Topic

Auction caps leading to other limits?

[Note: This post was originally titled "Hot Topic: Limits on tree harvest", but was edited by staff for clarity.]

Maintaining and handling enormous lists of harvestable trees causes fundamental problems for our gameservers.

This very well could be the message that we all see one day. How would you feel if you saw this? Would Glitch be the same if you were limited on your tree harvests? Could you perform at the same level you are now if Tree Harvest were limited?

What about a limit on Piggy Pettings and Piggy Nibbles? How would you feel if you saw this? Would Glitch be the same if you were limited here? Could perform at the same level?

********************************

I don't feel that simply putting a limit on something is a solution. That is simply hiding the problem. Glitch is a wonderful game which will continue to grow. What happens when there are simply too many people to 'Maintain and handle enormous lists of players which causes fundamental problems for our gameservers?' Are we all going to be ok with being assigned certain times of day when we are allowed to play to make room for everyone else?

********************************

Fix the auction problem please, don't just hide it. 

Posted 13 months ago by Hoodjack Saken Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • Dramatic exaggerations and doom aren't making your case very well.  Nor is your continued use of not-quite-accurate headers for your threads.  

    Whether or not you feel that way, that's the solution that TS has put in place.

    Very few players had more than 100 auctions going at one time.  The limit is one that most players will never reach.   I have no problem with a few players being slightly limited so that the game runs smoothly for  the rest of us.
    Posted 13 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Are we all going to be ok with being assigned certain times of day when we are allowed to play to make room for everyone else?"

    Welcome to the mud I used to play :)  From what I'm told, it was just a fact of life.

    edit: as for the question, no I wouldn't really care.  Sometimes I log on, and don't even bother nibbling/squeezing/milking/harvesting anything.  This coming from someone whose income and donations come solely from piggies, chickens, butterflies, and bubbles.  And has 17 piggies in her house.  Yes those piggies go unnibbled.  It doesn't bother me.

    There's limits on how fast my heart beats too.  That doesn't bother me either.  And one day, my heart's gonna give up (or my liver, or kidneys, or brain, or spleen), and I'm going to die.  Does that bother you?  It doesn't bother me.  Everything has limits!
    Posted 13 months ago by Lara Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Windborn,

    1)  ' Players have been begging staff to pin certain player generated topics for months, if not years.' - I believe it was my topic that broke this cycle yes?

    2) This is the action that TS has taken yes, however, it is no solution as the problem still exists. 

    3) -You are correct, very few players had more than 100 auctions going. However, ask the roughly 5000 auction owners whom I purchased their items if they enjoyed having their items bought? Is that a big difference? 
    -What about the 12000+ auctions I posted allowing players better and quicker access to items? Do they matter? 

    Once again, it's not just about me here. But where does it stop? Where does not fixing problems and just covering them up stop? It could very well not stop at something that is quite important to you.
    Posted 13 months ago by Hoodjack Saken Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Hoodjack - Hmm, no, topics have definitely been pinned before yours.  They just got unpinned when staff felt like it, like yours.
    Posted 13 months ago by Lara Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Plucky purchased Hoodjack Saken's auction of 1x Firefly Jar, for 1299 currants."

    No wonder you are incensed!  At roughly 1099c profit for this one auction (vendors sell Firefly Jars for just 200 c) the mind boggles to think how much you have been making!
    Posted 13 months ago by Reni's Mum Subscriber! | Permalink
  • a full firefly jar could go for that much (but I wouldn't buy one for more than 600)
    Posted 13 months ago by Treesa Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Enola Llataton,

    You are correct, I offer a product to people and they decide if they want to purchase it. Apparently this person felt having the item now vs. going out and getting it themselves was worth it. Maybe they did not have the skills necessary to get it. That was a decision that this person made.

    Now, unfortunately, 20 other consumers like this person are not able to make that same decision as I have lost 20+ full jars of fireflies in this AH bug which I was not properly reimbursed for.

    Not to mention buyers of over 100 other products as well :(
    Posted 13 months ago by Hoodjack Saken Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Amusing, I agree with Windborn about something.  

