Important Needed Economy Changes for ESO!

FlopsyPrince · December 2022

Billium813 wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

What's enjoyable about being forced to travel from trader to trader to find what you're looking for a ridiculous random prices that aren't even comparable in prices from one trader to another?

It's not necessarily about being "enjoyable". Yes, there is a tactile, RP feeling that ESO players are loath to throw away. But that doesn't account for what is good for the player base as a whole; the economy.

There is an inherent lag in the system that I think should not be discounted. TTC prices lag, players have to run around from trader->trader looking up prices; no one is working with perfect, real time information. You are approaching this lag as a detriment to the system and to players. I view this lag as a pressure valve to allow the system to self correct. I think it makes market manipulation much harder. It's harder to buyout and flip items. It's harder for one organization to corner the market. It encourages players to sell at lower prices so that they stand out in the crowd; it increases competitiveness!

Yes, the trade off is that you as a player have to hunt for the item you want. Yes, it means you won't always be the first person to the trader that has that super cheap item! That may not be good for YOU, but that's GOOD FOR PLAYERS AS A WHOLE! No one person can corner the market easily and OTHER players have a chance to get there first. [snip]

Having a central auction house will only encourage players to sit in one location and mass buyout items AS SOON AS THEY ARE LISTED. Giving other players no opportunity, ability, or even random chance to get it first. ESO has an issue with gold sinks; players have too much money. A central auction house would inflate prices faster than you could imagine.

Embrace the economy lag. It's actually good for players.

So making it hard for most players, something that cannot be overcome by learning to play better, is a good thing? Really?

No, hidden information is not good in real life nor is it good in the game. Wasting the time of far more players than the ones who benefit is also not good for the game.

I will be (pleasantly) surprised if it ever changes, but it is not good for most and another "negative factor" that can do a game in.

First off, there is a fairly large difference between "hidden information" and "decentralized information". I am advocating for information NOT to be curated and centralized for all the reasons I outlined above. That is not the same as "hidden information", which implies it exists, but is purposefully chosen to be barred from a select group. The curated information does not exist and I am advocating for no system be created to allow it to exist (like a central auction house). There is a difference.

Second, I think you are using the term "hidden" to imply some sort of nefarious connotation and/or connection with the real world. This would be decentralized information about virtual items being sold in a video game... this isn't real world political deals or ad revenue or government tax documents or insider stock trading being "hidden" from the public. Such real world information shouldn't be hidden because the public has an ethical interest in knowing and crimes are being committed! This is ESO... there is no virtual crime committed, no ethical issue of public interest. It's just a video game economy.

The nice thing about the ESO economy is that it DOESNT HAVE to align with real world politics. ESO is modelled more on a rudimentary, medieval economy where towns and provinces can and did fluctuate wildly on prices for goods and services. Real world services like TCC work to eliminate those market fluctuations by giving players approximations on their goods values and online resources (as well as zone chat) allow players to understand the value of their services. I'm currently fine with TCC and addons BECAUSE nothing is perfect information. That would be a line that once crossed, would ruin the whole system.

It isn't about you, it's about the system and community as a whole.

Boy, many are putting words in my mouth. Where did I say "nerfarious"? And yes, the information about the guild traders is effectively hidden, especially on consoles. While someone could spend all their life tracking it all, that is not practical for even the most dedicated players.

Why do you insist on changing the topic and making accusations? Clearly you either didn't mind spending a large bit of your play time hunting around for something on guild traders or you never have had to do so (or didn't want to do so). Some of us have and find that a huge waste of time. The reason I spent so much time is that the information about where to get something and/or the true going price for something was hidden, hence my use of the term.

Many of us find that a serious limitation of the game. Clearly you do not, but that does not negate its impact on others.

[edited to remove quote]

spartaxoxo · December 2022

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

Zodiarkslayer · December 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

Billium813 wrote: »

...
110% agree. I am in the minority that feel things like Wayshrines and armor repair costs should actually increase in cost. I personally think most players have too much in-game gold... BUT, I understand why that is not a popular opinion.
...

I agree with the notion. But that matter isn't as linear as it seems at first.

Both repairing and wayshrining can be avoided by other actions. You can use repair kits and just simply ride to the nearest wayshrine or teleport to the outside of your houses.

That creates a system where if the costs per action get higher, players are more likely to take the evasive action instead. That in turn will eventually result in less gold removed overall.
You can visualise that relation in a typical bell curve. If you want to maximise the amount of gold that gets siphoned out, you have to hit the sweet spot right at top of the curve. Everything else will be suboptimal.
Modelling that curve to fit the ESO system would probably be very difficult.

Its quite similar to taxes in the real world. And finding that sweet spot is tricky for governments. I do not know if ZOS is aware of that or if they even plan on regulating that. Who knows.

Edit: Here is the wiki entry on the curve in case anyone is interested, or just doesn't believe me 😉:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve

King_Jude · December 2022

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

...
Maybe the problem is not with the game but with the person not willing to be responsible and learn how to adapt, learn how the market works.
...

Such a good post overall. But this is the best insight. I think the notion that the game "should" provide for oneself is one of the most widespread misconceptions.

ESO is enticing and engaging, because it gives a player the opportunity to find his game for himself. I suppose that is a great motivator for a lot of players, while being a source of a lot of inconvenience for others at the same time.
Personally, I have come to understand just how much inconvenience the current trader system actuallly creates. After all, I went through it too, once. I only forgot after I made an effort and structured my activities.
Nonetheless, players who have a problem with the guild trader system have a right to be heard. And the community shouldn't disregard their voices. However, these players should also listen, when another player shares his experience on how to deal with the problem. Mutual respect is very important.

So let me examine the main problems once again under the condition that we do not want to change the system so much that it warps or even collapses.
The main pain point is the inconvenience of finding what one needs/wants in an appropriate timeframe. Right?
The second is that selling within the current system is taking too long and is too inconvenient.
The third pain point is an allegation really, that the system is creating artificially inflated prices and other, more centralised systems would push prices down to much more affordable levels.
And the fourth is that the game "should provide" all tools and information to trade fast, efficiently and from within its own interface. The reliance on external tools is unwanted, disadvantageous and creates problems on its own.
If anyone wishes to add something at this point, feel free to comment. Let's continue otherwise. I think examining the problems in reverse order is the easiest approach.

[Point 4] Honestly, I heartedly agree in the general notion that a game should provide everything on its own. If you look at other parts of ESO, you will notice this is a general problem. ESO has terrible way of explaining its systems. Combat, Trials, Progression, Questorder, how armour sets work, the list is so long. Almost nothing is explained in an easy and understandable way. The help section is unhelpful and leaves one with more questions than it answers. This is a reality in the game. And there are threads over threads for many years now, that have this as a topic.
On the other side this lack of explanations and tutorials has promoted a lively and supportive community. And I love that. It shows that a huge part of our community is using this game as a social platform to engage with and support each other. The forums are also a part of that. And I hope that this will never change.
But also lets take the discussion of community tools like TTC into the next point.

