Is the vendor system definitely done for?

[hooden]

My whole point in posting here was to hopefully salvage the idea of vendors since as a consumer and seller, I like the system. If you take my vendor today, then take everyone's vendor next week I will not be financially ruined (this is how it appears to be going down). If that is the case, take them all now including mine.

You dodged the question, so I'll repeat it. Why do you have issues giving up your vendor since you claim that everyone benefits equally?

If you take the question, "Will you give up your vendor for nothing?" then I say absolutely no. It makes no sense. If I could sacrifice myself for the greater good (and I think the system is good), I readily would. I never said I don't like having a vendor. I played this server without one, and with one it was nice as well. If you can keep vendors in so I do not have to sit like a drone and /auc then please, take my vendor in SNP and my vendor in NNP and give them to the first lvl 5 newbie in Blackburrow and say Happy New Year.

 

[Wiz]

I could see how they might be called unfair (at first glance) in the sense that not everyone can get one (I didn't have one when I started). But also, does a lvl 20 really need stuff on auction 24/7? I know I didn't have much at that level, and when I did get mine I was around level 50 maybe and I had a considerable amount of items in my bank. And by no means was I rich, and I would certainly not consider myself rich even now.

First paragraph of the thread.

If he thinks the system is currently unfair and wants to keep his vendor because it benefits him, all he has to do is admit it, and I'll leave him alone. I just don't like cognitive dissonance where he one moment comes out and proclaims that the vendor system is wonderful for both his clique (great vendor spot owners) and everyone else, and the next absolutely would not give up his spot in the clique except for something huge in return.

 

[Wiz]

My whole point in posting here was to hopefully salvage the idea of vendors since as a consumer and seller, I like the system. If you take my vendor today, then take everyone's vendor next week I will not be financially ruined (this is how it appears to be going down). If that is the case, take them all now including mine.

You dodged the question, so I'll repeat it. Why do you have issues giving up your vendor since you claim that everyone benefits equally?

If you take the question, "Will you give up your vendor for nothing?" then I say absolutely no. It makes no sense. If I could sacrifice myself for the greater good (and I think the system is good), I readily would. I never said I don't like having a vendor. I played this server without one, and with one it was nice as well. If you can keep vendors in so I do not have to sit like a drone and /auc then please, take my vendor in SNP and my vendor in NNP and give them to the first lvl 5 newbie in Blackburrow and say Happy New Year.

So, do you admit that you benefit a lot more from having a vendor than you would if someone else owned your vendor, since it's such a sacrifice?

This is all I really want an answer to, you don't have to keep playing dodgemania.

 

[hooden]

Personally, I do benefit, I never said I didn't.

I also played without one and I managed, which is what other people will do. Vendor owners come and go, which is good. To take them out altogether (back to one of my points) would not only not benefit anyone, but it would hurt us all, not just me.

 

[hooden]

Like someone else said, not everyone is gonna have a vendor, not everyone is gonna have the best charm in the game. That's just the way it works sometimes, but we dont take the best charm out because I can't buy one.

 

[Wiz]

Personally, I do benefit, I never said I didn't.

I also played without one and I managed, which is what other people will do. Vendor owners come and go, which is good. To take them out altogether (back to one of my points) would not only not benefit anyone, but it would hurt us all, not just me.

You most certainly istated that your benefit was at worst only a little more than people without a vendor in your original post, which is why I asked you to give it up for nothing, because it'd just be a minor sacrifice.

I'm glad we got that cleared up and you agree that the system is very unfair, since you have such a valuable commodity and selling advantage available to only a few people. You may place a higher value on vendors being in the game than having a level playing field in the market, but it's really the same kind of view that giving a 2:1 weapon to a random 5% of the population is good because the overall effect is easier mobs for everyone. It is, but it just isn't fair.

 

[Wiz]

Like someone else said, not everyone is gonna have a vendor, not everyone is gonna have the best charm in the game. That's just the way it works sometimes, but we dont take the best charm out because I can't buy one.

This is a terrifyingly bad argument because anyone can potentially work up enough money to buy the best charm in the game, but not everyone can buy your vendor spot no matter how much plat they have.

 

[Haphesto]

Where did the equally come from? I did read hooden say that both parties benefit, but by shear logic the man who is a consumer and a seller in this market is going to benefit more.

