Merchant Archive
Thread: can this be addressed w/o being flamed
And I can't recall nor find anywhere in my previous post where I said 'all' or 'most'. So please justify that 'subtle' jab.
DragonScout wrote:
lol. you need to work more on your metaphorsbecause stealing cookies and hiding them does not equal, by any means, putting items for sale on a vendor at high prices so that the chance of someone buying them is next to nothing. completley different acts.
And how exactly are vendor poachers making things worse when I can point to numerous posts from you and others that claim that unless they are 'true' merchant vendors, they are empty. If they are empty they can't be adding to the database problem, and if they aren't empty, they can't be adding to your loss in business because of customers getting discouraged from empty vendors -- which is crap anyways. So make up your mind here
If they are empty - They put people off searching other vendors, hurting legit vendor owners.
If they are not empty - They hurt merchants if they are poached due to lack of sales.
Poached vendors hurt legit vendor owners in more ways too, because the people sporting these poached vendors have adopted other skills in other classes making the character more versatile than the merchant/artisan who chooses to maintain the vendor in the intended fashion.
Is the player intention behind vendor storage different than was intended by the DEVs? perhaps, we don't know. Does it affect the actual mechanics? no. Because items put up on vendors for storage can still be bought. If that could somehow be avoided, then yes, it would be an exploit. But as it is now, it is working as intended.
You just said "Is the player intention behind vendor storage different than was intended by the DEVs? perhaps, we don't know" and "But as it is now, it is working as intended.".. So make up your mind on that one, you cannot say it is working as intended unless you yourself were on the design team for this game, or you have a post from a Dev stating that vendors are meant to be used as a storage device as well as to sell items... The fact that items are deleted from the stockroom after seven days would suggest that the system is not working as intended if the items you are putting on "sale storage" are there longer than seven days.
And it really doesn't matter in the end about poached vendors, because it will get fixed, and the database problem will still be there.
Yes , it doesn't matter because eventually it will be fixed.. There will still be a database issue but it will be greatly reduced when poached vendors andstorage vendors get capped/removed. I hope this happens soon so all this 'discussion' can end..
If they are doing something wrong, they will get theirs in the end. That should be enough to suffice. Yet, it seems to me, that a lot of the 'true' merchants on these forums feel the need to... boast? about how good they are being by keeping their skill points invested? Instead of just being happy knowing that they are doing what they feel is right. Kinda reminds me of religion. lol.And there is a difference between vendors working as intended and the intentions of players actually using them. Please don't get that confused. Vendors were designed to sell items. You can put things on them for prices far beyond the scope of the bazaar. That is their place in the game. Not to store items like the bank or houses. Anything put on a vendor was to be available for sale for 30 days, and afterwards placed in a stockroom for another 7 days before being deleted. That, as far as can be seen from the way they work, is how it was intended. Now, no matter what a player USES that vendor for, that is exactly what happens. The item, be it outrageously priced or not, is still up for sale for 30 days, and then is put in a stockroom for 7 more before being deleted. So, vendors are working as intended. Now, if players use them with different intentions than were original thought of, that is another aspect, which cannot be hard coded against. Not unless you completely removed vendors as they are in their present form.
Can you see the difference? One is how the DEVs intended the code to work, which is working correctly. The other is the basic thought process behind what they would be used for -- namely of selling goods, which, doesn't really matter as much as long as the hard code is working to make sure that it isn't like a bank/house.
And I will continue to disagree about the database problem being "greatly" reduced when poachers are gone.. And since they will never get rid of vendors being used as storage -- as vendors are now, it really is pointless to claim it being gone will change anything. An item limit will only hurt crafters with large stocks -- because let's be realistic, this profession is just a utility profession used by crafters to sell their items. There are few people like Dingoboi who run merchants just to be merchants. And that is because of the simple fact that there are so few (or should I say none) tools to help them in it. As much as it pains me, I must even applaud dingoboi for what he has done without tools/mechanics. Just think of what he and merchants like him could be if this was a real profession that had tools and abilities beyond vendors. it is almost scary. lol.
DragonScout wrote:
Ah, but why do you need a character more versatile when you can have your skill points invested in merchant and stock vendors all day long?
Personal opinion, and it is the merchants who are responding to the attacks.. Just because this entire profession doesn't like the way you think, doesn't make you right... It makes you outspoken.