[Point 3] Lets talk about TTC for a moment. It is a browser based platform, on which you can search for specific items and get references for prices. It has an ingame interface that hooks into the item information pop up and displays a few important infos of that specific item. It also comes with a companion app, that updates the displayed info everyime you run it. Pretty convenient, right? Well it is. That is why a oot of players use it on PC. And there is the point number 4 again. Console players are fresh out of luck in that convenience department. TTC just doesn't work well for them. If ESO had that feature it would provide massive QoL improvements for console players. There is bo denying that. But let's also point out that prices on console are way down from what they are on PC per item. And across the board, too. It is not just crafting mats or furnishing plans.
So maybe the guild trader system is capable of creating lower prices, after all. And honestly this argument comes up a lot, too. That it is the tools like TTC and MM, or ATT that make the markets bloat and not the lack thereof. That parallel is not easily debunked and pretty hard to deny.
On the other hand do we even want low prices for everything? Are new furnishing plans and old style pages, that do not drop anymore supposed to be had for a cheap penny? I disagree. They are supposed to be pricy, because they are rare. In some cases very, very rare. And these higher prices usually represent the amount of labour one has to put in to acquire that rare item. Furnishing mats are a good example. Compared to the demand, the drop rates are ridiculously low. Toxicly even, I would say.
It is, I think, easy to understand that the guild trader system itself is not the main culprit here. But rather the low drop rates of rarer items and the high demand of them.
Because lets still be honest and talk about the demand for a sec. Why do players want to buy fancy stuff? Sumple. The alternative ways of acquisition are tenuous at best. Painstakingly boring and time consuming/wasting is what will come to most players mind. Just think of PvP outfit styles and the 20 days of pvp one has to do for one armour page. Or the 40 days of pvp for one weapon style page. I'll lwt you do the math how long anyone has to pvp for a complete set.
Ri
Di
Cu
Lous.
And the entire reward system combined with the way ZOS utilizes the Crown store to make the most wanted items in game only avaiable through a crown store purchase, wether by crowns, seals or crystals, just creates a situation where player want to compensate by buying someyhing easy and fast for gold.
I postulate the theory, that if there were much easier ways to aquire crowns, crystals and seals, there would be less demand for the equivalent items in circulation in the guild trader system.
Summing up point number three, I contest the conclusion, that it is the guild trader system that pushes prices. It's the complex integration and interactions to other parts and outside of the game that are much larger forces in this regard. So why attack the pawn, when Queen, Bishop Knight and Tower are still in game and still unchecked? ... Moving on ...

[Point 2] This one I can again understand from the inconvenience side of the coin. One wants direct feedback to his efforts. I grind for a few hours and get the payout a week later? Not very motivating, isn't it?
But I have to say again inconvenience is a small price to pay for a working system, where your efforts are mirrored in the prices that you get.
Having to sell low to be able to sell fast, or sometimes even at all, devalues my own labour! Why in the world would I do that? Would you go to work for 10k per year when all the others are being paid 60k for the same labour? Because if one wouldn't do it himself, one shouldn't demand it of others.
A different solution is to simply ramp up the payout for random drops. Treasure items in green, blue and purple rarity could be dropping much more often and be higher valued. That would benefit the casual player, because he has more payout per hour (I still don'tlike that term), as well as it wouldn't threaten trade of highly rare items like furnishing plans and such.
I think all players have to decide themselves if they want sell low. But that decision is endangered in a centralised system. It might even be taken away entirely. After all ESO has massive servers. Not just fractured smaller servers like in other mmos, where centralised trading systems are considered working.

[Point 1] Inconvenience, the second. Or third? Who's counting anyways. It's undeniable that the fracturation of trader locations is inconvenient.
But I think what some players do not get, is that it has some major beneficial effects. To make a long argument short (I commend you for still reading at this point), the inconveniences do not outweigh the benefits. Not even by a long shot. But there is hope, because both sides can be satisfied to a degree, if we are clever about it.
The key is I think, that most naturally assume that after a global search, in whatever interface, we have to be able to facilitate the purchase from within the same menu. I contest that. One of the major benefits of the guild trader system is the fraturisation and the the need yo make the trip for a purchase. That leads to a specialisation of trader spots (prime general spots like Mournhold or Belkarth, crafting hot spots like Vivec or Leyawiin or the farming guilds that offer mats cheap in... hihi 😉). That specialization in turn is what forces the guilds into competition with each other. And that is what keeps prices somewhat in check.
In addition, it also rises the bids for guild trader spots way beyond the level of where they would land without competition for the best spots. That is important, because it makes the bidding for specialised spots a way better gold sinks than if all spots were equal, because they could be accessed without limitation through a centralised system. This point is so important for keeping the entire virtual economy of ESO healthy. And noone who followed the development of guild trader bids of the last years will deny that. Those prime spots have become freakishly expensive and lower spots go for several millions each, too.

Summoning up. The global auction house and the global market board, as presented by @King_*** , are a threat to the economy, because of the integrated purchasing function. Take that function away, make a global search function instead and we all should be fine.
Any opinions on prices and developement in each of the oposing systems is exactly that. Opinions. It is too complex and we lack a lot of important data to make any factual assessment.
And lastly, ESO is build to create a world for the individual player, where he/she can find their game. We should all have mutual respect for other players decisions to engage in one activity or another. Trading and flipping has become one of these activities, regardless of wether it was intended as one in the beginning. There should be respect for that. Not contempt.

Thanks for reading. I hope you noticed that I tried to be unbiased and to combine a lot of perspectives into one solution.
You are awesome!

I read the whole thing, I do appreciate the shift change in the perspective and the understanding that followed. A lot of the points you made, I already addressed.

Also I never felt like ESO has ever had a supply and demand issue when it comes to buying at the market unless items are rares. But there's never been a point to where we as the players went to the guild trader and all of any one particular material has been sold out. When I speak on farming at an hourly rate, I'm mainly speaking on materials, items that goes towards crafting skills. I don't feel like rare items such as monster masks should have an increased drop rate because that's a special rarity item.

I know what it means to farm these types of items for hours on end especially coming from prior MMORPGs. Everyone has to find their niche of what works for them, but the system has to allow that freedom for that player to be able to do that. Farming at an hourly rate shouldn't be looked at as a bad term, it's about as realistic as it gets. I know this is a game but hours of your time is still hours of your time in real life, so that has to be deemed worth it.

I love the concept of flipping, I don't mind that players do that, frankly I don't want to get in the way of that. It's very good money however. In ESO in order to flip to be worth your time for the items I would deem worth flipping would require for that individual player to at least have roughly close to a half a billion in gold to flip productively.

I do feel like the inconveniences of the current trader system definitely does outweigh the actual system as a whole, which is a major issue. I do appreciate the insight that you're taking to review the actual post what it is though.

King_Jude · December 2022

Vulkunne wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

Economy
What needs to change?
The guild trader system alone is failing and in need of a massive overhaul. ESO has come out after older MMORPG's such as RuneScape, and FFXIV which have paved the way laying down ground work of what ESO should have followed and improved.

Player's should have a feature for viewing an item's history, past sales, a list prices the item were bought/sold for including the names of the players who bought/sold the item.

Player's should be able to find Market Boards in every country or a central trading Country/Island area that all guild traders in the game are linked too displaying all listed items in one place giving steady consistent pricing, and competitive prices.

The idea of players traveling to one area searching for items, and seeing a whole list of that item Sounds a whole lot better than the alternative.

Currently the alternative is using a function outside of the game such as TTC, a website used as a tool to locate desired items which may have been gone for hours, but is still listed as last seen as if the item is still at the listed location.

The game should still require a guild to purchase a guild trader in order to sell the products as usual. This change will make every guild trader a prime location making all the guild traders bids worth the same no matter the location as the race to the bid war would be to win and obtain a guild trader. Not to find the best location.

Prime location guild trader bids go down in price while simultaneously raising the price of all the other guild traders with terrible locations like the traders in the refuges.

How this would effect the economy?
First and foremost, what I am suggesting is a Market Board, Not an Auction House. The difference between a Auction house and a Market Board is that Market Boards allow more freedom.

Any item that is listed at any price, can be bought/sold without biding, exactly how guild traders work now which is first come, first served.

The Auction House forces players to bid on the items instead of letting player flat out buy it. Market Board allows for competitive pricing and fair pricing increasing the gold rate for every player, not just the Rich Players which would be like the top 1% of the game.

Players would never be forced to go from guild trader to trader trying to find one particular item, or better price.

Making a Market Board or Central trading Island/Country a one stop shop increasing the quality of life as everything would be convenient for the players.

Player's should not have to waste time traveling from guild trader to trader, country to country for endless hours searching for items.

Less inflation as farmed items would be purchased/sold a lot faster due to undercutting and fair pricing.

Less players being scammed, or taken advantage of as the players would have the tools IN GAME without the need of addons to have the information available to the player at all times.

