Merchant Archive
Thread: Vendors can no longer be traded between players (and no longer be placed in others houses)
DOH. I've wasted a lot of time juggling stuff I have on my lots and on my wife's lots accounts. Thanks for posting that information. I will try that out today.
Good question. Do they tranfer to the new owner, and if so do they tranfer back when you are finished? Are they still the property of the old owner through the transaction? And could the transistion bug them?
We need to tread cautiously on this one. Need to empty out a house except for like one item and test this.
I personally have used the TransferStructure command. It works great to set up your own vendors and then transfer it back to keep your own lots down. Nothing is lost in the house doing this. You do have to setup the Administrator List again, theses get cleared when transferred.
Tide Akeao
Ok I understand you can transfer now and nothing is lost but...
Say I transfer my home to BOB so he can drop his goods off. Does he now have the ability to pick up goods that were in the house?
Say I trnafer my home to BOB before I go offline. Does this work? Does the player you are transfering the home to need to be online or in the same area?
TeikoSun wrote:
Quick question...
Is the intent in not allowing players to trade vendors to require merchants to be shop owners now?
Frankly, we made a booboo and committed an oversight. There were exploits related to trading vendors, so we closed the loophole without realizing the implication of the broken house admin permissions. The result was a major nerf to merchant house-sharing. I do not have an ETA on a fix, because we are trying to devote the server programmers to stability 100% of their time right now--we see that as the biggest issue we need to resolve.
That said, we also uncovered bugs in how houses are working. Players were only supposed to get one house unless they were merchants. Well, that's clearly blown now. We do have to be very careful about item limits in SWG, so we are looking at probably setting house storage caps per house size, rather than it being a flat 250 for any house, like it is now.
-Raph Koster,
Creative Director
"Frankly, we made a booboo and committed an oversight. There were exploits related to trading vendors, so we closed the loophole without realizing the implication of the broken house admin permissions. The result was a major nerf to merchant house-sharing. I do not have an ETA on a fix, because we are trying to devote the server programmers to stability 100% of their time right now--we see that as the biggest issue we need to resolve."
- Well, okay. That sheds some light on the subject anyway.
"That said, we also uncovered bugs in how houses are working. Players were only supposed to get one house unless they were merchants. Well, that's clearly blown now. We do have to be very careful about item limits in SWG, so we are looking at probably setting house storage caps per house size, rather than it being a flat 250 for any house, like it is now."
- Whoa! Whoa whoa! Nice to learn this NOW!
- So let me see here. The plan WAS for merchants to be the only people who could own more than one house, and everyone else... everyone who was not a merchant... they only get one. This plan was known by... who? I don't think anyone even realized that the fact that anyone could own multiple houses was a bug! Nowhere in the skill, in the manual, or in the FAQdoes it even imply that merchants should be the only people who can own multiple houses.
- As an architect/merchant, I'm sure we can all understand how profound this is for me! How different would my professions both be if this one item had worked as intended??
- And what shall we do now? Leave merchant borked? Erase everyone else's 2nd-5th houses except for merchants?
I am more confused than ever on how vendors are INTENDED to work. Is it intended for vendors to reside in any house other than one owned by a merchant? Is it intended for any non-merchange to have admin access to vendors? I guess in a nutshell, how ARE player vendors intended to be used??
Heh... that caught your attention too, eh? I kind of did a double take at that as well.
Yet another item I'm going to add to my List of Things That Make You Go Hmmmmmm? 