    Of course, while the fix doesn't affect very many people, the problem didn't affect anyone other than those same people.  So in all fairness the game does not run any more smoothly (or any less) for us than it did before.  If it was causing demand on the services, it hasn't had a notable effect.   

    But given that I don't really like the auction UI and they have tossed around the idea of possibly changing it---though not committed to it yet---I think any solution other than a quick fix is a waste of development time.  It doesn't make sense to put real time and the corresponding wage costs into a problem that might go away completely when the UI is revised and affects very few players, especially since that time could be placed on a problem that affects all or on new content and game mechanics to help retain players. 

    But it's a serious stretch to go from a wonky server UI and coding to assuming they will allow the same to happen with basic game play.  And while it got me to open this thread, I'm not very happy that I did.  

    Other games have placed arbitrary limits on sales without claiming any coding issues, anywhere from 10 to 16 to you get more as you level to you only get this much but you can buy more slots in the cash shop.  A limit of 100 is far from unreasonable from that perspective.  
    Posted 13 months ago by Red Sauce Subscriber! | Permalink
  • what do you mean "pinned"?

    "I have no problem with a few players being slightly limited so that the game runs smoothly for  the rest of us"

    I don't see how Hoodjack's problem made the game run less smoothly for the rest of us?    He had a lot of auctions up, they would expire and not be returned to him.   I don't see how that interfered with the rest of us.

    It may even have helped to reveal a problem that might have gone unoticed by players who don't put lots of stuff up for auction,.

    For the record, I don't really agree with the idea of using the auction space to store stuff, knowing that it might expire, but I don't  see why you shouldn't be able to sell as much as you can produce or gather.
    Posted 13 months ago by Treesa Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "I think any solution other than a quick fix is a waste of development time."
    "A limit of 100 is far from unreasonable from that perspective."

    Agree :) Thanks Saucelah.
    Posted 13 months ago by Lara Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It's entirely possible that I don't understand this topic because I'm severely inebriated. In fact, let's go ahead and say that I'm about to miss the point completely because I'm wasted. 

    I am baffled and amused by your self righteous anger. You mad, bro. But I can't figure out why. 

    It's like if I were to start a topic called "Sharks are going to eat your genitals! The Government is going to provide grants to make this happen!" And then, when you open the topic, it's actually about how the government is cutting funding for failed potato taming initiatives. 

    I don't understand the correlation!
    Posted 13 months ago by Xev Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Oh, and I've found that when I lost items due to bugs and quietly sent a bug report to the devs without raising a stink, less than two weeks later the items were in my bags when I logged in.  

    Maybe there's something about your approach?  
    Posted 13 months ago by Red Sauce Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Glitch is growing rapidly and new companies often have hiccups where growth exceeds means for a while.  I don't have a problem with them limiting any feature that affects a minority of users, even if I'm in that minority.
    Posted 13 months ago by Wintera Woodswitch Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I can totally relate. I have the hiccups right now.
    Posted 13 months ago by Xev Subscriber! | Permalink
  • lol, Xev :)
    Posted 13 months ago by Lara Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Perhaps the 'fix' would be to set it up that items are never returned if they don't sell in the auction.  List at your own risk, etc.  Yesterday I moved out of my Salatu house, so I sold off all the piggies in my pen.  That means I had 21 piggies listed.  I wouldn't have been upset if they had gone away if nobody bid on them.

    Methinks there is a little Ferrengi fury going on here in the thread.

    There have been a number of changes made to the way the game operates to encourage balanced play.  Having hundreds and hundreds of items listed in the auction is not balanced play.

    Oh, and to stay 'on topic' (*ahem*) there already is a limit on tree harvesting.  There has been since day one AFAIK and people haven't had a problem with it.  There's a limit on how many times a piggy can be petted and nibbled, too.  The limits per tree or animal versus the time to travel kind of establishes a practical limit on total harvests/nibbles.  Unless perhaps I were to use a bot to run around harvesting trees and piggies....
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Parrow Gnolle - Ferrengi fury is spot on and I totally love that way of describing it!
    Posted 13 months ago by Reni's Mum Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I normally avoid these threads but...