Undercutting doesn't stop sales, it only slows sales, player's who undercut get sales faster, while player's who don't budge still sell, but not as fast. All items sold cheaper listed below would bought out until the next in line is next to be sold.

Having access to the history option will prevent players from exploiting the market placing items up at whatever unreasonable price the player wanted as players would be able to view the history of that items transaction history.

An example would be a sold out item, A player holds the monopoly currently being the only individual listing the item at that time due to the item just selling out. Another player should be able to check the transaction history of the item and make a proper judgement of worth.

I thought about this and planned to respond with more, however I think to sum this up under your recommendations we would no longer have a free-market approach to the economy.

However, there's an old saying and having bought/sold many things for years with ESO, I can tell you that no matter how good or bad it gets the market will fix itself. Undercutters don't always sell. Some people choose not to undercut because they're not looking to move things fast. See there are many reasons why things work the way they do in a free-market economy and I think, although I will agree with you somewhat that there are drawbacks as well as some issues ZOS might could help us with, its better to have a freedom driven market which we have now, rather than anything centrally planned and policed for 'fairness', which will definitely lead to even greater problems.

I disagree, It would still be a fair free market, it already works in FFXIV with no issues. It also already works in RuneScape with no issues. The undercut prices don't always sell, however, they will always sell before the higher prices of that same item because who as a consumer will see a list of items being sold and choose the more expensive item verses the cheaper price of that same item? of course people will grab the cheaper listed item.

Go around asking the average player, especially on console, console players verses PC players are so broke, they're luckily to make 100k in a month, and that's the average player, it's a major issue. PC offer's far more opportunities especially with the additional help of addons.

The system simply has to change for the better especially when there's already other system out there doing it working flawlessly.

Thank you for your reply.

The only thing I would say is that ESO isn't one of those other games. This is important because some might view this as saying that ESO needs to change or conform to be like something else, ergo, that is kin to saying ESO should become something it is not. This will drive people away from your argument because some of us don't play those other games and indeed I play ESO at the expense of playing other games or doing other things right? Hahaha.

That said and I'll leave it at this, while going thru your list, again some things ZOS could help us with. But other things people could be perhaps a little more responsible for themselves and utilize mods that already exist for this purpose. So the tools are out there and its not anyone's place to educate people if they are not willing to learn. Add to that, again I noticed a pattern that suggest you (and others as well I'm certain) feel that things aren't fair.

From past experiences let me just say that fairness is a matter of the person's opinion. If you want to be treated fairly, if you want things to go your way then it start with changes that you need to make, even if there are other factors involved. Why do I say this? Because the only other option is to force others to make changes that you think are fair for everyone. And that's where the problem begins and then it gets worse when you try to police the matter. I've seen this time and time again and ultimately it leads to resentment and people rising up to put this down because once someone starts mandating what's fair for everyone I will step up and decide what is fair for myself and there is no satisfactory way to measure this between people because the concept of fairness is generally driven by feelings and not logic. Sometimes its better just to move on and understand you're dealing with a system that doesn't really favor anyone.

Maybe the problem is not with the game but with the person not willing to be responsible and learn how to adapt, learn how the market works. I've had my share of ups and downs and I didn't ask anyone to put a fix in for me I just learned from my mistakes and dealt with it, without asking anything from anyone. There's all kinds of tools out there and trade guilds with years of experience, and gold, willing to help people out but forcing something on an economy this big will not hurt the big traders it will just hold people back to protect someone else's feelings and cause even more misery.

"What needs to Change?" is a question that ideally, I believe, should start with the merchant first before going in there and forcing the rest of us to lose out on sales and opportunities, especially when these already exists for everyone. I am responsible for myself and not responsible for anyone else's education, budget, sales, bad fortune or lack of planning.

You're welcome! Thank you for your reply as well!

Yes Eso is a different game with a lot of similarities as the other games as it is an MMORPG. Mentioning the other games only serves as the proof of the stable economy that the suggestions actually works opposed to crashing argument that others have been speaking on with no actual evidence. The other games serves as on going evidence while others can't provide an MMORPG that's crashed with a similar type of market.

What type of good practice is it to not have newer and older player's best interests at heart? As games go through updates, maturity, and changes, improvements are always welcomed as well as added in over time. No game stay's the same, and this game has gone through massive changes since the release of 2014 which has made this game massively better. This game's economy system is still a victim of that old relic system that has yet to be improved on that needs to be severely updated to appeal to newer and older players moving forward into 2023 and so on.

You can't keep essentially suggesting segregation for a game where 2/3 of the platforms this game is on doesn't have access to the addons you claim player has to take responsibility for. Two of those platforms don't even have a choice to use them or not. Also the addons slows down the game making character swapping much slower depending on how many addons you have downloaded. To suggest that everyone should use addons for features that should already be in the game is an irresponsible selfish suggestion as everyone does not have access to do as such and i'm sure you can agree with me on that when broken down in that manner.

At the end of the day ESO has been in a position of losing more players then it actually gains, I love the game, but that means certain aspects of the game has to change and appeal to the players rather than giving player the middle finger. This game is a great game, has many aspects about the game that we all really gravitate too. However, i'm not gonna stand and turn the other cheek when a game has systems in place that are far outdated that needs to be updated to today's standards. In this game, or any other game I may play, suggestions will be made to better improve the game, that's what the forums are actually for is it not?!

I don't think adapting is the issue, people have already adapted to the system, can use the system as it is, that doesn't make the system any good or mean that system should stay. When this game came out, it didn't have a lot of things, an outfit system were you can save your own looks and cosmetics. people argued against that, but now we're here and it hasn't destroyed the game, and a lot of people are happy with the change. None of the suggestions I've made would negatively affect the game. Also these changes would bring more general interests to the market. Every MMORPG has a market system as it's a basic necessity for trade for players. This system is not a "Mini game" as people in this forum would call it, it's a system tool that player's use to accommodate for their needs.

Elaborate for me, what sales and opportunities would you lose out on as the player that you are in comparison to the other system that should actually yield not only the same, but better results for you? I'm listening, I really want to know. your sales rate would substantially increase. Keeping you listing at 30/30 would be more difficult for you as your products would sell out quickly rather than sitting for 30 days. I know this because i've experienced it with the other system i'm suggesting. Where's your actual proof, supporting evidence that these factors you claim actually happens in MMORPG's? Also tell me exactly how you would struggle in the new system verses the old.

Are you against other players, and newer players becoming more successful at a faster rate? Is that your real concern? What actually is your motive to debate so strongly about it, What exactly do you gain from this system that you can't gain and more from the proposed system, and how do you benefit more from this system and forcing everyone to stay on this horrid system in comparison to the proposed?

Hello again,

Thank you again for your thoughts here, very interesting. Rather than talk about every point (which we're probably not going to always agree on everything anyways) I'll answer your question...

Really, I could ask you the same thing seeing how your changes are so comprehensive and arguably follow an agenda at least partially based on fairness as I pointed out in previous post. Massive changes generally coincide with fundamental change of a system, its scope, its approach, its implementation, whom is serves, so forth. And I think this is the crucible, in that I see a system in need of a little TLC while it appears to me and others that you and those who share your opinion are looking for fundamental changes, in part for reasons that reflect a lack of fairness in not just the current system but how players choose to use that system.

This is where I draw the line because in every contest, there are winners and losers. The ultimate expression of fairness is no one gets to decide either, so when you propose to make massive changes in favor of those whom you have deemed are disenfranchised, again for reasons you provided, then that means you are implicitly asking not just for someone else to lose, but to force others to lose in favor of they whom you all wish to raise. So I am completely opposed to this idea, as stated, its that simple.

This is why I suggested before we start making losers into winners and winners into losers, lets examine ourselves first. If someone thinks the only solution for the economic woes is large-scale, fundamental change then I would respectively ask them to please stop and first consider what they have done to improve things either for yourself or those around you? I don't mean lobbying for someone else to make massive changes, I mean done to improve your own situation or that of those you know who needs it? Not intended in any way to play a role here but I have done my share, especially in an economic system such as this.

