Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6

Stopping Trading Guilds from Cheating?

  • lordhakai
    lordhakai
    ✭✭✭
    I believe that if a guild is disbanded the location should remain empty for the week.
  • jlboozer
    jlboozer
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    No, let guilds bid 168 hours (7 days) per week on a trader- and preserve convenience- even if it encourages monopolies and breaches in ZoS terms of service.
    It does happen, but not worth giving up convenience. Maybe some other way like if guild disbands with trader then that trader can't be acquired by anybody until Sunday trader flip. Just leave the trader empty for that week.
    Edited by jlboozer on July 12, 2017 5:05AM
  • NyassaV
    NyassaV
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    No, let guilds bid 168 hours (7 days) per week on a trader- and preserve convenience- even if it encourages monopolies and breaches in ZoS terms of service.
    That is so *** smart. But as long as they aren't botting I unfortunately don't see anything wrong with it
    Flawless Conqueror ~ Grand Overlord
    She/Her ~ PC/NA | I record things for fun and for info
  • kargen27
    kargen27
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Your "solution" and blatantly biased poll choices do absolutely nothing to contend with those guilds who use bots to pay for their spots, which is against the ToS from any angle.

    If they're selling them for real money, report them. If they aren't, it's shady but not against the rules. Sigh, congratulate yourself on your integrity, and move on.

    And for all those suggesting to lock the trader on guild disband, you're just going to have shadow guilds buying up spots and leaving them fallow to eliminate competition, limiting the number of actual guilds to buy from. I'll be honest. I'd rather have shady business practices than empty/blank guild traders who do nothing but waste time and space.

    If the shady practice the OP is talking of exists then both is happening now. It is easy to find traders with either nothing in them or just one or two items extremely high priced. But yeah just closing the trader for the week can't be the entire solution. Might be a start though.
    and then the parrot said, "must be the water mines green too."
  • Rahotu
    Rahotu
    ✭✭✭
    disintegr8 wrote: »
    just get rid of traders already - im sorry but if i wanted to play with money id play monopoly!
    Why not get rid of PVP - because I might only want to play PVE, or vice-versa, or get rid of vMA, because I have no interest in it so it shouldn't exist.

    The game contains things you are and are not interested in, just ignore the traders and trading if you don't like them and leave others to use them if they choose.

    best fix yet,get rid of the forums,all problems would be solved instantly :)
  • Rahotu
    Rahotu
    ✭✭✭
    or another fix could be make a guild unable to be disbanded for 2 weeks after creation,not perfect but at least the planning would become tougher
  • Pele
    Pele
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Some people take trading way too seriously. It's a game for funsies FFS.
  • Cpt_Teemo
    Cpt_Teemo
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Yes, restrict the trader bidding window to 24 hours (thus discouraging shadow guilds from gifting traders to their parent guilds and/or reselling the trader for profit).
    Pele wrote: »
    Some people take trading way too seriously. It's a game for funsies FFS.

    That's why we just need a pure AH tbh, an AH does not cause this many problems than this current system.
    Edited by Cpt_Teemo on July 12, 2017 7:21AM
  • Saturnana
    Saturnana
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    No, let guilds bid 168 hours (7 days) per week on a trader- and preserve convenience- even if it encourages monopolies and breaches in ZoS terms of service.
    Being able to create a small army of guilds and using them all to bid on traders is not the problem, just a symptom.
    The underlying issue seems to be the ease with which a trader can be transferred after bids are finalized.

    To counteract that, ZOS could just keep guild traders in their purchased / taken 'state' even when the guild that took or purchased said trader has disbanded (which is not something that should happen all that often anyway). Bidding will work the same, but now that the trader cannot be moved from one guild to another for a measly sum, any guild bidding on the trader will want to actually use them for their intended purposes.
    @Saturnna | PC / EU

    Nâmae Rin : Dragonknight | Dr Milodas Ra'Himo : Templar | Mira Motierre : Sorceress
    Plays-ln-Puddles : Warden  |  Lady Neria : Dragonknight   | Philadore : Nightblade  
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Ha! I do love it when the mortals know they're being manipulated. Makes things infinitely more interesting."
                                      - Sheogorath
  • FrancisCrawford
    FrancisCrawford
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I fail to see what's so bad about this, to the extent that it is true.

