40 replies to this topic

[Neon]

While stacking has been bought up again this idea hit me which would seem to work well.

 

To start, banking:

 

Banks changed so that any item placed into bank storage can have a 100x multiplier to an items current stack.

 

So..

 

An item with no stack (such as a vanity item) can now stack to 100 in the bank, however if one is bound and one is still bind on equip, they will stack in separate places. An item such as coal will now stack to 2500 in the bank.

 

This idea could also see an easy method for HCS to make some money.

 

"Upgrade bank storage multiplier"

 

First upgrade to 200x - 2000EP

Second upgrade to 300x - 3000EP

Third upgrade to 400x - 5000EP

Final upgrade to a 500x multipler (example: 12500 coal, 500 no stack items) - 8000EP

 

Now this could be toned down or up, that's up to HCS (if they're interested).

 

Positives

- Much more happier free2play players.

- Less people quitting due to the limitied space and enforcing cash shop.

- A nice extra means of cash shop income for HCS.

- Much more freedom within the game (I know players who spend allot on the game would appreciate this idea, and those who love unboxing chests etc)

 

Negatives

- Bots could store much more resources and in time it may manipulate the market for resources.

Edited by Neon, 01 February 2014 - 17:54.

[Mongo]

I like the idea, would be nice to be able to stack X Nevan armor for example in my stash. I guess it would need to be balanced, like you say, to be profitable for HCS before it was considered though.

 

It may negate the need to purchase as much BP storage, but I kinda done that already, using alt stash as a cheaper alternative to Backpacks 

[Neon]

I like the idea, would be nice to be able to stack X Nevan armor for example in my stash. I guess it would need to be balanced, like you say, to be profitable for HCS before it was considered though.

 

It may negate the need to purchase as much BP storage, but I kinda done that already, using alt stash as a cheaper alternative to Backpacks 

Yeah it would definitely draw some attention away from backpacks, but at the same time it will provide the community with more freedom in turn making everyone much more content. It's much more likely that this will see a larger profit for HCS than straight up backpack sales.

 

I'm not sure why people are voting no for this, it seems everyone I've come across would like some form of extra space, so if you're going to vote no I'd like to hear your reason (curios).

Edited by Neon, 01 February 2014 - 18:27.

[Linkondrugs]

This is a decent idea but essentially with stuff like this you are moving more and more to the P2W (Pay to Win) gamestyle which has ruined many games. I think with sacks implemented there is plenty of room.

[Neon]

This is a decent idea but essentially with stuff like this you are moving more and more to the P2W (Pay to Win) gamestyle which has ruined many games. I think with sacks implemented there is plenty of room.

How is this pay2win? This is bank space?

 

You cannot win the game by having the ability to store items.

Edited by Neon, 01 February 2014 - 18:53.

[Samppa]

I wouldn't go into adding more and more benefits to those who pay. If I had to think more additions to Item Shop, they would be something visual and handy small things, most major ones exist and some of them should be removed/changed. The main goal should be to avoid putting too much power at Shop users while also achieving required money to the company.

 

MMORPG's where buyers hold the power, are mostly enjoyed by  other ...buyers.
 

I'm in favor of changing stack system to be more benefittable to non-buyers. 100x multiplier is a bit too much though? Perhaps considering the whole bank as sack would be better and reasonable, meaning that every slot in bank would be 10x.

[BigglesVII]

Stacking does seem like a good idea but I though that's why you can unlock more bank slots and add bags to them. Another way to look at it would be to introduce a sack alternative for other items which would help make HCS more money and give players the flexibility expressed above.

 

Another thing to note would be the fact that once the auction house is implemented this would alleviate the need to hold on to so many items.

Edited by BigglesVII, 01 February 2014 - 19:21.

[ultramus]

I think 100x multiplier is too high, might flood the market with resources and items making them less rare.  But smaller stacks would be good like up to 20X.  Since it is a bank, I think gold should be deposited to get more space, like 100 gold for 10x and 200 gold for 20x. If you want to withdraw the gold, you have to clear your items from the bank.

[Shylark57]

How is this pay2win? This is bank space?

 

You cannot win the game by having the ability to store items.

Well it may not be pay to win.. But some player here would use it to stash more "Exclusive" or harder to get items to sell later at majorly high prices..

So I will be Voting NO....

[Neon]

I'm in favor of changing stack system to be more benefittable to non-buyers. 100x multiplier is a bit too much though? Perhaps considering the whole bank as sack would be better and reasonable, meaning that every slot in bank would be 10x.

 

I think 100x multiplier is too high, might flood the market with resources and items making them less rare.  But smaller stacks would be good like up to 20X.  Since it is a bank, I think gold should be deposited to get more space, like 100 gold for 10x and 200 gold for 20x. If you want to withdraw the gold, you have to clear your items from the bank.

 

Now this could be toned down or up, that's up to HCS (if they're interested).

I never said my numbers were good or set the idea with them.

 

 

Well it may not be pay to win.. But some player here would use it to stash more "Exclusive" or harder to get items to sell later at majorly high prices..