And that's what I'm saying, many of us have done our share to bring success to both ourselves and those around us without the use of overwhelming force to bring the system to its knees, and by extension other merchants, just for us... If many of us can prosper and even raise others then there is no excuse for why someone else can't.

Change for the sake of itself is natural however, meaningful... purposeful change... takes time and we must be careful to let changes happen organically rather then replacing one system (with something foreign) lock stock and barrel, which will almost certainly have unforeseen consequences that may bring us right back here at another time and place.

Hey again,

Let's break this argument down to give a deeper understanding of what we're talking about here. I love the topic of winners and losses I agree with you here. I do not feel that losers should get a participation trophy. However I do feel like everybody should have an equal opportunity to become a winner or a loser.

It's an undisputable fact that you cannot deny that only PC players benefit from this current system. Using TTC or the other tool from a web-based browser isn't as accurate on console as it is for PC players. So only one platform out of three different platforms is actually benefiting from this current system.

I can say that there's maybe a small percentage of players who would agree with you that actually plays on console. But you got to look at the rest of the players that wouldn't agree with you because they don't have The proper access to the same tools that you would have.

We all have to admit that we love these add-ons on PC they're great. We also have to admit that playing the game on PC without any add-ons are using these tools doesn't make the game very fun as we were still find our way without it because we like the game but that doesn't make the system great. Just because a system has been in place for a long time since the beginning of the game doesn't make it perfect. It also doesn't mean that it shouldn't change because that's we know. As the society grows, interests changes, policies change, directions change all in order to better benefit the society as a whole.

It's irresponsible to only cater to one particular audience when you can cater to the majority of the audience that's in a better interest of the audience. There's a total of three platforms PC Xbox and PlayStation. The platforms that suffer the most are Xbox and PlayStation. You can't honestly tell me that this current system is a great system for those two platforms. I was going to say that stadia was suffering too but they got discontinued. Stadia had to suffer as a console type player in a PC environment without any of the PC bonuses. I can only imagine how frustrated that could have been.

I hope that I provided more insight overall with this whole post. I do believe that there should definitely be winners and losers but I don't feel like only one group should benefit from the notion of the system.

Thanks.

King_Jude · December 2022

Billium813 wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

What's enjoyable about being forced to travel from trader to trader to find what you're looking for a ridiculous random prices that aren't even comparable in prices from one trader to another?

It's not necessarily about being "enjoyable". Yes, there is a tactile, RP feeling that ESO players are loath to throw away. But that doesn't account for what is good for the player base as a whole; the economy.

There is an inherent lag in the system that I think should not be discounted. TTC prices lag, players have to run around from trader->trader looking up prices; no one is working with perfect, real time information. You are approaching this lag as a detriment to the system and to players. I view this lag as a pressure valve to allow the system to self correct. I think it makes market manipulation much harder. It's harder to buyout and flip items. It's harder for one organization to corner the market. It encourages players to sell at lower prices so that they stand out in the crowd; it increases competitiveness!

Yes, the trade off is that you as a player have to hunt for the item you want. Yes, it means you won't always be the first person to the trader that has that super cheap item! That may not be good for YOU, but that's GOOD FOR PLAYERS AS A WHOLE! No one person can corner the market easily and OTHER players have a chance to get there first. [snip]

Having a central auction house will only encourage players to sit in one location and mass buyout items AS SOON AS THEY ARE LISTED. Giving other players no opportunity, ability, or even random chance to get it first. ESO has an issue with gold sinks; players have too much money. A central auction house would inflate prices faster than you could imagine.

Embrace the economy lag. It's actually good for players.

Embracing economy lag where only PC benefits is not good for players what so ever. I don't think I've ever found TTC useful on console. I've searched up an item and countless locations that that item was listed at and couldn't find the item not one time. I can say I've used TTC on PC where it's more accurate than what it would be on console however I've never found items through TTC on console. I'm not saying that it's impossible but the lag is extremely different between platform and PC.

You claim that my "position seems to be self-centered and narcissistic" however would it not be selfish of you to benefit from a system that only caters to PC rather than all three platforms of PlayStation Xbox and PC?

There comes a point where you have to admit that you're actually being biased. Also I've already addressed the goal tick If every location became a prom location That means all the cheaper locations that were worth nothing have become a higher gold thing more standardized in comparison to every other location which means more money is being poured down the sink with all the traders rather than just the main traders. That's an indisputable fact that I've already addressed several times.

[snip] It's completely normal for people to want their cake and eat it too would it takes a bigger person to look at the bigger picture and understand that how things are done is absolutely wrong and a different approach should be taken to make it more equalized for all platforms to benefit all players. It's never been a bad thing to gain more features that the players benefit from than to not benefit at all.

[edited for baiting & to remove quote]

spartaxoxo · December 2022

Players aren't prevented from any knowledge about the price of items. It's only that the price of items might vary based on location.

King_Jude · December 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Players aren't prevented from any knowledge about the price of items. It's only that the price of items might vary based on location.

Are you speaking from a PC standpoint or are you speaking from a console standpoint because those are two different things. Even though both are still hindered one is more severely hindered compared to the other.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Players aren't prevented from any knowledge about the price of items. It's only that the price of items might vary based on location.

Are you speaking from a PC standpoint or are you speaking from a console standpoint because those are two different things. Even though both are still hindered one is more severely hindered compared to the other.

Neither are hindered from knowing the price of items. If you want to know what the price of an item is in Rivenspire, it is easy to go to Rivenspire and look.

King_Jude · December 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Players aren't prevented from any knowledge about the price of items. It's only that the price of items might vary based on location.

Are you speaking from a PC standpoint or are you speaking from a console standpoint because those are two different things. Even though both are still hindered one is more severely hindered compared to the other.

Neither are hindered from knowing the price of items. If you want to know what the price of an item is in Rivenspire, it is easy to go to Rivenspire and look.

Elaborate. The average player on console doesn't even know TTC exist or use it, also if you're traveling from trader to trader viewing prices, and each trader is commonly a different price. Where you might find one specific motif for 5k at one trader, 16k at another trader, 23k at another trader, 7k at another trader. How do you define the cost of that item.

Also if you're a player selling your goods, but don't know what each item is worth, the same concept applies, you go compare and contrast how does a player find out that items worth? Also why does that player have to travel back and fourth between traders to view prices, then back to the bank to list the item?

Let's take TTC out of the equation since it doesn't really apply to most console players. And it's not a function within the game. It's just for the sake of it no add-on help either as these features aren't originally in the game. How do these players find out information accurately and efficiently within a timely manner? Please riddle me that.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

How do these players find out information accurately and efficiently within a timely manner? Please riddle me that.

You go to the various guild traders in your local area and look at the price of the item. Then you list it at the local price of the area. If everyone in Grahtwood has it in the 5-10k range then you know the price in Grahtwood is 5-10k. It takes only a couple of minutes.

What a centralized system does is remove effort on part of the player to compare prices at different locations. Which removes the ability for different locations to be competitive with each other for the sake of convenience for the player searching. It is not that they aren't allowed to know the price of materials in Rivenspire, it's that the effort to know it changes.

King_Jude · December 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

How do these players find out information accurately and efficiently within a timely manner? Please riddle me that.

You go to the various guild traders in your local area and look at the price of the item. Then you list it at the local price of the area. If everyone in Grahtwood has it in the 5-10k range then you know the price in Grahtwood is 5-10k. It takes only a couple of minutes.

What a centralized system does is remove effort on part of the player to compare prices at different locations. Which removes the ability for different locations to be competitive with each other for the sake of convenience for the player searching. It is not that they aren't allowed to know the price of materials in Rivenspire, it's that the effort to know it changes.