And there is a difference between vendors working as intended and the intentions of players actually using them. Please don't get that confused. Vendors were designed to sell items. You can put things on them for prices far beyond the scope of the bazaar. That is their place in the game. Not to store items like the bank or houses. Anything put on a vendor was to be available for sale for 30 days, and afterwards placed in a stockroom for another 7 days before being deleted. That, as far as can be seen from the way they work, is how it was intended. Now, no matter what a player USES that vendor for, that is exactly what happens. The item, be it outrageously priced or not, is still up for sale for 30 days, and then is put in a stockroom for 7 more before being deleted. So, vendors are working as intended. Now, if players use them with different intentions than were original thought of, that is another aspect, which cannot be hard coded against. Not unless you completely removed vendors as they are in their present form.
If you read my post carefully, I think I explained it quite clearly.. You contradicted yourself in the same paragraph, and still this is your opinion.. there is no difference in my eyes, your mincing with words. I've said before that yes, the item is for sale, you intentionally put it there and overpriced it to the point where it will not sell.. Thus using the vendor for storage, which considering there is a seven day limit on items in the stockroom basically means that the main window was not meant to be used as a 30 temporary cache of items to roll into the actual 7 day cut off.. I really don't care about the wording in this matter, you admit it's storage, discussion over, vendors were intended to sell, not store.. The system may be working, but if vendors were meant to be used as permanent stockrooms they wouldn't have a 7 day limitation on the stockroom, so, it's not working as they intended it to work.
Can you see the difference? One is how the DEVs intended the code to work, which is working correctly. The other is the basic thought process behind what they would be used for -- namely of selling goods, which, doesn't really matter as much as long as the hard code is working to make sure that it isn't like a bank/house.
Yeah I can see your interpretation of the way things are.. Do you think that SOE intended for you to use a poached vendor to store items ? No.. Word mincing again. Please, open your eyes for five seconds and see the point you are arguing, it is nothing more than an interpretation of wording, which to me sounds like religion.. And considering the post count in here from yourself and others with the same views, a few of you are fanatical.
And I will continue to disagree about the database problem being "greatly" reduced when poachers are gone.. And since they will never get rid of vendors being used as storage -- as vendors are now, it really is pointless to claim it being gone will change anything. An item limit will only hurt crafters with large stocks -- because let's be realistic, this profession is just a utility profession used by crafters to sell their items. There are few people like Dingoboi who run merchants just to be merchants. And that is because of the simple fact that there are so few (or should I say none) tools to help them in it. As much as it pains me, I must even applaud dingoboi for what he has done without tools/mechanics. Just think of what he and merchants like him could be if this was a real profession that had tools and abilities beyond vendors. it is almost scary. lol.
Yes, you will disagree with the fact the problem will be greatly reduced, because you clearly have no understanding of coding.. If you did, you would agree.. Fact. Are you a merchant ?.. I'm guessing your not, in which case why are your views on the merchant profession being a poor profession anything to take into account ? They are not, because you are not a merchant.. Also the only reason it is pointless to say that is because it just blows holes in your argument.. If the number of vendors is reduced by X% then X% is removed from the DB, simple.
I didn't contradict myself at all. There are differences between a coded system working as it was made to work. And the uses people put it to. Vendors work just fine as they are. You put items on them for sale, they can be bought, regardless of the price, and everything is good to go. That people put high outrageous prices on certain items is immaterial because not everyone agrees on the same prices. If it is on a vendor, it can be bought if the buyer thinks it is worth it. So it cannot EVER be defined as storage because it is still up for sale.
You are also getting two issues confused. It is late (for me at least) so I will give you some leeway. Vendor poaching and vendors as storage are two completely separate issues. Please keep them that way for the purpose of this discussion. Pretend, for this, that poached vendors are no more, and concentrate just on vendors being used as storage -- which will still happen after they fix vendor poaching. okay.. you on the same page? good.
There is no mincing of words. There is no exploit. The item is put on the vendor at a value that the owner doesnt want it easily sold at. be that 999999999 or even just 1k over the going rate. Either way, it is what they value the item at, and either way, if a buyer is interested enough in the item, because vendors are working correctly, the item can still be bought.
hmm. How to explain this. I did it once before and I am sure balkstar or p4samwise could point you to the post, but I not only was a game developer for Simutronics for over 2 years but I also was a game tester for westwood studios and worked on such games as Lands of Lore 3, Nox, Command and Conquer tiberian sun, recoil, command and conquer for the N64, and a few other games. But that doesn't give me any knowledge on coding does it? Nor is that knowledge really necessary for this discussion, but if it helps you to feel better about what I am saying, there you go.
And As far as Merchant goes, I mastered the profession, found nothing to sustain it besides vendors and dropped it because it was pointless to me. Merchant to me, shouldn't be centered around stocking vendors, especially in a world like Star Wars. When I first came to the merchant forums, the first few posts were definitely negative -- though aimed towards making it what I consider a better profession as a whole, and since then I have been all about changes to make this profession into something greater than it is at the present. And yet what are all the 'true' merchants posting about? How evil and vile and terrible vendor poachers are. lol.
