Pirharri the Smuggler improvement

DenverRalphy · May 26

Jaraal wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

Just to play devils advocate for 1 moment...

What if they did remove the Smuggler's Fee, and they added Laundering to Pirharri! Why would a player ever go to a Fence in an Outlaw Refuge again?

See, look at Merchant Assistants. I bet players would love Merchant Assistants to fix armor, and sell lockpicks! But ZOS refuses to let Merchant Assistants do everything a "real" merchant can. Why? I think ZOS just doesn't want Assistants to make existing things in the game 100% obsolete. Which... I actually think is admirable. Even though some players claim they would want it, it would be a bad thing for the game ON THE WHOLE to have players shut up in their houses, using assistants to do everything, never needing to go into town themselves.

This is exactly why Pirrhari doesn't fence, banker assistants don't have guild access, and the merchant doesn't repair armor. ZOS wants people to have to go to towns, so they look busy and vibrant, and the game looks like it's thriving. Which is also why you'll never be able to do writs in your house, too.

Well, actually you can do writs in your house. You just can't pick them up or drop them off.

shadyjane62 · May 26

Billium813 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I doubt they will remove the fee our assistant charges since doing so also eliminates the risk of thieving.

Basically, if someone has a bounty they can dump their ill gotten loot via the assistant without risk of guards taking it. If they want full price then they need to risk traveling to the fence. It seems to be a clear design.

What "risk of of thieving" are you talking about? I mean, it's not like Thieves Guild entrances are all in the center of town, surrounded by town Guards. It's not exactly hard to get to a Fence, so that "risk" is already incredibly small. I get it, I get the idea of the design conceptually, but in practice it just doesn't work that way. Maybe if random NPCs could nark on you and summon guards... but there just aren't enough guards in the game to create a real "risk" and Thieves Guilds are already positioned out of town.

Also, we are talking 10's of gold here. No on is getting rich selling Stolen Goods to Fences. All the Fee does is make no one want to use Pirharri at all.

Ten years I have played this game. Not once have I used the smuggler because the 35% is outrageous.

TBH I had to think twice who the smuggler was.

Gray_howling_parrot · May 26

Amottica wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I doubt they will remove the fee our assistant charges since doing so also eliminates the risk of thieving.

Basically, if someone has a bounty they can dump their ill gotten loot via the assistant without risk of guards taking it. If they want full price then they need to risk traveling to the fence. It seems to be a clear design.

What "risk of of thieving" are you talking about? I mean, it's not like Thieves Guild entrances are all in the center of town, surrounded by town Guards. It's not exactly hard to get to a Fence, so that "risk" is already incredibly small. I get it, I get the idea of the design conceptually, but in practice it just doesn't work that way. Maybe if random NPCs could nark on you and summon guards... but there just aren't enough guards in the game to create a real "risk" and Thieves Guilds are already positioned out of town.

Also, we are talking 10's of gold here. No on is getting rich selling Stolen Goods to Fences. All the Fee does is make no one want to use Pirharri at all.

The risk is clear and obvious. Granted, I don’t find it hard to avoid or run from a guard but there is still a risk that is very evident.

As you indicated, it’s not hard to get to a den so there is little reason for Zenimax to change their mind on this as the design seems to have been created on purpose.

Design choices are made all the time that may conceptually make sense in 2014 but in practice in all of the following years and especially 10 years later, it's just silly.

There's no difficulty getting to a thieves den just like there's no difficulty running back to town to get to a merchant or banker. The assistants are there to provide ease of access and that's it - not to RP and conceptually try to make sense of an in-game mechanic.

It's something that definitely needs to be changed. Conceptual or not - their frame of thinking with it makes the assistant unusable, so that's bad design.

SilverBride · May 26

I've never used Pirharri because of the fee. I just port to Sleek Creek House if I have a bounty and safely walk right into the Outlaw's Refuge.

I would use it though, if they removed the fee.

kargen27 · May 26

Cooperharley wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I doubt they will remove the fee our assistant charges since doing so also eliminates the risk of thieving.

