A trade suggestion

[jweb_4_8938282]

"Asking for too much. Trades in this game would instantly be manipulated to make super guilds that kill off the server." "The game already has a built in balancing mechanism to encourage smaller players to grow. Let's not tip the scales by giving players yet another way to manipulate power"...

Wow.
I think a member of a super guild feels a bit threatened by a level 36 with with lousy gear
being able to quest a bit more easily.
It ISN'T just about the pvp here. There is a quest line that people play.
Unless you coin it can take weeks to beat a boss.
Yes, formation and runes help.
But if the gear isn't good enough then the runes and formations are nearly useless.

Every single negative comment by top tier players reinforces my belief that a LIMITED trade system is needed.
That they hate the idea is the proof.
EVERYONE could trade. Your place in the pecking order is secure.
How could people enjoying the game and potentially paying to play be a bad thing?


And LAZINESS, (*stares at Herby) has nothing to do with it.
The game plays itself. How could ANYTHING be any lazier?
VIP3 allows stakes to be auto collected.
Players use bot's to raid stakes then auto-collect the loot.
THAT'S LAZY.
Trading a plan that somebody needs isn't LAZY.
The code that gives you a HB sword when you kill The Re-Animated, that's lazy.
When you kill him for the 20th time and receive the 20th weapon plan, that's lazy code.
"That's just bad luck." you say?
"Oh No it's not" Say I.
It's lazy code.

As for the difficulty of implementation, well, all the bugs in the game point to that possibility.
But there is a trade system already in place. It would just need a different interface.
"What trade system?" you ask?
Why the system that trades with you every time you kill a HR or WB or anything else in the game.
"It can't possibly be altered to work like that!" you cry.
Pshaw, say I.
It could. It can. The simpler the better.
Use that which is already in place in a new way.

Heavily LIMITED trade should be in the game.

Gorgon

[Klepto]

But there is a trade system already in place. It would just need a different interface.
"What trade system?" you ask?
Why the system that trades with you every time you kill a HR or WB or anything else in the game.
"It can't possibly be altered to work like that!" you cry.
Pshaw, say I.
It could. It can. The simpler the better.
Use that which is already in place in a new way.

That's not a trade system, it's an acquisition system. A trade system has entirely different sets of rules, conditions, security concerns, and other factors that take time and effort to implement, should a game developer even choose to do so. Trade systems in games are tremendously susceptible to fraud, problems, and can cause many headaches for both players and game developers/designers alike.

For a game like this with terrible client-to-server syncing, a two-part trade system would have to be implemented, similar to what Diablo II used on Battle.Net. A player initiates a trade request with another player, showing a dialog to accept or decline trading at all with the requester. Assuming the requestee accepts, both players place 0 to N (upper limit, probably 5-6) items/item stacks in the trade dialog from their inventory (bank not allowed). When a player is satisfied with the trade, they can click "Accept Trade". Once a player clicks "Accept Trade", if any changes happen made by the other player, the acceptance is nullified and the trade has to be accepted again to prevent bait-and-switch scenarios. Once both players fully accept the trade, ownership of the items changes hands and the items are deposited in available spots in the receivers' inventories (the trade isn't allowed if space is not available in the receivers' inventory or bank). There are also concerns about transferring funds such as coins, credits, or even gems, rune fragments, spirits.....Why go halfway on a trading system if you're going to do it at all?

This is just a quick run-down, as even more work is necessary to make sure this could possibly work. Even then, a trade system could possibly cause Tynon to lose funds that would otherwise be spent on gems necessary to obtain traded equipment. This is especially true on newer servers. Older servers might see more benefit from a trade system to keep the playerbase interested and active, but again, this type of system carries a lot of potential for problems despite the benefit to players.

Ultimately, it's not easy, it's not simple, and just because you think it is doesn't make it so. That highly discounts the power and vulnerabilities associated with trading ownership of items.