Ding ding, we have a winner.

The problem with many vendors is stagnation (nothing new added) and overpricing. Come back in a month, the same shit is there for the same price.

The GOOD thing about vendors is how convenient it is to find items no matter when you log in with such a small player base. So how do we keep the good and get rid of the bad? I have an idea. Add a vendor rotation system. We need healthy turnover so more people can use these valuable assets. How about this:

Vendors would be employable for 1-2 weeks. After that time period, the seller would not be able to hire another vendor for 1 week. Easy, simple. It would encourage fair prices to move stock, and allow more people access to the vendors in one swoop.

An exception to the rotation could be made for exceptional merchants such as Maimai, who is the premier jeweler on the server with every type of jewelry at fair prices, updated often.

 

[Wiz]

There's other reasons we want to get rid of the vendor system, just as an aside note. These include:

- Less Newport centrism.
- Less clutter in the cities.

And more. The current vendor system is going, entirely, completely. We're not even going to consider reforming it. What's being put in instead is what's up for discussion.

 

[hooden]

Personally, I do benefit, I never said I didn't.

I also played without one and I managed, which is what other people will do. Vendor owners come and go, which is good. To take them out altogether (back to one of my points) would not only not benefit anyone, but it would hurt us all, not just me.

You most certainly istated that your benefit was at worst only a little more than people without a vendor in your original post, which is why I asked you to give it up for nothing, because it'd just be a minor sacrifice.

I'm glad we got that cleared up and you agree that the system is very unfair, since you have such a valuable commodity and selling advantage available to only a few people. You may place a higher value on vendors being in the game than having a level playing field in the market, but it's really the same view that giving a 2:1 weapon to a random 5% of the population is good because the overall effect is easier mobs for everyone. It is, but it just isn't fair.

LOL, are we back there? The system is not very unfair; it's convinient. If the system was like EQ2 where everyone can see everyone else's prices, I would have no problem with that. Then everyone can buy from the same location.

I don't see how you can keep saying that I think it's unfair because I have a vendor. If you want to ban me from ever owning a vendor, but keep the system I have no problem with that. But to just take my vendor for nothing is illogical.

 

[Wiz]

Personally, I do benefit, I never said I didn't.

I also played without one and I managed, which is what other people will do. Vendor owners come and go, which is good. To take them out altogether (back to one of my points) would not only not benefit anyone, but it would hurt us all, not just me.

You most certainly istated that your benefit was at worst only a little more than people without a vendor in your original post, which is why I asked you to give it up for nothing, because it'd just be a minor sacrifice.

I'm glad we got that cleared up and you agree that the system is very unfair, since you have such a valuable commodity and selling advantage available to only a few people. You may place a higher value on vendors being in the game than having a level playing field in the market, but it's really the same view that giving a 2:1 weapon to a random 5% of the population is good because the overall effect is easier mobs for everyone. It is, but it just isn't fair.

LOL, are we back there? The system is not very unfair; it's convinient. If the system was like EQ2 where everyone can see everyone else's prices, I would have no problem with that. Then everyone can buy from the same location.

I don't see how you can keep saying that I think it's unfair because I have a vendor. If you want to ban me from ever owning a vendor, but keep the system I have no problem with that. But to just take my vendor for nothing is illogical.

Please explain how "very unfair" and "convenient" are mutually exclusive.

But okay, since it's not unfair and you're not better off with a vendor than without, I'll take it tomorrow then. Sound good?

 

[kineldar]

Man, take the vendor already! :lol:

 

[hooden]

Personally, I do benefit, I never said I didn't.

I also played without one and I managed, which is what other people will do. Vendor owners come and go, which is good. To take them out altogether (back to one of my points) would not only not benefit anyone, but it would hurt us all, not just me.

You most certainly istated that your benefit was at worst only a little more than people without a vendor in your original post, which is why I asked you to give it up for nothing, because it'd just be a minor sacrifice.

I'm glad we got that cleared up and you agree that the system is very unfair, since you have such a valuable commodity and selling advantage available to only a few people. You may place a higher value on vendors being in the game than having a level playing field in the market, but it's really the same view that giving a 2:1 weapon to a random 5% of the population is good because the overall effect is easier mobs for everyone. It is, but it just isn't fair.