Basically, if someone has a bounty they can dump their ill gotten loot via the assistant without risk of guards taking it. If they want full price then they need to risk traveling to the fence. It seems to be a clear design.

What "risk of of thieving" are you talking about? I mean, it's not like Thieves Guild entrances are all in the center of town, surrounded by town Guards. It's not exactly hard to get to a Fence, so that "risk" is already incredibly small. I get it, I get the idea of the design conceptually, but in practice it just doesn't work that way. Maybe if random NPCs could nark on you and summon guards... but there just aren't enough guards in the game to create a real "risk" and Thieves Guilds are already positioned out of town.

Also, we are talking 10's of gold here. No on is getting rich selling Stolen Goods to Fences. All the Fee does is make no one want to use Pirharri at all.

The risk is clear and obvious. Granted, I don’t find it hard to avoid or run from a guard but there is still a risk that is very evident.

As you indicated, it’s not hard to get to a den so there is little reason for Zenimax to change their mind on this as the design seems to have been created on purpose.

Design choices are made all the time that may conceptually make sense in 2014 but in practice in all of the following years and especially 10 years later, it's just silly.

There's no difficulty getting to a thieves den just like there's no difficulty running back to town to get to a merchant or banker. The assistants are there to provide ease of access and that's it - not to RP and conceptually try to make sense of an in-game mechanic.

It's something that definitely needs to be changed. Conceptual or not - their frame of thinking with it makes the assistant unusable, so that's bad design.

The banker and merchant also have limited use. All by design and all good for the game. THe zones/towns need to feel populated and assistants that have full functionality take away from that.

kargen27 · May 26

shadyjane62 wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I doubt they will remove the fee our assistant charges since doing so also eliminates the risk of thieving.

Basically, if someone has a bounty they can dump their ill gotten loot via the assistant without risk of guards taking it. If they want full price then they need to risk traveling to the fence. It seems to be a clear design.

What "risk of of thieving" are you talking about? I mean, it's not like Thieves Guild entrances are all in the center of town, surrounded by town Guards. It's not exactly hard to get to a Fence, so that "risk" is already incredibly small. I get it, I get the idea of the design conceptually, but in practice it just doesn't work that way. Maybe if random NPCs could nark on you and summon guards... but there just aren't enough guards in the game to create a real "risk" and Thieves Guilds are already positioned out of town.

Also, we are talking 10's of gold here. No on is getting rich selling Stolen Goods to Fences. All the Fee does is make no one want to use Pirharri at all.

Ten years I have played this game. Not once have I used the smuggler because the 35% is outrageous.

TBH I had to think twice who the smuggler was.

Almost every time there is an endeavor that includes stealing or looting I use the smuggler. Before I had the smuggler I would leave the white stuff worth next to nothing lying there on the ground. Now I get a bit of gold out of it. If I have something of more value I can take the time to visit a thieves den.

TaSheen · May 26

kargen27 wrote: »

Cooperharley wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I doubt they will remove the fee our assistant charges since doing so also eliminates the risk of thieving.

Basically, if someone has a bounty they can dump their ill gotten loot via the assistant without risk of guards taking it. If they want full price then they need to risk traveling to the fence. It seems to be a clear design.

What "risk of of thieving" are you talking about? I mean, it's not like Thieves Guild entrances are all in the center of town, surrounded by town Guards. It's not exactly hard to get to a Fence, so that "risk" is already incredibly small. I get it, I get the idea of the design conceptually, but in practice it just doesn't work that way. Maybe if random NPCs could nark on you and summon guards... but there just aren't enough guards in the game to create a real "risk" and Thieves Guilds are already positioned out of town.

Also, we are talking 10's of gold here. No on is getting rich selling Stolen Goods to Fences. All the Fee does is make no one want to use Pirharri at all.

The risk is clear and obvious. Granted, I don’t find it hard to avoid or run from a guard but there is still a risk that is very evident.

