Merchant Archive
Thread: Backpacks on Vendors
joined42904
Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:15 am
#105
Ok...there is also the possibility that you could make a house near your merchant friend's shop...or your friend could...admin the other person...and use it to exchange merchandise. That's not so hard.
Tirgwystraff
Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:20 am
#106
Hmnnn, burn 2 more lots, that can't run factories or harvestors....... and can't be used to store anything else. Times the number of regular customers I have......
Bermag
Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:27 am
#107
I am not sure it is "reasonable" that contents of backpacks should count against vendor limit. We have not been informed of the reason why we got vendor limits. If the problem is that the number of items on each vendor was causing problems because of large queries (which I think it is more than size of storage) then it should not matter that there are backpacks on vendors or not (actually good since it would lower the number of items on vendors.
If they have made the vendor limits because they think merchant/crafter should be nerfed because some get "to powerful" or "are monopoly" let us discuss this matter. But SOE has not commented anything.
I also think that we will get a lot of trouble with people offering items.
Logistics is a nightmare. Using vendors for storage might not be what they are intended for but it is a great for managing your stuff. Easy access, stuff can be spilt into categories, it is safe (never lost items on vendors other than my own stupidity) since only you can access it (lost millions of resources because one person who was admin dropped game without telling us and gave his account away and robbed a storage house).
I spend way to much time dealing with storage issues. Using vendor for storage is to get around the limitations of the program design (not the game design). For example identical looted items does not stack, not able to merge crates etc.
What SOE (and also some of those posting in this forum) is to think more about the "fun" factor, than thinking of what is reasonable or not. No matter what SOE will do payers will find ways around to store what they want to. if they could just get that crap about "limiting monopolies" out of their heads and try to find solution that would both satisfy players and their technical limitations then we would all be happy.
I really think that some kind of storage device that could store like50 items (but only count as 1) but not load until you open it would make us all happy. Solve the storage problem for us and take items off vendors. Those items could maybe even be stored in an outside table/database so they will not cause performance problems etc for all other normal database operations.
There are lot of ways to deal with technical problems if you look a bit further than just nerfing with limitations.
How do people deal with storage (because none want to give up their items):
- Lot trades (more character created - more structures in the world)
- Vendors (heavier load on vendor database)
- Have guild member place structures using unused lots (more structures)
- Rent lots (more structures)
No solution would lower items, people work around it. It just add more tedious work/trouble for us the players. if we can't achieve whatwe want to do and we have to spend more and more time with stuff like this people will finally quit. That is not good for anyone.
joined42904
Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:36 am
#108
You are correct about my position on the issue.
However, I am now in the position of coming up with workarounds....
So long as something is still permissible in the game...and keep in mind that these lots are from actual hypothetical players on the individual's own server, not from cross-lotting...I can't see any negative account consequences.
There are work-arounds. The sky is not falling. Your business will survive. You just need to get a bit creative.
joined42904
Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:40 am
#109
Bermag,
The solution lies in character lot rebalancing. And in perhaps balancing and limiting lots on a per-account basis as well.
Some workarounds need to be eliminated.
joined42904
Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:53 am
#110
Maybe the way to deny the use of this as storage is to mark anything offerred to a vendor in this manner with a tag so that it can't be re-offerred for a period of 60 days to any other vendor.
This way folks could still offer a factory run of components to someone else. But the person trying to use offers as storage would be out of luck.
Ragnaat
Tue Aug 24, 2004 8:05 am
#111
I want to know why this is now "confirmed to be a bug" yet from day ONE it was never seen as a bug when we're talking a bazaar item limit of 25? Please. Explain this one to me. Also, when if/it changes to "count" against your vendor limit on vendor sales will it also be counting for bazaar sales or will it continue to not be a "bug" on the bazaar, but be a "fixed bug" on vendors? And what about vendor offers? When this changes can an armorsmith ever offer a bag of 40 crates of AUKs (one full schematic run) to my slicing vendor ever again (or BE tissues, or syth cloth, or any of the other interdiciplinary componets)?
DocSavag wrote:
Wait.. I never said you wouldn't be able to USE backpacks
I said the contents would count toward the item count. You can continue to use them all you want. Just don't exceed your item count with them or you will have to get under it again when they fix it. I'm sorry for the confusion.
