• Good day, Stranger! — Are you new to our forums?

    Have I seen you here before? To participate in or to create forum discussions, you will need your own forum account. Register your account here!

Trade with inventory items

  • Thread starter DeletedUser6046
  • Start date

DeletedUser6046

Guest
Inno, please allow us to sell each other inventory items for diamonds, please! :)

So, if someone got 5 moonstone libraries they can put them in the trader for whatever diamonds they want to sell them for. We win and you win, you will get more diamond sold.
 

DeletedUser1874

Guest
Totally against the idea, given what the history of auction houses where players have leeway should've taught us. This would open the way to whole new avenues of pushing and abuse. Got 5 moonstone libraries and don't know what to do with them? Shard them.
 

DeletedUser6046

Guest
I got too many spells and inventory items to disenchant and plenty of spell fragments. Now we also have a set that produces spell fragments. So, sharding buildings for spell fragments is not an attractive idea.

What is so wrong with trade??? How is trading with goods any better? The more interaction players have with each other the more interesting the game is. Otherwise, let's stop all trades and have everybody play on their own...

Totally against the idea, given what the history of auction houses where players have leeway should've taught us. This would open the way to whole new avenues of pushing and abuse. Got 5 moonstone libraries and don't know what to do with them? Shard them.

I have no idea what these are??? What are they and what have they taught you?
 

DeletedUser6046

Guest
You can already disenchant unwanted buildings. I do not see how Inno would have any advantage from giving diamonds instead of spell fragments :confused: Not even sure that the players would be better off.

I didn't suggest Inno giving diamonds. Quite the opposite. For example, imagine you got a few gum trees that you don't need. I played the spire week after week and never got the gum tree. You put the gum tree for sale for 25 diamonds. I buy from Inno 25 diamonds and buy the gum tree from you. You get the diamonds. Why is this unattractive for you?
 

DeletedUser1874

Guest
I got too many spells and inventory items to disenchant and plenty of spell fragments. Now we also have a set that produces spell fragments. So, sharding buildings for spell fragments is not an attractive idea.
Giving Inno yet another way to entice us into buying diamonds is an even less attractive idea. As if there weren't enough out there already. And if you'd been pushing this event, you wouldn't be swimming in spell fragments, I can tell you that.

I
I have no idea what these are??? What are they and what have they taught you?
I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention other games on these boards, however there's plenty of glaring, easily-googlable examples. Maybe try "auction house video game debacle" or something along those lines.

P.s. I see you have 2 moonstone libraries already. By doing some maths, or looking around cities, you'll realize you're the exception rather than the norm. That's besides the main point, but I thought I'd point it out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser6046

Guest
Giving Inno yet another way to entice us into buying diamonds is an even less attractive idea. As if there weren't enough out there already. And if you'd been pushing this event, you wouldn't be swimming in spell fragments, I can tell you that.

Well, Inno needs to get money somehow... I'd personally buy a few diamonds to potentially buy event/spire buildings I missed from other players at a reasonable price. For this event, I think I'll get two bears to lvl10 or near lvl10... not sure if this is pushing or not the event...

I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention other games on these boards, however there's plenty of glaring, easily-googlable examples. Maybe try "auction house video game debacle" or something along those lines.

Thank you, I'll check them out. I haven't played such a game. I did play a game in which you can trade anything you have and that's what made the game attractive. This is where I am coming from...

P.s. I see you have 2 moonstone libraries already. By doing some maths, or looking around cities, you'll realize you're the exception rather than the norm. That's besides the main point, but I thought I'd point it out.

Out of the norm in what sense? That I didn't get 6 mermaids? :) BTW, I got these two mermaids without buying anything from Inno during the event. For the current event I bought the +1 building and not going to invest more.
 

Pauly7

Magus
I'm really against the idea. As others have said it is far too open to abuse and it would be used as a way to move diamonds from push account to main account. Inno doesn't want to do anything about that problem so it will get 10 times worse.

Second you should like having a nice stock of things ready to disenchant when you need them. I know I do.