As you indicated, it’s not hard to get to a den so there is little reason for Zenimax to change their mind on this as the design seems to have been created on purpose.

Design choices are made all the time that may conceptually make sense in 2014 but in practice in all of the following years and especially 10 years later, it's just silly.

There's no difficulty getting to a thieves den just like there's no difficulty running back to town to get to a merchant or banker. The assistants are there to provide ease of access and that's it - not to RP and conceptually try to make sense of an in-game mechanic.

It's something that definitely needs to be changed. Conceptual or not - their frame of thinking with it makes the assistant unusable, so that's bad design.

The banker and merchant also have limited use. All by design and all good for the game. THe zones/towns need to feel populated and assistants that have full functionality take away from that.

Well.... I thought so - until starting my new baby account. I'm waiting on the next discount on the banker at least - because more than a dozen times an hour in playing my low level new girls on that account both PC NA and EU, hit F9 to pull up Ezabi - and then realize I don't HAVE Ezabi on that account yet....

SpiritKitten · May 27

Because of the new Larcenist achievements, this npc is even more undesirable.

kargen27 · May 27

TaSheen wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Cooperharley wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Billium813 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I doubt they will remove the fee our assistant charges since doing so also eliminates the risk of thieving.

Basically, if someone has a bounty they can dump their ill gotten loot via the assistant without risk of guards taking it. If they want full price then they need to risk traveling to the fence. It seems to be a clear design.

What "risk of of thieving" are you talking about? I mean, it's not like Thieves Guild entrances are all in the center of town, surrounded by town Guards. It's not exactly hard to get to a Fence, so that "risk" is already incredibly small. I get it, I get the idea of the design conceptually, but in practice it just doesn't work that way. Maybe if random NPCs could nark on you and summon guards... but there just aren't enough guards in the game to create a real "risk" and Thieves Guilds are already positioned out of town.

Also, we are talking 10's of gold here. No on is getting rich selling Stolen Goods to Fences. All the Fee does is make no one want to use Pirharri at all.

The risk is clear and obvious. Granted, I don’t find it hard to avoid or run from a guard but there is still a risk that is very evident.

As you indicated, it’s not hard to get to a den so there is little reason for Zenimax to change their mind on this as the design seems to have been created on purpose.

Design choices are made all the time that may conceptually make sense in 2014 but in practice in all of the following years and especially 10 years later, it's just silly.

There's no difficulty getting to a thieves den just like there's no difficulty running back to town to get to a merchant or banker. The assistants are there to provide ease of access and that's it - not to RP and conceptually try to make sense of an in-game mechanic.

It's something that definitely needs to be changed. Conceptual or not - their frame of thinking with it makes the assistant unusable, so that's bad design.

The banker and merchant also have limited use. All by design and all good for the game. THe zones/towns need to feel populated and assistants that have full functionality take away from that.

Well.... I thought so - until starting my new baby account. I'm waiting on the next discount on the banker at least - because more than a dozen times an hour in playing my low level new girls on that account both PC NA and EU, hit F9 to pull up Ezabi - and then realize I don't HAVE Ezabi on that account yet....

yeah, I use mine often and the banker assistant was the first purchase I made with ESO+ crowns on my 2nd account. I'm fine with the limited functionality of the assistants. I'm opposed to full functionality because we need some reason to go back to town.

DenverRalphy · May 27

If a change needs to be made, I seriously doubt the playerbase will like it, because there's really only one way to fix it. In fact, they'll scream bloody murder if it is fixed.

The fee can't be removed, and they sure as hell can't give it the ability to Launder items either. Why? Because that would make the Justice system completely pointless because everybody could just walk around thieving willy nilly.If you can just dump or wash your treasure/loot on the fly as you go, then the bounty system is effectively taken out of the game because you can just let guards kill you to remove the bounty, and even empty inventory slots being taken up by garbage treasures.

