A better option would be to redo the extremely dated auction house to be more like how amazon (is supposed to) operate. 1 listing on the auction house, its current cheapest rate per item, and you buy the quantity you're looking for. This update feels like a "quick fix" for a larger problem blizzard has yet to improve, and I hope to see some forward progress instead of a backward pass. In this design, posting 1 or 500 wouldn't make a difference, and there would be no need to adjust the auction house deposits.
The auction house already does taxes (5% fee on your asking price) so you can stick an additional fee based off that same format for the posting fee. My opinion would be to use a flat rate or percentage based value rather than some off-hand calculation based off a vendor's sell price.
Hey look, every herb on my server has walls up in stacks of 1. Same with ore. And cloth. And it's starting to lag some.
Wow, who could possibly have seen that coming.
Wow, who could possibly have seen that coming.
I just feel like users are being PUNISHED with this new fee due to blizzard's inadequate design of the auction house itself, and that's not fair to the players.
A better option would be to redo the extremely dated auction house to be more like how amazon (is supposed to) operate. 1 listing on the auction house, its current cheapest rate per item, and you buy the quantity you're looking for. This update feels like a "quick fix" for a larger problem blizzard has yet to improve, and I hope to see some forward progress instead of a backward pass. In this design, posting 1 or 500 wouldn't make a difference, and there would be no need to adjust the auction house deposits.
Just to reiterate, I feel like users are being PUNISHED with this new fee due to blizzard's inadequate design of the auction house itself, and that's not fair to the players.
A better option would be to redo the extremely dated auction house to be more like how amazon (is supposed to) operate. 1 listing on the auction house, its current cheapest rate per item, and you buy the quantity you're looking for. This update feels like a "quick fix" for a larger problem blizzard has yet to improve, and I hope to see some forward progress instead of a backward pass. In this design, posting 1 or 500 wouldn't make a difference, and there would be no need to adjust the auction house deposits.
Just to reiterate, I feel like users are being PUNISHED with this new fee due to blizzard's inadequate design of the auction house itself, and that's not fair to the players.
08/22/2018 09:49 AMPosted by YthisensOur goal is to give players some forewarning on this change, and to gather feedback. We’re putting together a list of the items that would be affected by this deposit change, which we expect to be limited to high-quantity trade goods. Furthermore, we’re deploying the change to the PTR first, so that addon authors can work through the change while we test it thoroughly.
This change will likely be a temporary measure, as we’re also working to broadly improve the default Auction House in the future. It’s clear to us that many players use addons because they find the default Auction House interface inadequate. A temporary change to deposit fees will help with this in the short term, and we’ll continue to work on overall improvements to the Auction House for a future patch.
Given I offered a similar suggestion the same day you posted this, obviously I think the general outlines are a good idea. However, I think some fine tuning is needed. I also note that the fact you got no feedback for 5 days, and then 15 pages of feedback in the last day, suggests that no one noticed the thread until we started responding.
I like the idea of a per stack surcharge. I have a few observations.
First, 20% is extreme, especially on listing fees. Some markets are slow markets: for example, I keep a 36 slot enchanting bag on the AH at all times just so it's available for people, but I only sell one per week or less. I think it's good for the community for these things to be available; my server has been accused of being a dead server, and when what you want isn't on the auction house, that certainly tends to make one think things are dead. However, with a 20% listing fee, obviously what I'm doing would be impossible; even 5% would be pretty prohibitive.
Okay, I know you are only targeting some commodities, which probably doesn't include my bags. However, a similar argument applies to other slow markets, such as old content commodities. Sometimes people want to go back and make an old item, or level up an old profession, and the old commodities ought to be available. That means you need to provide for sellers who have to list many times to make one sale. My tailoring supplier wouldn't be able to make the enchanting bags if there weren't a market in the old content commodity ingredients for them.
I think a better idea would be to make the change to the auction house cut instead of to the listing fee. This is different from both your post and my original suggestion, but other responses in this thread suggest that a change to the auction house cut would be more effective. This would avoid suppressing slow markets, while still allowing the basic idea to work as intended.
I'd also suggest you make the per stack fee substantially lower. Commodity trading is a high volume, low margin business; even a 1% of unit price fee would have an effect. I'd also suggest that you be very careful about making manual judgements about which commodities to apply this to; as a check on what you think would be reasonable, I'd suggest that you only apply as much of a fee as you'd be willing to place on all stackables, or at least on all current expansion stackables.