LOL, are we back there? The system is not very unfair; it's convinient. If the system was like EQ2 where everyone can see everyone else's prices, I would have no problem with that. Then everyone can buy from the same location.

I don't see how you can keep saying that I think it's unfair because I have a vendor. If you want to ban me from ever owning a vendor, but keep the system I have no problem with that. But to just take my vendor for nothing is illogical.

Please explain how "very unfair" and "convenient" are mutually exclusive.

But okay, since it's not unfair and you're not better off with a vendor than without, I'll take it tomorrow then. Sound good?

You are going in circles. It looks like I just started page 2 again. So, when is the server losing vendors?

 

[Wiz]

I'm going in circles because you keep contradicting yourself. Stop disagreeing with reality.

(Here is a hint. If there is a system where some people are better off than others based on arbitrary decides and barriers of entry, that system is unfair. You have a great vendor spot simply because you happened to be online at the right time, and everyone else doesn't get a chance to have a great vendor spot, thus this is unfair. The only way it wouldn't be unfair is if you weren't better off than them, which you have admitted that you are, so STOP with the intellectual dishonesty.)

 

[Wiz]

I'm still waiting on you to successfully redefine the english language by explaining how "convenient" and "unfair" are mutually exclusive by the way.

 

[hooden]

Here are some answers you might have missed:

Does Hooden like the current system?: Yes

Does Hooden like having a vendor?: Yes

Does Hooden think vendors are very unfair?: No

Would Hooden ban himself from ever owning a vendor to keep the current, convenient system?: Yes

Should Wiz stop thinking Hooden is trying to dominate the market with his 2 NP vendors?: Yes

 

[Wiz]

Here are some answers you might have missed:

Does Hooden like the current system?: Yes

Does Hooden like having a vendor?: Yes

Does Hooden think vendors are very unfair?: No

Would Hooden ban himself from ever owning a vendor to keep the current, convenient system?: Yes

Should Wiz stop thinking Hooden is trying to dominate the market with his 2 NP vendors?: Yes

Would hooden give up the advantage he thinks isn't big at all (apparently) for anything less than getting to dictate server policy? No.

But this is really irrelevant, because it doesn't matter that you like it and think the convenience outweighs the unfairness, because A) You're in the vast minority and B) A fair game trumps a little convenience (same reason we're not going to give the ability to port to a select few warrior buddies of the staff, even though they would be able to conveniently port other people), and now that the altruism argument has been debunked, the discussion can turn productive.

 

[Haphesto]

If there is a system where some people are better off than others based on arbitrary decides and barriers of entry, that system is unfair. You have a great vendor spot simply because you happened to be online at the right time, and everyone else doesn't get a chance to have a great vendor spot, thus this is unfair.

Which vendor rotation would address.

I know you want some intimate level of personal interaction to go along with buying/selling, but it just not realistic with a player base of this size. A large percentage of the population would miss out on the proposed events due to time constraints, isn't that unfair?

 

[Wiz]

If there is a system where some people are better off than others based on arbitrary decides and barriers of entry, that system is unfair. You have a great vendor spot simply because you happened to be online at the right time, and everyone else doesn't get a chance to have a great vendor spot, thus this is unfair.

Which vendor rotation would address.

I know you want some intimate level of personal interaction to go along with buying/selling, but it just not realistic with a player base of this size. A large percentage of the population would miss out on the proposed events due to time constraints, isn't that unfair?

Stop with the selective reading, unfairness isn't the only reason we're nuking the vendor system.

If we were only concerned with unfairness, we would go ahead with the trade house idea which would be even fairer than rotating vendors. We are however, concerned with fairness, gameplay, social factors AND looks (the vendors really make cities ugly).

 

[Haphesto]

Fairness - Okay, we've addressed that with ideas to improve the situation greatly.

Gameplay - ?

Social factors - But how viable are merchant events with a server population this small? As I said, a large portion of players would be unable to attend due to time constraints. It sounds fun, but so many people would miss out. Atleast vendors are always there to check on your schedule.

AND looks (the vendors really make cities ugly)

That boils down to personal preference. Personally I think the vendors make cities feel more lively, just like the addition of citizens.