Merchant Archive

---

Baelin_Radiant wrote:

---

DocSavag wrote:

I knew it was coming soon as I had been working with TH to try to adjust the numbers upwards for a few days. I wasn't allowed to share those with you at the time.

---

Doc? Are these changes occurring now, as opposed to after JtL, because SOE is trying to accommodate the additional server demands of JtL? You stated that you have been working with TH on this. Why are these changes being made now? SOE stated they can't dedicate a lot of resources to non-JtL concerns at this time, yet this large effort is being made to merchant despite large changes needed in other areas. Why merchant? Why now? Is SOE trying to avoid the costs of additional server demands from JtL?

---

---

DocSavag wrote:

---

Baelin_Radiant wrote:

---

DocSavag wrote:

I knew it was coming soon as I had been working with TH to try to adjust the numbers upwards for a few days. I wasn't allowed to share those with you at the time.

---

Doc? Are these changes occurring now, as opposed to after JtL, because SOE is trying to accommodate the additional server demands of JtL? You stated that you have been working with TH on this. Why are these changes being made now? SOE stated they can't dedicate a lot of resources to non-JtL concerns at this time, yet this large effort is being made to merchant despite large changes needed in other areas. Why merchant? Why now? Is SOE trying to avoid the costs of additional server demands from JtL?

---

These changes were announced months ago. They were originally scheduled to be done when the bazaar was raised to 6k. They got pushed around on the schedule and they ended up here. I don't have any information that suggests there is any JTL connection to the change but I have no real way of knowing that. It don't think this is a huge effort in terms of resources to make the changes we are talking about (not trying to trivialize the change its huge for us but its not a lot of manhours to do)

As for the suggestion that I was "muzzled" or silenced..no please don't take it like that. Correspondants occasionally get a preview of a response that is going to go out to the community. TH shared the numbers with me about a week ago and he I were talking about such things as aggregate limits and other suggestions when the patch went to TC. I wasn't specifically slienced about it, we just don't talk about those announcements ahead of time as they are supposed to be released publically by the dev team. The point of this is that its still an ongoing process. I wasn't done pushing TH for aggregate limits and the raising of the limits when the patch went to TC. Its still a fluid situation at this point.

---

---

DocSavag wrote:
I'm not trying to talk you out of your theory that its related to JTL I don't know for sure. Doesn't seem likely to me based on what I know but it could be. It honestly seems more connected to varous comments the devs have made about the economy and their vision of what the economy should be. But that is just a guess too.

---

I do think there are areas that need to be addressed. Removing "ghost" vendors or denying vendors to those that have since given up the skills required to get them makes sense. These two changes alone would have helped the game in many areas. However, if a merchant is dedicated to their profession and keeps their vendors stocked with hundreds of viable and needed products, then how does this hurt the system? Everyone complains that they can't find well stocked vendors and this "cap" is going to make that happen much more.

This cap "can't" be economically driven. It sounds more like it is being imposed to sharply reduce server demands "despite" the detriment it poses to the players and/or merchants.

Let me ask you. As a merchant, do you see any way that this cap is going to actually help the economy? Granted, many vendors will be stripped of items that probably won't sell. These "sleeper" products will be gone, thus less database glut. But still, isn't this cap really just going to hurt everyone in the long run? If so, then why have it? Do you really think this cap is being imposed to help us? or help SOE?

---

joined42904 wrote:

Skypreacher,

You think the economy is fine. That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. I don't think the economy is fine. I think it is dominated by a relatively small number of oligopolists and that this needs to change. We have a sincere difference of opinion.

Maybe you are one of these oligopolists. Maybe you sell your profits on ebay. Maybe you don't.

I think the dominant crafter/ebay currency sellers are the folks who would have the biggest problem with this change. To be sure, not all of them do ebay. But surely some of them do. After all, it takes less time to sell 2 or so suits of armor than to farm credits using janta missions. Of course the latter is generally more fun. All those credits for sale on ebay came from somewhere. And I think this is where. The oligopolists.

The folks hurt by this "nerf" are the very folks who buy up experimentation attachments after they already have their 12 points.

Well...as a newer crafter who is harmed by this practice...I support the new vendor limits in full. And I don't think the numbers even need to be raised. I can deal with the numbers as they presently exist. And so...I think...can the oligopolists.

---

How did these players become so successful? They must have sold thousands of items every day for months, right? While I understand that you are trying to "spread the wealth", I think you are trying to use bad logic. If you open a small shoe store next to Walmart and then scream, Hey! No fair! Everyone is shopping there!" then you are not going to make your point. Do you really think Walmart should be crippled into becoming the same level as you just because you want to sell stuff too?

Is it Walmarts fault that you haven't gone through everything they haveto reach the level of success that they enjoy? These "super-merchants" that you seem angry with don't run automated stores. They invest incredible time and resources keeping the doors open. If you can't match their efforts, then you don't succeed like they do. Hard truth, but still.

And no.. ..I don't run a store. I do, however, appreciate going to a single location and finding well stocked vendors offering good items at reasonable prices. These changes are going to end that. If implemented, every store will be constantly low on products and I will be spending countless hours tracking down what I need.

---

joined42904 wrote:

Baelin,

You are comparing what folks are able to do in a game with what folks are able to do in a capitalist society. I think the analogy doesn't hold. Wal-Mart is allowed to exist because people need to jobs that are offered and people who don't earn much need to be able to buy inexpensive goods. Wal-Mart serves a role in the real world. This is a game world.

There aren't any players who need jobs as clerks at your hypothetical Wal-mart. Credits aren't that hard to come by once you figure out what you are doing. So...the reasons that justify Wal-Mart's existence in the real world don't exist in this game world.

You won't have to spend countless hours tracking down what you need. Find a location where you like to shop. Note the vendors that have the items you tend to want. Just check whether the vendor is on the map before travelling there. Your problem is solved just by thinking a bit before investing a lot of time. Of course not everyone does that. You did hear that empty vendors won't be on the map anymore, right? Or did you miss that in all the hysteria about the "nerf?"

I think you will do just fine buying from someone other than your friendly neighborhood oligopolist on occasion.

---

I disagree. Walmart doesn't exist because it is trying to keep people employed and I sincerely doubt the executives of the company are all wearing Robin Hood caps and patting themselves on the back for "feeding the poor." They're out to make money and they have succeeded in becoming quite successful at it. They put in the effort, and it has paid off for them. If a smaller store wants to scream foul, then that is just sour grapes.

As far as your statement that I will just have to find my favorite vendor and stick with them.. ..well, that would be fine if I was only playing this game with a hundred other players. Realistically, I'm playing with thousands of other players. They too, will be shopping at these stores. These stores will "all" be finding it hard to keep their vendors full. Chances are, if I find a shop that does a good job of staying fully stocked "despite" this proposed cap, then others will discover it too. Eventually, this store will get flooded so much that it will only be able to accommodate everyone if the owner stays on 24 hours a day and constantly keeps feeding the vendors. And where are they suppose to be getting this restock from? Are they suppose to be creating it on the fly? Doubtful considering the complexity of the rcrafting process.

Does this then mean that the nearby stores will now get increased business? To an extent, probably. But let me ask you, if they weren't able to keep up before, then how will they now? Will these other shop owners be willing to stay on for hours every day just to keep stocking vendors and crafting on the fly? Doubtful.