Lastly it would be a radical game change that I wouldn't support because suddenly all these buildings wouldn't be hard earned from events any more. Powerful players would be winning them many times over and sharing them with their fellowships.
 

Timneh

Artisan
I doubt Inno would support this idea because they want players to buy diamonds and spend them on the events to get the buildings and not buy them from other players at probably a much lower cost.
 

DeletedUser6046

Guest
I'm really against the idea. As others have said it is far too open to abuse and it would be used as a way to move diamonds from push account to main account. Inno doesn't want to do anything about that problem so it will get 10 times worse.

I don't understand what you mean. Can you please give an example of possible abuse? I'd rather see Inno implementing better control of the so-called "push" accounts (I presume you mean one person having multiple cities on the same server) than limiting the options in the game.

Second you should like having a nice stock of things ready to disenchant when you need them. I know I do.

True, I do. But I rather invest my diamonds and resources in things I want instead of a random choice of things to craft that is a pure gamble and very seldom things I want. I'd rather buy and spend diamonds for things I want than pressing the 50 diamond button in the MA.

Lastly it would be a radical game change that I wouldn't support because suddenly all these buildings wouldn't be hard earned from events any more. Powerful players would be winning them many times over and sharing them with their fellowships.

What's wrong with sharing things in a FS? I see it as a good thing. I don't think it will make obtaining hard to get buildings easier. The demand will control prizes. I'm very much for a free market in real life or in games.
 

DeletedUser5093

Guest
I like the idea of being able to trade buildings between players on an open market. People could list items, or groups of items, with perhaps a small message explaining what they're looking for, and other players could make an offer. Not sure whether diamonds should be able to be offered, as that could create a means to abuse the system, but definitely be able to offer other buildings and perhaps things like enchantments, instants, spell fragments, etc. There would have to be a few in-built rules to prevent abuse though. For example, a player would only be able to purchase buildings of their current chapter or below. That way you couldn't have one powerful player feeding high level buildings to the rest of their fellowship, or their collection of push accounts, and you wouldn't end up with cities with overpowered buildings.

Would these limitations prevent or limit the types of abuse people are concerned about?
 

DeletedUser1874

Guest
Would these limitations prevent or limit the types of abuse people are concerned about?
No. Every player-driven auction system has been systematically abused in multiplayer games. I myself made millions (in in-game currency) and was among the first players worldwide to reach the money cap per character every time they were raised in a famous MMO, becoming the server's richest person and maintaining that status till I quit, just by logging in once a day for 5 minutes and playing the auction house. And that's a MMO where rules are very strictly enforced. Imagine what could happen here, where people suddenly coming up with level 30 AWs as soon as a chapter is released is tolerated.
P.s. what I did in that other MMO was entirely legal (it's not the kind of game where one can "push" himself, after all). Had Game Masters confirm that to me several times and even complimenting me whenever I reached the gold cap.
 

DeletedUser5093

Guest
@Vetrinus Could you elaborate on how it might be abused with the limitations I proposed? Perhaps there's a solution, but without knowing what forms the abuse might take it's hard to say.
 

DeletedUser6046

Guest
Imagine what could happen here, where people suddenly coming up with level 30 AWs as soon as a chapter is released is tolerated.

How will this happen if you can trade building? I don't see how. If you teleport your 30 lvl AW back to inventory and sell it, you no longer have a 30 level AW... If making 30 lvl AWs every day and selling them is your craft, what's wrong with it?

I mean, I assume you are REALLY not allowed to have 10 alts and make tons of KPs etc.... But even if you are allowed, and that's what you choose to do with your life, I see no problem.
 

