Issue with trader-holders for trading guilds

failkiwib16_ESO · October 2016

Dear ZOS
A few trading guilds have lesser sister guilds, which they bid on the cheap locations for the only purpose of disbanding it, in the case their main guild looses a trader, and they take over the cheap trader.
Meanwhile if they don't loose bid, that cheap trader they have will continue to remain in the game and hold that trader hostage, with 0 items set for sale.

This behavior, which causes problems for lesser guilds who try to hold on to a cheap trader, could easily be fixed by not allowing a guild disbandment to free their trader in that period of time. To put it simple: if the guild disbands then the trader will not be free.
It would discourage these trader-holders for trading guilds to continue bidding, and the traders will be of use to costumers of those traders as well, since only guilds with intention to sell will find encouragement to bid.

I am aware that this doesn't happen equally on all platforms, and in PC/EU it's very rare yet still very annoying.

agegarton · October 2016

I think it's more common on PC/EU than you think.

failkiwib16_ESO · October 2016

@agegarton perhaps, I've heard more complains about it from other platforms so I assumed they're less common on PC/EU.

I've experienced this a few times, where I loose a bid and go to the trader to see who or what my competitor is ...and I see 0 items for sale.
It's common logic that it's a trader-holder for trading guild, as no regular guilds would waste gold just to bid 10k-100k on a weekly trader with no intention to earn the gold back. Unfortunately the trading system encourages trading guilds to continue with this behavior

agegarton · October 2016

@failkiwib16_ESO I agree with your point entirely.

Quite a few of the larger trading guilds have "backup" guilds or similar. Some are legitimately for overflow purposes and aim to share the success around, but I have long suspected that others are simply used as placeholders in cheap spots, just in case their massive bids in prime locations are not sufficient. You have to remember, many of these bids (in places like Belkarth, Mournhold, Rawl'ka, etc.) are several millions each week. A place holder bid of potentially 10k is nothing.

I hope that One Tamriel and the way new sets drop will encourage more player movement around the wider Tamriel map, which should encourage trade at what are currently lesser trade stations. I'm seeing that - I think - at this early stage. Fingers crossed!

Cryptical · October 2016

Question on background - what happens to the overbid amount?

As in, guild A bids 1 mill, B bids 1.5 mill and wins the bid. Does B pay the full 1.5 or some other smaller amount?

agegarton · October 2016

Cryptical wrote: »

Question on background - what happens to the overbid amount?

As in, guild A bids 1 mill, B bids 1.5 mill and wins the bid. Does B pay the full 1.5 or some other smaller amount?

Unfortunately this is a completely blind auction process - so if you win your bid, you pay all of what you bid regardless of how much more it was than the next highest bid - or even if no-one else bid at all. Other than through building relationships with other Guildmasters (not many will reveal what they bid, obviously), or through a complex spy network (most large trade guilds have spies in other guilds), it's impossible to know what is being bid. It's part luck, part experience, part bid as much as you can if you really want the spot.

I don't like the system, mostly because it encourages some pretty shoddy behaviour and detracts from the game. At this point, I'd prefer a transparent bidding process - I think it would open things up, and stop some of the crappy behaviour that goes with secrecy. Guildmasters then have a choice - if Guild A is prepared to spend 1m for the post, all should be able to see that and decide whether the post is worth more than 1m to them. It'd be easy to put in a rule that states you have to bid (for example) 10% more to prevent last minute outbidding by 1g.

failkiwib16_ESO · October 2016

@agegarton I sympathy for the overflow guilds, I mean if you really care to set things for sale then it's fair game and the trader is being of use in Tamriel, to both the bidders and the potential costumers.

My issue is that I lost bid several times to guilds, who set 0 items for sale. In case the main guild does not loose bid, the trader I lost bid to will remain useless for an entire week.

I don't even blame the big trading guilds for this behavior, corruption is close to encouraged by the tight competition and sytem. I want ZOS to lock traders to the guilds who bid on them - regardless of wether the guild disbands or not. This way only guilds with interest in selling items will have reason to place a bid.

@Cryptical as agegarton explained, the money will be lost to the game wether you overbid by 5g or 5million gold. However, if you loose the bid, then the amount of gold you bid for will be thrown into your guild bank automatically.

alexkdd99 · October 2016

I dont think your solution will fix anything. Instead of disbanding the guild they could just invite all the members from the main guild to the one with the trader.

failkiwib16_ESO · October 2016

@alexkdd99 nah not really. Big trading guilds are usually between 450-500 members, and many members are offline for a few days, but have items set for sale.
Also most members of a trading guild members aren't devoted enough to give the same guild 2 spots, when they can only be in 5 guilds total .... the members who are unsatisfied with not having a trader in a popular location usually just quit the guild for one that have an attractive trader.

AzraelKrieg · October 2016

I'm sorry but the notion a larger guild would make an overflow guild just to simply disband it when the main guild doesn't get a vendor and the overflow guild does is ridiculous. Why the hell would you recruit the necessary people to a guild, place a bid that could be in the millions, just to secure a cheap vendor in the case that main one doesn't get it? That is a lot of wasted and unnecessary effort

agegarton · October 2016

alexkdd99 wrote: »

I dont think your solution will fix anything. Instead of disbanding the guild they could just invite all the members from the main guild to the one with the trader.

That wouldn't work - serious traders won't jump to a new guild, even if it is run by the same people, for multiple reasons. Not least is that they lose their trading history, which is of huge importance when pricing and gauging profit. Also, think of the logistics of having 500 people quit your guild and have to be invited to the new guild....... yuk!

agegarton · October 2016

AzraelKrieg wrote: »

I'm sorry but the notion a larger guild would make an overflow guild just to simply disband it when the main guild doesn't get a vendor and the overflow guild does is ridiculous. Why the hell would you recruit the necessary people to a guild, place a bid that could be in the millions, just to secure a cheap vendor in the case that main one doesn't get it? That is a lot of wasted and unnecessary effort

Ridiculous, but it happens. You need a handful of people only, to bid on a trader. The cheapest traders used to go for less than 10k gold - 10k is now the minimum bid. If you MUST ensure that you have a trader, it's a perfectly logical tactic. Remember, we're talking about guild than turnover >20m in revenue per week. Even a crummy trader in the middle of nowhere is better for a trade guild than no trader at all.

failkiwib16_ESO · October 2016

@agegarton even guilds with revenue below 5 million a week does this