, was genau passiert.

Monday happens to be a little late considering that guilds need to make decisions for bidding before sunday night. As it stands, guilds don't know how much they'll be refunded, how much will be deleted even more, and according to what criteria. It's hard to bid if you don't know how much money you actually have. It's even harder if you fear that your bank account will be set to zero and you'll be considered a launderer and all your bids will be cancelled without refund. I know that Jess said they'd be cool with that and we should quietly bid "as we normally would"... but what does "as we normally would" mean, considering that the multibidding system is totally new and changes everyone's bidding strategies ? There is no such thing as "bidding as we normally would" !

I appreciate the increased communication and efforts from Jess, but the downside is, it shows how much they haven't understood from the variety of situations this bug has created.

Dont_do_drugs

Also a problem is, that if they removed the dupe gold, but guilds were already biddig, there is an off balance because of the not refunded gold of the main bid as well. Which might have lead into the 0bank issue for some then.... Bcs their guild bank maybe wasn't able to handle the removal even tho the main bid gold part actually was rightfully theirs.

Dont_do_drugs

It's crazy. Those are the people who created multi bid and claimed it a QoL Improvement, showing now their lack of insight into the business.

Blobsky

Meanwhile, Guildmasters have tickets not yet solved regarding the gold and have no idea what on earth will even happen this week with bids etc...

Will bids even go through?
Will flips work normally or randomly?

Guildmasters are paying players, who run guilds for their communities to help them enjoy the game and pay to play the game themselves as well. They are not workers for Zenimax and should not have to do their job for them. I seriously hope that all of the issues GMs are having that may affect next and future weeks can be solved today, but being a Saturday it is impossible to say if this is the case.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

i agree on that, even tho i dont think its that many guilds which hired despite winning bid.

Well, I don't have numbers either, but one of my guilds did, so it was definitely technically possible. Probably a matter of being lucky inbetween two hiccups of the system.

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

i mean we are already over that point where we think, that zos is able to handle it fair and restore the gold balance situation between all affected guilds anyways.... so well...

They could still handle it fairly, provided they accept to pay people to do it manually, and these people are not only agile with figures, but also know the market and the relative values of trader locations on PC/EU. No script can do that properly. I wish they took your offer. 40$/hour ain't much to clean up such a mess AND leave players confident again in the game and the company.

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

It's crazy. Those are the people who created multi bid and claimed it a QoL Improvement, showing now their lack of insight into the business.

The bug is one thing, the multibidding system is another. I'm still in favour of that system (now we can start fighting again ;-) )
Look at NA, they seem fine...

NA guys, what do you think of the results of your first week of "normal" multibidding ? Would be nice to hear some opinions on that. Are the trader locations all upside down, is there a "revolution", or else... ?

Dont_do_drugs

I can sign an nda and also I quit as a gm at 12.08.19 (I'm a wise girl), so I do not have any advantage from that insight.

martinhpb16_ESO

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom

hi Jessica do you think we could have a single official post on what is happening and what we need to do as GMs please, outside of this thread?

Its great that you are letting us know what is happening now but the info is trickled across this thread. Some of us have real lives and don't constantly follow this thread.

If it wasn't for guildies and other GMs messaging me I would not have a clue what is going on as I have a family event this week.

Also the information is still sporadic.

Some people kept the extra gold in the bank. Some people put it on characters for security and were waiting to hear what they should do. Some gold has been reclaimed already and some is coming out on Monday apparently. Its hard to keep tabs on the numbers and it would be disastrous to leave guilds with less than they started with.

Also if people are banned what recourse do they have to state their case, how do we know that people wont be banned because they put the gold somewhere safe but never spent / laundered any of it?

I think you need to be very clear with your expectations and instructions please and put these where everyone can see them easily, not spread across a long thread.

You are dealing with a lot of people here who have worked very hard over a number of years to maintain their guilds and the trading system. Even slight risks of unfair bans or gold deficits should be seriously considered.

