Tigerseye wrote: »

the pro-guild store vote hasn't, unless you include the "Add more guild stores per city." option, which most ardent pro-guild store people (including most guild leaders) will, almost certainly, be against.

Why would they be against it? More options means potentially less competition for spots, which means slightly lower fees, which means more profit.

Tigerseye wrote: »

Proportionately, most of the people who use the forums fall into the more "hardcore" part of the playerbase; as opposed to the "casuals", who make up the actual majority of the playerbase, but don't tend to visit the forums.

I love the variety of definitions of "casual" and "hardcore"

It's refreshing to see it used to describe trading, as opposed to vet content.

Tigerseye wrote: »

n0tthesun wrote: »

Tigerseye wrote: »

n0tthesun wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

n0tthesun wrote: »

Nanfoodle wrote: »

Its clear about 45% want to see things change. Current system is broken by design.

You are misusing the polls statistics. 45% want to see things change -- yes, 9% of that belongs to people who like the current system, but would love it to actually go a step further by adding more traders (me included), and 2% of that belongs to people who want things to stay as is, but ban TTC. And 3% sasid "Other...", and their opinions vary from "make this one tiny change" to "overhaul the system" so it isn't really usable here.

All in all, what we can actually conclude from this poll is that around 32% want some form of auction house, while about 61% want guild traders to stay. Your logic is flawed.

A majority of players, according to this poll of 406 people, want ZOS to keep the guild trader system in place.

Although there isn't a majority for keeping the present system in place as is. That's the same with every poll on this, there is never a majority in favour of a new system, nor is there one in favour of keeping the present system as is. The common theme is that a majority of players don't like the present system as it is, and either want a new system or some improvement to the existing one - and it isn't wild speculation to suggest that most of those who do favour keeping things as they are will be PC traders using add-ons, so at best they can only represent one third of the playerbase. ZOS have themselves defended the present system on the sole basis that opinion about it is evenly divided.

Are you saying that > 50% isn't majority? You are arguing against math. Sorry, but you will never win that argument.

Doesn't really work like that, as:


a) Proportionately, most of the people who use the forums fall into the more "hardcore" part of the playerbase; as opposed to the "casuals", who make up the actual majority of the playerbase, but don't tend to visit the forums. Therefore, an isolated poll, like this, cannot be considered representative.

b) The anti guild store vote, which is also 50% currently, has been split into multiple parts. Whereas, the pro-guild store vote hasn't, unless you include the "Add more guild stores per city." option, which most ardent pro-guild store people (including most guild leaders) will, almost certainly, be against.


If a poll was taken amongst the playbase, as a whole, it is extremely likely that a centralised system would prevail, mainly for the sake of convenience, more than anything else.

As I say, I would favour a combined system, personally, as I know there are pros and cons to both.

However, that would be my prediction as to what most other people would want, if asked.

You can speculate on the entire population of ESO players, but there is no evidence one way or another. All we have to go by right here is this poll. Which, admittedly is quite flawed. It would be MUCH better if the OP had just made a poll stating: AH, yes or no? as the title says.

Obviously you cannot determine what the entire population wants from this poll. But you are making assumptions about the ESO player population without any basis. You cannot say what the population prefers because there is no sample data to base it on.

Additionally, the logic in point b is quite flawed. As someone who personally chose the option of add more traders, I can say I want TG, not AH. And judging by the comments in this thread, the majority of those who selected that option agree with me. So both of the choices--TG or AH--are split. If you group up the PRO-AH choices, it is about 35% of the vote. The PRO-TG vote is 65%. Those who voted other represented less than 1% and it is insignificant to include.

Alternatively, if you choose to look at those who voted any of the PRO-AH options vs. ONLY "keep it how it is" it is STILL 35% to 50%. Thus, using this poll, the conclusion is that a majority prefer it the way it is.

How are you getting that the AH vote is 50%. Where are you seeing that? It is quite clearly NOT. No matter how you look at it. You can't just make up numbers.

EDIT: You say "it is extremely likely that a centralised system would prevail." Where are you getting the data for determining this? Just your opinion or do you have facts to back this up? Statistics? Anything?[/spolier]

Well, I've been here a while and this isn't my first game forum.

