Showing Posts For Ruben.5610:
Whoa, thanks for the quick response
After i had posted this request i had gone to bed and when i woke up this morning, i realised how narrow minded my request was (i had only started looking in using these API’s yesterday to work out how to call them and i only worked on 1 specific idea).
My new idea might actually work around the issues you mentioned. I would like a Vendor API.
Possible fields would be:
- VendorID (int)
- Name (string)
- VendorType (optional string => e.g. Heart Vendor, Festival Vendor, etc.)
- Map (string)
- Zone (string)
- Items (object array)
- ItemID (int)
- PriceRange (int array => 2 values, highest value first then lowest/same value)
- PriceType (string => coin or karma)
One call to get VendorIDs and one call to get Vendor information. Perhaps even an option to not only be able to search for vendorID, but also for ItemID!?
I admit this will not help with the first issue (the test vendors), i will not ask where they are located or what they are actually selling, but maybe one of those 2 answers may be a reason to recognize them as actual test vendors.
As for the second issue, it should not be an issue anymore.
I apologize in advance if this has already been asked, but for me the “Search this forum…” option does not seem to work (even if i search for “API” it returns 0 hits).
Facts:
- The “Items” API has an entry for “vendor_value” (The value in coins when selling to a vendor.).
- Some materials can/must be bought from vendors for either coin or karma (e.g. cooking supplies like 10 Packet of Salt for 80c or 10 Spool[s] of Wool Thread for 160c for other crafting professions).
Request:
I would like to see this information (vendor_buy_price, bought_ammount and buy_type (coin / karma)) added to the “Items” API.
Indeed an Underworlder (i assume you got that from my mentioned score) though i don’t think that our server is the only server that had alot of people leaving (though i could be mistaken)…
If only they had removed the reward level from servers finishing position and had only left it to how much people had contributed to the final count, the reason to leave a server would be way less and alot of people might have stayed where they were.
If they added it just to ensure more people buying gems for the server transfer, i feel that the game will head in the wrong direction. Personally i like to think that its a negative effect which they hadnt expected to be so big for a portion of their community.
Hopefully in 6-7 weeks we will be fighting against equal servers again, even if that means we end up at the bottom of the list. I just hope that if that happens, not more people decide to switch server…
I wanna thank ANet for the WvW Season 1 living story and how they made the server matches… Why? Well, ever since they introduced this, alot of our wvw guilds and players left our server and thus we now face servers which are way too strong for us. Current score 187k vs 85k vs 47k… Guess what, our server has the 47k.
I always played WvW casual and it was often doable to do stuff alone or with a friend, like kill a dolyak / sentry here and capture a camp there… Now, we get overrun. Our zerg (if there is one) stays only on the top half of our map cause it doesnt have the numbers to do stuff on the southern half.
I don’t even bother with the daily wvw stuff anymore since this change, and when i try, i often get ganked by groups of 5+. So wvw is no longer a fun part of the game for me and the living story achievements are unreachable for me.
Thanks again…