I think an upper limit of the per stack fee you should consider would be 5-10% of per unit price sale price. As a Jewelcrafter, most people buy my gems one at a time, but enough people buy two or more at a time that even a 5% extra sale fee would make me post some stacks of 2 instead of all singles.
Finally, I would make an additional suggestion that it would help a lot if the default listing order were in order of increasing unit price, rather than in order of increasing stack price. It would encourage people to post stacks of more than 1 if they knew that wouldn't cause their stack to be pushed to the back of the listings. I know this would be a more involved coding change.
It's good that you're thinking about these things. Please don't go overboard with the excuse that this is going to be a stopgap measure; stopgap measures have a way of becoming permanent much of the time. And if the longer term work you're thinking about has to do with my earlier suggestion of larger database transactions encompassing multiple listings, I'm happy to do code reviews if you want. Please don't follow the suggestions for turning the auction house into an automated commodity exchange; I play fantasy games to escape the real world, and it's fun to be able to do things like trying to manipulate markets or try to gank the competition that would land one in jail in the real world.
Awesome change.
08/28/2018 01:55 PMPosted by Nomorelevels100g a stack for anchor weed....
I'm lucky to get 10 anchor weed during my farm time. I been farming herbs and ore off and on to get some tokens, but I don't have a whole lot of time, so most of the time I don't even get a stack of 200 of herbs and ore. I also don't have the time to try to sit around a city and try to sell them through trade. So it's not even worth it to me anymore to sell the anchor weed I guess if it's that much of a deposit. Also, who is going to put a full stack of 200 anchor weed up on the AH?? The price would be absurd that people aren't going to buy that!
Also, like I said in a post before, I sell in stacks of 20 because they sell quicker that way than a stack of 200. Some people don't need a full stack of 200. This is a horrible way to try to get rid of stacks of 1 because all you're doing is penalizing the other players.
After reading every post since that last wall of text i typed - it seems that the major issue here is the way selling stacked items works. Being able to post "X" number of items and allowing people to buy "Y" number of items from "X" seems like the ideal solution, up until X becomes depleted.
Having to post an amount of items that matches up closely to what a consumer actually desires is fairly un-intuitive, despite it being the norm of how the AH has worked over the past 14 years. Granted, this may require changes to the functionality of how the AH works. At the end of the day, the question is does it make sense to make the system better, even if it requires significant changes under the hood?
In my own opinion, though this 'solution' may fix the current issue of pages being filled with 1 stacked items bogging down the system - to implement a solution like this will negatively affect the entire in-game market -- this based on value, and quantity needed vs. the costs of doing so. The end result is that there are second and third order effects at play - and not everyone likes to dump a wad on deposits which have a chance at going in the trashcan should that item somehow not sell.
Having to post an amount of items that matches up closely to what a consumer actually desires is fairly un-intuitive, despite it being the norm of how the AH has worked over the past 14 years. Granted, this may require changes to the functionality of how the AH works. At the end of the day, the question is does it make sense to make the system better, even if it requires significant changes under the hood?
In my own opinion, though this 'solution' may fix the current issue of pages being filled with 1 stacked items bogging down the system - to implement a solution like this will negatively affect the entire in-game market -- this based on value, and quantity needed vs. the costs of doing so. The end result is that there are second and third order effects at play - and not everyone likes to dump a wad on deposits which have a chance at going in the trashcan should that item somehow not sell.
This change disproportionately hurts people on lower pop servers who may have to relist an item over 5 times before it sells. It also hurts new players who now can't even afford to post their copper ore and silverleaf.
I fully agree people posting hundreds of single items is a serious problem on the AH, especially on high pop servers, but this is not a good solution. I would love auction listings to be handled like Guild Wars 2. Instead of seeing 30 pages of single stacks, a buyer would see that there are 600 <item> available at <price> and they can input how many they would like to buy.
I fully agree people posting hundreds of single items is a serious problem on the AH, especially on high pop servers, but this is not a good solution. I would love auction listings to be handled like Guild Wars 2. Instead of seeing 30 pages of single stacks, a buyer would see that there are 600 <item> available at <price> and they can input how many they would like to buy.
a better solution would have been to make the deposit go up based on the number of concurrent listings of the same item.
people posting 1 large stack, would be completely unaffected, people posting 200 small stacks take a huge hit.
as it stands this change does nothing but make sellers timid and create a buyer's market by forcing prices into the ground (at the absolute worst time to do that).
also doesn't address the fact that the mobile auction house was still better than the in-game one in nearly every way.
people posting 1 large stack, would be completely unaffected, people posting 200 small stacks take a huge hit.
as it stands this change does nothing but make sellers timid and create a buyer's market by forcing prices into the ground (at the absolute worst time to do that).
also doesn't address the fact that the mobile auction house was still better than the in-game one in nearly every way.
