Should we prevent items being sent to inactive players?
#1
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:03
How would you feel about preventing items being sent to inactive players? This mainly relates to Guilds using inacitve players as additional backpack storage.
#2
fs_phyrstormz
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:05
those bp spots were paid for, they should be allowed to be used by the guild a they need
#3
fs_musja
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:11
i say no
those bp spots were paid for, they should be allowed to be used by the guild a they need
i say yes.
bp slots are a property of inactive players, not the guild.
#4
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:13
If Ure gonna make this a "no no" - then U simply have to lower the price of guild safe slots (which we have asked for for many a times now)
No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins
#5
fs_phyrstormz
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:14
I say yes. If ppl decide to leave the game, they're free to "donate" their bp slots to their faction if they wish.
If Ure gonna make this a "no no" - then U simply have to lower the price of guild safe slots (which we have asked for for many a times now)
then you mean you vote no
#6
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:15
Otherwise you will force some guilds who have inactives with huge amounts of backpack to either immediatly upgrade maybe 1000 fsp worth of guildstore slots or upgrade the founders backpack (but he can go inactive as well someday).
I can really imagin if this update happens that some guilds will have serious problems.
As an example, the guild has 1000 guildtagged items, 200 guildstore slots, 1 inactive player with 100 used backpackslots for guildequipment.
If you then make it so that inactive players can't receive anymore items. You'll force some guilds to upgrade in a week around 100 guildstore slots (costing 5000 fsp), or 1500 fsp worth of backpack for the founder, who then in the future can go inactive again.
Still both ways of solving the lost backpack is something I assume 90% of the guilds can't pay for. Doing this update just forces guilds to immediatly solve guildstore problems.
I know if this update happened in the passed, that I had to destroy guildtagged equipment.
#7
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:16
then you mean you vote no
I know what I meant, and so did U - that's all that is important :oops:
No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins
#8
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:16
#9
fs_chumei
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:16
#10
fs_slayer4150
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:17
#11
fs_tmrv
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:19
#12
fs_mudgezbt
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:21
#13
fs_musja
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:21
#14
fs_thundermik
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:22
#15
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:25
#16
fs_ananasii
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:25
I'm sorry HCS, but this reeks of trying to force more donations to the game.
If you're going to prevent items being sent, reduce the cost of GS slots to the same as individual slots, and refund the diffrence to all guilds.
#17
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:25
#18
fs_phyrstormz
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:26
I'd like to say yes, but the cost of Guild Store slots is just to high for many guilds - a guild slot is over 3 times the cost of a indvidual slot.
I'm sorry HCS, but this reeks of trying to force more donations to the game.
If you're going to prevent items being sent, reduce the cost of GS slots to the same as individual slots, and refund the diffrence to all guilds.
i agree with you, but i actually dont think this is a moneygrab by hcs
with gvg update yesterday, i think they are just trying to get a feel of how inactives should be treated in reagrds to all aspects
#19
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:26
#20
Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:27
How about players only be allowed to send items to inactives in the same guild?
That is what they are talking about. If you send to inactives anywhere outside of your guild you are not able to recall the items from them then.
As for letting inactives hold the gear in your guild.. I see it both ways..
On one hand, with inactives being able to hold gear, then you save your guild FSP by having backpack slots for 15FSP instead of 50. You have free space because the inactive has already paid for those spaces and you choose to keep them in the guild.
On the other hand, the inactives are unable to be hit for GVG, so they should not be able to hold gear as well. This is when you will start getting people who horde inactives just to hold gear. I believe that if you hold inactives, that there should be some risk to holding them, and yes, this does include them being targets for GVG. I believe if you want to hold onto them, then they should be targets like anyone else.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

