MandyMae wrote: »

This thread is very intriguing. I'm most curious about who are these people spending so much gold just to grieve guilds? If its their gold they are spending then who got trolled? Seems the new system would work in the grieved favor as they spend gold to take your spot but wait, you have 9 other spots to back you up so unless you tell them your 10 bids, how can they grieve you?

And what about guild C that is now getting hit because guild A grieved guild B and guild B took guild C's spot?

And so on.

this new idea is going to be so freaking stressful for GMs

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

tbh it really sucks, that still not a single dev member had anything to say about it yet.

Probably because they are still trying to work out what we are saying.

It's been clear since day one that as they don't play the game as we play it, they really have no clue what is going on.

Just look at the numerous, disastrously failed attempts to "balance" combat.

I'm not even sure they know what "balance" even means.


All The Best

MandyMae wrote: »

This thread is very intriguing. I'm most curious about who are these people spending so much gold just to grieve guilds? If its their gold they are spending then who got trolled? Seems the new system would work in the grieved favor as they spend gold to take your spot but wait, you have 9 other spots to back you up so unless you tell them your 10 bids, how can they grieve you?

The same way they are grieving guilds now. So with the changes, they would have more bids to do the same thing. Some larger guilds have 8 or 9 other bids, and other small and medium sized guilds may only have 1,2, or 3 other bids if they can afford them each week. The change gives the deep pocket guilds, and especially fake guilds a higher chance to knock a legitimate trading guild out. So who gets trolled? That's easy. The legitimate guilds getting knocked out each week, and are unable to sell anything.

Before the bid change is introduced, ZOS should get rid of fake guilds who are disbanding and changing gm. Then reforming the same day to do it all over again for the next bids.

lordrichter wrote: »

juttaa77b16_ESO wrote: »

I must partially. and respectfully disagree.

It can't be ZOS chasing after them, and banning them....? Really, why not? The exploiters get a warning to not exploit, if they continue to do so after the warning, they get banned. It can, definitely, be done. However, on the flip side, they could do something much more effective.They could get a patch ready, and get rid of the exploit. No one needs to get banned, legimate guilds have a better chance of getting vendors, and update 23 can introduce the changes without penalty to the players supporting their game.

As far as I see, there is nothing fun about bidding against fake guilds, who are just trolling, because they still can. I and many others can't, and won't support this change unless the fake guilds are eliminated. Cheers and good wishes.

Historically, ZOS has not been really strong on chasing after players and banning them. They do it, but it never seems like it is something they want to do.

Whatever deterrent that has to come with a multi-bid system like this, it is going to have to be done with how the system works, not with punitive action initiated by ZOS special forces teams banning people.

Other than the thought that ZOS will run around and ban people, I am in agreement with your statements regarding fake guilds. Maybe, at the same time, ZOS will do something about them. There are definitely things that they can do.... if they want to do it.

I, basically, said most of this in my statements. Most of us know. ZOS doesn't ban people often, but they do ban players on occasion when necessary. Otherwise, the players think. They've received a free pass to exploit the game. ZOS crawling up in a ball, ignoring the trade problems, won't help this situation.

The devs should show a strong hand here, and they should patch the problem out quickly to reduce the likelihood of bans. I never said ZOS should ban people who did it in the past, only those who continue after ZOS warns them to disengage. After that point, players can only blame themselves if they continue. I have no preference as too which method ZOS uses though, and no sympathy for those banned if they were to ignore ZOS's warnings. I, merely, offered a suggestion within a sea of suggestions, which is exactly what ZOS wants in these threads. In the end, ZOS decides which method will support the integrity in their game.

Imho, ZOS removing fake guilds, before the bidding change goes live, would be a huge plus for legimate guilds.

Sorcery wrote: »

kojou wrote: »

As a guild leader of a social guild that also likes to have a trader, I actually look forward to this change.