I believe you're ignoring the fact that not all products are listed within the same range. It's common that looking up these products within the guild traders the prices are all over the place. So now as a player not only is this method extremely time-consuming it's also frustrating to the player.

Also what happens let's say as a player, The player list a product within that 5 to 10K range and it sits on a trader all month and gets return to the player. This also commonly happens that frustrates players.

Is baffling to me while you're advocating on making the seamless task to continue to be extremely inconvenient for the player. Players put in plenty of effort but there is a such thing as taking things too far for so long.

Also only looking in just gratwood isn't all that accurate as players travel from country to country define a better deal. Players might migrate from Deshaan, to Grahtwood, to Stormhaven, and so on. The prices between just the first three mentioned are widely inconsistent. Then on top of that the guild trader that your guild might have might not even be in the best position.

There's so many factors that absolutely factor in when it comes to this topic and all of that can be resolved simply by the change that was suggested. There literally wouldn't be any more problems.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

I am not ignoring anything. There is usually a range that's very easy to determine unless the item is rare or low demand. There would be more problems. You'd have higher prices and less competition, in favor of more convenience. There's a trade-off.

Regardless, the information isn't hidden. If you want to know the price in Deshaan, just go to Deshaam. It's not difficult. Information not being spoonfed to the player in a list of things already collected isn't the same thing as information actively hidden from the consumer.

King_Jude · December 2022

That's purely nothing more than assumption with no evidence to support it, If the majority of MMRPGs already do it and don't have that problem why would elder scrolls online have that problem?

There has never been a supply and demand issue with an elder scrolls online. If that was actually a factor where rich players were buying out the market, then nothing would stop it from happening right now.

That would actually be less prices and more competition. Everyone in the game would have the ability to sell all their products in one place flooding in the market with supply making The demand for those supplies less as all of it is found in one place.

The prices for these products will also be less because it would have more supply than demand and far more competitive prices between players trying to sell out the fastest.

These are common known practices that happens from MMORPG to MMORPG.

Again, information is hidden based off the simple that just because you went to Deshaan to find out what the prices are in Deshaann that doesn't mean that's the price of the item on average between all locations.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

That's purely nothing more than assumption with no evidence to support it, If the majority of MMRPGs already do it and don't have that problem why would elder scrolls online have that problem? .

No. It's not an assumption. It happens on every MMO I ever played, with the only real way to make money being to flip items or grind extremely hard. And rich flippers with long establish accounts cornering a marker was common.

I actually used to assumed that this was just a natural part of an aging MMO. And then I played ESO and to this day I can I still recommend just playing how you want and selling excess stuff to people. They will get all they need and much of what they want.

There would be less competition because it would be easier for sellers to buy out their competition and relist.

King_Jude · December 2022

I'll tell you what I'm listening to hear you out. I've already given explanations of how other markets the multiple MMORPGs that I've played functions with their features. Explain to me the games that you've played how their market works what are the features and functions of their market so we can dissect that.

It's literally impossible to buy out every player in the game that's listing product what's happens to be a constant generated import good within the game. These products are being listed every day within every hour within minutes of each other all the time constantly. There's literally no possible way that a player has the funds to buy out everybody's product all day everyday.

For that to actually happen it would take a large guild filled with players that are billionaires that's on all day buying off the market. It's not going to happen...

FlopsyPrince · December 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

FlopsyPrince · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

Economy
What needs to change?
The guild trader system alone is failing and in need of a massive overhaul. ESO has come out after older MMORPG's such as RuneScape, and FFXIV which have paved the way laying down ground work of what ESO should have followed and improved.

Player's should have a feature for viewing an item's history, past sales, a list prices the item were bought/sold for including the names of the players who bought/sold the item.

Player's should be able to find Market Boards in every country or a central trading Country/Island area that all guild traders in the game are linked too displaying all listed items in one place giving steady consistent pricing, and competitive prices.

The idea of players traveling to one area searching for items, and seeing a whole list of that item Sounds a whole lot better than the alternative.

Currently the alternative is using a function outside of the game such as TTC, a website used as a tool to locate desired items which may have been gone for hours, but is still listed as last seen as if the item is still at the listed location.

The game should still require a guild to purchase a guild trader in order to sell the products as usual. This change will make every guild trader a prime location making all the guild traders bids worth the same no matter the location as the race to the bid war would be to win and obtain a guild trader. Not to find the best location.

Prime location guild trader bids go down in price while simultaneously raising the price of all the other guild traders with terrible locations like the traders in the refuges.

How this would effect the economy?
First and foremost, what I am suggesting is a Market Board, Not an Auction House. The difference between a Auction house and a Market Board is that Market Boards allow more freedom.

Any item that is listed at any price, can be bought/sold without biding, exactly how guild traders work now which is first come, first served.

The Auction House forces players to bid on the items instead of letting player flat out buy it. Market Board allows for competitive pricing and fair pricing increasing the gold rate for every player, not just the Rich Players which would be like the top 1% of the game.

Players would never be forced to go from guild trader to trader trying to find one particular item, or better price.

Making a Market Board or Central trading Island/Country a one stop shop increasing the quality of life as everything would be convenient for the players.

Player's should not have to waste time traveling from guild trader to trader, country to country for endless hours searching for items.

Less inflation as farmed items would be purchased/sold a lot faster due to undercutting and fair pricing.

Less players being scammed, or taken advantage of as the players would have the tools IN GAME without the need of addons to have the information available to the player at all times.

Undercutting doesn't stop sales, it only slows sales, player's who undercut get sales faster, while player's who don't budge still sell, but not as fast. All items sold cheaper listed below would bought out until the next in line is next to be sold.

Having access to the history option will prevent players from exploiting the market placing items up at whatever unreasonable price the player wanted as players would be able to view the history of that items transaction history.

An example would be a sold out item, A player holds the monopoly currently being the only individual listing the item at that time due to the item just selling out. Another player should be able to check the transaction history of the item and make a proper judgement of worth.

I thought about this and planned to respond with more, however I think to sum this up under your recommendations we would no longer have a free-market approach to the economy.

However, there's an old saying and having bought/sold many things for years with ESO, I can tell you that no matter how good or bad it gets the market will fix itself. Undercutters don't always sell. Some people choose not to undercut because they're not looking to move things fast. See there are many reasons why things work the way they do in a free-market economy and I think, although I will agree with you somewhat that there are drawbacks as well as some issues ZOS might could help us with, its better to have a freedom driven market which we have now, rather than anything centrally planned and policed for 'fairness', which will definitely lead to even greater problems.

I disagree, It would still be a fair free market, it already works in FFXIV with no issues. It also already works in RuneScape with no issues. The undercut prices don't always sell, however, they will always sell before the higher prices of that same item because who as a consumer will see a list of items being sold and choose the more expensive item verses the cheaper price of that same item? of course people will grab the cheaper listed item.

Go around asking the average player, especially on console, console players verses PC players are so broke, they're luckily to make 100k in a month, and that's the average player, it's a major issue. PC offer's far more opportunities especially with the additional help of addons.

The system simply has to change for the better especially when there's already other system out there doing it working flawlessly.

Thank you for your reply.

The only thing I would say is that ESO isn't one of those other games. This is important because some might view this as saying that ESO needs to change or conform to be like something else, ergo, that is kin to saying ESO should become something it is not. This will drive people away from your argument because some of us don't play those other games and indeed I play ESO at the expense of playing other games or doing other things right? Hahaha.

That said and I'll leave it at this, while going thru your list, again some things ZOS could help us with. But other things people could be perhaps a little more responsible for themselves and utilize mods that already exist for this purpose. So the tools are out there and its not anyone's place to educate people if they are not willing to learn. Add to that, again I noticed a pattern that suggest you (and others as well I'm certain) feel that things aren't fair.