So what's the fix if the Justice System is just so easy to circumnavigate that the assistant's limitetd use is antiquated and pointless? Simple really. Bolster and beef up the justice system so that it's not a trivial matter to get around it. Crank up the bounty-decay times, increase the bounties, extend the aggro range of guards, and let guards whip out that 1-Shot Kill crossbow bolt more often that they currently very rarely use.

Pirhrarri wouldn't be looking so bad then, would she?

vsrs_au · May 27

DenverRalphy wrote: »

If a change needs to be made, I seriously doubt the playerbase will like it, because there's really only one way to fix it. In fact, they'll scream bloody murder if it is fixed.

The fee can't be removed, and they sure as hell can't give it the ability to Launder items either. Why? Because that would make the Justice system completely pointless because everybody could just walk around thieving willy nilly.If you can just dump or wash your treasure/loot on the fly as you go, then the bounty system is effectively taken out of the game because you can just let guards kill you to remove the bounty, and even empty inventory slots being taken up by garbage treasures.

So what's the fix if the Justice System is just so easy to circumnavigate that the assistant's limitetd use is antiquated and pointless? Simple really. Bolster and beef up the justice system so that it's not a trivial matter to get around it. Crank up the bounty-decay times, increase the bounties, extend the aggro range of guards, and let guards whip out that 1-Shot Kill crossbow bolt more often that they currently very rarely use.

Pirhrarri wouldn't be looking so bad then, would she?

The only flaw in that argument is that, as someone already mentioned in this thread, you can travel to a house (e.g. Sleek Creek), go straight into the nearest outlaw's refuge, and use the fence there. That already allows anyone to steal without consequences. This basically makes Pirharri obsolete.

SilverBride · May 27

What is the point of an assistant that isn't being used because of its exorbitant fees? I don't see any way that removing this fee would hurt the justice system.

DenverRalphy · May 27

vsrs_au wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

If a change needs to be made, I seriously doubt the playerbase will like it, because there's really only one way to fix it. In fact, they'll scream bloody murder if it is fixed.

The fee can't be removed, and they sure as hell can't give it the ability to Launder items either. Why? Because that would make the Justice system completely pointless because everybody could just walk around thieving willy nilly.If you can just dump or wash your treasure/loot on the fly as you go, then the bounty system is effectively taken out of the game because you can just let guards kill you to remove the bounty, and even empty inventory slots being taken up by garbage treasures.

So what's the fix if the Justice System is just so easy to circumnavigate that the assistant's limitetd use is antiquated and pointless? Simple really. Bolster and beef up the justice system so that it's not a trivial matter to get around it. Crank up the bounty-decay times, increase the bounties, extend the aggro range of guards, and let guards whip out that 1-Shot Kill crossbow bolt more often that they currently very rarely use.

Pirhrarri wouldn't be looking so bad then, would she?

The only flaw in that argument is that, as someone already mentioned in this thread, you can travel to a house (e.g. Sleek Creek), go straight into the nearest outlaw's refuge, and use the fence there. That already allows anyone to steal without consequences. This basically makes Pirharri obsolete.

And Emmisary's Enclave has a door exiting directly into an Outlaw Refuge. But it doesn't matter.

Even the best thieves get spotted from time to time, and often at very unfortunate times. And traveling to the house every time you pick something up worth any value is too much trouble, and often bad for your crime spree because other thieves will step right into your rotation while you're zoning.

For example, the Vvardenfell safebox run throughout the zone. No thief who knows what they're doing is going to scurry home after they pick every safebox and pocket in an area. They[re gonna go straight to the next area because the competition is pretty cutthroat. They're not headed back to safety until they either collect a substantial number of high value treasures, or hit a big score with a 500k-5mil drop, or they complete the loop. They don't want to keep porting home to safety, because they know the chances are high that another thief will have cleaned the next area while they were gone.

vsrs_au · May 27

DenverRalphy wrote: »

vsrs_au wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

If a change needs to be made, I seriously doubt the playerbase will like it, because there's really only one way to fix it. In fact, they'll scream bloody murder if it is fixed.