So I will be Voting NO....

They already stated that the only discontinued items would be founder items, which a few of us control the market on already.

It would hardly make a difference to exclusive items rather than make a different to things such as raw materials, general loot.. etc..

[Neon]

I wouldn't go into adding more and more benefits to those who pay. If I had to think more additions to Item Shop, they would be something visual and handy small things, most major ones exist and some of them should be removed/changed. The main goal should be to avoid putting too much power at Shop users while also achieving required money to the company.

Again, this benefit has little effect on other players (assuming you're talking about the extra multiplier for EP purchase).

 

This game is fully free2play meaning that the cash shop will always give bonuses to those who pay, this suggestions really changes nothing in the game other than making players much more free to gather and collect different items rather than being limited to such small space (for both paying and free players).

 

Allot of us who unboxed say 25+ packs have run out of space, most of us have given out tons of items due to lack of space.

 

This would increase their sales in packs above everything else, and if they execute packs right (with more updates) they will be the main source of EP purchases.

[Samppa]

Again, this benefit has little effect on other players (assuming you're talking about the extra multiplier for EP purchase).

 

This game is fully free2play meaning that the cash shop will always give bonuses to those who pay, this suggestions really changes nothing in the game other than making players much more free to gather and collect different items rather than being limited to such small space (for both paying and free players).

 

Allot of us who unboxed say 25+ packs have run out of space, most of us have given out tons of items due to lack of space.

 

This would increase their sales in packs above everything else, and if they execute packs right (with more updates) they will be the main source of EP purchases.

Since they have chosen "Shop Mall" business model, of course. But, I personally find games more appealing if they manage to restrict P2W elements to their best of ability. I find P2W very greedy and taking it the easy way system. Take DotA2 for example, a moba, that runs alone with visual enchantments, that is truly commendable!
 

Path of Exile is yet another good example of using Shop Mall, you might know it. The only "advantage" you get in that game is: Bigger Warehouse(bank). Other then that it runs on visual enchantments..

 

In case you misundestood, I'm all in for this change, except the shop.

Edited by Samppa, 01 February 2014 - 20:52.

[Shylark57]

I never said my numbers were good or set the idea with them.

 

 

They already stated that the only discontinued items would be founder items, which a few of us control the market on already.

It would hardly make a difference to exclusive items rather than make a different to things such as raw materials, general loot.. etc..

Still gives Major advantage to Players that have money to Burn so I still say NO... And I have money I do spend but some can't so it really would not be fair to them... Just how I see things not every one can do the way some of us can....

[021962]

Not sure I am a fan of this idea. See no real need for backpacks if it is approved. Do support the idea of rare crafting materials being able to put in sacks or even a different form of sack that only holds rare crafting items. This alone would free up a lot of the Stash space.

[Bryn]

100x is way too much.  I can see 10x but only for gear and other unsackable items.

[Neon]

100x is way too much.  I can see 10x but only for gear and other unsackable items.

 

I never said my numbers were good or set the idea with them. 

[Neon]

Okay how about I clear some things up then.. it is quite obvious that not everyone can look far into the future of the game and make some assumptions of what will happen based on the game and the gameplay.

 

Do you want to be running out of space and limiting items constantly? Once you've been playing this game for over a year do you want to feel like you have to manage your items to only keep a certain amount on you because that's all you can keep?

 

If you want to say do a profession but have stored tons of materials for another profession do you not want the chance to be able to store items to do something else?

 

If you ever unbox crates do you not want a place to store the items?

 

Backpacks are extremely easy to fill up I currently have 50% backpacks and I find myself overflowing very easily (and I hardly do professions or grind).

 

This suggestion won't go through which is obvious due to the results, it doesn't bother me but now I have something to quote when another user posts complaining about space.

 

Truth be told I was expecting at-least a 75/25 ratio on the yes to no, so many people complain about space lol. Oh well just keeps us paying players at a huge advantage and more fun gameplay compared to free2play players.

Edited by Neon, 02 February 2014 - 00:58.

[Shylark57]

Well I for one am not a pack rat as we here in the US call it... Just no need for all those items.. Sorry but a little Common sense managing what you keep or don't goes a long way here...

[Neon]

Well I for one am not a pack rat as we here in the US call it... Just no need for all those items.. Sorry but a little Common sense managing what you keep or don't goes a long way here...

You haven't opened packs, you're level 18. Presumably lowish professions?

 

Play the game some more and this suggestion may be more meaningful to you, this is encouraging more-so for free2play players, as I said I could careless if it is added since I can manage my space, but I do have to gift items away when I unbox due to the ridiculous vanity space there is.

[ernzor]

I like the idea, with some more though into numbers (I do think the 100, 200 etc is a bit high but as ou said numbers werent final) could be a great addition to the game.

 

Even if bank spaces acted like a sacks giving 10x the amount. Of course you could also stack non sackable items there too like the original idea. 10x the amount there would be great and then you could do your increments by 10.