From past experiences let me just say that fairness is a matter of the person's opinion. If you want to be treated fairly, if you want things to go your way then it start with changes that you need to make, even if there are other factors involved. Why do I say this? Because the only other option is to force others to make changes that you think are fair for everyone. And that's where the problem begins and then it gets worse when you try to police the matter. I've seen this time and time again and ultimately it leads to resentment and people rising up to put this down because once someone starts mandating what's fair for everyone I will step up and decide what is fair for myself and there is no satisfactory way to measure this between people because the concept of fairness is generally driven by feelings and not logic. Sometimes its better just to move on and understand you're dealing with a system that doesn't really favor anyone.

Maybe the problem is not with the game but with the person not willing to be responsible and learn how to adapt, learn how the market works. I've had my share of ups and downs and I didn't ask anyone to put a fix in for me I just learned from my mistakes and dealt with it, without asking anything from anyone. There's all kinds of tools out there and trade guilds with years of experience, and gold, willing to help people out but forcing something on an economy this big will not hurt the big traders it will just hold people back to protect someone else's feelings and cause even more misery.

"What needs to Change?" is a question that ideally, I believe, should start with the merchant first before going in there and forcing the rest of us to lose out on sales and opportunities, especially when these already exists for everyone. I am responsible for myself and not responsible for anyone else's education, budget, sales, bad fortune or lack of planning.

You're welcome! Thank you for your reply as well!

Yes Eso is a different game with a lot of similarities as the other games as it is an MMORPG. Mentioning the other games only serves as the proof of the stable economy that the suggestions actually works opposed to crashing argument that others have been speaking on with no actual evidence. The other games serves as on going evidence while others can't provide an MMORPG that's crashed with a similar type of market.

What type of good practice is it to not have newer and older player's best interests at heart? As games go through updates, maturity, and changes, improvements are always welcomed as well as added in over time. No game stay's the same, and this game has gone through massive changes since the release of 2014 which has made this game massively better. This game's economy system is still a victim of that old relic system that has yet to be improved on that needs to be severely updated to appeal to newer and older players moving forward into 2023 and so on.

You can't keep essentially suggesting segregation for a game where 2/3 of the platforms this game is on doesn't have access to the addons you claim player has to take responsibility for. Two of those platforms don't even have a choice to use them or not. Also the addons slows down the game making character swapping much slower depending on how many addons you have downloaded. To suggest that everyone should use addons for features that should already be in the game is an irresponsible selfish suggestion as everyone does not have access to do as such and i'm sure you can agree with me on that when broken down in that manner.

At the end of the day ESO has been in a position of losing more players then it actually gains, I love the game, but that means certain aspects of the game has to change and appeal to the players rather than giving player the middle finger. This game is a great game, has many aspects about the game that we all really gravitate too. However, i'm not gonna stand and turn the other cheek when a game has systems in place that are far outdated that needs to be updated to today's standards. In this game, or any other game I may play, suggestions will be made to better improve the game, that's what the forums are actually for is it not?!

I don't think adapting is the issue, people have already adapted to the system, can use the system as it is, that doesn't make the system any good or mean that system should stay. When this game came out, it didn't have a lot of things, an outfit system were you can save your own looks and cosmetics. people argued against that, but now we're here and it hasn't destroyed the game, and a lot of people are happy with the change. None of the suggestions I've made would negatively affect the game. Also these changes would bring more general interests to the market. Every MMORPG has a market system as it's a basic necessity for trade for players. This system is not a "Mini game" as people in this forum would call it, it's a system tool that player's use to accommodate for their needs.

Elaborate for me, what sales and opportunities would you lose out on as the player that you are in comparison to the other system that should actually yield not only the same, but better results for you? I'm listening, I really want to know. your sales rate would substantially increase. Keeping you listing at 30/30 would be more difficult for you as your products would sell out quickly rather than sitting for 30 days. I know this because i've experienced it with the other system i'm suggesting. Where's your actual proof, supporting evidence that these factors you claim actually happens in MMORPG's? Also tell me exactly how you would struggle in the new system verses the old.

Are you against other players, and newer players becoming more successful at a faster rate? Is that your real concern? What actually is your motive to debate so strongly about it, What exactly do you gain from this system that you can't gain and more from the proposed system, and how do you benefit more from this system and forcing everyone to stay on this horrid system in comparison to the proposed?

Hello again,

Thank you again for your thoughts here, very interesting. Rather than talk about every point (which we're probably not going to always agree on everything anyways) I'll answer your question...

Really, I could ask you the same thing seeing how your changes are so comprehensive and arguably follow an agenda at least partially based on fairness as I pointed out in previous post. Massive changes generally coincide with fundamental change of a system, its scope, its approach, its implementation, whom is serves, so forth. And I think this is the crucible, in that I see a system in need of a little TLC while it appears to me and others that you and those who share your opinion are looking for fundamental changes, in part for reasons that reflect a lack of fairness in not just the current system but how players choose to use that system.

This is where I draw the line because in every contest, there are winners and losers. The ultimate expression of fairness is no one gets to decide either, so when you propose to make massive changes in favor of those whom you have deemed are disenfranchised, again for reasons you provided, then that means you are implicitly asking not just for someone else to lose, but to force others to lose in favor of they whom you all wish to raise. So I am completely opposed to this idea, as stated, its that simple.

This is why I suggested before we start making losers into winners and winners into losers, lets examine ourselves first. If someone thinks the only solution for the economic woes is large-scale, fundamental change then I would respectively ask them to please stop and first consider what they have done to improve things either for yourself or those around you? I don't mean lobbying for someone else to make massive changes, I mean done to improve your own situation or that of those you know who needs it? Not intended in any way to play a role here but I have done my share, especially in an economic system such as this.

And that's what I'm saying, many of us have done our share to bring success to both ourselves and those around us without the use of overwhelming force to bring the system to its knees, and by extension other merchants, just for us... If many of us can prosper and even raise others then there is no excuse for why someone else can't.

Change for the sake of itself is natural however, meaningful... purposeful change... takes time and we must be careful to let changes happen organically rather then replacing one system (with something foreign) lock stock and barrel, which will almost certainly have unforeseen consequences that may bring us right back here at another time and place.

Hey again,

Let's break this argument down to give a deeper understanding of what we're talking about here. I love the topic of winners and losses I agree with you here. I do not feel that losers should get a participation trophy. However I do feel like everybody should have an equal opportunity to become a winner or a loser.

It's an undisputable fact that you cannot deny that only PC players benefit from this current system. Using TTC or the other tool from a web-based browser isn't as accurate on console as it is for PC players. So only one platform out of three different platforms is actually benefiting from this current system.

I can say that there's maybe a small percentage of players who would agree with you that actually plays on console. But you got to look at the rest of the players that wouldn't agree with you because they don't have The proper access to the same tools that you would have.

We all have to admit that we love these add-ons on PC they're great. We also have to admit that playing the game on PC without any add-ons are using these tools doesn't make the game very fun as we were still find our way without it because we like the game but that doesn't make the system great. Just because a system has been in place for a long time since the beginning of the game doesn't make it perfect. It also doesn't mean that it shouldn't change because that's we know. As the society grows, interests changes, policies change, directions change all in order to better benefit the society as a whole.

It's irresponsible to only cater to one particular audience when you can cater to the majority of the audience that's in a better interest of the audience. There's a total of three platforms PC Xbox and PlayStation. The platforms that suffer the most are Xbox and PlayStation. You can't honestly tell me that this current system is a great system for those two platforms. I was going to say that stadia was suffering too but they got discontinued. Stadia had to suffer as a console type player in a PC environment without any of the PC bonuses. I can only imagine how frustrated that could have been.

I hope that I provided more insight overall with this whole post. I do believe that there should definitely be winners and losers but I don't feel like only one group should benefit from the notion of the system.

Thanks.

Note that even the TTC addon does not fully resolve the challenges. It just helps. But anyone who has tried to find something that has sold on the TTC site will know things listed are not always still there.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

I didn't state you asked about wayshrine fees. When you ask "what's another gold sink' the person answering can choose any other gold sink that they feel like picking. I chose wayshrine fees. I chose them because they are generally considered a good gold sink in this game. I then used to that as a jumping off point to explain why I think having gold sinks, such as the guild traders fees, are a necessary function of the game.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

For that to actually happen it would take a large guild filled with players that are billionaires that's on all day buying off the market. It's not going to happen...