I've only once used a vendor for storage, and that was for a week or two while redeeding my vendor house, but if this is a "fix" its treading on way too many VALID scenarios for me to be happy about it. And frankly, both announcing it through a Correspondent and providing no details is a pure bull**edit** move on the staff's part.
DocSavag
Tue Aug 24, 2004 8:15 am
#112
Ragnaat wrote:I want to know why this is now "confirmed to be a bug" yet from day ONE it was never seen as a bug when we're talking a bazaar item limit of 25? Please. Explain this one to me. Also, when if/it changes to "count" against your vendor limit on vendor sales will it also be counting for bazaar sales or will it continue to not be a "bug" on the bazaar, but be a "fixed bug" on vendors? And what about vendor offers? When this changes can an armorsmith ever offer a bag of 40 crates of AUKs (one full schematic run) to my slicing vendor ever again (or BE tissues, or syth cloth, or any of the other interdiciplinary componets)?
DocSavag wrote:
Wait.. I never said you wouldn't be able to USE backpacks
I said the contents would count toward the item count. You can continue to use them all you want. Just don't exceed your item count with them or you will have to get under it again when they fix it. I'm sorry for the confusion.
I've only once used a vendor for storage, and that was for a week or two while redeeding my vendor house, but if this is a "fix" its treading on way too many VALID scenarios for me to be happy about it. And frankly, both announcing it through a Correspondent and providing no details is a pure bull**edit** move on the staff's part.
I don't believe I said it was a bug.
They didn't "announce" it through me. In talking to the devs I learned that they will make this change to prevent people from multiplying their vendor item limit by a factor of 50. I asked for permission to warn you before it happens so you don't get surprised by the change later. That is it.
I happen to agree personally with the decision though I see some areas that must be improved (offers is the most critical). I've never supported vendors used for storage. I know you have storage issues so do I. I work around them the best I can but I never used a vendor to store large amounts of items. Everything on my vendor is for sale. If I make components that I might use later I put them on the vendor at a reasonable price. If they sell I make more. Frankly if I could make money just making the components I would..less work for me.
Ciirybeccaskyr
Tue Aug 24, 2004 5:31 pm
#113
DocSavag wrote:
As many of you know containers on vendors on TC currently count as 1 item towards the sales item limit. This was obviously not intended and I have confirmed with JustG that it won't remain that way. It might not get changed before publish 10 gets released however VERY soon the total items in the container will count against your item limit cap.
This really was the only way to do it, it makes no sense to set item limits and then give people a way to store 50x that number in containers.
Edit: Please don't use packs to store things on your vendor above the limit of the items you can have in the mean time. You will only get frustrated when theyh fix it and having informed you in advance the sympathy level will be rather low. You can still use backpacks of course just realize that when this gets changed if you are over the limit you will have to reorganize things to get back under the limit.
Message Edited by DocSavag on 08-21-2004 03:42 PM
do you ever bother to think anything out????
or do you jsut hop on the badwagon odf trying to get at people using vendors as storage and let that total blind you to the other issues that this causes? Or are you simply incapable of seeing them.
Either way i think we need someone that will actualy speek for us not jump on the half asses poorly thought through ideas of the devs with the zeal you do.
How are you unable to see the effect this will have on people offering items to my vendor? sets of cubes from the geo cave better not have more than 3 sets. RIS componets better not have more than 2 drops to sell me. same with NS layers. Oh and armro subcomponetns cant even offer me a full run of those to my vendor.
These are just a few of the MAJOR ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE FAILED TO CONSIDER IN YOUR QUEST TO KISS AS MUCH DEV ASS AS YOU CAN.
SilentReproach
Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:01 pm
#114
Why are they doing all this? The answer is simple in my personal and not-so-humble opinion:
a)They (SoE) want/need more accounts. The are nerfing merchant so that, for us to keep doing what we have been doing,we'll need to open a donkey account in order to put down 3 or 4 houses for storage.
b) Crush the economy. They (SoE) apparently will do anything tobludgeon the wealthy. Not entirely sure why (since God knows we spent 100's of hours of our lives *earning* these credits), but I believe they want to keep the gulf as small as possible between the newbie and the elite (refer to point a) ).