The fee can't be removed, and they sure as hell can't give it the ability to Launder items either. Why? Because that would make the Justice system completely pointless because everybody could just walk around thieving willy nilly.If you can just dump or wash your treasure/loot on the fly as you go, then the bounty system is effectively taken out of the game because you can just let guards kill you to remove the bounty, and even empty inventory slots being taken up by garbage treasures.

So what's the fix if the Justice System is just so easy to circumnavigate that the assistant's limitetd use is antiquated and pointless? Simple really. Bolster and beef up the justice system so that it's not a trivial matter to get around it. Crank up the bounty-decay times, increase the bounties, extend the aggro range of guards, and let guards whip out that 1-Shot Kill crossbow bolt more often that they currently very rarely use.

Pirhrarri wouldn't be looking so bad then, would she?

The only flaw in that argument is that, as someone already mentioned in this thread, you can travel to a house (e.g. Sleek Creek), go straight into the nearest outlaw's refuge, and use the fence there. That already allows anyone to steal without consequences. This basically makes Pirharri obsolete.

And Emmisary's Enclave has a door exiting directly into an Outlaw Refuge. But it doesn't matter.

Even the best thieves get spotted from time to time, and often at very unfortunate times. And traveling to the house every time you pick something up worth any value is too much trouble, and often bad for your crime spree because other thieves will step right into your rotation while you're zoning.

For example, the Vvardenfell safebox run throughout the zone. No thief who knows what they're doing is going to scurry home after they pick every safebox and pocket in an area. They[re gonna go straight to the next area because the competition is pretty cutthroat. They're not headed back to safety until they either collect a substantial number of high value treasures, or hit a big score with a 500k-5mil drop, or they complete the loop. They don't want to keep porting home to safety, because they know the chances are high that another thief will have cleaned the next area while they were gone.

Well, I weigh that inconvenience against the 35% fence fee, and guess which one wins?

DenverRalphy · May 27

vsrs_au wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

vsrs_au wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

If a change needs to be made, I seriously doubt the playerbase will like it, because there's really only one way to fix it. In fact, they'll scream bloody murder if it is fixed.

The fee can't be removed, and they sure as hell can't give it the ability to Launder items either. Why? Because that would make the Justice system completely pointless because everybody could just walk around thieving willy nilly.If you can just dump or wash your treasure/loot on the fly as you go, then the bounty system is effectively taken out of the game because you can just let guards kill you to remove the bounty, and even empty inventory slots being taken up by garbage treasures.

So what's the fix if the Justice System is just so easy to circumnavigate that the assistant's limitetd use is antiquated and pointless? Simple really. Bolster and beef up the justice system so that it's not a trivial matter to get around it. Crank up the bounty-decay times, increase the bounties, extend the aggro range of guards, and let guards whip out that 1-Shot Kill crossbow bolt more often that they currently very rarely use.

Pirhrarri wouldn't be looking so bad then, would she?

The only flaw in that argument is that, as someone already mentioned in this thread, you can travel to a house (e.g. Sleek Creek), go straight into the nearest outlaw's refuge, and use the fence there. That already allows anyone to steal without consequences. This basically makes Pirharri obsolete.

And Emmisary's Enclave has a door exiting directly into an Outlaw Refuge. But it doesn't matter.

Even the best thieves get spotted from time to time, and often at very unfortunate times. And traveling to the house every time you pick something up worth any value is too much trouble, and often bad for your crime spree because other thieves will step right into your rotation while you're zoning.

For example, the Vvardenfell safebox run throughout the zone. No thief who knows what they're doing is going to scurry home after they pick every safebox and pocket in an area. They[re gonna go straight to the next area because the competition is pretty cutthroat. They're not headed back to safety until they either collect a substantial number of high value treasures, or hit a big score with a 500k-5mil drop, or they complete the loop. They don't want to keep porting home to safety, because they know the chances are high that another thief will have cleaned the next area while they were gone.

Well, I weigh that inconvenience against the 35% fence fee, and guess which one wins?