So (quite frankly), I don't need statistics to know the kind of people who tend to frequent games forums and they are invariably not, predominantly, the people they often refer to as "casuals".

They are not statistically representative of the gaming community, as a whole.

This is not a new, or original, observation, on my behalf, by the way, so I don't really think I need to defend that already well-established observation much more.

Whereas, the majority of people who play games (pretty much all games) tend to fall into that "casual" category and I think it is pretty obvious why most people, who don't play very much and/or very seriously, would not want to spend hours on trading, or time and/or gold on maintaining a trade guild membership.

That is if they even want to join a guild, at all; as some don't.

There are probably general statistics out there, about the proportion of "casual" players vs "hardcore" ones, in games, if you really need some.

Yes, you're absolutely right - I should have said "the people who are against keeping the current system exactly as it is" are at 50%.

However, seeing as only 8% of people chose the "Add more guild stores per city." option and some of them might be anti the current guild store system (if that doesn't happen), it really doesn't make much difference, either way, does it?

You didn't mention this, but I realised I also missed the whole 2% who want to "keep as is but ban TTC" (it's late), so we can split the difference on the 8%, if you prefer and add that 2% and guess that roughly 56%, on this forum alone, probably want to keep guild stores, even if nothing changes about them, if you like?

As far as I can see, all the other options (apart from a small proportion of "other", possibly?) definitely are splitting the anti-guild store vote, though.

So, it's still extremely close and given point a), I'm afraid I'm still going to have to go with the likelihood that the majority of players (or would-be players, or ex-players), who don't frequent the forums, would want a change away from the current guild store system.

I know you don't like that conclusion (and as I say, I would prefer a hybrid system), but there you go.

First of all, that is not how statistics work. You are saying these results do not represent the ESO community--that's fair. What is not okay, is then using that to make the assumption that the ESO community as a whole disagrees with the results of a poll on the forum. The fact is, without hard data, you are guessing. And considering your only "evidence" is that you have been playing games a while, I'd say you are guessing with bias, which is even worse then regular guessing.

I never questioned whether people who frequent forums are "hardcore" or "casual" players. TBH it is not relevant. As I pointed out several times, all we can do with this poll is look at the data that it presents. How does me asking for data supporting your claim that most people in the community want an AH lead you to say that you don't need data to tell me most people on a forum are "hardcore" players. That isn't what I was asking for. The way people play the game has absolutely zero to do with the data I asked about.

Another point, who decides what the definition of a "hardcore" vs "casual" player is? You? You are trying to add this extra factor in that has little to do with anything in order t o make your point. Instead of providing any sort of evidence to prove that the ESO community in general wants a CAH or any form of AH, you are trying to bolster superiority through time spent on forums--as if that somehow makes your point more valid.

Next, you say that the majority of players do not want to spend time trading in guilds, etc--but (without even questioning if this is even accurate) this does not mean then that those players automatically would prefer an AH system. One thing does not equal the other. You are drawing false conclusions.

Okay, you keep saying that the number of people against keeping the current is 50%. That is fair--but only if you clearly state that to include people who like the system as is but want TTC gone, people who like the current system but would love to actually go further with it by adding additional traders, and people who chose other, who's opinions on the matter vary significantly. Without presenting it in this fashion, you are falsely presenting data, which is typically frowned upon.

"Splitting" the people who chose add more traders makes literally zero sense. Have you read the comments from those people? None of them said they want an auction house. Remember, this whole thing is about whether or not ESO should switch to AH, not whether or not people want to tweak or change the system. So please enlighten me--how is adding MORE TRADERS a vote for AH?

So, once again, it is not extremely close. The ONLY choices which clearly stated "give me auction house" show about 35% of the vote (when the tally was at a total of 416 votes, it may have changed slightly since). Once again, even if you ONLY look at the votes for "DO NOT CHANGE" and throw out the options which want change but within the trading system, it shows about 50%.

As I said multiple times now, this is a flawed poll. The OP should have just gave two choices: YES I WANT AUCTION HOUSE or NO I DO NOT WANT AUCTION HOUSE. And it would be a much more useful set of data. As it stands, this is what we have. Even by combining the pro-AH options, it is still showing a minority.