We will have to fund raise for the first week, so we can bid on the number of places we care about, but after that we will be able to just raise the funds needed for one trader. All the bids we lose come back to us.

We don't have the time or energy to make shadow guilds, so this should be a way for us to make sure we have a trader every week. With TTC the most important thing is to have a trader every week even if it is a "bad" one.

There will be some turmoil at first (especially the top tier spots), but I am not competing for those anyway.

I think people need to be more open minded about the advantages of this change and be flexible. It will actually work out better in the long run.

If guilds at the top lose, it has the potential to ripple down to the bottom. That means increased costs for everyone, more time you'll spend fundraising gold to bid weekly. We have yet to see how it'll turn out, but expect a lot of musical chairs.

they don't want our crappy spots, they'll develop a thirsty way to get back on top! :-) be patient!

generalmyrick wrote: »

they don't want our crappy spots, they'll develop a thirsty way to get back on top! :-) be patient!

People do want your crappy spot. Every guild will be bidding x 10 across all spots, don't imagine that you have some sort of immunity. Also new jacks on the scene will be pitching across 10 crappy spots. If you want your crappy spot you can bet your bottom gold piece someone else will too.

Also rather than framing this issue into the single viewpoint of just your spot why not have a thought for everyone across the board, with the good spots and the crappy spots. Even if it does only affect the good spots, whats that 50% or 75% of spots?

Isn't that a bad thing?

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Wouldn't it already for the first week this is out be something to say "we read it, acknowledge your concerns and discuss it"?

At the moment I just think, nobody read it and nobody cares.

This thread has been in the forefront for many days now, and no we haven't received a response from them yet. Maybe they're deciding what they want to do before they comment, maybe they didn't read it yet as you said, and maybe they're overwhelmed on multiple fronts with complaints from the leak of the patch notes. Nevertheless, the players have a legitimate reason to be concerned and to wonder, if anything will be done to fix the trade system before the bidding change goes live.

A lot of questions are flying around the forums and in our minds still. Do the devs really play the entire game live? If so, how have they missed this happening for so long? Why have the problems in the trade system continued to exist for so long? Why isn't the manipulation of a major system within their game important to them? If it is important to them, why haven't they even acknowledged the extent of the problem? Are they already working to fix the problem? Is it even on their radar at this point? ZOS did say they would communicate more. So, it would be nice if they clued the players in somehow. Cheers

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

juttaa77b16_ESO wrote: »

Imho, ZOS removing fake guilds, before the bidding change goes live, would be a huge plus for legimate guilds.

Backup / fake / ghost guilds is one thing, bidding on 10 spots is something new and completely different.

We can only guess what ZOS is thinking by this change.

However we can try and explain to ZOS why this bidding on 10 or even 3 or 2 guild spots is a potential disaster and will amount to even more stress to an already overworked stressed GM community.

Ghost guilds I can put up with, this bidding change I cannot.

Many people have been explaining the issues in this thread, but ZOS hasn't responded. We're all in the dark, as to why they're doing it, and how they could've missed the impact on smaller, mid sized and newer guilds. However, we shouldn't underestimate the fake, ghost, and backup guilds either, at this point. They will only increase in number, if they aren't dealt with, and they're op biddng on spots that legitimate guilds need.

Each time a guild gets knocked out of their primary bidding and secondary area, they'll move further into the least traveled, boon dock areas. As more and more guilds are displaced, the less attractive areas will become more expensive and harder to get too. Essentially, they will continue to take more and more vendors from legitimate guilds, because they still can. ZOS, not putting the system manipulation in check, will only encourage them to continue doing it, possibly on a larger scale as well. Good luck and cheers.

I have this nagging suspicion that zos knows exactly what they are doing and what they really intend to do is create chaos. Shake things up a bit. A bit like Volendrung in PvP. Trading has been the same more and less since trade guilds were introduced in the game. So if it's chaos they are aiming for, then it will be chaos that they will get. When a game is no longer fun, creates more grief than happiness, causes anxiety instead of relaxation, rage instead of joy, then perhaps it is time to rethink what we are still doing here.(especially if paying eso+).