Yup, that is correct. Which brings us back to how to fix it. Remove the fee, literally making a trivial justice system 100% useless. Or fix the justice system to give the 35% fee an actual consideration?

vsrs_au · May 27

DenverRalphy wrote: »

vsrs_au wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

vsrs_au wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

If a change needs to be made, I seriously doubt the playerbase will like it, because there's really only one way to fix it. In fact, they'll scream bloody murder if it is fixed.

The fee can't be removed, and they sure as hell can't give it the ability to Launder items either. Why? Because that would make the Justice system completely pointless because everybody could just walk around thieving willy nilly.If you can just dump or wash your treasure/loot on the fly as you go, then the bounty system is effectively taken out of the game because you can just let guards kill you to remove the bounty, and even empty inventory slots being taken up by garbage treasures.

So what's the fix if the Justice System is just so easy to circumnavigate that the assistant's limitetd use is antiquated and pointless? Simple really. Bolster and beef up the justice system so that it's not a trivial matter to get around it. Crank up the bounty-decay times, increase the bounties, extend the aggro range of guards, and let guards whip out that 1-Shot Kill crossbow bolt more often that they currently very rarely use.

Pirhrarri wouldn't be looking so bad then, would she?

The only flaw in that argument is that, as someone already mentioned in this thread, you can travel to a house (e.g. Sleek Creek), go straight into the nearest outlaw's refuge, and use the fence there. That already allows anyone to steal without consequences. This basically makes Pirharri obsolete.

And Emmisary's Enclave has a door exiting directly into an Outlaw Refuge. But it doesn't matter.

Even the best thieves get spotted from time to time, and often at very unfortunate times. And traveling to the house every time you pick something up worth any value is too much trouble, and often bad for your crime spree because other thieves will step right into your rotation while you're zoning.

For example, the Vvardenfell safebox run throughout the zone. No thief who knows what they're doing is going to scurry home after they pick every safebox and pocket in an area. They[re gonna go straight to the next area because the competition is pretty cutthroat. They're not headed back to safety until they either collect a substantial number of high value treasures, or hit a big score with a 500k-5mil drop, or they complete the loop. They don't want to keep porting home to safety, because they know the chances are high that another thief will have cleaned the next area while they were gone.

Well, I weigh that inconvenience against the 35% fence fee, and guess which one wins?

Yup, that is correct. Which brings us back to how to fix it. Remove the fee, literally making a trivial justice system 100% useless. Or fix the justice system to give the 35% fee an actual consideration?

Please stop acting as a self-appointed moderator, i.e. mentioning the time between my earlier post and the previous one, even though this topic is still very much relevant. Since you're also aiming your posts at me, not the topic, I have no further comment to add to this thread.

tincanman · May 27

tincanman wrote: »

The 'fee' of 35% can be completely negated by having all the relevant legerdemain and thieves guild passives (not including cp, I think).

I expect the developers made Piranha (or whatever) with that in mind.

Since thread is necroed....updating/correcting this.

The fee can be [edit]completely negated mitigated (see this comment by @virtus753 ) [/edit] with Thieves Guild Haggling passive (+10%) and the green cp star 'infamous' (+25%). Still think devs had this in mind when creating this npc.

With some of the requests to remove the penalty, I doubt zos will fix it with Piranha (or whatever her name is - I don't use her either) but might introduce a new crown-store exclusive assistant who doesn't have the penalty and looks like a cat, bird, factotum...

Alinhbo_Tyaka · May 27

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Wow, necro post almost a year old. But I'll contribute.

If Pirharri didn't have the 35% fee, and could launder, then the entire Bounty System would simply become obsolete.

Thieves could simply pick a pocket, sell the loot. Crack open a safebox, sell the treasure and launder the big score. Get stopped by a guard? pffft... take the death because there's nothing to lose because you've already sold/laundered everything and you get a free bounty reset and the junk/trash items are confiscated to clear your inventory slots.

And if that's the case. Might as well just go back to Pre-Justice system and everything is just lootable.

The bounty problem can be resolved by not allowing Piharri to be called when the player has a bounty on them.