How bout a system where you can post a full stack of items set the price per item then let the customers come in and buy whatever amount of the stack they want. For example I have a stack of 200 herbs at 1g per herb so 200g for the stack. Someone wants to buy some herbs from me because my price is right, but they only need 20. Let them buy 20 out of my stack.
08/22/2018 09:49 AMPosted by YthisensAs we looked at ways to change this behavior and improve the overall Auction House experience
Perhaps another way to improve the experience would be to improve the purchasing tools. Create tools that allow purchase of multiple items at the lowest price below XX or X number at XX price or below, etc.
Let people post as they like but improve the buying experience. (w/o addon)
08/27/2018 06:18 PMPosted by Doomclan08/27/2018 06:00 PMPosted by JoetraderFeedback : this sounds like a very sensible plan and I support it 100%, since you will not put min caps of say 10.
Except, there are entirely valid reasons to buy small stacks. Sometimes you just need one or two ore. If I'm just one herb away from making a potion, why would I want to buy a stack of 20?
That said, I doubt the proposed change is going to make a big enough dent in the issue. A better solution would be to clump up all of a seller's items into single giant stacks, and allow buyers to choose how many of a given item they want to buy from that stack.
This. Why not make it: search for peacebloom. List of people, and what their per item selling price is. Why do we even have to break it down into stacks? Sure, it would discourage people selling a lot of it at once, because it will get undercut, but it will undercut in smaller volumes most of the time.
I'm not sure this is working as intended:
I have mountains of stacks of low level JC mats. I want to sell them for ridiculously low so that someone else can level their JC for cheap.
I go to put a stack of 20 of these on the AH for a total of 20g for 20. WELL under vendor price.
deposit: 25g.
this doesn't make sense blizz.
I have mountains of stacks of low level JC mats. I want to sell them for ridiculously low so that someone else can level their JC for cheap.
I go to put a stack of 20 of these on the AH for a total of 20g for 20. WELL under vendor price.
deposit: 25g.
this doesn't make sense blizz.
Worst change in 14 years in the game. Solution in search of a problem. Why not update your technology once every 14 years? You basically forced a lot of changes with your DX12 change so we are fine to eat upgrade costs but you cant install more gerbils?
135 gold total to post up usable stacks (not 1 or 2 or 3) that cost 10 silver at 759am EST this morning? Total value of about 3200gold vs a single bag at 2K sale price is 46 silver? You basically just handed the market to the mass farmers who can afford to eat losses on large postings. Nice job. You guys clearly do not understand the laws of unintended consequences. Maybe hire someone with a degree in economics or finance who understands microeconomics?
Guess it is time to convert to Blizz account balance and move on as I sure dont enjoy grinding WQ. At least I could farm mats for gold. And dont bother telling me I get it back. This is now a race to the bottom on pricing as the small seller cant afford not to go lower. And no difference for 12 vs 48hr for some auctions and a differnce for others? OMG do some quality control on your changes. Good thing it will run fast because no one will be posting auctions...
135 gold total to post up usable stacks (not 1 or 2 or 3) that cost 10 silver at 759am EST this morning? Total value of about 3200gold vs a single bag at 2K sale price is 46 silver? You basically just handed the market to the mass farmers who can afford to eat losses on large postings. Nice job. You guys clearly do not understand the laws of unintended consequences. Maybe hire someone with a degree in economics or finance who understands microeconomics?
Guess it is time to convert to Blizz account balance and move on as I sure dont enjoy grinding WQ. At least I could farm mats for gold. And dont bother telling me I get it back. This is now a race to the bottom on pricing as the small seller cant afford not to go lower. And no difference for 12 vs 48hr for some auctions and a differnce for others? OMG do some quality control on your changes. Good thing it will run fast because no one will be posting auctions...
Please rollback the deposit change.
Honestly, a more reasonable temporary fix would've been:
A) limit how many auctions per item a character (or account) could have on the AH. A limit of 25 auctions per item per character/account is reasonable.