If x% of vendors is removed from the game it does not necessarily mean that x% of database load is lightened. The problem is that there are too many items on vendors in general. Not that there are too many vendors to begin with. Yes, removing poached vendors might be a quick fix for a little while, but then people will just get business 3 or a secondary account and the overall issue of the database load will still remain. Because it will just force people to put more items on fewer vendors. Which is why they are talking about an item limit on vendors because that would then significantly reduce the load.
Yet, even a change like that would still not affect vendors as storage because I don't know about you, but I have yet to see a vendor used as pure storage with over 150 items on it. I am sure there are some out there. Crafters need a lot of space, but the majority of the problem comes from malls and shops and 'true' merchants with 6 different vendors each with 500+ items. That is a fairly common scene for any player run city on shadowfire.
Your last paragraph was basically just an attack on me to sidetrack the issue since you couldn't back up your points. Try a bit harder next time
DragonScout wrote:
The entire profession doesn't like the way I think? Talk about exaggeration and just slightly over-stepping your bounds. Not to mention the idea that I am attacking anything. If anything, aside from my first few posts, I have just been fighting to improve Merchant overall. Unlike most of the 'true' merchants who just want vendor poaching and vendors as storage fixed.
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration, your stating that this profession is useless and also your thoughts on vendor poaching and storage are highly questionable as is apparent.. But I may have put a little too much into that statement.. Could all of the merchants in the room who hate this profession, please stand up..
I didn't contradict myself at all. There are differences between a coded system working as it was made to work. And the uses people put it to. Vendors work just fine as they are. You put items on them for sale, they can be bought, regardless of the price, and everything is good to go. That people put high outrageous prices on certain items is immaterial because not everyone agrees on the same prices. If it is on a vendor, it can be bought if the buyer thinks it is worth it. So it cannot EVER be defined as storage because it is still up for sale.
It can be defined as storage when the person who is 'selling' the items says that they put it there specifically for storage purpose.. Try checking the first post and try telling me those items are not there as storage.. You can't because the poster stated they are, so yes it can. The fact does remain that item is for sale, but, it's there for storage in people's own words.. Not mine.
You are also getting two issues confused. It is late (for me at least) so I will give you some leeway. Vendor poaching and vendors as storage are two completely separate issues. Please keep them that way for the purpose of this discussion. Pretend, for this, that poached vendors are no more, and concentrate just on vendors being used as storage -- which will still happen after they fix vendor poaching. okay.. you on the same page? good.
Please read my posts about vendor storage and vendor poaching, I know you probably havent so I will give you some leeway there. I have stated that they are two seperate issues, but other people are rolling them into one.. Pretend for just one second that you read the first post in this thread, pretend that just for one second that the person starting this thread actually stated he was using a poached vendor as storage... We on the same page now ? Ahh no this pointless debate has gone on to five pages..
There is no mincing of words. There is no exploit. The item is put on the vendor at a value that the owner doesnt want it easily sold at. be that 999999999 or even just 1k over the going rate. Either way, it is what they value the item at, and either way, if a buyer is interested enough in the item, because vendors are working correctly, the item can still be bought.
You are mincing words if you knowingly put that item up on the vendor with the intention of storing that item, you did not put the item up for sale for what it is worth, it was put there with a price to discourage people from purchasing it.. You are saying that it's not storage because it's still for sale but you knowingly put it there as storage.. So yes, you are mincing with words. If a real buisnessman used that strategy, they wouldn't sell anything at all.
hmm. How to explain this. I did it once before and I am sure balkstar or p4samwise could point you to the post, but I not only was a game developer for Simutronics for over 2 years but I also was a game tester for westwood studios and worked on such games as Lands of Lore 3, Nox, Command and Conquer tiberian sun, recoil, command and conquer for the N64, and a few other games. But that doesn't give me any knowledge on coding does it? Nor is that knowledge really necessary for this discussion, but if it helps you to feel better about what I am saying, there you go.
You said game designer and game tester, doesn't necessarily mean that you were a coder or that you know anything about coding in general, design canbe many things including managerial roles,testing games doesn't really involve any coding at all.. But that could be me mincing words on that one.. Well, considering you were a coder.. I'm surprised that you don't realise that a simple reduciton in the size of the database, results in... The size of the database decreasing ?... And I'm saying that coder to coder.