Czeri · May 27

tincanman wrote: »

tincanman wrote: »

The 'fee' of 35% can be completely negated by having all the relevant legerdemain and thieves guild passives (not including cp, I think).

I expect the developers made Piranha (or whatever) with that in mind.

Since thread is necroed....updating/correcting this.

The fee can be completely negated with Thieves Guild Haggling passive (+10%) and the green cp star 'infamous' (+25%). Still think devs had this in mind when creating this npc.

With some of the requests to remove the penalty, I doubt zos will fix it with Piranha (or whatever her name is - I don't use her either) but might introduce a new crown-store exclusive assistant who doesn't have the penalty and looks like a cat, bird, factotum...

It's not really negating the fee if you still get 35% less for using the smuggler than if you used a regular fence even with the passive and champion points. It just goes 100% with the smuggler vs 135% with the fence as opposed to 65% with the smuggler and 100% with the fence.

It's not a useful assistant if you're trying to complete the larceny achievements, but it's very useful if you happen to find yourself with something stolen and can't be bothered to deal with loading screens...

MreeBiPolar · May 27

Jaraal wrote: »

This is exactly why Pirrhari doesn't fence, banker assistants don't have guild access, and the merchant doesn't repair armor. ZOS wants people to have to go to towns, so they look busy and vibrant, and the game looks like it's thriving. Which is also why you'll never be able to do writs in your house, too.

On that note, what's a meaningful reason for outlaw refuge bankers to not have guild access? There even are guild vendors in the refuges...

Jaraal · May 28

MreeBiPolar wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

This is exactly why Pirrhari doesn't fence, banker assistants don't have guild access, and the merchant doesn't repair armor. ZOS wants people to have to go to towns, so they look busy and vibrant, and the game looks like it's thriving. Which is also why you'll never be able to do writs in your house, too.

On that note, what's a meaningful reason for outlaw refuge bankers to not have guild access?

You'd have to ask ZOS that question, as it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, either.

Metafae · May 28

Killing two birds with one stone here.

Trafficker Passive Issue:
Currently, if you have no skill points in the Trafficker passive, you can fence 50 items and launder another 50 items per day.
After spending just one skill point in this passive, the daily limit increases to 110 items per category (an additional 60 items per category).

Subsequent skill points add only 10 items per category each, up to a maximum of 140 items per day per category.

Proposed Solution:
Change the Trafficker passive progression to:
50 items (no skill points)
60 items (1 skill point)
80 items (2 skill points)
110 items (3 skill points)
150 items (4 skill points)

Additionally, allow selling to Pirharri beyond the daily limit, but consider adjusting the fee (perhaps increasing it to 50%).

This gives her a purpose and drives players to get her.

virtus753 · May 28

tincanman wrote: »

tincanman wrote: »

The 'fee' of 35% can be completely negated by having all the relevant legerdemain and thieves guild passives (not including cp, I think).

I expect the developers made Piranha (or whatever) with that in mind.

Since thread is necroed....updating/correcting this.

The fee can be completely negated with Thieves Guild Haggling passive (+10%) and the green cp star 'infamous' (+25%). Still think devs had this in mind when creating this npc.

The fee cannot be completed negated.

Her cut is multiplicative. Haggling and Infamous are first additive with each other and then multiplicative. The game does not just do -35% for her cut and +35% for your bonuses. It multiplies by 0.65 for her cut and then by 1.35 for the two bonuses combined. The result is 87.75%.

Check this screenshot - you will see Haggling Bonus 35% in the lower right because I have both Infamous and Haggling. Pirharri will still only give me 880 gold for a stack of 10x 100-gold green items, or 88 gold each. She will give 35 gold per white treasure, which have a default price tag of 40 gold (40 * 0.65 * 1.35 = 35.1).

