Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »ZOS need to lay out, explicitly, what it is they think the Trade System does, and why and how it does it.
Only then can we as paying customers hold them properly to account for their ability to deliver to those specifications.
Every single time when a big guild is gonna get outbid, thanks to back up system the domino effect will be going down to bottom of the chain where a small guild will get a hit and be dropped out of the map entirely, just because they were unlucky enough to be in the same chain were domino went forwards.
Every single time when a big guild is gonna get outbid, thanks to back up system the domino effect will be going down to bottom of the chain where a small guild will get a hit and be dropped out of the map entirely, just because they were unlucky enough to be in the same chain were domino went forwards.
You're deliberately ignoring the guild (let's call them DominoZero) that started it. Winning their bid over "a big guild" makes the kiosk previously occupied by DominoZero available for others. Every guild in the chain except DominoZero saves gold. If some small guild gets dropped out entirely because they didn't have or lost their backup, then it means some other guild, that previously didn't have a kiosk, now has one.
martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »Sorry too much of a simplification. A shuffle like you describe would only be the case if there were enough kiosks to go around, but there aren't. Also I don't think Fik would deliberately ignore anything if it was a real possibility.
Alright, bad choice of words on my side. Maybe he just forgot, but the point stands. He described a domino effect where each guild falls into its backup spot, except the last guild that falls off the table, but forgot to consider the spot that was freed by the guild who kicked the first one. It was an oversimplification to begin with, and a flawed one.martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »Also I don't think Fik would deliberately ignore anything if it was a real possibility.
martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »Also the reality of all that swapping around is higher bids, increased dues, stress on GMs and pressure on weaker guilds
@anitajoneb17_ESO
Honestly seems you're just trolling this post, so really are you even a GM of a trade guild? If so where even? This first of all is mainly a topic affecting trade GMs, and you seem to just go on attacking random people on the thread isn't very productive is it.
Alright, bad choice of words on my side. Maybe he just forgot, but the point stands. He described a domino effect where each guild falls into its backup spot, except the last guild that falls off the table, but forgot to consider the spot that was freed by the guild who kicked the first one. It was an oversimplification to begin with, and a flawed one.martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »Also I don't think Fik would deliberately ignore anything if it was a real possibility.martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »Also the reality of all that swapping around is higher bids, increased dues, stress on GMs and pressure on weaker guilds
That may very well be the end result, but I tend to think the market can sort it out.
@anitajoneb17_ESO
Honestly seems you're just trolling this post, so really are you even a GM of a trade guild? If so where even? This first of all is mainly a topic affecting trade GMs, and you seem to just go on attacking random people on the thread isn't very productive is it.
martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »@anitajoneb17_ESO
Honestly seems you're just trolling this post, so really are you even a GM of a trade guild? If so where even? This first of all is mainly a topic affecting trade GMs, and you seem to just go on attacking random people on the thread isn't very productive is it.
Dont feed the troll. Literally just ignore or it gets derailed. She just wants people to argue back.
We already have one major faction leader from PC EU posting in this thread and laying out a scenario whereby he is indicating that he is already planning to scatter bid against another faction because he is being hit by a troll guild. The assumption there is that the troll guild is being funded by a rival. Albeit with the veiled threat of being hypothetical.
martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »@anitajoneb17_ESO
Honestly seems you're just trolling this post, so really are you even a GM of a trade guild? If so where even? This first of all is mainly a topic affecting trade GMs, and you seem to just go on attacking random people on the thread isn't very productive is it.
Dont feed the troll. Literally just ignore or it gets derailed. She just wants people to argue back.
Not every guild out there has enough gold to sustain 1 bid, let alone 10.
martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »@anitajoneb17_ESO
Honestly seems you're just trolling this post, so really are you even a GM of a trade guild? If so where even? This first of all is mainly a topic affecting trade GMs, and you seem to just go on attacking random people on the thread isn't very productive is it.
Dont feed the troll. Literally just ignore or it gets derailed. She just wants people to argue back.
Yeah i know , they're the type to take opposing sides in most every topic just to get a reaction back. Seen it before, waste of time and not even entertaining truthfully.
Every single time when a big guild is gonna get outbid, thanks to back up system the domino effect will be going down to bottom of the chain where a small guild will get a hit and be dropped out of the map entirely, just because they were unlucky enough to be in the same chain were domino went forwards.