B) implement a stack size limit of 5 or 10 for white items
C) Allow searches based on stack size to allow users to exclude stacks of 1. This is probably the most sensible change to fix the AH strain, assuming stack size gets an appropriate index.
Right now, we have probably the worst solution I've seen that's been applied in ways that aren't uniform. As it stands, slow moving items aren't worth buying/selling on the AH because of a high deposit fee.
The real solution:
Lump all items together and use an order book system similar to Guild Wars 2 with a buy/sell order system (similar to the NYSE).
Since all Anchor Weed, Storm Silver Ore, etc is indistinguishable, it's no different than shares of Netflix and Facebook. The only finer points that would need to be hammered out are the following.
1) Favor the buyer. This means that if Buyer A puts a buy order up for 100g (with the highest current sell order being 110g by Seller X) and Buyer B has a buy order up for 101g that the following scenarios happen.
2) Seller A lists item X for 99g. Buyer B would buy for 99g (because he has a higher asking price). If Buyer B's order is smaller than Seller A's sell order, then the remainder gets sold to Buyer A. Otherwise Buyer B buys all of Seller A's order.
3) If Seller A and Seller B both list for 99g, Seller A's items are sold first because Seller A listed first.
4) In a similar fashion if Buyer A and Buyer B both had buy orders for 100g, Buyer A's buy order would get executed first.
5) Show the top 10 buy orders ordered by decending price. Ex: 101g, 100g, 99g.
6) Show the top 10 sell orders ordered by ascending price. Ex: 110g, 111g, 112g.
To be fair, the complications to this are well known (such as Buyer A having a buy order for 100g, so Buyer B puts in a buy order for 100g 0s 1c) but these problems currently exist on the current AH. I forget what this is called. Penny jumping? It happens in the NYSE, too.
To implement this:
A minor patch happens on Tuesday. Servers are reset and patched. Part of the patching process cancels all current auctions. If the auction has bid, it's sold for that bid. If it doesn't have a bid or buyout, the auction is cancelled normally.
Servers are brought up, all players are given a new quest to explain the new AH functionality complete with a demo. Players can then manually add items back onto the AH. Players must complete this quest to use the new AH (because it's such a radical change). This quest should simulate the following: Putting an item on the AH. Pricing it high so it doesn't sell. Pricing it low so it sells immediately. Putting in a buy order and not getting the item. Putting in a buy order and immediately getting the quest item.
For the purposes of making it so players can't abandon the quest to try to dupe gold the item that the player tries to sell sells for 1c to Johnny Awesome. The item the player has to buy is bought for 2c from Johnny Awesome. Johnny Awesome is thrilled at the new AH. He rides off into the night on his starry pony.
The new AH functions so much better, stronger, faster, harder than the old one that we're all thrilled.
Honestly, a more reasonable temporary fix would've been:
A) limit how many auctions per item a character (or account) could have on the AH. A limit of 25 auctions per item per character/account is reasonable.
B) implement a stack size limit of 5 or 10 for white items
C) Allow searches based on stack size to allow users to exclude stacks of 1. This is probably the most sensible change to fix the AH strain, assuming stack size gets an appropriate index.
Right now, we have probably the worst solution I've seen that's been applied in ways that aren't uniform. As it stands, slow moving items aren't worth buying/selling on the AH because of a high deposit fee.
The real solution:
Lump all items together and use an order book system similar to Guild Wars 2 with a buy/sell order system (similar to the NYSE).
Since all Anchor Weed, Storm Silver Ore, etc is indistinguishable, it's no different than shares of Netflix and Facebook. The only finer points that would need to be hammered out are the following.
1) Favor the buyer. This means that if Buyer A puts a buy order up for 100g (with the highest current sell order being 110g by Seller X) and Buyer B has a buy order up for 101g that the following scenarios happen.
2) Seller A lists item X for 99g. Buyer B would buy for 99g (because he has a higher asking price). If Buyer B's order is smaller than Seller A's sell order, then the remainder gets sold to Buyer A. Otherwise Buyer B buys all of Seller A's order.
3) If Seller A and Seller B both list for 99g, Seller A's items are sold first because Seller A listed first.
4) In a similar fashion if Buyer A and Buyer B both had buy orders for 100g, Buyer A's buy order would get executed first.
5) Show the top 10 buy orders ordered by decending price. Ex: 101g, 100g, 99g.
6) Show the top 10 sell orders ordered by ascending price. Ex: 110g, 111g, 112g.