Pauly7

Magus
I don't understand what you mean. Can you please give an example of possible abuse? I'd rather see Inno implementing better control of the so-called "push" accounts (I presume you mean one person having multiple cities on the same server) than limiting the options in the game.
Particularly it involves using multiple accounts, rather than multiple cities on one account. The latter shares a pool of diamonds, but if someone were to set up many accounts and each account has diamond farms, then they could all feed their diamonds back to the main account. I'm not actually the expert on this, but if there are ways to exploit a system then players will find them and abuse them and Inno won't enforce a rule.
What's wrong with sharing things in a FS? I see it as a good thing. I don't think it will make obtaining hard to get buildings easier. The demand will control prizes. I'm very much for a free market in real life or in games.
In the old days events would have three grand prizes and you could feel a certain amount of pride in managing to pick up the 2nd of 3. The third was reserved for diamond spenders and a few ultra lucky people. Inno has subsequently already watered down the value of old prizes by handing them all out as daily prizes in future events, but if people are passing around duplicates of grand prizes then it won't even be meaningful to have won the current event prize.
For example, a player would only be able to purchase buildings of their current chapter or below. That way you couldn't have one powerful player feeding high level buildings to the rest of their fellowship, or their collection of push accounts, and you wouldn't end up with cities with overpowered buildings.

Would these limitations prevent or limit the types of abuse people are concerned about?
It would certainly make it better and I guess it would remove the ability to move items from low level push accounts to a main account.
 

DeletedUser1874

Guest
@Vetrinus Could you elaborate on how it might be abused with the limitations I proposed? Perhaps there's a solution, but without knowing what forms the abuse might take it's hard to say.
Players with alt accounts could trade stuff they don't need (fodder buildings for instance) for stuff that's actually useful (instants, KPs, whatever). Even without diamonds into the equation, such systems are always prone to abuse, even more so in a scenario where alt and push accounts are a big issue already.

How will this happen if you can trade building? I don't see how. If you teleport your 30 lvl AW back to inventory and sell it, you no longer have a 30 level AW... If making 30 lvl AWs every day and selling them is your craft, what's wrong with it?

I mean, I assume you are REALLY not allowed to have 10 alts and make tons of KPs etc.... But even if you are allowed, and that's what you choose to do with your life, I see no problem.
AWs can't be teleported so that's rather moot, but and aside from that, when someone states that he'd have no issue in people cheating by pushing AWs, that's where I realize it's utterly pointless to keep discussing with them.
 

DeletedUser6046

Guest
It would certainly make it better and I guess it would remove the ability to move items from low level push accounts to a main account.

Yes, if implemented, that should certainly be the case. I won't expect early-chapter player being allowed to buy a building available or upgraded for a later chapter.

Particularly it involves using multiple accounts, rather than multiple cities on one account. The latter shares a pool of diamonds, but if someone were to set up many accounts and each account has diamond farms, then they could all feed their diamonds back to the main account. I'm not actually the expert on this, but if there are ways to exploit a system then players will find them and abuse them and Inno won't enforce a rule.

Yes, I can see how this could happen. Say, I have two cities, one as a diamond farm with plenty of wishing wells, and the second a "normal" big city that can win diamond-making buildings easier.

The normal city can sell stuff to the diamond city and get the diamonds. The diamond-farm can grow and make more diamonds. It's effectively gaining more expansions... Yes, I agree it can be abused this way.

So, maybe if implemented, it should be impossible to trade diamond-making buildings. For other things, like goods and KPs, people already have multiple accounts and move goods and KPs between cities. With diamonds, it can be controlled by not allowing trade with such buildings.

On the other hand, the abuse with moving goods and KPs doesn't seem to harm Inno or the game overall. It probably benefits them as people are developing a larger number of cities on the map. I don't do it personally, don't have the time to play with more than 1 city.
 

DeletedUser6046

Guest
AWs can't be teleported so that's rather moot, but and aside from that, when someone states that he'd have no issue in people cheating by pushing AWs, that's where I realize it's utterly pointless to keep discussing with them.

Why? In discussing things, we understand each other better. I don't personally feel harmed by somebody investing twice or three times more time to play multiple cities and gain more KPs for one of their cities. Let them be... Or, if Inno is harmed by it, they can easily stop it. They can easily introduce identity verification. True, anybody then can use the identity of all their family members to register multiple accounts and use different IP addresses and mobile phone numbers for each account... I doubt there will be more than a handful of people who will make such an effort. I can see people going to that extent only if they can cash out diamonds.
 

m4rt1n

Adept
While trading inventory items could well be a nice idea. I don't see where diamonds would come into it, as that opens the door to big problems in my opinion.
 
Top