clayandaudrey_ESO wrote: »clayandaudrey_ESO wrote: »You should only be allowed to bid once.
To what, guarantee that the cheaters have a better chance at winning?
How in the hell can you cheat a one done bid?
You should place a closed bid and wait till flip. That is the only way this should work.
Let's say I place a bid for 123456g
Someone spying on the bid can see that I bid 123456g, and then they'll bid 123457g to beat the bid.
To counteract that, guilds will place their final bid at the last moment, so that people spying on what is supposed to be a blind private bid won't have enough time to act on it. But placing a bid last-minute has risks, too, such as the bid not going through, technical difficulties, etc. So guilds will place an initial bid (so that they have something placed as a bid), and then place their final bid at the last moment.
clayandaudrey_ESO wrote: »clayandaudrey_ESO wrote: »clayandaudrey_ESO wrote: »You should only be allowed to bid once.
To what, guarantee that the cheaters have a better chance at winning?
How in the hell can you cheat a one done bid?
You should place a closed bid and wait till flip. That is the only way this should work.
Let's say I place a bid for 123456g
Someone spying on the bid can see that I bid 123456g, and then they'll bid 123457g to beat the bid.
To counteract that, guilds will place their final bid at the last moment, so that people spying on what is supposed to be a blind private bid won't have enough time to act on it. But placing a bid last-minute has risks, too, such as the bid not going through, technical difficulties, etc. So guilds will place an initial bid (so that they have something placed as a bid), and then place their final bid at the last moment.
Notice where I said CLOSED (as in private) bid?
silvereyes wrote: »So ... Update 12 has a lot of really great stuff in it. I have to say I'm pretty excited about it.
I'm disappointed that they are trying to do so much in a single update, though. It's likely to be full of bugs, and there is very little hope that their devs will have a moment to spare on fixing bid spying or the kiosk flip time.
Funny how they seem to find time to spend on a new massively unpopular cash store gambling feature, though.
silvereyes wrote: »phaseadept wrote: »It's hard not to look at this thread with some cynicism, mainly because of all the grief big trading guilds give players that are looking for other options to trade, like a public trader type system....
These are 500 man active guilds, there should be far more incentive than just selling stuff to people who can't afford to join the 1% Wall Street players.
Is it so strange that the kiosk is what *makes* a top trade guild? In-guild sales usually only account for about 10% of the total.
This isn't about guild traders vs. auction house, although that is certainly a valid debate. This is about the most experienced, fanatical players for a particular aspect of the game not being able to do 90% of the thing they like to do most in the game. This is about their leaders being forced to turn their lives upside down dealing with asinine management decisions in order to ensure that doesn't happen.
Think of it this way ... what if an elite PvE guild were, overnight, only allowed by an arcane game mechanic to run 10% of the trials and dungeons they normally do? Or an elite PvP guild only allowed to queue for Cyrodiil on Thursdays?
But, if the officers wanted to avoid that situation, they could be online 4 AM on Monday to submit a form, but only a limited number of forms are accepted and the last one in wins. But the officers would not find out whether it was accepted or rejected by ZOS until maintenance was over; maybe at 9 AM, maybe at 5 PM, depending on how the maintenance went.
To the rank-and-file members of the guild, not being able to play how they normally do 90% of the time would be inconvenient for 1 week. It would be highly annoying for 2. By week 3, they would start looking around for another guild.
It's a game. It's meant to be fun. None of the situation with kiosk bidding is fun right now, neither for the officers nor for the members of guilds that lose their bids because of it.
I wish I could have expressed it so eloquently. I love running a trading guild. Contrary to popular belief, I do not get rich from it, quite the opposite. These maintenance/switchover overlap times are just destroying my sleep, and increasing the amount of money we have to bid on even a mid-range trading kiosk. I take on a huge responsibility when I take money donated by members and tax income and bid on a trader, this is not something I do for myself. I don't sit here for hours waiting to see whether we won our bid for myself.
I have noticed a theme here, that those who are blaming the GMs for these problems (and not ZOS for implementing a faulty mechanic) seem to think that those who run top trading guilds are guilty of some sort of sin for *striving* to do well in the game, and that they deserve any *punishment* that they get in the form of losing kiosks, sleep etc. That supposed 'greed' and the desire to do well should be *punished* in some fashion.