[jweb_4_8938282]

Do you really mean that the system that waits for you to kill a boss then gives you a reward
ISN'T trading that reward to you when you meet the
"sets of rules, conditions, security concerns, and other factors"
that are in place to trigger the event? I wholeheartedly disagree.
The parameters may be different but those can be adjusted.
The interface needed would be different as well.
BUT if a parameter/condition that now requires a boss death is changed to having killed a boss of a specific level
then that BASIC module can be modified and used elsewhere. Isn't that what is done anyway?
A new label makes it a new module.
Aren't the security measures already in place?

Believe it or not, I do understand how trade works.
It could simply be tied to the mail system like in LotRO.
Then there is no need for a trade interface at all.
Just tracking.
If the USPS can track mail so can Tynon.
All you would need is a tracking system that counts how many items a player mails and how many are received.
Yes, it would also have to verify a player can use that level of gear. The game knows that already.
That could be displayed in the mail window itself as well. Plans sent and received.

Mail, another shortcoming of this game.
You should be able to click on a guild mates name in the guild list and send a mail.
That would then allow an item to be easily sent.

Now that I've done all of the thinking all the devs need to do is implement it.
Don't give me any BS about it not being that easy.
It IS that easy.
The thousands of dollars they scoop up every day make it that easy.

Gorgon

[Klepto]

Do you really mean that the system that waits for you to kill a boss then gives you a reward
ISN'T trading that reward to you when you meet the
"sets of rules, conditions, security concerns, and other factors" that are in place to trigger the event?
I disagree.
The parameters may be different but those can be adjusted.
The interface needed would be different as well.
BUT if a parameter/condition that now requires a boss death is changed to having killed a boss of a specific level
then that BASIC module can be modified and used elsewhere. Isn't that what is done anyway?
A new label makes it a new module.
Aren't the security measures already in place?

Believe it or not, I do understand how trade works.
It could simply be tied to the mail system like in LotRO.
Then there is no need for a trade interface at all.
Just tracking.
If the USPS can track mail so can Tynon.
All you would need is a tracking system that counts how many items a player mails and how many are received.
Yes, it would also have to verify a player can use that level of gear. The game knows that already.
That could be displayed in the mail window itself as well. Plans sent and received.

Mail, another shortcoming of this game.
You should be able to click on a guild mates name in the guild list and send a mail.

Now that I've done all of the thinking all the devs need to do is implement it.
Don't give me any BS about it not being that easy.
It IS that easy.
The thousands of dollars they scoop up every day make it that easy.

Gorgon

No, it's not that easy. I don't know what your programming experience is but based on your posts I'd say you either aren't a professional or shouldn't be if you are.

Money doesn't solve programming problems. Fact.
Code can be reused but you're asking for an entirely new set of features. Fact.
Trading does not occur when a boss is killed and you receive items. Fact. That is item creation. You are asking for item ownership transfer. Two entirely separate concepts with their own implications.
The security measures are not in place because trading carries with it a specific set of rules that apply only to human-to-human trading in multiplayer games. Fact. Blizzard had tremendous trouble with their trading system in Diablo II via Battle.Net and there were exploits galore. Let me say it again, Trading is not an easy system to implement correctly. Or do you want players finding exploits and duplicating items, or generating currency, or stealing items from other players? All of this happened to Blizzard, a far more mature and experienced company than Tynon's uCool.

Believe me, I want trading just as much as you do, but I also recognize the complications it introduces. Be patient and understanding and maybe your suggestion will be taken into consideration. Don't just dismiss the work as easy, though. It's not.

[xxdannisouthxx_7889427]

No, it's not that easy. I don't know what your programming experience is but based on your posts I'd say you either aren't a professional or shouldn't be if you are.

Money doesn't solve programming problems. Fact.
Code can be reused but you're asking for an entirely new set of features. Fact.
Trading does not occur when a boss is killed and you receive items. Fact. That is item creation. You are asking for item ownership transfer. Two entirely separate concepts with their own implications.
The security measures are not in place because trading carries with it a specific set of rules that apply only to human-to-human trading in multiplayer games. Fact. Blizzard had tremendous trouble with their trading system in Diablo II via Battle.Net and there were exploits galore. Let me say it again, Trading is not an easy system to implement correctly. Or do you want players finding exploits and duplicating items, or generating currency, or stealing items from other players? All of this happened to Blizzard, a far more mature and experienced company than Tynon's uCool.