  • Belidos
    Belidos
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rahotu wrote: »
    or another fix could be make a guild unable to be disbanded for 2 weeks after creation,not perfect but at least the planning would become tougher

    They don't disband the guild, they drop their membership below the requirement for the store, and they lose the store, meanwhile the guild leader of their real guild is standing waiting for it to drop so he can snatch it up.
    I fail to see what's so bad about this, to the extent that it is true.

    It means that the lesser trade guilds get less of a chance to own a trader because the major trade guilds are holding onto multiple fake guilds and monopolizing the traders.

    There's not enough traders available to provide one to every guild in the game as it is, the guilds doing this are making that number of available traders smaller and smaller.
    Edited by Belidos on July 12, 2017 9:33AM
  • SantieClaws
    SantieClaws
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Khajiit she thinks we can all agree that the present system is far from perfect and often manipulated by less than scrupulous guilds.

    However what are the alternatives?

    They have said that a global AH would probably kill the servers.

    Individual traders - well there are not enough of them and some guilds appear to be taking more stands than is probably fair. The present system is not viable as the population of Tamriel continues to grow. Due to the limits in guild size there will be more guilds bidding for the same traders. This is not going to work for very much longer.

    So how about a solution that meets in the middle somewhere?

    An AH for each alliance - or even each zone? With the option still for an individual guild to purchase an available trader if really they wish to do so. A balance between the needs of the consumer and the needs of the guild.

    Perhaps even a different AH in a different location for different sorts of things? One for recipes, one for materials, one for furnishings yes? So the load is spread out but in a way that is less chaotic than what we have now.

    Yours with paws
    Santie Claws
    Shunrr's Skooma Oasis - The Movie. A housing video like no other ...
    Find it here - https://youtube.com/user/wenxue2222

    Clan Claws - now recruiting khajiit and like minded others for parties, fishing and other khajiit stuff. Contact this one for an invite.

    PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!

    https://www.imperialtradingcompany.eu/
  • Urkraft
    Urkraft
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    @SantieClaws

    The trade guild system in ESO has been built quite thoughtfull in the beginning, the problem why it loses more and more ground and starts to become a serious issue on different servers is, because trade guilds in general are the dregs of the community. Meanwhile a normal player or a base of 2 or 3 palyers is able to achieve via sales the amount, which a guild gets by taxes, so they are able to set their own will or a tradeinactive pve or pvp guild over a 500 people strong trading guild. still there is no chance to make them aware, that this kind of ideology is just ***. its not like trade guild would have a possibility to buy themselves into the "working area" of pve and pvp guilds (trial ranking, campaign rankings) - still otherwise around its okay for small non trading bases to push into the one and only area trading guilds have.

    u know how many pople give something about that? not a lot. if u can bid on a trader its your right to bid on that trader.


    u see, right now, 2 months after last patch/update zos already started adjusting pve stuff again, even though some changes seemingly are taken very positive, many people still think, it isnt nice to overdo it now that fast, because they are nothing else than caught into a farm bop items loop.


    while that, over a year bots infecting all servers, goldsellers have the greatest time of all because zos is doing nearly nothing. while zos changed most of the gear to bop, people dont have a lot stuff anymore to buy, also tempers falling in price permanenty, having millions on the privat bank isnt unusual anymore and nothing which is reserved to the really farm- and trade active part of the community. still the weekly tax income of a casual trade community of 500 people on pc eu as example is between 500k and 800k (15 and 25m), or when more ambitious and good selling trade guild let it be 1,3m (~40m-ish). bids everywhere are rising, since many people think its legitimate that 2 or 3 people of a guild, mainly leading people just pay some extra millions into the bank - why? - because is so easy to gather millions, if u want to - or: i even know of gm buying gold. never saw a ban, even though of reports.

    nothing against some supportive donations, but in my opinion fair competetion works over sales. a good guild with good and attractive sales, with ambitious gm working and recruiting to maintain a quality trade guild deserves a good and attractive spot. its also what pleases most of the people, we all know, 50% of the people are pro auction house, since they hate running around.

    at least on pc eu trading went competely out of order, competition is distorted due to "fake" sales by exploitive methods, by people having to much gold and beeing not able to spend their gold on something, because either bop or omg cheap tempers - thanks bots.

    and u know how much zos gives on that? nothing.

