Market Wards, enough is enough

[Sorel]

indeed, thats because the current system works. i dont think that would be argued. its possible to do everything we need in the MW system.
and because of that, they don't feel its necessary to change it.
but the problem isnt that its possible, its about how easy and convenient it is.

I mean no disrespect. I've read every post in this topic. Some I've read twice to completely understand, because so many points are brought up. I hope that you can understand my point, which is not for everyone to get hung up on the name.

The name has no value. If the Development Team removes the Market Wards and puts in an Auction House that functions exactly the same way (i.e. lots of walking, disconnected markets, etc), we will be no better off for it.

We need to concentrate on the features we want, regardless of the name those collection of features are called.

[Griss]

I would hazard a guess that the stability of the wards has something to do with the way they are instanced. The wards seem to consist of one small map and multiple instances running on that map. Given that the majority of the time the only wards crashing are related to uldah there is probably a "Critical mass" of retainers/players that cause the instancing to crumble.

[Sorel]

I would hazard a guess that the stability of the wards has something to do with the way they are instanced. The wards seem to consist of one small map and multiple instances running on that map. Given that the majority of the time the only wards crashing are related to uldah there is probably a "Critical mass" of retainers/players that cause the instancing to crumble.

If that is so, I wonder what would happen if the Development Team simply "de-instance" the Wards. We'd have a lot of players and Retainers in a small space, right?? But we would also have no more Masons Ward, Tanner's Ward, etc as separate instances.

So before they "de-instance" a city's wards they would need to increase the size of the zone. Something like 20x (1x for each ward being eliminated). Such a large zone would certainly require a map, and maybe a few NPCs that can give directions (e.g. "You're in the Mason's Ward, luv. South o' 'ere is the Tanner's Ward").

That may be an interesting solution to that facet of the problem.

[Griss]

If that is so, I wonder what would happen if the Development Team simply "de-instance" the Wards. We'd have a lot of players and Retainers in a small space, right?? But we would also have no more Masons Ward, Tanner's Ward, etc as separate instances.

So before they "de-instance" a city's wards they would need to increase the size of the zone. Something like 20x (1x for each ward being eliminated). Such a large zone would certainly require a map, and maybe a few NPCs that can give directions (e.g. "You're in the Mason's Ward, luv. South o' 'ere is the Tanner's Ward").

That may be an interesting solution to that facet of the problem.

Well one way around it with the same "ease of travel" would be to do what the xi team did with the bcnm system. instead of every one getting cramed into the same box they make multiple boxes with the movement between them being exactly identical to what we have now.

Of course the only way to know for sure that they are not already doing this would be to be able to see outside and look around. and if they are and its not a case of the instancing failing. then i don't know, but i would still hazard a guess that its a critical mass issue.

[Dreamer]

I'm still hopeful that SE will take the AH option off the table completely. The game has enough stuff to fix without dedicating a team to completely redundant functionality.

[Honz]

I don't care what SE names the market system as long as its stable and stops crashing. Maybe the stability issue will sort itself out when SE balances the game and make Limsa and Gridania more appealing to players.

[kurokawa]

Jesus christ guys. I logged off last night at around page 20 of this, and we're still going?

After all the debate I think they are plainly looking at turning this game into a 'game'. Focusing on the battle mechanics and storyline above ALL else.

Can't see them investing any time into new MWs or an AH for ages yet as it's not essential to the 'game' being fun. It is a game after all.

They'll change it eventually, but god knows what to, and frankly, who cares as long as the battles are fun and parties work.

Surely we have some better things to talk about?

Let's discuss the possibility of new areas opening up by August, and which ones will come first!

Let's dream a bit.

[Tiraelina]

Different teams do different tasks.

How does anyone actually think the wards are going to hold up if the game ever took off?

[Shika]

I think a good compromise can be made if the following adjustments are made to the current system:

* Allow the search function to show NQ, +1, +2 and +3 items
* Allow retainers to seek for items that a player does not currently own- probably through the item search counter and assigning it to their retainer that way
* Display of price history, e.g. last ten set prices by different retainers for an item and the retainer names
* Possibly simplifying the item search function itself; rather than by each ward possibly just by item categories- food, ingredients, armour >> legs, hands, feet etc and list armour and weapon types in ascending or descending rank order. Maybe still showing something in the heading as to which market ward these types of items should be sold in- or scrap the specific wards and tax players a certain % regardless, especially as some people are petitioning for more ways to “sink gil”
* When marking a retainer, maybe giving some system message to the player as to the retainer name and ward location for the bazaar that you want to look at
* Allow purchase of goods directly from the item search counter into your inventory, or a designated collection point outside like a delivery box
* Have two tabs in the item search window that you can switch between- retainers selling the item and retainers seeking the item
* A separate search for retainers seeking repairs (?)

This way players still utilize the wards to put up their retainers for selling items in their bazaar, seeking repairs, exchanging items etc so not rendering them defunct, and people that want to browse (or “window shop”) can still go through wards and look at all of the goods a retainer may have up for sale.

Players will be able to have access to some form of pricing history and the ability to purchase items from the search counter immediately, rather than having to mark up the retainer, go to the relevant ward and then make the purchase.

[Sorel]

* Have two tabs in the item search window that you can switch between- retainers selling the item and retainers seeking the item

Intriguing ...

I think I may like that idea. I'll have to ruminate on it more, though.

I also like the idea of a "Repair Search Counter" option added to the top level menu. It would have to be based on Disciple Of Hand Class though, not Item. After selecting the DoH class, it would then mark all the Retainers that are seeking repairs appropriate for that class.