Believe me, I want trading just as much as you do, but I also recognize the complications it introduces. Be patient and understanding and maybe your suggestion will be taken into consideration. Don't just dismiss the work as easy, though. It's not.

It wouldn't be easy, but it would be possible. However, it simply won't happen. Resources are simply devoted to creating new servers rather than new/adjusted gameplay.

Though I feel like we have a tendency to choose the slippery slope argument so many times in these forums. Alot of great games have a trading system. Just because it hasn't been tried here is no reason to count it out, or assume the worst will happen. Besides, players on this game get fleeced enough anyways, if someone does get a trade glitch and end up with an extra plan, good on 'em.

[Deucalion]

It wouldn't be easy, but it would be possible. However, it simply won't happen. Resources are simply devoted to creating new servers rather than new/adjusted gameplay.

Though I feel like we have a tendency to choose the slippery slope argument so many times in these forums. Alot of great games have a trading system. Just because it hasn't been tried here is no reason to count it out, or assume the worst will happen. Besides, players on this game get fleeced enough anyways, if someone does get a trade glitch and end up with an extra plan, good on 'em.

The resources needed to open a new server every week is minimal at best. Opening new servers isn't eating into time devoted to bug/glitch repair and new feature implementation, that is a common falsity that has been thrown around here for a while now. Each time you guys see a new server open and complain that it's BS, since all these glitches still exist, your not seeing the broader spectrum here... Anyhow, that is off topic. Klepto, your trading system plan you outlined would be extremely difficult to integrate into Tynon, but It would be sweet if they could. I think you explained it the best, though I'd like to see it restricted or earned in a way. Maybe they could charge a small gem amount for the right to trade certain items. I wouldn't hold your breath anyhow, folks. The chances of seeing a trading system here are about as good as the one we all envisioned for Evony way back when

[xxdannisouthxx_7889427]

The resources needed to open a new server every week is minimal at best. Opening new servers isn't eating into time devoted to bug/glitch repair and new feature implementation, that is a common falsity that has been thrown around here for a while now. Each time you guys see a new server open and complain that it's BS, since all these glitches still exist, your not seeing the broader spectrum here... Anyhow, that is off topic. Klepto, your trading system plan you outlined would be extremely difficult to integrate into Tynon, but It would be sweet if they could. I think you explained it the best, though I'd like to see it restricted or earned in a way. Maybe they could charge a small gem amount for the right to trade certain items. I wouldn't hold your breath anyhow, folks. The chances of seeing a trading system here are about as good as the one we all envisioned for Evony way back when

When I talk resources, I'm talking a perspective beyond lines of code. More of the business plan and target audience stuff. For example, the disconnect in gameplay where there are still blank spots for heros in the upper ranks...the quest pacing being really front-loaded...the quest enemies being recycled the further you go, etc...my perspective is the focus is really geared on the cash cow within the first month of a new server, and much less focus on what comes after. Current migration patterns confirm this. So I feel like the "BS" calling is the result of people saying "what now?" after the server reaches its endgame within a few weeks. General frustration that there seems to be little offered to keep servers breathing.

I believe the expectation was different, or alot of the players on the older servers would have adjusted their investment strategy to move along with the wave instead of investing in higher level characters and getting left behind. I believe the levels of frustration that appear on forums also confirms this. The connection to this and things like trading is that everyone guns down the good idea fairy as soon as something gets brought up.

[Deucalion]

When I talk resources, I'm talking a perspective beyond lines of code. More of the business plan and target audience stuff. For example, the disconnect in gameplay where there are still blank spots for heros in the upper ranks...the quest pacing being really front-loaded...the quest enemies being recycled the further you go, etc...my perspective is the focus is really geared on the cash cow within the first month of a new server, and much less focus on what comes after. Current migration patterns confirm this. So I feel like the "BS" calling is the result of people saying "what now?" after the server reaches its endgame within a few weeks. General frustration that there seems to be little offered to keep servers breathing.

