1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

OSI IDOC and stocking vendors.

Discussion in 'UHall' started by imported_DarkVoid, Apr 16, 2008.

  1. I noticed recently that someone was restocking their rental vendor when the house was in an OSI owned state.

    What possible benefit could the person hope to gain from this, unless they collect the gold the vendor earns promptly, it will become the property of whoever is lucky enough to loot it when the house finally falls.

    In fact, why are rental vendors allowed to stand at an OSI-owned IDOC at all? They should all have their contracts rendered null and void and the OSI-owned house should simply wait 9 days and then fall.

    I also don't understand why OSI houses cycle through decay stages. Can't they simply state something simple like rental collection period or rental retrieval period on the house sign?

    Something like this would be appropriate:

    Days 1-8 Rental contract retrieval period (Insert number of days remaining).

    Day 9 Rental contract retrieval will expire within 24 hours.

    If the house is owned by OSI I see no reason at all why people should be able to profit from a doomed house if they are able to make some sales they should only be able to do this with the permission of the original house owner. Since OSI can't give anyone permission to keep a vendor running, the contracts should be nullified completely and allow people their 9 days to collect their stuff.

    So that people aren't taken out of the running by a premature fall if the last contents are collected, the house should continue to the end of the 9 day cycle regardless of whether there's anything left to collect or not, especially in the case of Luna IDOCs this means there will be the usual placement competition to secure a house spot.

    Cheers ...

    DarkVoid
     
  2. Redxpanda

    Redxpanda Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    116
    Vendors are rented on a weekly basis. That person restocking paid for his week of vendor time and he deserves it if the owner quits or not. When his 1 week contract runs out his vendor will be gone. Until then, he is free to do what he pleases.
     
  3. <blockquote><hr>

    Vendors are rented on a weekly basis. That person restocking paid for his week of vendor time and he deserves it if the owner quits or not. When his 1 week contract runs out his vendor will be gone. Until then, he is free to do what he pleases.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't care about before the OSI-owned status comes into play. This is about when that status is on the house sign and OSI owns the house.

    The sole reason for the OSI status has been stated that it's for the rental owners to retrieve their belongings.

    Allowing rental vendors to be restocked with gold/items used to allow people to bug their vendors and cause the rental contracts to go on forever with a decaying OSI IDOC that never fell.

    They fixed it for recent OSI IDOCs so that it now should decay when the contracts expire. I therefore see no reason why players should be allowed to continue to sell goods instead of just reclaiming stocks and moving onto an active account which they can legitimately sell their goods from.

    If a house is OSI-owned, the rental contracts should be doing the right thing and disappearing so nobody can buy stuff any more. If the owner of those contracts wishes to reclaim their goods they can do so through the existing game mechanics already implemented for vendors. There is absolutely no reason at all to have a vendor rental contract standing at an OSI-owned IDOC.

    At the very least they should be prevented from adding to the loot already at an IDOC, most people will just wait for the house to fall, and there is a danger the person paying the vendor will lose their goods to the house collapse.

    Cheers ...

    DarkVoid
     
  4. Redxpanda

    Redxpanda Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    116
    It's a system that was put into place to protect people who own vendors at a house that they do not own but yes, some people take advantage of it and housing is being held up because of it
     
  5. Jahira-Tor

    Jahira-Tor Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    2
    Personly i think the house should fall, not go OSI, and have any belongings or gold on the vendor put it the persons bankbox type thing.
     
  6. <blockquote><hr>

    Personly i think the house should fall, not go OSI, and have any belongings or gold on the vendor put it the persons bankbox type thing.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I like it when I see the players camping the vendors for the checks. It's a way for a new character to make a small fortune (or a large one, depending on the type of vendor) and if the rental vendor owner didn't bother to collect their stuff, someone who is actually going to use it should get it.

    As I've said before, game mechanics already allow the rental vendor owner to collect their belongings. With that in mind, I want to see the 9-day grace period implemented, with the rental vendors removed from play, because it is silly having a vendor standing on a house that's decaying.

    Cheers ...

    DarkVoid