And As far as Merchant goes, I mastered the profession, found nothing to sustain it besides vendors and dropped it because it was pointless to me. Merchant to me, shouldn't be centered around stocking vendors, especially in a world like Star Wars. When I first came to the merchant forums, the first few posts were definitely negative -- though aimed towards making it what I consider a better profession as a whole, and since then I have been all about changes to make this profession into something greater than it is at the present. And yet what are all the 'true' merchants posting about? How evil and vile and terrible vendor poachers are. lol.
You mastered it , you had not use for it.. That's you, I think it's usefull.. So on the whole it's still personal opinion. I've said they could change it for the better, that's not even close to what these posts are about.
If x% of vendors is removed from the game it does not necessarily mean that x% of database load is lightened. The problem is that there are too many items on vendors in general. Not that there are too many vendors to begin with. Yes, removing poached vendors might be a quick fix for a little while, but then people will just get business 3 or a secondary account and the overall issue of the database load will still remain. Because it will just force people to put more items on fewer vendors. Which is why they are talking about an item limit on vendors because that would then significantly reduce the load.
Sorry but yes it does.. X - Y = Z ... And seeing as X and Y are both positive values whereX is greater than Y, Z is naturally going to be less than X. That will result in a reduction in size.. If people pick up buisness III then they get a legit vendor, in which case I don't care really what they choose to use it for just as long as they don't try to twist things around and say "Even though i'm storing it, and I am storing it because that's all I have it for, I'm not storing it because it's for sale" because that would still be wrong.
Yet, even a change like that would still not affect vendors as storage because I don't know about you, but I have yet to see a vendor used as pure storage with over 150 items on it. I am sure there are some out there. Crafters need a lot of space, but the majority of the problem comes from malls and shops and 'true' merchants with 6 different vendors each with 500+ items. That is a fairly common scene for any player run city on shadowfire.
If the majority of the database is taken up with legit overstocked vendors, so be it.. It's going to make a difference with an item cap and all the exploited vendors being removed, and then people will have to cope.
Your last paragraph was basically just an attack on me to sidetrack the issue since you couldn't back up your points. Try a bit harder next time
Hmmm, the last one wasn't an attack on you... It was stating facts, your not a merchant so it doesnt really matter one bit what you think of this proffesion as it stands because changes to the merchant proffesion wont directly effect your character because your not a merchant, so you trying to change this profession 'for the better' may be appreciated but everyone here has more right to speak on the subject than yourself. I thought you weren't a coder because I couldn't believe anyone would not understand the simple fact that if you reduce the size of a database, it reduces..
I don't need to try harder, there is one side of this whole discussion which has been made clear, and I contributed, which is people are cheating.. Backing up my points in itself is pointless because all of my point are covered by common sense.. Backing up your points might be a better idea.
On a final note if you thought that post was a little toasty, then fair enough I tend to write with a little passion sometimes.. You are blinkered to the fact that your argument is fundamentally flawed, and you will not listen to reason.
Songe wrote:
Ever felt like you're discussing with a guy who keeps using the same old invalid arguments every time no matter how people tell him he is wrong? Cause it's the impression I have here.
Yeah, just a little.. Got any motion sickness tablets...?
Scoooter wrote:
Bounty,
You are correct removing the vendoirs may just be a short term fix, however it may not.
It does not alter the fact that the dev's have even said that if you drop the skill to be able to manage your vendor you should not be able to manage a vendor. There is no need to bring the items database into this. This is a bug fix and not a nerf.
This fix is just that a bug fix that has been there since launch and in fact it should have been addressed sooner.
But fixing this will allow the devs to monitor the results and see what happens.
True, and I agree.
As for the bountyblunter guy and songe...
Items on vendors, are always for sale, so they cannot ever be defined as storage. Regardless of the thought process the player behind the screen has when he prices the item. That is immaterial to the vendor, because the vendor doesn't care. It accepts the item at whatever price it is told -- a key part of vendors and the reason they ARE a good thing -- and hold it for 30 days allowing anyone in the game to buy it if they feel the price is right. That is its job, that is what it does. Period. End of Story. Until you can code an intelligent computer that can read people's minds to figure out their intentions, it isn't going to change.
You could add in a pop-up screen asking if they are putting it up for sale or storage every time they try to add items to a vendor, and if they clicked storage tell them no, sorry, vendors are not the place for that. LOL.
You, keeping them separate? Sorry, but so far in this discussion, it has been you and Songe who keep pushing those two completely different issues together. If you want I can point to posts. I have no problem getting facts. It just seems like you do.
And it is immaterial, as I have stated before, whether he admits it is storage or not. It isn't mincing words, It just doesn't matter at all, because the system is working as intended. Vendors, aside from a few tools to make things easier, work amazingly well for what they do. They just can't read people's minds. But when you find a computer that can, let me know. Until then, you can complain all you want about vendor storage, because it will never go away.