    Wow. I thought they gave a very honest response to the problem in the thread dealing with why they have implemented the change for right now. The OP even said so. And yet...

    "Hoodjack Saken: nothing is necessarily "forever", but this limit will probably be around for quite some time. 
    Maintaining and handling enormous lists of auction items causes fundamental problems for our gameservers. Problems which you in particular have seen manifest themselves recently.

    The game's economy is still pretty rudimentary (at least compared to some of the things we have in the works), and it's pretty likely that at some point over the next year or so we'll revisit how auctions function both from a technical and a "mechanics" point of view. Until then, however, this limit is likely to remain."


    They are aware of the problem. They are making it, for the time being, so the system doesn't break. The change is far from game breaking for the VAST majority of players. I applaud TS handles these issues.
    Posted 13 months ago by Lord Bacon-o Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I have no idea why you guys are agreeing to this '100 cap'. It cannot solve the problem nor even hiding it.

    If your inventory is full (all slots used), no matter it is just 10 or 100 or 1000 expiring auction they have to "waiting for space to open up in your pack so they could be delivered" so you still have a chance of losing them.

    It may reduce the loss of bulk sellers a little bit (by reducing the profit they can make), but for most of you who don't list more than 100 auctions the situation is just the same as before that you can still loss your stuffs as mentioned above.

    It is not something like 'sacrificing few bulk sellers in exchange for the benefit to the rest' they you want. Instead it is 'sacrificing few bulk sellers in exchange for nothing good to the rest'.

    Why don't just send the expired auctions back via the frogs, I don't think this involves complicated coding since it is very similar to the way how frogs deliver auction stuffs. However this is far better than trying to hide the problem.
    Posted 13 months ago by Utopia Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Frankly, I would rather have the developers working on other new features for the game, rather than workarounds so a handful of players can be auction powerplayers.  It's a matter of priorities.  I get the feeling that in the past few days, Tiny Speck devoted a fair amount of time to exploring fixes to this 'problem' and decided the cost/benefit to 'fixing' it just isn't worth it.  There are so many other changes and updates they could make.....
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I believe TinySpeck has stated in the past that the auctions that have been lost will be reimbursed. A little more patience on your part would be appreciated I'm sure on their part. They just implemented the limit, and it still really hasn't been a week since they said they would start reimbursements. The issue at hand isn't TinySpeck's ability to address the issue as much as your ability to accept the manner in which it is being resolved. In the end, it is their name on the game. 

    Maybe try exploring other parts of the game aside from the auctions while they rectify the situation? 
    Posted 13 months ago by Zu Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Would Glitch be the same if you were limited on your tree harvests? Could you perform at the same level you are now if Tree Harvest were limited?

    What about a limit on Piggy Pettings and Piggy Nibbles? How would you feel if you saw this? Would Glitch be the same if you were limited here? Could perform at the same level?"

    ...Um. I may be missing something here, but there are limits aren't there? I can only harvest each tree twice per day. Same with petting and nibbling Piggies...
    Posted 13 months ago by Xain Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Utopia: Preliminary explorations suggest that the vast majority of players have absolutely no problems with auction items going missing.

    The cause of missing items is primarily having too many simultaneous auctions.

    I personally don't take the adding of limits lightly, and in fact advocated against it for several days before coming to the conclusion that it is the best, safest thing to do for now.

    As to your other point, auction returns will be changed to use the postal system before the end of this week. The only reason we've been waiting is to keep from muddying the waters (debugging-wise) while we get a handle on the overall set of issues with auctions.

    Unfortunately, changing how expired auctions are delivered to you will not fix the problems caused by large numbers of auctions... the problems are caused by having too many items listed, and manifest themselves at a point in the auctions system before we're at the point of returning items - changing the delivery method of expired items will not alleviate the problem which leads to auction items disappearing.

