Merchant Archive
Thread: can this be addressed w/o being flamed
BountyBlunter
Mon May 31, 2004 4:42 am
#27
DragonScout wrote:
Is there anywhere that the DEVs have specifically said that using the vendors as storage is a bug/exploit? If so, post the link.
Technically the item is still for sale, just at a very expensive price, so the vendor is still working. You are not using it in a way that the vendor is storing items and yet customers are completely unable to buy the items on there. You are just placing items on a vendor for high prices. That cannot be classified as a bug/exploit because everything is working as intended.
True..
However if you are putting an item on sale for 100,000,000c which is worth 100,000c there is virtually no chance that item will be sold if the asking price is 1000x the going rate.. I'm curious what is the/your reasoning behind selling that item at such an infalted price and could you back up that reasoning with previous sales and future sales projections?
I would love to know if actually selling items at x(silly figure) the going rate will provide me with some infrequent but highly profitable sales.. Everything I put on sale at slightly over going rate (a few cpu) seems to stay in my vendor alot longer, so long I can usually add more stock to the vendor and reduce the price on the infalted items to stimulate sales...
(presuming of course that you are taking this literally in that you are intending to sell the item)
DragonScout
Mon May 31, 2004 4:47 am
#28
I don't take it literally. 
If you put it for sale at 10x the going cost, it won't sell. And that is the point. BUT. that doesn't change the fact that it COULD sell. So the system is not broke, and vendors are not being exploited.
If you put it for sale at 10x the going cost, it won't sell. And that is the point. BUT. that doesn't change the fact that it COULD sell. So the system is not broke, and vendors are not being exploited.
DragonScout
Mon May 31, 2004 5:20 am
#29
The problem is, is that they cannot get rid of this 'feature' without taking out vendors or nerfing them to uselessness. How is a computer ever going to be able to determine your intentions? It can't. Especially not in a player based economy where the value of anything can change in an instant depending on what is the FOTM. So it doesn't matter if they put a limit on the number of items a vendor can hold, people will always be able to use vendors as storage if they choose. And clearly, from what Thunderheart said on his post, vendors being used as storage is NOT the reason they were going to lower the item limit.
That people do it, isn't an issue. That some people consider it an exploit, is. It isn't, at all. Because the vendors are working as intended. You, the player, determines what it is worth to you, and place it up for sale. Regardless if you are placing it there for storage or to actually be bought is not an issue, because the mechanics don't care. The item is on the vendor, and it can be bought if someone wants to pay the price you put on it. That is end of story. No exploit, no bug, no problem at all. It is merchants, unhappy about the DEVs placing a limit on vendors, trying to find a place to lay the blame -- and they are wrong.
That people do it, isn't an issue. That some people consider it an exploit, is. It isn't, at all. Because the vendors are working as intended. You, the player, determines what it is worth to you, and place it up for sale. Regardless if you are placing it there for storage or to actually be bought is not an issue, because the mechanics don't care. The item is on the vendor, and it can be bought if someone wants to pay the price you put on it. That is end of story. No exploit, no bug, no problem at all. It is merchants, unhappy about the DEVs placing a limit on vendors, trying to find a place to lay the blame -- and they are wrong.
Message Edited by DragonScout on 05-31-2004 05:21 AM
DragonScout
Mon May 31, 2004 5:28 am
#30
oh, and I agree. If they do place a limit on vendors, they should also give merchants a higher limit the closer they get to master. That would be a good benefit to being merchant.
Unfortunately, it is still centered around vendors. Until they completely rewrite the merchant profession, and make vendors just a small portion of what makes up merchant as a whole, it will never be more than a utility profession in my opinion. and I think that THAT is the main problem/issue that merchants in general should be complaining about. Not vendor poaching or vendors used as storage. Those are very small consequences of the overall problem. You don't cure a sickness by treating the symptoms.. you cure it by attacking the root of the problem itself.
Unfortunately, it is still centered around vendors. Until they completely rewrite the merchant profession, and make vendors just a small portion of what makes up merchant as a whole, it will never be more than a utility profession in my opinion. and I think that THAT is the main problem/issue that merchants in general should be complaining about. Not vendor poaching or vendors used as storage. Those are very small consequences of the overall problem. You don't cure a sickness by treating the symptoms.. you cure it by attacking the root of the problem itself.