To be fair, the complications to this are well known (such as Buyer A having a buy order for 100g, so Buyer B puts in a buy order for 100g 0s 1c) but these problems currently exist on the current AH. I forget what this is called. Penny jumping? It happens in the NYSE, too.
To implement this:
A minor patch happens on Tuesday. Servers are reset and patched. Part of the patching process cancels all current auctions. If the auction has bid, it's sold for that bid. If it doesn't have a bid or buyout, the auction is cancelled normally.
Servers are brought up, all players are given a new quest to explain the new AH functionality complete with a demo. Players can then manually add items back onto the AH. Players must complete this quest to use the new AH (because it's such a radical change). This quest should simulate the following: Putting an item on the AH. Pricing it high so it doesn't sell. Pricing it low so it sells immediately. Putting in a buy order and not getting the item. Putting in a buy order and immediately getting the quest item.
For the purposes of making it so players can't abandon the quest to try to dupe gold the item that the player tries to sell sells for 1c to Johnny Awesome. The item the player has to buy is bought for 2c from Johnny Awesome. Johnny Awesome is thrilled at the new AH. He rides off into the night on his starry pony.
The new AH functions so much better, stronger, faster, harder than the old one that we're all thrilled.
I expect these kind of crap changes from a Free to play MMO, not a paid triple A game purchase with a monthly subscription!
Do what every single other MODERN MMO does and make it so you can only post your stack of whatever but can sell it in 'bulk'.
Example:
I have 1000 Monelite ore. Instead of putting up 100's of individual stacks of 1 at undercut prices which will in turn be undercut themselves, players only see and can search by price per unit and shows the stack sizes of whatever they are.
*edit for clarity: This makes it so that regardless of what the stack size is whether its one or 1000, players can view the price per unit with an additional default filter to not show the pointless pages of stacks of 1. This would make people more inclined to sell in bulk as more players would actually SEE the freakin stacks and be able to access them to purchase them.
Players can then take what they need from that stack of 1000 so the auction stays up until all of the units are sold, or the auction expires. Making WAY fewer listings and easing the use of the actual auction house. Players could then finally not have to worry about mods such as TSM or Auctionator to compare price per unit prices.
People will still sometimes need only 1 of a certain item so you should not really punish that. But you really want to encourage the bulk sales and enable players to view them.
Does that make sense?
Or is the Blizzard spaghetti code so bad that they literally cannot touch the auction house coding without breaking it? :|
Do what every single other MODERN MMO does and make it so you can only post your stack of whatever but can sell it in 'bulk'.
Example:
I have 1000 Monelite ore. Instead of putting up 100's of individual stacks of 1 at undercut prices which will in turn be undercut themselves, players only see and can search by price per unit and shows the stack sizes of whatever they are.
*edit for clarity: This makes it so that regardless of what the stack size is whether its one or 1000, players can view the price per unit with an additional default filter to not show the pointless pages of stacks of 1. This would make people more inclined to sell in bulk as more players would actually SEE the freakin stacks and be able to access them to purchase them.
Players can then take what they need from that stack of 1000 so the auction stays up until all of the units are sold, or the auction expires. Making WAY fewer listings and easing the use of the actual auction house. Players could then finally not have to worry about mods such as TSM or Auctionator to compare price per unit prices.
People will still sometimes need only 1 of a certain item so you should not really punish that. But you really want to encourage the bulk sales and enable players to view them.
Does that make sense?
Or is the Blizzard spaghetti code so bad that they literally cannot touch the auction house coding without breaking it? :|
Its time to overhaul the AH... not break addons on a hotfix to make it look like a problem was solved. (This will only take a week before the addons work again)
I could see a 'wants to buy' market being super successful in WoW.
That is, you allow sale orders and buy orders. see successful auction platforms like Valve's trading cards and Eve online that already do this.
Here you would have a list of buyers and sellers. Client side this just becomes a list of prices and amount available which reduces the traffic. To further reduce traffic, no auctions should ever expire. The price war becomes stable due to the ability of buyers to place bids in advance. The expiration causes price jumps and more mail traffic that just gets reposted. Would be better gameplay if items were always available when you needed them.
Farmers get to farm what is clearly in demand. Everything sells when sold at a steady price that normalizes over time. Flippers cant keep up so inflation dies. Reduced need to scan and troll the AH increases performance for all users and reduces server load. Pending buy orders work as a gold sink that doesn't actually anger the player. The need for addons, stack size limits, extra fees, etc all go away.