It's not one player. It's a very small amount of billionaire players that corner the market in other MMOs with centralized systems.

BlueRaven · December 2022

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

The game needs gold sinks. I can think of nine off the top of my head and quite frankly I think it needs more.

1 - Repairs, which is off set by repair kits.

2 - Bag space improvements.

3 - Wayshrines.

4 - Buying houses (off set by crown purchase option).

5 - Furniture lux vendor.

6 - Home and achievement furniture vendors.

7 - Golden (monster gear) vendor (off set by alliance points [I think]).

And more on point for this thread…

8 - The games “cut” on sold items through guild store.

9 - Guild’s “bid” on the guild vendors.

This last one is a big deal, it pulls a lot of gold out of circulation. And that extra gold stops inflation in a major way. The more gold a player has the less the price for things matter. Having a major gold sink helps.
(The problem though is that there are so many guild vendors now that price for each vendor could go down if there is not enough new guilds who want vendors around to offset it.)

I am still a bit baffled about what this thread is really about. A centralized hub (if that is the idea here) is just a bad idea in an economic sense, RP sense, and a game engine stand point.

The first two problems have already been touched on but let me elaborate on that third point.

Think of a standard guild vendor now, the amount of items posted allowed is 30 per guild member. Guilds are limited to 500 accounts max. So at most there can only be (30x500=)15,000 posted items at any one time.
Think about the delay it takes to search for something right now. Now multiply that by how many guilds will be “attached” to this centralized listing. Now think of all the people posting things and buying things constantly. Now let’s add for the game to determine what the average price should be of everything posted? (Do things that don’t sell count?) And you can already see where the wheels are starting to come off.

The guild vendor system we have now is fine. Guilds compete for better higher traffic areas so that increases gold sinks as the bidding gets higher. If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition.

The current system promotes a healthy balance.

King_Jude · December 2022

BlueRaven wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

The game needs gold sinks. I can think of nine off the top of my head and quite frankly I think it needs more.

1 - Repairs, which is off set by repair kits.

2 - Bag space improvements.

3 - Wayshrines.

4 - Buying houses (off set by crown purchase option).

5 - Furniture lux vendor.

6 - Home and achievement furniture vendors.

7 - Golden (monster gear) vendor (off set by alliance points [I think]).

And more on point for this thread…

8 - The games “cut” on sold items through guild store.

9 - Guild’s “bid” on the guild vendors.

This last one is a big deal, it pulls a lot of gold out of circulation. And that extra gold stops inflation in a major way. The more gold a player has the less the price for things matter. Having a major gold sink helps.
(The problem though is that there are so many guild vendors now that price for each vendor could go down if there is not enough new guilds who want vendors around to offset it.)

I am still a bit baffled about what this thread is really about. A centralized hub (if that is the idea here) is just a bad idea in an economic sense, RP sense, and a game engine stand point.

The first two problems have already been touched on but let me elaborate on that third point.

Think of a standard guild vendor now, the amount of items posted allowed is 30 per guild member. Guilds are limited to 500 accounts max. So at most there can only be (30x500=)15,000 posted items at any one time.
Think about the delay it takes to search for something right now. Now multiply that by how many guilds will be “attached” to this centralized listing. Now think of all the people posting things and buying things constantly. Now let’s add for the game to determine what the average price should be of everything posted? (Do things that don’t sell count?) And you can already see where the wheels are starting to come off.

The guild vendor system we have now is fine. Guilds compete for better higher traffic areas so that increases gold sinks as the bidding gets higher. If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition.

The current system promotes a healthy balance.

If you read the thread, I never once talkee about doing away with the guild traders gold sinks. I spoke on a way to improve the current system without scrapping how guild traders are obtained, so why do you guys keep talking about gold sinks if those post doesn't affect it?

Just reread the post, I did explain it. In fact, with my suggestions, more gold would be sinked, but you didn't see that did you?

BlueRaven · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

The game needs gold sinks. I can think of nine off the top of my head and quite frankly I think it needs more.

1 - Repairs, which is off set by repair kits.

2 - Bag space improvements.

3 - Wayshrines.

4 - Buying houses (off set by crown purchase option).

5 - Furniture lux vendor.

6 - Home and achievement furniture vendors.

7 - Golden (monster gear) vendor (off set by alliance points [I think]).

And more on point for this thread…

8 - The games “cut” on sold items through guild store.

9 - Guild’s “bid” on the guild vendors.

This last one is a big deal, it pulls a lot of gold out of circulation. And that extra gold stops inflation in a major way. The more gold a player has the less the price for things matter. Having a major gold sink helps.
(The problem though is that there are so many guild vendors now that price for each vendor could go down if there is not enough new guilds who want vendors around to offset it.)

I am still a bit baffled about what this thread is really about. A centralized hub (if that is the idea here) is just a bad idea in an economic sense, RP sense, and a game engine stand point.

The first two problems have already been touched on but let me elaborate on that third point.

Think of a standard guild vendor now, the amount of items posted allowed is 30 per guild member. Guilds are limited to 500 accounts max. So at most there can only be (30x500=)15,000 posted items at any one time.
Think about the delay it takes to search for something right now. Now multiply that by how many guilds will be “attached” to this centralized listing. Now think of all the people posting things and buying things constantly. Now let’s add for the game to determine what the average price should be of everything posted? (Do things that don’t sell count?) And you can already see where the wheels are starting to come off.

The guild vendor system we have now is fine. Guilds compete for better higher traffic areas so that increases gold sinks as the bidding gets higher. If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition.

The current system promotes a healthy balance.

If you read the thread, I never once talkee about doing away with the guild traders gold sinks. I spoke on a way to improve the current system without scrapping how guild traders are obtained, so why do you guys keep talking about gold sinks if those post doesn't affect it?

Just reread the post, I did explain it. In fact, with my suggestions, more gold would be sinked, but you didn't see that did you?

I am sorry, is this NOT you?

"[*] Player's should be able to find Market Boards in every country or a central trading Country/Island area that all guild traders in the game are linked too displaying all listed items in one place giving steady consistent pricing, and competitive prices."

So you want a centralized listing, right? Which I addressed in my post?

" If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition." That is me, addressing your post. And how a centralized listing affects the gold sink of vendor bidding,

ALSO you were not the post I was directly replying to, I was rep[lying to someone who mentioned gold sinks and said; " I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision." And that part was addressed more to them.

It's a thread with multiple people posting.

King_Jude · December 2022

BlueRaven wrote: »

King_*** wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

The game needs gold sinks. I can think of nine off the top of my head and quite frankly I think it needs more.

1 - Repairs, which is off set by repair kits.

2 - Bag space improvements.

3 - Wayshrines.

4 - Buying houses (off set by crown purchase option).

5 - Furniture lux vendor.

6 - Home and achievement furniture vendors.

7 - Golden (monster gear) vendor (off set by alliance points [I think]).

And more on point for this thread…

8 - The games “cut” on sold items through guild store.

9 - Guild’s “bid” on the guild vendors.

This last one is a big deal, it pulls a lot of gold out of circulation. And that extra gold stops inflation in a major way. The more gold a player has the less the price for things matter. Having a major gold sink helps.
(The problem though is that there are so many guild vendors now that price for each vendor could go down if there is not enough new guilds who want vendors around to offset it.)

I am still a bit baffled about what this thread is really about. A centralized hub (if that is the idea here) is just a bad idea in an economic sense, RP sense, and a game engine stand point.

The first two problems have already been touched on but let me elaborate on that third point.