You think these new changes are bad? Nothing in real life or in any game will ever match the nerf they made to the stockroom, where anything left in there for over 7 days got deleted without warning. See my post:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=Starsider&message.id=274840#M274840
Unforgivable. This was a blatant attempt to destroy large stocks of goods on our vendors. I find it unbelievable that CSRs told me there was nothing they could do to retrieve my 10's of millions of credits worth of resources (actually priceless). I nearly barfed when I saw the statement that they (SoE) were able to trace credit duping with fear-inspiring accuracy, yet they can't recover @#$! after they take it away from me.
Well, this is not as constructive as I would like it to have been, and full of conspiracy theories. I know they are trying to do what they think they must do to improve the gameplay, but so far they are only succeeding in bewildering and frustrating us beyond belief.
I'm tired, I'll shut up now.
Sage,
Master Armorsmith -333 2222 Dantooine, Starsider
Sheylaya
Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:22 pm
#115
If its a lag issue then why do i lag in cities that are generated by the devs with nothing in the bazaars in that city ... ?? but i go to a player made city with over 50+ vendors and don't suffer this lag ?
my details are on low settings so ... the excuses they are giving us is BS IMO ..
they want to make the crafting professions where we have to work harder as i stated in another post maybe they should pay us to play the game ...
DID SWG EVER MAKE IT OUT OF BETA feels like it hasn't 
DocSavag
Tue Aug 24, 2004 8:41 pm
#116
Ciirybeccaskyr wrote:
DocSavag wrote:
As many of you know containers on vendors on TC currently count as 1 item towards the sales item limit. This was obviously not intended and I have confirmed with JustG that it won't remain that way. It might not get changed before publish 10 gets released however VERY soon the total items in the container will count against your item limit cap.
This really was the only way to do it, it makes no sense to set item limits and then give people a way to store 50x that number in containers.
Edit: Please don't use packs to store things on your vendor above the limit of the items you can have in the mean time. You will only get frustrated when theyh fix it and having informed you in advance the sympathy level will be rather low. You can still use backpacks of course just realize that when this gets changed if you are over the limit you will have to reorganize things to get back under the limit.Message Edited by DocSavag on 08-21-2004 03:42 PM
do you ever bother to think anything out????
or do you jsut hop on the badwagon odf trying to get at people using vendors as storage and let that total blind you to the other issues that this causes? Or are you simply incapable of seeing them.
Either way i think we need someone that will actualy speek for us not jump on the half asses poorly thought through ideas of the devs with the zeal you do.
How are you unable to see the effect this will have on people offering items to my vendor? sets of cubes from the geo cave better not have more than 3 sets. RIS componets better not have more than 2 drops to sell me. same with NS layers. Oh and armro subcomponetns cant even offer me a full run of those to my vendor.
These are just a few of the MAJOR ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE FAILED TO CONSIDER IN YOUR QUEST TO KISS AS MUCH DEV ASS AS YOU CAN.
I've already brought up the issue of offers and made a very strong arguement that they need to address the limits to offers at the same time as they make the change for the backpacks.
KawikaMacGuyver
Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:38 am
#117
I would not like it if items inside the packs would count against the vendor limit. I've used vendors for both storage and for sales. I do understand both sides of the issue.
I think it's a common perception that SOE's main push for this is database memory. With the current proposed merchant changes (excluding the backpack issue) and the october character purge, this should free up a lot of database space.
There are many benefits (many borne out of convenience ) which justifies keeping backpacks counting as one item on a vendor. Realistically, who would want to manage 100, 200, or 4000 backpacks full of items. I'd imagine not many as that alone poses many problems for the individual from tracking items in packs, to managing inventory on your person just to retreive the pack.
On the flip side ( non merchant ) how would you track items that someone offers to your vendor? Does the pack count as one or more? How then to you accomodate those individuals you are trying to offer a pack of goods to your vendor and they number more than the cap?I cant remember what it was, but it was something low i think......like 20 or something like that. If it's large like 50 or something like that, the arguement could still be valid as what happens if they got a lot to offer to differentpeople. SOE needs to keep in mind that the casual player makes up a portion of their player base (a good portion i think) and that players dont all sit in the same time zone. Not everyone can meet face to face to do transactions and not everyone has the time to play everyday of the week. Consessions and considerations must be made or else they (SOE) stand to loose alarge percentage of their income.
Message Edited by KawikaMacGuyver on 08-24-2004 09:39 AM