The problem is that the Auction House was not destroyed and rebuilt during the Cataclysm like it should have been (see categories that arent even used and other bugs). The free player market will fix this in a week... this hotfix will not.
I could see a 'wants to buy' market being super successful in WoW.
That is, you allow sale orders and buy orders. see successful auction platforms like Valve's trading cards and Eve online that already do this.
Here you would have a list of buyers and sellers. Client side this just becomes a list of prices and amount available which reduces the traffic. To further reduce traffic, no auctions should ever expire. The price war becomes stable due to the ability of buyers to place bids in advance. The expiration causes price jumps and more mail traffic that just gets reposted. Would be better gameplay if items were always available when you needed them.
Farmers get to farm what is clearly in demand. Everything sells when sold at a steady price that normalizes over time. Flippers cant keep up so inflation dies. Reduced need to scan and troll the AH increases performance for all users and reduces server load. Pending buy orders work as a gold sink that doesn't actually anger the player. The need for addons, stack size limits, extra fees, etc all go away.
The problem is that the Auction House was not destroyed and rebuilt during the Cataclysm like it should have been (see categories that arent even used and other bugs). The free player market will fix this in a week... this hotfix will not.
Hey, I have a Suggestion, in order to allow for people to buy smaller stacks; Allow you to buy portion of peoples stacks. Example: Player A puts up 200 Linen Cloth but Player B wants only 5, allow Player B to buy 5 cloth of the 200 cloth posted by Player A. Thus Player A has only 195 linen cloth left on AH.
Sorry if repost I was getting 500 error last night.
Sorry if repost I was getting 500 error last night.
They should revert the change for old world/old expansion mats since the costs associated with posting them are really unreasonable. Nobody is gonna buy a huge stack of khorium bars, for example.
The single stack spammers are only an issue with current expansion mats.
The single stack spammers are only an issue with current expansion mats.
08/22/2018 09:49 AMPosted by YthisensTo address some issues related to the Auction House, we’re reconsidering how deposits—the refundable fees you pay to list your auctions—are calculated. This fee is based on the item’s vendor price, and for profession materials in particular, vendors offer very low prices, so these mats have a low deposit cost. Deposits are substantial on items such as BoE uncommon gear, gems, and so forth, but not trade skill materials (trade goods such as cloth, ore, leather, etc.).
One thing we’ve identified as particularly troublesome is a large volume of trade skill materials being auctioned off in stacks of 1. Some addons make posting quantities of this size trivial to do, resulting in dozens, if not hundreds, of pages of auctions for a single item. As we looked at ways to change this behavior and improve the overall Auction House experience, we found that we prefer to avoid inflexible solutions such as caps on the number of listings a player can make, or increased minimum stack counts, which might interfere with many players' common gameplay habits.
Our current plan is to increase the deposit cost of some profession materials on a per-stack basis, which should provide incentive for players to post items in larger stacks.
Here's an example:
• Let’s say that a player is trying to sell 200 Tidespray Linen for 10g (gold) each. Today, each item has the normal deposit cost of 1c (copper), with a 1s (silver) minimum deposit, so 1 auction of 200 linen requires a deposit of 1s, and 200 auctions of 1 linen each adds up to a total deposit of 2g.
• Now imagine an additional 20% deposit added to the listing fee per auction. With an asking price of 10g each, that raises the deposit by 2g per stack. In the case of 1 stack of 200 linen, the total buyout price is 2000g, and the new deposit is 2g1s. In the case of 200 individual stacks, the new deposit of an additional 2g per stack brings the total deposit up to 402g.
In either case, the deposit is returned to the seller if the item sells. Successful auctions aren’t affected by this change.
Our goal is to give players some forewarning on this change, and to gather feedback. We’re putting together a list of the items that would be affected by this deposit change, which we expect to be limited to high-quantity trade goods. Furthermore, we’re deploying the change to the PTR first, so that addon authors can work through the change while we test it thoroughly.
This change will likely be a temporary measure, as we’re also working to broadly improve the default Auction House in the future. It’s clear to us that many players use addons because they find the default Auction House interface inadequate. A temporary change to deposit fees will help with this in the short term, and we’ll continue to work on overall improvements to the Auction House for a future patch.
Saying the default interface for the auction house is inadequate, is a joke. Its archaic beyond measure.
Those addons shouldnt even be needed.