Clearly the trading guild mechanic is not constructed to support the likes of the trading guilds that have come to dominate the market.
When something exceeds the expected parameters, of course things fail to function smoothly.
If it's so damn hard to run a large guild on the kiosk mechanic but many other guilds run small on the kiosk mechanic then perhaps the issue is the size.
I have noticed a persistent lack of acknowledgement that there are guilds that run just fine when they don't get a kiosk for a week or a few weeks.
covenant11b14_ESO wrote: »There was a short period of time when maintenance was happening on Tuesday. This was the absolute best. This allowed a reasonable amount of time for bidders to make bids and follow up after. As it stands you make a bid, cross your fingers. For the third time in six weeks my guild does not have a trader because of the conflict between maintenance and trader budding.
Are there guilds that run just fine when they don't get a kiosk for a week?
I run a small social Guild. We have around 300 members, of whom 77 logged in yesterday, 33 within the past week, 30 within the past month. Depending on what you count as "regular" members, that's somewhere between 110 and 140 regulars.
....
Some weeks we get outbid, and the three people who both have the ability to bid and are able to be online at 7.55 am EDT have to run around like blue-assed flies trying to find an alternative. Sometimes, only one of us is able to get on. It's immensely stressful for all of us.
Going on 2 weeks with this thread. 8 pages and still no word from Zos. No Go jump off a cliff, No we don't give a crap, or a we ain't gonna do nothing about it. Just complete utter silence in the fact of completely ignoring everyone posting on this thread, everyone tagging members of the Zos team @ZOS_GinaBruno, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom, @ZOS_AlanG, to name a few, we just want and at this point need to hear something from the team that our pleas have at least been heard.
I honestly interpret their silence as an apathetic stance regarding this issue. Especially when I see them respond to issues/requests that have much less impact on the game. This is an exploit that breaks how it is intended to work. They have been shown how simple it is to do. Maybe the folks tagged in this thread just don't "get" what this is about and therefore can not empathize with trading guild masters.
Bryanonymous wrote: »Don't expect maintenance times to change. Those are real people who work real world jobs on a real schedule. However, why can't they adjust the time that the kiosk bids close? Ridiculous that they chose the exact time that the servers go down.
Well its that time of the week again. Guild stores have flipped and I am still waiting to see if we have a GS this week. Tonight it seems to be taking even longer than usual. Of course we have no feedback from ZOS to give any indication of when the servers will be back up and I am now officially tired and getting very cranky.
One of the things that annoys me the most about this is that ZOS won't even respond to our numerous posts about this conflict even though there have been many. Should I happen to forget my manners and swear I am sure they would respond to that but they cannot even acknowledge that we are upset about this maintenance conflict let alone give us any reassurance that they are looking at trying to find a solution. How long does this thread have to get before they will realise this is a reall issue in the community.
It may be argued that it affects only a small number of people but that is only if you look at it in the most simplistic manner. The GS changeover affects every person in the guild if a store is lost so if you look at it that way then there is a huge impact down the line. As much as people love to think they are in the game for the trials, grouping, pvp etc every likes to sell their unwanted loot.
Please take our posts seriously and at least let us know that you are willing to consider a solution. Or that you even care!
Tashira_Ronin wrote: »Is there some actual zeni thought behind having these overlap? Do they think it will give greater "variety" of trader . Such as last week we had a rawl'ka store on PV NA with 49 items, do they belive that is a positive outcome?
I am hopping it was not got by bid spying and just by ludicrous gold bid.
I get the need for Maintenance, But could we please have a decent explanation for why it is at the same time as Trader flip. If they gave some rationale it 'might' be easier to see from where they are coming. As it is it just seems like poorly thought out with no care for the player base big or small.
My thinking on it is that at this time Zeni is using it as a gold suck and sink. That is suck it out of guilds in exhorbitant bids so there is less in the economy to prevent it overheating. HAs to coincide with maintenance to force guilds to bid extra high " just to be sure"
Wacky way to do it. But if that is the reason just say something, silence is breeding terrible behavior.
If you realy want to keep the gold sink then remove the ability for anyone to see the bid but the bid placer. Then it comes down to a Guild trust of their leaders which they can vote on by staying or leaving a guild.
What I also find interesting about this the past few weeks. It seems as the past few weeks 2 or 3. Seems as if the day after the long maintenance time the servers went down the next day I believe, for over half the day.