    As for item reimbursements, those will also take place before the end of the week. Hopefully tomorrow, but making promises about timing of things like that is just asking for something else to pop up first thing tomorrow that requires a day or more of my time to fix ;) 
    Posted 13 months ago by hitherto Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Limits suck, but hopefully it's a rather temporary solution, the problem with limits is anyone who's serious will have no problem with making more characters to be able to put things up, which really just makes it more annoying for everyone involved.
    Posted 13 months ago by Bluigi Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Sharks!!!!!
    Posted 13 months ago by Orbst Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Am I the only one sitting here thinking that if I'm buying from the AH, I'm going to avoid certain auctions? 8(
    Posted 13 months ago by Saiai Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Hmmm... Zero in on a problem. Come up with possible solutions. After debate and careful thinking, finally settle on the one that works best for now, and implement it while remaining open to changes for the better in the future.

    Tiny Speck for Congress!!!
    Posted 13 months ago by La_La Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think maybe there needs to be a forums rule about the thread subject matching the thread contents. And maybe there should also be a rule about the original poster explaining his/her point in a direct manner.

    I can't be the only person who wishes they didn't waste some of their precious time on this earth reading part of this thread just to figure out that it has nothing to do with harvesting trees.

    :-/
    Posted 13 months ago by Becky Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Land Sharks!!!!!!!!
    Posted 13 months ago by Tibbi Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Dear Tiny Speck - 

    I love how you handle pretty much everything.  Please remain a shining example of awesomeness so that I can point to you when other companies and sites could use some inspiration.

    Cheers!
    Posted 13 months ago by Wintera Woodswitch Subscriber! | Permalink
  • hitherto wrote: "Unfortunately, changing how expired auctions are delivered to you will not fix the problems caused by large numbers of auctions... the problems are caused by having too many items listed, and manifest themselves at a point in the auctions system before we're at the point of returning items - changing the delivery method of expired items will not alleviate the problem which leads to auction items disappearing."

    Indeed, a few moments of thought about the problem would make this obvious, as the problem also included auctions disappearing as someone attempted to buy them.  (Lest anyone ask, the thread starter has known this to be the case for some time, and has mentioned it in other threads.)  I say all of this, and the following, as someone who generally enjoys economic manipulations and strategizing in MMO games.  I do understand why you're frustrated and why this is important to you.

    There are effectively two options available right now from a player's perspective. 
    1) There are limits in place which prevent you from placing a high number of auctions and losing some of your items.
    2) There are not limits in place, and nothing stops you from placing a high number of auctions and losing some of your items.

    Ultimately, with those 2 choices, I'll take #1.  I understand that what you want is to have the bug fixed. I am quite sure that the employees of Tiny Speck want it fixed too.  But there are a finite number of hours in the day and a very long list of bug fixes and features to go in to the game.  Using the resources they have to fix a bug in a system that's due to be replaced and impacts a minority of players would not leave them in business for very long.

    I get that something like this could impact something I do a lot in the game.  If that happened, I'd find something else to do until it was fixed.  Who knows, I might even find something I like more... but unless you really enjoy engaging in long lists of fallacies and false analogies while people on the internet try to get you to take a deep breath, you might want to work on that one yourself.

    The point, summarized:  Getting more upset isn't going to fix your problem.  You don't have the power to implement a bug fix.  So find something you DO have the power to do and invest your energy in that instead.
    Posted 13 months ago by Magic Monkey Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think Magic Monkey wrapped this thread up well enough :)
    Posted 13 months ago by Reihox Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Hoodjak--Your tittle is unrelated. 

    Big AH people revealed a problem by using snipers and autosellers. Automation to put up hundreds or thousands of auctions in less than a minute.

    Scripts cannot be used in game so harvesting or nibbling so quickly that it creates problem is bogus.

    Also,  it cannot be done offline. There is no Ur dust for the items to be floating as...it's either in your inventory or leaking at your feet.

    Oh!! A solution! When you log in your hundreds or thousands of expired auctions simply fall all around you...as would happen if you were acquiring that many items simultaneously in game. No limits then!

    Just be glad Tiny Speck didn't quash scripts for AH entirely. Which would have also solved this problem, though would have affected a greater number of players.

    Also, your concern for your suppliers and (non)-customers is overblown. 

