I agree it's frustrating to see a trader with nothing listed, but how is it unfair? They bid higher than you. They can do whatever they wish with their trader location.

redspecter23 wrote: »

I think what he's getting at is ghost guilds, bidding in out of the way locations just in case their primary guild loses their bid. that way they can basically place multiple bids, bypassing the restriction that guilds can only bid on one location. In the event that they ghost guild is not needed as a backup to the primary, the location can be sold (likely at a profit) to another guild that lost that week.

Larger guilds will have no problem putting 50 members together to throw at this purpose on a weekly basis.

That last line though... 500k? You may want to rethink how much you bid as that is extremely low for most locations.

Yes, sorry it was early and I should have been more specific. My biggest issue is with them buying these traders to flip at a premium.

As for 500k, in a refuge or a single totally out of the way spot this should be more then sufficient. And would be if these larger guilds weren't flipping them for profit. I have placed bids and won at 500k or less in the past only to see the following week my spot be taken by one of the ghosts. It's annoying. Honestly it would be as simple as changing a line of code making the trader unavailable until the following Sunday when it's open to all. This would disable their ability to make money on something that should be freely open to all.

There is currently a trader in Stonefalls and Rawl'kha only selling 8 banana's... Yep playing by the rules but come on this is not good for the game or anyone. Come on ESO wake up!

The guild trader system is a horrible auction system.

FreshlyB8ked wrote: »

Making it impossible to disband a guild once they secure a trader will not stop a guild from just holding a spot so others cannot use it nor does it stop a guild from only listing 8 bananas that week. Please bid higher if you do not like the current guild holding the spot you wish to sell at. It's that simple.

It would take away the purpose these ghost guilds have for bidding in the first place, so while it wouldn’t prevent some idiot from bidding to sell a few bananas, the incentive to do so would be removed.

I think preventing guilds with traders from disbanding is a good idea with no downside.

I'd like to see the trader spot blocked for the week then it just becomes a gold sink for the griefer guilds listing nothing/8 bananas, etc.... or the ghost guilds that may be ensuring the main guild has a spot to trade for the week or flipping it for profit.

Problem source in 3 words: Crown Store gifting.
Hint: Gold.

Where has ZOS stated this? To my knowledge, they have never commented on the issue.

Nestor wrote: »

If ZOS would just idle the kiosk for the week and not refund the money to a disbanded guild, this would stop happening on the consoles.

They don't refund the gold. They disband the orig guild and then the guild taking their spot pays them for it. So really they could be bidding anything and then charging whatever they feel like in order for another guild to have their spot. I

Guilds with less than 1,000 items listed for sale in their store should be prevented from bidding on traders. Not hiring unclaimed ones, just bidding.

Unfortunately, ZOS likes to keep the emergent gameplay suspenseful and turbulent.

So now we want restrictions on how many items must be listed on a guild trader to hold a spot?
Dear lord people. Bid higher or just be a member to a guild that can handle the bidding process in this suspenseful and turbulent game we play.

Universe wrote: »

Problem source in 3 words: Crown Store gifting.
Hint: Gold.

It certainly hasn't helped, but this has been a problem (especially on console) since long before Crown Store gifting.

its pretty sickening as well, having to "explain" your members, also as gm of an established strong trade guild, that u wont use that exploit and get [snip] from your traders for not exploiting. how more crazy has this to become. there had been an official statement in the forums, and even if it was in german, i definitely know, that those, using the backup, are pretty much aware, that this statement happened and they are also aware of the translation of it. still they tell their traders, its legit.

[edited for profanity]

oh and for those questioning, wether there had been a statement. kai schober made it on the german ones, sirinsidiator translated it into english in a former thread, issuing that problem as well (open the hidden quote):

sirinsidiator wrote: »

@ZOS_KaiSchober has finally made a statement about the guild trader exploit on the super secret german forums.
The important part translates to the following:

ZOS_KaiSchober wrote:

We are aware that the auction system can be circumvented in unfair ways. This is not in the meaning of the system and diminishes the available offer for players, when prominent spots stay empty or financially weak guilds get completely booted out.
There were many good ideas how this can be prevented. If and when we will go which way, I cannot write yet. For 2019 there are some good Quality of Life points - for guilds too - on the plan.

I am also aware of some changes to the guild trader API, which gives me hope for 2019.

Sateena wrote: »

LOL interesting, I

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

its pretty sickening as well, having to "explain" your members, also as gm of an established strong trade guild, that u wont use that exploit and get sh*t from your traders for not exploiting. how more crazy has this to become. there had been an official statement in the forums, and even if it was in german, i definitely know, that those, using the backup, are pretty much aware, that this statement happened and they are also aware of the translation of it. still they tell their traders, its legit.

Indeed. Losing members because you refuse to give into these bully guilds is disheartening. It is near impossible to maintain a steady trader with the way the system is now, unless you can make 50 account, make fake guilds and bid in multiple locations.

Well it also depends on the platforms, actualy since before a year i was pretty glad it didnt happen on pc eu so far, but by reading those complaints in the forums and also recognizing, that zos didnt do anything to change that problem, they seemingly were motivated and started claiming it a legit practice, since zos didnt acknoewledge that exploit. my personal opinion about it is: if it smells like a fish, if it looks like a fish, then its most likely a fish. the syswtem had been made so one guild can bid one spot. everyone knows, this is the intention of the system, and these backup traders are undermining this intention. also zos made a fallback - empty traders on which hasnt been bid can be fast hired after the trader change. and this is a competition of who is the fastest. pretty easy to understand, someone would guess.

to me its just a cheap excuse, telling it must be legit, to get advantage. still also in the past people claimed something wouldnt be an exploit, even tho its been obvious, and even with late reaction of zos, it lead into ban.

Tho, I have to say, I am gm of one of those "biggies", which are often accused for everything bad which happens in trading, and its personally also really hitting me on a very personal level, beeing thrown into the same drawer, or getting accused of every stuff other people ever did in that system, just bcs of hearsay. I also am most of the time not affected by having to search for an empty trader, but that doesnt make me ignore the fact, that a lot of other guilds have to face these issues, and i definitely know, how it felt, to be a "newcomer" or to gm "medium selling guild" trying to find a spot.

[edited myself for profanity, before mod does OO sry bro, those words just sometimes flow out of me]