A House Auction Vendor Would Be Epic

One_ofMany

A vendor you can place in your house with 30 selling slots and only one per account. This could be tied to a main world Auctioneer and when someone buys something from you it ports them to your house to take it from the house Vendor. I feel this would be a nice incentive for people to really get into their home and decor + it would be a compromise for players who want a central auction house.

Athyrium93

That is an awesome idea. I like it, but maybe if it was only like 10-15 slots the people that love guild vendors would be more okay with it.

Kittytravel

I like the idea moreso because it adds "personalization" to the world. Incentive to visit peoples houses is something that ESO is missing and should be brought into it.

I think the requirements for something like this though to not interfere with the trader system should actually be a little tighter.
1. You can only have the vendor in a single home, no abusing slots.
2. The vendor can only hold 10 items at any time.
3. The "directory" for these is relevant to the home you choose. If your vendor is in Amaya Lake Lodge then the "directory" for your vendor is in Vivec City. If your vendor resides in Potentates Retreat then they need to visit Pellitine to see the listings in that zone.
4. This is synchronized with ZOS's current vision as incentive to purchase ESO+ or DLC zones so that you can see these vendor listings.
5. A higher fee of lost gold; in this case your "vendor" charges you the full 9% of the tax fees and none of it gets sent anywhere else. This is 2% more than you would normally lose by using guild traders maintaining them as the best system.
6. Inn Rooms don't qualify. Since you can only have 2 people max in a inn room it'd make sense to have it be apartments+ only and this doesn't seem like that big of an issue tbh.

Overall the idea is nice since it will encourage more people to go out and see homes and people get their global auction house in a limited current-game-friendly way. I could see the vendor charge even going up to 10% to really drive home the inefficiency. (For every million gold you make in a GT you'd lose 70k of it VS at 10% you'd lose 100k of it. GT's would retain 35k of it as their tax but the 100k you lose would be gone forever out of the economy.)

Anotherone773

I would get behind this as long as:

* It had more expensive listing fees (2-4%)
* It didnt replace guild traders
* You had to port to a persons house to buy the item.

Kittytravel

Anotherone773 wrote: »

I would get behind this as long as:

* It had more expensive listing fees (2-4%)
* It didnt replace guild traders
* You had to port to a persons house to buy the item.

Listing fees are refunded already as long as the item sells, that's not the part you want higher.
"Every item you list in the guild store costs you an upfront 1% listing fee. You must have the gold on hand to cover this fee. If the listing sells, you will be refunded the amount in your sale. However, if you remove the listing, the fee is not refunded."

MageCatF4F

Sign me up with all of Kittytravel's constraints. No problem.

But, given past history, we will probably never see anything so useful for home ownership.

Anotherone773

Kittytravel wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

I would get behind this as long as:

* It had more expensive listing fees (2-4%)
* It didnt replace guild traders
* You had to port to a persons house to buy the item.

Listing fees are refunded already as long as the item sells, that's not the part you want higher.
"Every item you list in the guild store costs you an upfront 1% listing fee. You must have the gold on hand to cover this fee. If the listing sells, you will be refunded the amount in your sale. However, if you remove the listing, the fee is not refunded."

nope its the part i want higher. The reason i want listing fees higher is because it discourages penny wars making it more expensive to unlist and relist to undercut someone. It also discourages you from listing items for very high prices in order to skew averages or to try the market of a single item since buying a bunch low and trying to sell it very high becomes more risky.

Azriael2

Anotherone773 wrote: »

* You had to port to a persons house to buy the item.

As someone who have problems with disconnect when changing areas - it's most quacked idea ever. I already play a game that forces you to travel to someone else house to trade with them and it's most unfun thing in whole game. Same would be here.

idk

Considering Zos has purposely kept trading from the personal banker and has specifically stated they have refrained from adding certain functionality from housing so players have a reason to enter cities I doubt they would consider this. Not even getting into the fact we already have a trading system.

OmniDo

It wouldn't work anyway. Homes cannot currently permit enough players who potentially might want to shop, especially if the seller becomes reputable.