    There are bigger structural issues with the glitch economy atm. TS has plans. Supporting thousands of simultaneous expired auctions...eh, I can't speak for their priorities but your non-customers are not heartbroken you won't be not selling them several hundred different auctions.

    @Lara--LOL! 

    @Xen--my genitals are internal...but I'm not looking at potatoes the same way again >.< shaaaark!

    @Saiai--Yeah. Same :/ I either shop people I know or lowest price. I don't remember seeing the name before, but...if I do, a seller I'll avoid now. Unless, the sniper I use get's his auction ;D

    @Becky--hopefully no new rules need to be put in place when, hopefully, peer pressure can do the trick.
    Posted 13 months ago by M<3tra, obviously Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Misleading title. Also, big unnecessary rant. I must be drunk too, because I don't understand what the big fuss is about. TS is one of the best companies I've ever seen, regarding customer satidfaction, and the game is free.

    And anyway, yes, I'd be okay with limits to individual petting, nibbling and harvesting... as those already exist: maximum of 2 per pig/tree at AK7 :P
    Posted 13 months ago by Mandy.23 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I challenge every person who posted something along the "(fix idea here) would work, and it should be easy to code" line to go ahead and try it. Feel free. Bonus points if you make the code change to a game with already existing piles of spaghetti code. Having been made to eat my words myself for posting something like this before, I can assure you it's harder than you think, for the majority of us (yes, some are closet code monkeys - go to it I say).

    I don't see a problem with temporary throttling of mega sellers. What are we talking; 10 or so folks?
    Posted 13 months ago by Evadrepus Terramere Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Metra: 1) Xev. 2) Your genitals are not internal. Trust me, when the shark comes knockin' you'll cross your legs just like everyone else. You may not have any dangly bits, but you have enough exposed to warrant concern.
    Posted 13 months ago by Xev Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I totally understand Tiny Speck's short-term solution to the problem, and also the OP's grumpiness about it.

    What consistently irritates me about the player base is how anyone who is doing something unusual is mocked and dismissed.

    There's an awful lot of back-slapping regarding how wonderful and open-minded we are as a community of players, but the good will only lasts as long as everyone is moving along with the same groupthink.

    "Play in the manner that best expresses your individuality as long as you play just like me."
    Posted 13 months ago by Biff Beefbat Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @evadrepus, it's like you read my mind...i wanted to make a comic to the effect of "this is what non-coders think coding is" but since kukubee did that already with ps, i'll just point to it instead.

    kukubee.com/comic/?p=7
    Posted 13 months ago by Lara Subscriber! | Permalink
  • [redacted because it added nothing to the discussion]
    Posted 13 months ago by Lord Bacon-o Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I actually thought the cap would be implemented before we left beta, so I don't have a problem with it.
    Something needed to be done until they can either solve it or find a workaround for it and I find it'll be much better to deal with a cap then to constantly worry about whether I've gotten all of my things returned - be it expired or I cancel it.

    I no longer post as much in the auctions as I use to since we've went live but when I did, I didn't use an api to do so - so I'm sure my "lots of stuff on auction" wasn't near what some of y'all are putting up.

    hitherto rules at what he does and I'm sure he didn't come to this decision lightly.
    Just have faith and a bit of patience - I have no doubt he'll get it all worked out for us. (((HUGS))) hitherto 
    Posted 13 months ago by sgjo Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I hope the developers know that many of us support them in their pragmatic decision to institute limits.  Powerplayers who spam the auction don't need to direct game development.  Work on the roadmap that matter to most players, which is new features.
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It states that the staff edited the title, not the OP
    Posted 13 months ago by sgjo Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think the limits are fine and won't affect many people. I'm sorry if the world changed to block something you found fun or profitable, but...that's the way things go. 

    Also...the drama is pretty funny. WHERE DOES IT ALL STOP?!?!
    Posted 13 months ago by TrentSkunk Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think what the OP was trying to do was point out that if what happened to him had happened to others, there would be more outcry and less mockery.  We know that to be the case, in fact, based on past events.

    I think he just needs a shoulder to cry on.  I'd help out, but my epaulettes are enormous.
    Posted 13 months ago by Biff Beefbat Subscriber! | Permalink