Think of a standard guild vendor now, the amount of items posted allowed is 30 per guild member. Guilds are limited to 500 accounts max. So at most there can only be (30x500=)15,000 posted items at any one time.
Think about the delay it takes to search for something right now. Now multiply that by how many guilds will be “attached” to this centralized listing. Now think of all the people posting things and buying things constantly. Now let’s add for the game to determine what the average price should be of everything posted? (Do things that don’t sell count?) And you can already see where the wheels are starting to come off.

The guild vendor system we have now is fine. Guilds compete for better higher traffic areas so that increases gold sinks as the bidding gets higher. If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition.

The current system promotes a healthy balance.

If you read the thread, I never once talkee about doing away with the guild traders gold sinks. I spoke on a way to improve the current system without scrapping how guild traders are obtained, so why do you guys keep talking about gold sinks if those post doesn't affect it?

Just reread the post, I did explain it. In fact, with my suggestions, more gold would be sinked, but you didn't see that did you?

I am sorry, is this NOT you?

"[*] Player's should be able to find Market Boards in every country or a central trading Country/Island area that all guild traders in the game are linked too displaying all listed items in one place giving steady consistent pricing, and competitive prices."

So you want a centralized listing, right? Which I addressed in my post?

" If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition." That is me, addressing your post. And how a centralized listing affects the gold sink of vendor bidding,

ALSO you were not the post I was directly replying to, I was rep[lying to someone who mentioned gold sinks and said; " I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision." And that part was addressed more to them.

It's a thread with multiple people posting.

Yes that's me, but if you did finish reading you would have caught the explanation. But I'll explain it for you a bit. So adding market boards to each country that all the guild traders in the game is connected too wouldn't change how guild traders are acquired.

As I've said many times this will make every guild trader location a prime location making each guild trader price a prime location, it's more of a race to get one rather than finding the best location. So the average bid on the trash locations of guild traders would actually go up. The main prime locations would most likely go down but the cheap locations nobody cared about would go way up.

You would still need to be in a guild who has a guild trader in order to sell your goods, but now you would have extra features at your disposal that will help you buy and sell faster and more efficiently that everyone benefits from.

spartaxoxo · December 2022

If all spots are prime locations, none of them are.

Billium813 · December 2022

BlueRaven wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

The game needs gold sinks. I can think of nine off the top of my head and quite frankly I think it needs more.

Couldn't agree more. There are a ton of gold sinks in the game that honestly, seem pointless because the cost is so low. I mean, 74gp to use the teleport can rack up a decent cost if used too many times, but things like sending mail or upgrading mounts seems pointless to charge for given how common gold is.

Mount upgrades - You can only do this once per day anyway, so why charge 250 gold? Is that supposed to be a lot?
Bounty payments to guards
Tax selling in Guild Traders - This may be the largest gold sink in the game
Sending mail

Personally, I think ESO has an issue with inflation. Not enough gold leaves the system and most of these systems we are outlining are still charging the same costs that they were charging in 2014! I think most of these costs need to be x10 at least.

King_Jude · December 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

If all spots are prime locations, none of them are.

Technically they are because everyone needs one. There's more guilds thwnnguils traders available but yet there's never a guild trader left out... So more guilds would be coughing up more money rather than dishing out chump change for the useless locations.

Billium813 · December 2022

NOW, to play devils advocate a bit! I don't think players having too much money is that bad of an issue for virtual games. Honestly, I don't want gold to become an inhibiting factor in players playing the game!

For example, would you rather?:

Have everyone be millionaires in the game to the point where using gold is basically pointless because everyone can easily afford everything?
Have players struggling to pay the cost of mailing a letter or being unable to afford upgrading their mount today because gold is a scarce resource?

I would say that the first is the much better issue to have as a game as it does promote more fun and less struggle for players. However, it comes at the cost of making your ingame gold basically pointless.

I think ESO has also chosen option 1, probably for the same reason; the alternate is just worse for player engagement. I would like there to be a happen medium... but that may be hard to hit. I think the current system we have is the worst system... except for every other system that exists.

King_Jude · December 2022

Billium813 wrote: »

NOW, to play devils advocate a bit! I don't think players having too much money is that bad of an issue for virtual games. Honestly, I don't want gold to become an inhibiting factor in players playing the game!

For example, would you rather?:
Have everyone be millionaires in the game to the point where using gold is basically pointless because everyone can easily afford everything?

Have players struggling to pay the cost of mailing a letter or being unable to afford upgrading their mount today because gold is a scarce resource?

I would say that the first is the much better issue to have as a game as it does promote more fun and less struggle for players. However, it comes at the cost of making your ingame gold basically pointless.

I think ESO has also chosen option 1, probably for the same reason; the alternate is just worse for player engagement. I would like there to be a happen medium... but that may be hard to hit. I think the current system we have is the worst system... except for every other system that exists.

Honestly, I feel like zos chose option twom gold is easier to come by on PC but definitely not on console.

kargen27 · December 2022

King_*** wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Wayshrine fees must be kept because they are a gold sink. Gold sinks aren't flaws, they are necessary part of combating inflation.

I wasn't talking about wayshrine fees. Why bring them up?

Because you asked this question...

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

What other system must be kept because it is a gold sink?

So, I answered it. Wayshrine fees are another system that must be kept because it is a gold sink.

I didn't ask about wayshrine fees. I only noted that requiring a gold sink in the form of bidding for guild vendors each week was not a good design decision. Some gold sinks are better than others.

The game needs gold sinks. I can think of nine off the top of my head and quite frankly I think it needs more.

1 - Repairs, which is off set by repair kits.

2 - Bag space improvements.

3 - Wayshrines.

4 - Buying houses (off set by crown purchase option).

5 - Furniture lux vendor.

6 - Home and achievement furniture vendors.

7 - Golden (monster gear) vendor (off set by alliance points [I think]).

And more on point for this thread…

8 - The games “cut” on sold items through guild store.

9 - Guild’s “bid” on the guild vendors.

This last one is a big deal, it pulls a lot of gold out of circulation. And that extra gold stops inflation in a major way. The more gold a player has the less the price for things matter. Having a major gold sink helps.
(The problem though is that there are so many guild vendors now that price for each vendor could go down if there is not enough new guilds who want vendors around to offset it.)

I am still a bit baffled about what this thread is really about. A centralized hub (if that is the idea here) is just a bad idea in an economic sense, RP sense, and a game engine stand point.

The first two problems have already been touched on but let me elaborate on that third point.

Think of a standard guild vendor now, the amount of items posted allowed is 30 per guild member. Guilds are limited to 500 accounts max. So at most there can only be (30x500=)15,000 posted items at any one time.
Think about the delay it takes to search for something right now. Now multiply that by how many guilds will be “attached” to this centralized listing. Now think of all the people posting things and buying things constantly. Now let’s add for the game to determine what the average price should be of everything posted? (Do things that don’t sell count?) And you can already see where the wheels are starting to come off.

The guild vendor system we have now is fine. Guilds compete for better higher traffic areas so that increases gold sinks as the bidding gets higher. If where those guilds post things becomes less important through a centralized listing, than the need for “better locations” goes away, which decreases the gold sink on prime locations, which puts more gold in circulation, and which makes everything more expensive for rare items, while making cheaper (common) items pointless to post due to massive amounts of competition.

The current system promotes a healthy balance.

If you read the thread, I never once talkee about doing away with the guild traders gold sinks. I spoke on a way to improve the current system without scrapping how guild traders are obtained, so why do you guys keep talking about gold sinks if those post doesn't affect it?

Just reread the post, I did explain it. In fact, with my suggestions, more gold would be sinked, but you didn't see that did you?

"Player's should be able to find Market Boards in every country or a central trading Country/Island area that all guild traders in the game are linked too displaying all listed items in one place giving steady consistent pricing, and competitive prices."

That change would end guild traders as we know them. There would be zero reason to compete for heavy traffic locations. It would allow for easier market manipulation and it would drive many who play the economy like end game away from the game all together.
You didn't say you wanted to remove trade guilds or the gold sink but that is exactly what would happen if this change was made.