    after the dust exploit the gold from the resellers was still running around + exploited material which shouldnt have been there - either due to botting or due to a dupe. over and over again. instead of fixing or correcting it, zos just banned some accounts. like they did over and over in the past again the plus of material and the plus of gold stays in the game. this is how inflation works. this one time, hopefully, a decent amount of gold has been deleted - but since zos didnt answer the questions about wether they dealt or not, we wont know too fast. might even be, the guild jsut deleted themselves, change names, found new and saves the gold from the sales into a new guild bank, hitting again sooner or later.


    the trade guilds dont get richer by all that. they will go down by that.
    we have an ecenonomic system, where ZOS is the bank, providing the players with gold. and here over a longer time zos has been providing too much liquidity onto the market while people dont have too much on what they can spend they gold on, which just can sooner or later lead into a crumbling trade system.

    this is the situation of pc eu.

    the state of other servers compared to that is a situation where more hubs for trade guilds are available than needed. this makes other exploitive methods available. and u know how much zos will give on that? also nothing.
    ___

    all zos cares is increasing the amount of new crown crate items, crown store items, giving free eso+ and crown crate gifts to attract people pay and buy more, titeling a dlc + base game update as a chapter, to make also the eso+ers pay again, and bringing the pve players into the never ending farm loop, so they spend more time on new pve content and in the game (re-farming before beeing able to play it) and maybe...making a new dungeon dlc easy enough a wider mass of people is interested in buying it.



    Edited by Urkraft on July 12, 2017 11:14AM
  • The_Art_of_Paw
    The_Art_of_Paw
    ✭✭✭
    As much as it feels annoying, these are just early days on this type of system. The economy is not completely flooded so new guilds get the ocassional chance to participate.

    Wait until 10 years on when there is trillions upon trillions of gold flowing through small communities after decades of questing/raiding and revisit these thoughts.

    It is inevitable that a global sales system will be added if they wish every player the chance to sell good to others though I can see their hesitation.Limiting the mail server to a maximum amount of vendors (our current system) definitely reduces the strain on memory.
  • reiverx
    reiverx
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Having the guild trader sit empty for a week is a terrible idea and will only create a new problem where the larger guilds deliberately lock out traders in order to restrict points of sale.

    A partial solution would be to disable the disbanding of a guild that has an active trader.
  • Defilted
    Defilted
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    What's wrong with having more than one guild? You can only get 500 people in one guild. Big trading guilds will need several to get all the people in the network.

    What is the issue here?
    XBOX NA
    XBOX Series X

    #NightmareBear
  • iamkeebler
    iamkeebler
    ✭✭✭✭
    I can't stand the trading setup in ESO right now. What's going on in the NA server is just nuts. The size of bids that need to be placed to out bid the "mafia" even in areas that aren't high traffic is just ridiculous. On top of that, knowing that those guilds also coordinate their pricing for certain items, it also controls the cost of certain items in the market. I personally wish ZOS would come up with a better solution for trading. Hell, I'd even be happy with a market board like they have in FFXIV, it made it a lot easier to sell items and it was a lot harder for folks to group up to do a market take over.

    But knowing ZOS this will be an issue left alone because there is no incentive for ZOS to do anything about it.
  • theher0not
    theher0not
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes, restrict the trader bidding window to 24 hours (thus discouraging shadow guilds from gifting traders to their parent guilds and/or reselling the trader for profit).
    I don't know much about how the process work but I vote for either locking a trader if the owning guild disbands or preventing guilds that owns a trader from disbanding.


    They could also make it so that people can bid with a lower amount and make it so if the highest bidding guild disbands the second highest bidder would be the new highest (this would be like a scoreboard, if the top one goes away the second place will be the new top, and if that goes away it will be the one just below that and so on). If they make it this way it would be next to impossible to use shell guilds to secure a cheap trader since legit guilds could make their offer even if it is lower than the one from a fake guild.
  • Urkraft
    Urkraft
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    They could also make it so that people can bid with a lower amount and make it so if the highest bidding guild disbands the second highest bidder would be the new highest (this would be like a scoreboard, if the top one goes away the second place will be the new top, and if that goes away it will be the one just below that and so on). If they make it this way it would be next to impossible to use shell guilds to secure a cheap trader since legit guilds could make their offer even if it is lower than the one from a fake guild.

