Quote Originally Posted by Abriael View Post
1: Bigger wards. More efficent code.
This creates loading issues, especially for slower machines. Current wards that are full are already fairly slow to load, and only a few retainers load at a time. It places a heavy load on the server, because now it must account for an increased amount of retainers in the ward, and depending on how well SE's code is optimized, load times don't necessarily increase in a linear fashion.

This also creates a problem where, if you're searching for a popular item, you can end up with 30, 40, 50 retainers that are all selling that item, leaving you to manually sift through them, almost as if the search function wasn't there.

More efficient code is a noble goal, but not always doable without making some sacrifices somewhere. You can optimize some code only so far before you start having to ditch certain features.

2: Multiple wards of the same kind, divided by level (exactly like the current tailors wards, I cannot really fathom why they did that only for tailors, it works wonders and there are other kinds of items that would need that more, see battlecraft)
Further brings out the problem of people being penalized for selling multiple types of items.

If it was made so that there was no penalty for selling level 50 armor in the level 10 ward, retainers would be lumped into the first ward on the list. If it was made so that there was a penalty, then people trying to sell both a level 10 armor and a level 50 armor would have to take a penalty on one of the sales.

Creates a problem on the shopper's side as well; if someone is trying to buy a level 10 armor and a level 50 armor, they would need to go through a loading screen.

Last but not least: 3: phase out by-wards search and implement Centralized search.

I search for an item and i'm told Retainer, price, and ward where it is.
Good feature, would improve wards without creating additional problems.

All in all, you sort of solved one problem, which is overcrowding, but introduced 2 new problems and exacerbated an already existing problem (that you offered no solutions to).

Ain't it lucky that you aren't a developer (like me)?