Examining statistics isn't about opinion. It's about numbers. You can prefer one way or another all you want, you can try to convince others that your way is better, but at the end of the day, the numbers tell the truth. As I stated earlier, I know this sample set may not be representative of the opinions of the entire community, but considering it is currently the only data points we have to look at, it is the only thing we can accurately make assumptions on. And the results show TG > AH. Sorry it isn't the results you hoped for.

Maybe one day ZOS will do a random survey to ESO and we can get a better set of data (but I doubt it since they have said they will not do a CAH ever). Until then, this is what we have.

daemonios wrote: »

Zulera301 wrote: »

as much as I hate shopping and load screens (and I just blew 4m on housing, and another 2/5m on top of that completing my motif collection from post-jubilee), I dont want a global auction house by any means. tedious as the shopping may be, it's much harder to monopolize items with it.

This is patently false. Some items are cornered regularly, maybe not by 1 person, but still bought up and reposted at a premium. Rare motifs (DLC dungeon chests and legs for example), potent nirncrux, high-demand alchemy ingredients, all are picked up and reposted at a profit. There is NOTHING to prevent this other than the need to visit other guild stores. Travel in ESO is trivial, as opposed to other games where you can't simply port from one zone to the next. It's inconvenient and boring AF, especially when the game starts serving you long loading screens, but still trivial.

If market cornering is such a concern, then the focus should never be on guild store vs. auction house. The difference between them is negligible. To prevent market cornering you'd need high enough taxes to discourage reposting items, or an outright ban (temporary or permanent) on reposting store-bought items.

if you actually read my post, I said "it is harder", not "it is impossible". would you rather make these people have to travel around a bit, or would you rather just give them everything on a silver platter to scoop up because "it's convenient".

I mean, if your argument is about "the convenience" and not liking that you have to sometimes travel around, then stop and consider the following:
if you don't like travel in an Elder Scrolls game, you're playing the wrong franchise.

n0tthesun wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

n0tthesun wrote: »

Nanfoodle wrote: »

Its clear about 45% want to see things change. Current system is broken by design.

You are misusing the polls statistics. 45% want to see things change -- yes, 9% of that belongs to people who like the current system, but would love it to actually go a step further by adding more traders (me included), and 2% of that belongs to people who want things to stay as is, but ban TTC. And 3% sasid "Other...", and their opinions vary from "make this one tiny change" to "overhaul the system" so it isn't really usable here.

All in all, what we can actually conclude from this poll is that around 32% want some form of auction house, while about 61% want guild traders to stay. Your logic is flawed.

A majority of players, according to this poll of 406 people, want ZOS to keep the guild trader system in place.

Although there isn't a majority for keeping the present system in place as is. That's the same with every poll on this, there is never a majority in favour of a new system, nor is there one in favour of keeping the present system as is. The common theme is that a majority of players don't like the present system as it is, and either want a new system or some improvement to the existing one - and it isn't wild speculation to suggest that most of those who do favour keeping things as they are will be PC traders using add-ons, so at best they can only represent one third of the playerbase. ZOS have themselves defended the present system on the sole basis that opinion about it is evenly divided.

Are you saying that > 50% isn't majority? You are arguing against math. Sorry, but you will never win that argument.

When I wrote that post the vote for keeping the system as it currently is was 50%. That is not a majority. It's now 51% which is a majority.

Personal seller 6 slots

Keep everything as it is... even roll back a few patches when bidding for 10 traders wasnt a thing.

majulook wrote: »

Responses to his poll show.
32% (152 votes) for some sort of auction house.
64% (301 votes) are against any Auction House.

This and every other poll and discussion on this end the same way majority of votes are for NO Auction House, and that ZOS has started NO to Auction House request. Can we finally stop this silliness.

Yet only 51% want to keep the present system as it is. That is why it will always be a regular topic for discussion. Only when the present system is improved so that more people support it will the idea of a different system finally be laid to rest.

Also, it's highly likely that the narrow majority who support the present system as it is will be slanted towards PC players with add-ons, it's highly unlikely that there is a majority of console players in favour of keeping the present system as it is. If the present system was to be improved in such a way that more console players supported it then that would also be likely to lay the idea of a different system to rest.

However, all the time the polls show either side of 50% against keeping the present system unchanged, as they have done over the years, sometimes one way and sometimes the other way but always by a small margin, it will be a regular topic for discussion.