    this one doesnt work. the guilds the thread opener talks about, bid the lowest possible amounts, since due to a lack of guilds there is a high chance, that traders stay free (which happens usually, because guilds often try the bigger hubs and while 2 or 3 guilds might bid on same trader, other less attractive traders stay free). those traders are used as backup trader to hire, if a guild gets outbid - right after the bidding time is over, u can run around, find a free trader and quick-hire it then for 10k. by making a bunch of "fake guilds" with 50 people, they just bid the lowest amount or a very low amount on traders and hope, that one of those is one, where no guild bid on.

    the second reason, why it doesnt work this way quite good is, that also the losing guild on such a trader is able to check another trader and quick-hire that, so it would be blocked for that week on that trader.
  • hellcatlizzieb16_ESO
    Yes, restrict the trader bidding window to 24 hours (thus discouraging shadow guilds from gifting traders to their parent guilds and/or reselling the trader for profit).
    There's way too many ways for large syndicates and alliance guilds to monopolies traders.
    I help with a smaller trade guild and we don't have the numbers/donations to always get a trader anymore due to the 'dummy' guilds. When we do, it's not a good trader. To get to the level where we can we would have to ally which we don't want to do. I think the whole trader system needs a full overhaul tbh.
  • Urkraft
    Urkraft
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    There's way too many ways for large syndicates and alliance guilds to monopolies traders.
    I help with a smaller trade guild and we don't have the numbers/donations to always get a trader anymore due to the 'dummy' guilds. When we do, it's not a good trader. To get to the level where we can we would have to ally which we don't want to do. I think the whole trader system needs a full overhaul tbh.

    I dont know which server you are on, and how the people are you are talking to. Me, been a GM of two quite large and active guilds, also remember having to deal with rumours of beeing a very very ugly mafia guy with very very bad intentions, rumours of which carefully spoken not quite a lot was true. Just sayin'.
  • DRXHarbinger
    DRXHarbinger
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Once I hit 150M gold on PC EU, I am going to front for my guilds and actually block off Mournhold or Craglorn for 2-3 weeks so not a single one of these guilds will be able to trade there, nothing will be on sale in town when this happens. ETA about a month and I should be there, Don't care about the size of the outrageous bids that'll go down or how much I lose, I'll always make more. Feel the need to troll the trolls.

    More simple solutions.. a Guild cannot bid on a trader within it's 1st month of creation.. that'll stamp it out instantly.
    PC Master Race

    1001CP
    8 Flawless Toons, all Classes.
    Master Angler
    Dro-M'artha Destroyer (at last)
    Tamriel Hero
    Grand Overlord
    Every Skyshard
    Down With BOP!
  • AoDD33pfri3d
    AoDD33pfri3d
    ✭✭✭
    Leave it as is but if you disband a guild anyone in that guild cannot make another one for 2 weeks
  • Urkraft
    Urkraft
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Once I hit 150M gold on PC EU, I am going to front for my guilds and actually block off Mournhold or Craglorn for 2-3 weeks so not a single one of these guilds will be able to trade there, nothing will be on sale in town when this happens. ETA about a month and I should be there, Don't care about the size of the outrageous bids that'll go down or how much I lose, I'll always make more. Feel the need to troll the trolls.

    why would u do that? i dont see a good reason?
    More simple solutions.. a Guild cannot bid on a trader within it's 1st month of creation.. that'll stamp it out instantly.

    actually this is something i like.

    Edited by Urkraft on July 12, 2017 12:19PM
  • lillybit
    lillybit
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Belidos wrote: »
    Rahotu wrote: »
    or another fix could be make a guild unable to be disbanded for 2 weeks after creation,not perfect but at least the planning would become tougher

    They don't disband the guild, they drop their membership below the requirement for the store, and they lose the store, meanwhile the guild leader of their real guild is standing waiting for it to drop so he can snatch it up.
    I fail to see what's so bad about this, to the extent that it is true.

    It means that the lesser trade guilds get less of a chance to own a trader because the major trade guilds are holding onto multiple fake guilds and monopolizing the traders.

    There's not enough traders available to provide one to every guild in the game as it is, the guilds doing this are making that number of available traders smaller and smaller.

    Agreed. If the main guild doesn't need the secondary location they quite often leave the dummy guild in place. On a bad week in PS4 EU, there can be 2 or 3 of the traders in a prime locations with one of these guilds selling nothing.