BountyBlunter
Mon May 31, 2004 5:54 am
#31
DragonScout wrote:
The problem is, is that they cannot get rid of this 'feature' without taking out vendors or nerfing them to uselessness. How is a computer ever going to be able to determine your intentions? It can't. Especially not in a player based economy where the value of anything can change in an instant depending on what is the FOTM. So it doesn't matter if they put a limit on the number of items a vendor can hold, people will always be able to use vendors as storage if they choose. And clearly, from what Thunderheart said on his post, vendors being used as storage is NOT the reason they were going to lower the item limit.
That people do it, isn't an issue. That some people consider it an exploit, is. It isn't, at all. Because the vendors are working as intended. You, the player, determines what it is worth to you, and place it up for sale. Regardless if you are placing it there for storage or to actually be bought is not an issue, because the mechanics don't care. The item is on the vendor, and it can be bought if someone wants to pay the price you put on it. That is end of story. No exploit, no bug, no problem at all. It is merchants, unhappy about the DEVs placing a limit on vendors, trying to find a place to lay the blame -- and they are wrong.Message Edited by DragonScout on 05-31-2004 05:21 AM
It's using the vendor as storage, but no it's not an exploit if you take the system literally. A vendor nerf wouldn't bother me but it should be tied into the level of merchant which you are just to give more depth to the profession instead of just slapping it down.
The database in this game is apparently an issue for SOE, and we know that, so I see that vendors with items purely for storage are contributing to a section of their database which is undergoing a future change, for whatever reason. As a coder I think that the reasoning behind that change is that as the game progresses so do the number of items being stored by the players which in turn increases the complexity of the database. Players can exploit the merchant profession so they can keep +6 vendors, there are a limited ammount of places players can store items and the only one with no real limitations in place is a vendor. It could be the merchant's doing this, it could be people with poached vendors. If I wanted to thin out a database that's the kind of thing I would look at changing in a revamp of the merchant profession.
If I am wrong then maybe that's just an added bonus for them when they do it for whatever reason they are doing it.
BountyBlunter
Mon May 31, 2004 6:00 am
#32
DragonScout wrote:
oh, and I agree. If they do place a limit on vendors, they should also give merchants a higher limit the closer they get to master. That would be a good benefit to being merchant.
Unfortunately, it is still centered around vendors. Until they completely rewrite the merchant profession, and make vendors just a small portion of what makes up merchant as a whole, it will never be more than a utility profession in my opinion. and I think that THAT is the main problem/issue that merchants in general should be complaining about. Not vendor poaching or vendors used as storage. Those are very small consequences of the overall problem. You don't cure a sickness by treating the symptoms.. you cure it by attacking the root of the problem itself.
I think it's a good profession myself. I used alot of the skills such as structure/vendor maint reductions, merchant tents, planetary registration and vendors in creation of our city. It does need a little more flavour, there is no shortage of suggestions on changes to the current system. Hopefully they will change it for the better.
Songe
Mon May 31, 2004 7:36 am
#33
DragonScout wrote:
Is there anywhere that the DEVs have specifically said that using the vendors as storage is a bug/exploit? If so, post the link.
Technically the item is still for sale, just at a very expensive price, so the vendor is still working. You are not using it in a way that the vendor is storing items and yet customers are completely unable to buy the items on there. You are just placing items on a vendor for high prices. That cannot be classified as a bug/exploit because everything is working as intended.
You're using vendors for your own benefit in a way that wasn't intended. It's obviously an exploit to me, as well as keeping vendors when dropping skills when it wasn't intended. It doesn't matter what lame excuses you can use saying that it could sell at the 100 million you put your stuff at... It's still cheating. And taking up database for items that should be stored in your house.
theonebountyhunter
Mon May 31, 2004 8:46 am
#34
ok so say i get and keep business III
your saying that i'm still in the wrong for storing items on the vendor at a price no one is going to buy them at...
Every master merchant I know keeps one vendor for them selves for their resources and other items they use but don't have storage for.
a fair amount of master merchants are not their players primary character. but are their secondary one. so saya MM sets up a market area. as is done in my town. the merchant places 10 merchant tents and places most his vendors in them. what is he now supposed to do for storage?? keep 75 items in each tent?
for the master merchant of the eclipse power company it is pretty obvious that you have never had to do a crafting proffesion for a business. you power is your only component/end product. you price it you sell it.