Thank you

Dont_do_drugs

put it on characters for security

sry but lol.

martinhpb16_ESO

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

put it on characters for security

sry but lol.

when officers got access to guild bank and bidding rights no point risking it right

Dont_do_drugs

withdraw access rights.

StabbityDoom

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Also a problem is, that if they removed the dupe gold, but guilds were already biddig, there is an off balance because of the not refunded gold of the main bid as well. Which might have lead into the 0bank issue for some then.... Bcs their guild bank maybe wasn't able to handle the removal even tho the main bid gold part actually was rightfully theirs.

Hopefully they thought of this.

Urigall

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Those are the people who created multi bid

Yes, ZoS did create multi-bid. Why?

The changes were a response to abuse of the trading system. Abuse as in taking the proverbial.

The changes didn't arise because one or two rules were being bent. ZoS were not: buying kiosks and flipping them; buying kiosks and then listing hardly any 30-day items; buying kiosks, then leaving them empty, or stocking kiosks with a lot of low value items, some of which were listed for one, yes ONE, gold. What was going on far exceeded a little bit of rule bending. The old bidding system was being exploited to the level where ZoS were forced to intervene. Don't take my word for that - read the official ZoS statement on the PTS board. ZoS saw what was going on and presumably decided the abuse was sufficiently widespread to justify intervention. Besides, anyone who was heavily involved with trading - even us non-GMs - could see what was going on. Only the wilfully blind couldn't have seen it.

Allowing up to ten bids is almost certainly related to stopping the abuse - or reducing it. Makes it a lot more difficult to use ghost/proxy/fake guilds to grab kiosks. Or it would have done, had the implementation on PC-EU gone smoothly. But allowing up to ten bids has a good rationale. Reduce the number of potential bids and the scope for gaming the bidding system increases. Keep the old system and we're fiznucked as regards stopping the abuse.

Firing some flak at ZoS was justified - they deserved it for borking the implementation on PC-EU (and credit for informing us about the proposed solutions) At the same time, have the honesty to direct some of the flak towards other, equally deserving, targets. If we step back and ask ourselves WHY the changes happened, it becomes clear that ZoS aren't the only, guilty party here. While ZoS did bork the implementation on PC-EU (but not on PC-NA, apparently) they didn't create the environment that precipitated the changes.

If the old system hadn't been abused - six ways from Sunday - ZoS wouldn't have intervened in the first place. We wouldn't have multi-bidding. We wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Dont_do_drugs

What was going on far exceeded a little bit of rule bending. The old bidding system was being exploited to the level where ZoS were forced to intervene. Don't take my word for that - read the official ZoS statement on the PTS board. ZoS saw what was going on and presumably decided the abuse was sufficiently widespread to justify intervention. Besides, anyone who was heavily involved with trading - even us non-GMs - could see what was going on. Only the wilfully blind couldn't have seen it.

I do understand, but I do disagree on that. This is not how you care for a game and give your players a sign that fairplay is appreciated. Changing the system for the benefit of exploiters is always the wrong message to the whole community, also the exploit hasnt been widespread on pc eu at least. so it looked like that, but in the core only a few people have been involved with initiating the abuse. zos had the chance for over 2 years when it first appeared on consoles, to just start with implementing mechanics as they did now: blocking a guild from disbanding when trader hried or making a trader not able to be hired after beeing disbanded. also the multibidding as well as the disband-protection now wont solve the consoles innitial problem: ghost guilds there have no interest into disbanding. but this is something for another thread, where it already has been discussed. all those arguments already had been made there, so it would just repeat itself.

u just do not bend to cheaters and exploiters as a developer, idk it makes people lose trust in him and his ability or interest to supply a surrounding, where someone is competing and playing with others in a fair way. and as somewhere als already stated, if u know ur competetor has some asses up his sleeve and is cheating on u, u quit playing that game bcs its senseless then.

Titansteele

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom

Some of us have real lives and don't constantly follow this thread.

Was this required? I agree with your point but an underhanded dig is not required in the slightest. I managed to balance my career, family life and hobby (this) fine thanks very much.