    As someone who has no patience for farming, I get really tired of having to trek all over trying to find gear, because so many of the good trader spots are inactive. Why make it harder than it has to be?
    PS4 EU
  • Arkadius
    Arkadius
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Belidos wrote: »
    They don't disband the guild, they drop their membership below the requirement for the store, and they lose the store, meanwhile the guild leader of their real guild is standing waiting for it to drop so he can snatch it up.

    That's not what happens, actually. The guild will keep the trader, even with only one member left in guild. I know this for sure.
  • DRXHarbinger
    DRXHarbinger
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Urkraft wrote: »
    Once I hit 150M gold on PC EU, I am going to front for my guilds and actually block off Mournhold or Craglorn for 2-3 weeks so not a single one of these guilds will be able to trade there, nothing will be on sale in town when this happens. ETA about a month and I should be there, Don't care about the size of the outrageous bids that'll go down or how much I lose, I'll always make more. Feel the need to troll the trolls.

    why would u do that? i dont see a good reason?
    More simple solutions.. a Guild cannot bid on a trader within it's 1st month of creation.. that'll stamp it out instantly.

    actually this is something i like.

    Because it'll be communicated that the week after I intend to make bids of 10m per trader and it will happen. And then if they wish to continue to collude then it'll be too expensive to prove viable thus causing huge loses and maybe it'll die down. No trader makes anywhere near that kind of cheese.
    PC Master Race

    1001CP
    8 Flawless Toons, all Classes.
    Master Angler
    Dro-M'artha Destroyer (at last)
    Tamriel Hero
    Grand Overlord
    Every Skyshard
    Down With BOP!
  • Urkraft
    Urkraft
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Urkraft wrote: »
    Once I hit 150M gold on PC EU, I am going to front for my guilds and actually block off Mournhold or Craglorn for 2-3 weeks so not a single one of these guilds will be able to trade there, nothing will be on sale in town when this happens. ETA about a month and I should be there, Don't care about the size of the outrageous bids that'll go down or how much I lose, I'll always make more. Feel the need to troll the trolls.

    why would u do that? i dont see a good reason?
    More simple solutions.. a Guild cannot bid on a trader within it's 1st month of creation.. that'll stamp it out instantly.

    actually this is something i like.

    Because it'll be communicated that the week after I intend to make bids of 10m per trader and it will happen. And then if they wish to continue to collude then it'll be too expensive to prove viable thus causing huge loses and maybe it'll die down. No trader makes anywhere near that kind of cheese.

    srsly. thats your reason. lol :joy:

    i mean hey, for some moments i enjoyed your text, since it confirms the stuff i wrote earlier today in this thread, and it also triggers the anarchist in me. but if thats all.... :joy:

    Edited by Urkraft on July 12, 2017 12:54PM
  • Saturnana
    Saturnana
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    No, let guilds bid 168 hours (7 days) per week on a trader- and preserve convenience- even if it encourages monopolies and breaches in ZoS terms of service.
    reiverx wrote: »
    Having the guild trader sit empty for a week is a terrible idea and will only create a new problem where the larger guilds deliberately lock out traders in order to restrict points of sale.

    A partial solution would be to disable the disbanding of a guild that has an active trader.

    I imagine that that first one would be a ban-able offence, but I agree that it could also introduce an entirely new set of problems. That second one though.. not being able to disband while holding a trader.. I think you're on to something!

    @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
    @Saturnna | PC / EU

    Nâmae Rin : Dragonknight | Dr Milodas Ra'Himo : Templar | Mira Motierre : Sorceress
    Plays-ln-Puddles : Warden  |  Lady Neria : Dragonknight   | Philadore : Nightblade  
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Ha! I do love it when the mortals know they're being manipulated. Makes things infinitely more interesting."
                                      - Sheogorath
  • Urkraft
    Urkraft
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    lnsane wrote: »
    reiverx wrote: »
    Having the guild trader sit empty for a week is a terrible idea and will only create a new problem where the larger guilds deliberately lock out traders in order to restrict points of sale.

    A partial solution would be to disable the disbanding of a guild that has an active trader.

    I imagine that that first one would be a ban-able offence, but I agree that it could also introduce an entirely new set of problems. That second one though.. not being able to disband while holding a trader.. I think you're on to something!

    @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom

    just saying that this case wouldnt fix an "exploit" of monopolizing trading.
Sign In or Register to comment.