You're deliberately ignoring the guild (let's call them DominoZero) that started it. Winning their bid over "a big guild" makes the kiosk previously occupied by DominoZero available for others. Every guild in the chain except DominoZero saves gold. If some small guild gets dropped out entirely because they didn't have or lost their backup, then it means some other guild, that previously didn't have a kiosk, now has one.
Of course there will still be a trader system. It's the only way available in the game for people to trade short of spamming WTS in zone chat, so people will make it work.At first sight the impact looks like it will be one of a ripple down effect, one that will lead to some guilds being pushed off the ladder. That is THE issue. Guild spots changing hands won't lead to the demise of the trading system. Spots will still be filled, still be sold and gold will still be sunk.
silvereyes wrote: »However, I think it's a bit simplistic to say that small guilds getting pushed out will be the only negative effect on players
silvereyes wrote: »[*] When selling crown gifts for gold was introduced to the system, sales / raffle ticket requirements in all my trade guilds more than doubled.
martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »Got the $, you get the crowns, you get the gold, you get advantages in trading.
chess1ukb16_ESO wrote: »What happens in the first few weeks is not necessarily indicative over what will happen in 6 months. There is an enormous amount of gold in individuals Banks and until that is thinned things will absolutely be chaotic.
ZOS_PhilipDraven wrote: »The guild trader system is a cornerstone of the in-game economy in ESO, but over time the enormous pressure on trading guilds to have a guild trader every single week has led to behaviors which reduce competition and negatively impact trader customers. Tactics employed to ensure guild trader ownership each week, such as the generation of alternate “shadow” guilds to bid on additional locations as well as guild trader speculation and resale through guild dissolution, often lead to fewer traders populated with goods and massive amounts of wasted gold.
The multi-bidding feature is part of an initiative to provide in-game supported methods for players to have fallback trader bidding options without the associated drawbacks for both guilds and their customers. In addition to multi-bidding, we are also removing the ability for guild traders to be transferred through guild dissolution in an upcoming PTS update for Update 23. We avoided making that change prior to the multi-bidding feature because we wanted to ensure trading guilds weren’t entirely dependent on winning their one single bid each week, which puts even more pressure on them to place exorbitant bids.
We appreciate the concerns being raised regarding this change and we are absolutely committed to monitoring the impact of this feature, as well as potentially making additional adjustments as necessary to ensure the ongoing health of the in-game economy.
Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »Dusk_Coven wrote: »Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »ZOS_PhilipDraven wrote: »The guild trader system is a cornerstone of the in-game economy in ESO, but over time the enormous pressure on trading guilds to have a guild trader every single week has led to behaviors which reduce competition
In what way is it a "cornerstone"?
SPECULATION: Extremely intense competition for kiosks involving huge bids is one of the objectives of the guild trader system because it is a gold sink, a way to remove gold from the system as more and more players enter it.
Unlike a real economy, there is unlimited gold and resources.
Maybe this is reading too much into it but the mention of "behaviors that REDUCE competition" might suggest they would like to see more competition -- and more gold exiting the system.
And without knowing what their goals are for the guild trader system, applying our own standards of "reasonable" might be completely irrelevant to them.
And that works if, and ONLY IF, the purpose of a Trade System is to act as a Gold Sink.
In that case the current system is indeed a cornerstone of what they want for the Trade System.
I would argue that the function of a Trade System is to "facilitate ease of trade for both sellers and buyers".
In which case the current system is not a cornerstone, it is a hindrance.
ZOS need to lay out, explicitly, what it is they think the Trade System does, and why and how it does it.
Only then can we as paying customers hold them properly to account for their ability to deliver to those specifications.
All The Best
sylviermoone wrote: »Of course, the biggest issue overall is the lack of access to the economy for the vast majority of players and the burden the system places on buyers. If we presume that there are 9 MILLION players of ESO, and that those players are spread evenly across the platforms (I know they aren't, but for the sake of illustration...) that's 2.25 million players per platform. Currently, there is something like 218 kiosks per server, not including Cyrodiil keeps. If we presume NO player overlap (which again, is not the case), that means only 109,000 players can access the economy on any given week through the purchase of a guild trader. OUT OF OVER 2 MILLION.
VaranisArano wrote: »It prevents the devaluation of rare gear - this was another original design intent of ZOS. They'd noticed that auction house style games tended to make end game gear very cheap and easy to acquire.