EllieBlue wrote: »

I have this nagging suspicion that zos knows exactly what they are doing and what they really intend to do is create chaos. Shake things up a bit. A bit like Volendrung in PvP. Trading has been the same more and less since trade guilds were introduced in the game. So if it's chaos they are aiming for, then it will be chaos that they will get. When a game is no longer fun, creates more grief than happiness, causes anxiety instead of relaxation, rage instead of joy, then perhaps it is time to rethink what we are still doing here.(especially if paying eso+).

Yup its actually causing me a huge amount of anguish just thinking about it.

So a minority of unfriendly guilds who dont give a flying fig about anyone else will start bidding all over, causing the rest of us to start doing the same. I have a very limited number of guilds I would be willling to bid against and they are unfortunately the weaker, smaller and un-allianced guilds.

Dw ellie I wont bid on you

From PC EU I know multiple gm of established guilds, including myself, thinking and talking bout using the ejection seat with u23. Too much bs since months. Grief and feeling unhappy, disrespected and feeling like having to do things u don't want to do including even logging in isn't the feeling a game should give u.

Sorcery wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

From PC EU I know multiple gm of established guilds, including myself, thinking and talking bout using the ejection seat with u23. Too much bs since months. Grief and feeling unhappy, disrespected and feeling like having to do things u don't want to do including even logging in isn't the feeling a game should give u.

Yeah on PC NA i've spoken with a few GMs ready to do the same. This update will just mean all guilds will have to start funding more, being more strict or raising requirements to remain competitive not only within your zone but against zones ahead and below you as well. Going to be a mess.

Agrees for both of you. I love my guild; I love ESO. This has been home for 5+ years. But it’s been one thing after another lately, making the already demanding job of running a trade guild harder and harder. All of the changes are being made with zero respect for the input from the people who play this game. It all leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

reoskit wrote: »

Sorcery wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

From PC EU I know multiple gm of established guilds, including myself, thinking and talking bout using the ejection seat with u23. Too much bs since months. Grief and feeling unhappy, disrespected and feeling like having to do things u don't want to do including even logging in isn't the feeling a game should give u.

Yeah on PC NA i've spoken with a few GMs ready to do the same. This update will just mean all guilds will have to start funding more, being more strict or raising requirements to remain competitive not only within your zone but against zones ahead and below you as well. Going to be a mess.

Agrees for both of you. I love my guild; I love ESO. This has been home for 5+ years. But it’s been one thing after another lately, making the already demanding job of running a trade guild harder and harder. All of the changes are being made with zero respect for the input from the people who play this game. It all leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

I agree, I just cant believe that they would implement something like this so quickly and without consulting GMs. Its like ZOS have no clue how much time we put in to running the trading system. Except for guild admin now I have stopped playing I feel so bad about the game

Grimm13 wrote: »

Glad to see some names of those that run some of the "big boy/girl" guilds saying that it is not a good thing. By their nature they don't want to outright squash us little guys but I can understand that they have to do all that they can for their guilds, which will lead to squashing less funded guilds under this system.

there are bigboy/girls here in that thread already. pc eu mournhold, craglorn, rawl kha - thats what i know and saw. same as some gm from the middle and starter friendly section as well, which i recognized.

I've been thinking where I would splash some bids.

And afraid to say it is likely to be on weaker guilds with no alliance where I dont know the GM. And I have the funds to bid generously. Its unlikely I'm going to bid against another big guild, unless they start on me first ofc.

I think most of us big guilds aren't looking forward to this but we are expecting hits from those guilds that just dont give a damn.

This idea is just completely disrespectful to GMs of trade guilds big and small who pretty much dedicate the majority of their game time and energy into running this system.

Again I say it - ZOS please work with us, give us a forum thread, give us a named dev, and consult with us rather than this nightmare you are handing us.