daily loss of gold

100% AGREE

Yes. I could put some expensive stuff on normal vendors.

The 5.25% charge is nothing compared to how much you lose per day with the normal vendors, imo. 

Easy fix, price your items 5.25% more than you would have.

ZekeTerra said:

Easy fix, price your items 5.25% more than you would have.

That's not how a fee set at intervals works.  You should look up how it works.  It's super important in life.

I don't really agree with this, but it's selfish reasons.  There's just too much gold in the game.  I have zero interest in saving gold for those that have multi-million gold costing items on vendors.

While I find the on-going problems with vendor search frustrating (all though not that frustrating cause I don't play on Atlantic) there was a time when we'd mark runes to vendors and send consistent business to people we liked. We’d also try hard to create relationships with customers, create novel advertising within the game, and vie for higher traffic vendor spots. Vendor search is certainly a wonderful addition to the game and I'd not want to lose it but there are still legacy options.

Jepeth said:

While I find the on-going problems with vendor search frustrating (all though not that frustrating cause I don't play on Atlantic) there was a time when we'd mark runes to vendors and send consistent business to people we liked. We’d also try hard to create relationships with customers, create novel advertising within the game, and vie for higher traffic vendor spots. Vendor search is certainly a wonderful addition to the game and I'd not want to lose it but there are still legacy options.

Standing Ovation! 🙂

Jepeth said:

While I find the on-going problems with vendor search frustrating (all though not that frustrating cause I don't play on Atlantic) there was a time when we'd mark runes to vendors and send consistent business to people we liked. We’d also try hard to create relationships with customers, create novel advertising within the game, and vie for higher traffic vendor spots. Vendor search is certainly a wonderful addition to the game and I'd not want to lose it but there are still legacy options.

There was also a time that there was a 3rd party site that you could search to see what was on all town vendors and VS was to include all out of town vendors but sadly on Atl it has not happened.  So the question is, is it the number of items in Atls data base or is it the number of players searching Atls data base.  If it is the number of items then Atl need to do a self imposed limit on the number of items per vendor that they do.  If it is as some people have stated that it is the number of accounts pinging VS then UO needs to limit who may use vendor search, such as paid accounts only that way it is even easier to ban accounts that constantly abuse VS.  This problem needs some serious attention as it does effect the UO player base a lot more than UO thinks it does.  With VS down and that 3rd party site that use to maintain a data base down I suspect that the RMT Sites are getting a lot more business.  What is there like 5 sites spamming Gen and Help chat almost constantly now on a bunch of throw away EJ accounts.

The 5.25% is when you sell the item.  Raising your price a little over the 5.25% should get you the gold amount you wanted.  I wasn't referring to the normal vendor contract, i was referring to the commission one.

The 5.25% you lose becomes less and less of a concern as you make more and more gold, imo. 

Gandalf said:

 it could even go as far as closing my account once I've lost everything.

I don't want to be all doom and gloom but honestly at this point it's the only way to get anything done. Vote with your wallet. I have known several people that were in the same situation as you and have just flat out quit because of the neglect this game has gotten, but several due to vendor search being broken for this long.

Bank as much as you can and come back when (if?) it gets fixed.

Probably not the answer you're looking for but look https://uo.com/ doesn't even work right now, hasn't all evening..

VS does not guarantee quick sale and save on rental charges.

Seth said:

VS does not guarantee quick sale and save on rental charges.

If it is easier for buyers to search, then it will also be easier for competitors to search for cheapest price and then lower theirs to compete. Currently, I just find it too slow to search for price reference, so pricing can be messy. If VS is fast and reliable, prices could become more competitive.

Double edge sword.

This is a Seller PoV. From a Buyer's one, "VS KO = No Buy", price quite incidental... 🙂

Ivenor said:

Seth said:

VS does not guarantee quick sale and save on rental charges.

If it is easier for buyers to search, then it will also be easier for competitors to search for cheapest price and then lower theirs to compete. Currently, I just find it too slow to search for price reference, so pricing can be messy. If VS is fast and reliable, prices could become more competitive.

Double edge sword.

This is a Seller PoV. From a Buyer's one, "VS KO = No Buy", price quite incidental... 🙂

That is so true, its a lose-lose situation. They need a power search server cluster like google or amazon with say 300 computers 😂

Seth said:

Ivenor said:

Seth said:

VS does not guarantee quick sale and save on rental charges.

If it is easier for buyers to search, then it will also be easier for competitors to search for cheapest price and then lower theirs to compete. Currently, I just find it too slow to search for price reference, so pricing can be messy. If VS is fast and reliable, prices could become more competitive.

Double edge sword.

This is a Seller PoV. From a Buyer's one, "VS KO = No Buy", price quite incidental... 🙂

That is so true, its a lose-lose situation. They need a power search server cluster like google or amazon with say 300 computers 😂