I believe the expectation was different, or alot of the players on the older servers would have adjusted their investment strategy to move along with the wave instead of investing in higher level characters and getting left behind. I believe the levels of frustration that appear on forums also confirms this. The connection to this and things like trading is that everyone guns down the good idea fairy as soon as something gets brought up.

I agree with you when it comes to looking back at the investment made. I can say with 100% accuracy that I would not have spent what I spent, when I spent it, if I had known where i'd be today. I wish they'd let spenders use a one time only "reset button" on servers 1-10, honestly. We all jumped on the spenders bandwagon to get a good lead in the game, only to stare at a brick wall for weeks and allow the others to catch up. I personally was very miffed at this, and it shows on my characters progression to date. I have not spent more than $5 in weeks now, only doing whats needed to stay caught up "free" now. We need a very large breath of life blown into these servers, or I am afraid that more will fall into the same pace. I will always spend money on a game that I enjoy playing, if it will give me an edge and at the end of the day doesn't make me feel ill. I cannot say that right now. A trading system integration may help this situation some, but it won't solve it. We need an expansion pack of sorts.

The connection to this and things like trading is that everyone guns down the good idea fairy as soon as something gets brought up.

lol

[Herby]

I think everyone forgets that No one is even remotely close to finishing the game.

And unlike other games that have no ending, Tynon has an end to its storyline.

[xxdannisouthxx_7889427]

I agree with you when it comes to looking back at the investment made. I can say with 100% accuracy that I would not have spent what I spent, when I spent it, if I had known where i'd be today. I wish they'd let spenders use a one time only "reset button" on servers 1-10, honestly. We all jumped on the spenders bandwagon to get a good lead in the game, only to stare at a brick wall for weeks and allow the others to catch up. I personally was very miffed at this, and it shows on my characters progression to date. I have not spent more than $5 in weeks now, only doing whats needed to stay caught up "free" now. We need a very large breath of life blown into these servers, or I am afraid that more will fall into the same pace. I will always spend money on a game that I enjoy playing, if it will give me an edge and at the end of the day doesn't make me feel ill. I cannot say that right now. A trading system integration may help this situation some, but it won't solve it. We need an expansion pack of sorts.



lol

lol I'm on the same program. It's completely possible to ride out the uber-guild bennies, well...endlessly, I suppose. I certainly don't see a reason to spend more than I already have, and consider what I have spent as being too much for the result. I suppose I can blame myself for not doing the homework or server spying before I jumped in and started investing in my character, but if I had this knowledge up front I'd simply spend $5 at the beginning of whatever server caught my fancy and just ride that out. At the beginning, even the person who inevitably is 40K power within 15 minutes of the server opening can only control so much, so you have a couple weeks where it's tooth and nail that are really fun.

This game is fascinating in alot of ways. It's the only one I've encountered where there really seems to be an adversarial divide between players and devs. I think it's based around Tynon resembling a casino more than a game. For example, in another game (which I'm not naming, so devs reading this please don't delete this post) there are regular Q&A sessions, and complete transparency in what's going on. "Why can't we have this?"..."Well, because our intent is to provide this, but not that" kind of thing. Somehow I always feel like there's a sleight-of-hand going on here, but I don't think that can be helped in a system where your investment may not pay off in the way you anticipate as a gamble, and where the devs represent The House, which always wins. Sometimes I just feel like a bit more openness would go a long ways, or being able to ask these forum questions in a real-time fashion. I think players here are shareholders, and no shareholder wants to be left in the dark about where the investment is going or what the vision for the future is.

Totally agree on the expansion pack. Maybe there's just not enough wiggle room for more changes to the way it is now, but some kind of expansion where you can import your character into an open warfare kind of situation. Open to all servers, detached from the rest of the game so people don't have to worry about protecting their current investments.