Necrotech_Master · May 28

as i posted in my original post on this thread, i use her mainly for quickly leveling legerdemain

go to khenarthis roost, kill 100s of sheep and get the white meat

white meat only "sells" for like 1-2 gold each at a fence, 35% of that probably gets rounded so your still probably getting 1g each for the item

even bulk selling, fencing 100 units at 1g each would only be loss of like 35g (as i believe its 35% of the total, you might be able to get around that with the time consuming method to sell each item individually by splitting the stack due to the low individual sale amount)

instead of running back to the fence every few min i just have her out while leveling legerdemain

tincanman · May 28

virtus753 wrote: »

tincanman wrote: »

tincanman wrote: »

The 'fee' of 35% can be completely negated by having all the relevant legerdemain and thieves guild passives (not including cp, I think).

I expect the developers made Piranha (or whatever) with that in mind.

Since thread is necroed....updating/correcting this.

The fee can be completely negated with Thieves Guild Haggling passive (+10%) and the green cp star 'infamous' (+25%). Still think devs had this in mind when creating this npc.

The fee cannot be completed negated.

Her cut is multiplicative. Haggling and Infamous are first additive with each other and then multiplicative. The game does not just do -35% for her cut and +35% for your bonuses. It multiplies by 0.65 for her cut and then by 1.35 for the two bonuses combined. The result is 87.75%.

Check this screenshot - you will see Haggling Bonus 35% in the lower right because I have both Infamous and Haggling. Pirharri will still only give me 880 gold for a stack of 10x 100-gold green items, or 88 gold each. She will give 35 gold per white treasure, which have a default price tag of 40 gold (40 * 0.65 * 1.35 = 35.1).

Thanks for the correction, and for checking, which I confess, I did not do and incorrectly assumed they were additive and therefore simply cancelled. Apologies; as I mentioned earlier I don't use that assistant and never have.

On checking I came by the same results slightly differently: 0.65 to account Piranah's(edit: or whatever her name is) cut to which is added 0.35 of that result due to haggling[0.2275] - the result is same at listed_price * 0.8775 (or, more fully, listed_price * [0.65 + 0.2275] ).

Thanks again - greatly appreciate the insightful check & correction.

belial5221_ESO · May 28

They made her that way for a reason.It's to make people go out into the world to make the world lively.It's why there's no daily craft writs in homes,master writ turnins,guldbank/guild access,etc.

virtus753 · May 28

tincanman wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

tincanman wrote: »

tincanman wrote: »

The 'fee' of 35% can be completely negated by having all the relevant legerdemain and thieves guild passives (not including cp, I think).

I expect the developers made Piranha (or whatever) with that in mind.

Since thread is necroed....updating/correcting this.

The fee can be completely negated with Thieves Guild Haggling passive (+10%) and the green cp star 'infamous' (+25%). Still think devs had this in mind when creating this npc.

The fee cannot be completed negated.

Her cut is multiplicative. Haggling and Infamous are first additive with each other and then multiplicative. The game does not just do -35% for her cut and +35% for your bonuses. It multiplies by 0.65 for her cut and then by 1.35 for the two bonuses combined. The result is 87.75%.

Check this screenshot - you will see Haggling Bonus 35% in the lower right because I have both Infamous and Haggling. Pirharri will still only give me 880 gold for a stack of 10x 100-gold green items, or 88 gold each. She will give 35 gold per white treasure, which have a default price tag of 40 gold (40 * 0.65 * 1.35 = 35.1).

Thanks for the correction, and for checking, which I confess, I did not do and incorrectly assumed they were additive and therefore simply cancelled. Apologies; as I mentioned earlier I don't use that assistant and never have.

On checking I came by the same results slightly differently: 0.65 to account Piranah's(edit: or whatever her name is) cut to which is added 0.35 of that result due to haggling[0.2275] - the result is same at listed_price * 0.8775 (or, more fully, listed_price * [0.65 + 0.2275] ).

Thanks again - greatly appreciate the insightful check & correction.

No problem! Thank you for the alternative solution.

I would agree that they should cancel each other out, but we know from damage and damage mitigation issues that sometimes things are programmed additively when they should be multiplicative and vice versa.