And no, I said Game Developer. But either way, it is rare for any computer company to have a group of designers getting paid to just sit around and figure out design without coding it eventually. I can't think of any. At Westwood Studios, The owner was a coder but by the time I worked there, he was rich and didn't do much hard coding. He just would have brain storming sessions and keep track of everything. I unfortunately never got that rich. lol.
As for a simple reduction causing the database to go down... okay. What is causing the database problem? Massive amounts of items on vendors in general? okay, so according to a lot of the 'true' merchants in these folders, poached vendors are usually empty, so, if empty vendors go bye bye, it doesn't do anything at all for the database. If these poached vendors have thousands of items, yes, it would help the database by removing them, but, the chances that those people will just get legit vendors is pretty high if they did keep them stocked, so the problem will still remain. Not to mention the fact that I would bet there are a lot more people like Ittov, crafters, who have just enough merchant to advertise, than there are poachers, and that poachers are fairly limited in number. If that is the case, then it really isn't going to change the overall database problem, which arises from the number of items ON vendors, not the vendors themselves.
But anyways. Take this as you want. You speak for all merchants I know.
And it is funny how you keep saying things like "Ever felt like you're discussing with a guy who keeps using the same old invalid arguments every time no matter how people tell him he is wrong? Cause it's the impression I have here." or "I don't need to try harder, there is one side of this whole discussion which has been made clear, and I contributed, which is people are cheating.. Backing up my points in itself is pointless because all of my point are covered by common sense.. Backing up your points might be a better idea." Do I really need to point out how funny these comments are? How many people laughed at the idea the world was round? How many people said that was wrong? I also keep using different ideas to try to explain better what I have said, and I back it up with posts, and logical reasoning. Not just common sense, which is far to often, wrong. But, everyone is free to have their own opinion.
I've been a master merchant, artisanand architect on Sunrunner since approx. Aug/Sep of last year, and started playing on day #2. I've produced and sold probably tens of thousands of items in that time, so I think I have some experience as a merchant.
I agree with Songe, and further, I find it hard to believe that anyone woulddefend the position of people stealing our skills.
I have worked my butt off to keep my vendors ALWAYS stocked, and I guess I'm insulted at the insinuation that Merchant is not a real class, bereft of benefits.Non-merchants being able toplace vendors is, I believe, the primary reason that we're looked at asnot being worth the skill points.
In my opinion, anyone with a shred of common sense (and not some agenda of their own) can see that removing the vendor-placing ability of non-merchants will fix things. I don't think the storage on vendors needs to even be an issue. Sure, these people might at first use their friends to sell... but eventually they will either turn to merchants to resell their products, they will go out of business, or else they will become merchants themselves, enriching our little community even further.
I also further agree with Songe with regards to the number of non-merchants using vendors. I have interacted with quite a few people, and I can honestly say that more than half of the "merchants"I've metdropped the skill long ago (this is on Sunrunner).
The interesting thing is, whenever I've brought it up, the reaction is way overblown, and borderline defensive. "If the system lets me do it, it must be ok." or "Merchant is worthless, why wouldI waste skill points in that?".
Dragonscout, what is your stake in all of this?
I don't think it is in question whether or not vendor poaching needs to be fixed. It does. Mainly because it is the only thing merchants have. And it doesn't really matter what vendor poachers or anti-vendor poachers say on the issue, because the DEVs have already stated that it isn't working how they would like it to, and they are going to fix it. So it is pretty much a done deal -- though who knows when, if ever, SOE will get to it. And it is really pointless to bring it up on either side. It just happens that every time someone posts, usually because they are new to the forums just looking for some answers, these arguments spawn because that new person gets bashed. I don't like people getting bashed for asking questions, hence why I have been responding so much. hehe. Just look what a good influence I have been on Dingoboi and Balkstar. we are even agreeing on stuff these days. too bad the world is about to end.
The question in my mind though, is whether or not a fix to vendor poaching should be a higher priority than an overall merchant rewrite to make this a more viable profession in and of itself. Yes, vendors are a very cool tool, but is that really all you want merchants to be? Wouldn't you rather be like Jabba the Hut (I know there are other major merchants in the books, but I am blanking right now.. will go look some up later), and actually be a high end merchant, that runs companies, instead of being a stock boy/girl for crafters? To me, I would like to see vendor poaching fixed, but I would like to see it as a small part of an overall change to the profession. If they fix vendor poaching and then move on to other more important systems, who knows if they will ever get back to merchant, and that is a sad thing in my book.