I don't even run that big an armorsmith business compared to most other armorsmiths. there are currently two options to ease the storage problems.1.) vendors 2.) cross server lot trades. at the rate people do cross server lot trades for houses and harvesterseventually the worlds are going to be covered by them. So basically your saying its better to fill the world with houses or factories since they offer a higher return in storage compared to houses then to use one vendor for storage???
Lomar4976
Mon May 31, 2004 9:06 am
#35
Theres nothing wrong with the physical act of storing stuff on a vendor - just bear in mind that at times things go missing without any explanation (ive lost track of the number of times sales and stock reports dont match, for loose bits of armour, that isnt a problem, but for your backup resources, it can be a profession breaker)
The thing people seem to have the most issue about is holding a vendor without the appropriate skill to use it - after all, if you become limited to 100 items on a vendor, its your right to use those 100 space as you wish - you can list resources at outrageous prices and use them as storage... as in now you can do it indefinately.
Just be warned that its happened to loads of people before, and it WILL happen to you(you've just got to hope it doesnt hit you too hard) - vendors are fickle things, and they lose stuff randomly, its up to you if you want to take the risk of losing half a million of top notch resources just to save on a few storage space.
theonebountyhunter
Mon May 31, 2004 9:33 am
#36
well lomar i admire you as an armorsmith. infact along while back i bought one of your armor smith starter kits. which was a superb deal. and helped me make larger runs b/c at the time i had some better resources but not in quanity, anyway i know you run a larger operation then i do. so how is it you handle your storage. the main thing i store is resources and armor enhancments such as janta hides and low lvl krayt scales b/c they add a nice % to kashyyykian armor. i hold them for special orders and stuff like that. anyway i am open to all suggestions on storage.....
Andymantium
Mon May 31, 2004 10:23 am
#37
I just spent 10 mins looking for the post that Thunderheart made way back...couldn't find it. Basically what he said is that vendors were not meant to be used as storage, and that it was not intended for players to retain vendor usage abilities after dropping merchant skills.
Can we just stop arguing about this already, I think everyone is getting tired of it.
Lomar4976
Mon May 31, 2004 11:01 am
#38
My post that came just after yours explained how I do it...
Basically, my storage spans between a house, and factories, plus bank accounts on 2 characters.
I dont do any of my own resource harvesting, I gave that up long ago, so therefore I run extra factories on the remaining lots.
I don't keep hold of too many loot components, so thats somewhere we differ, but between 7 factories, a house and 2 bank accounts (with the output hoppers of the factories used to store items as they're made before being moved onto the vendors) theres loads of room (ive got somewhere close to 20 million mixed resources now as well as a guess)
Any 'second and third' choice resources get posted on my vendors at a slightly higher than market price(1-2 cpu above market price)value so if they sell then all the better, if not, theyre there if I need them... but as mentioned above DO NOT EVER put your primary choice resources on a vendor as if they disappear you would be hurting a lot.
DingoBoi
Mon May 31, 2004 11:09 am
#39
theonebountyhunter wrote:
ok so say i get and keep business III
your saying that i'm still in the wrong for storing items on the vendor at a price no one is going to buy them at... well, if you never intend to sell them, then yes, it is an exploit of the system. Merchants by definition, sell things. Never selling anything from your vendor.... /tsk
Every master merchant I know keeps one vendor for them selves for their resources and other items they use but don't have storage for.
for the master merchant of the eclipse power company it is pretty obvious that you have never had to do a crafting proffesion for a business. you power is your only component/end product. you price it you sell it. And that has to do with what? Being a former mayor and running the business, I certainly encountered storage issues. EPC has 3 medium storage houses ourselves.
You are still EXPLOITING when you state you dropped merchant. Why not just keep the skills to maintain that one vendor?
there are currently two options to ease the storage problems.1.) vendors 2.) cross server lot trades. at the rate people do cross server lot trades for houses and harvesterseventually the worlds are going to be covered by them. So basically your saying its better to fill the world with houses or factories since they offer a higher return in storage compared to houses then to use one vendor for storage???
More exploits. You certainly love to exploit don't you? These are certainly much harder to fix if it's fixable at all... especially harvesters.
You want the BENEFITS of our PROFESSION but refuse to INVEST the SKILLPOINTS.
You say the PROFESSION is basically WORTHLESS but you know how to EXPLOIT the system to take ADVANTAGE of those worthless BENEFITS.
YOU obviously see alot of value in our profession, or you wouldn't be using it.
/throws eggs.