Jump to content

Photo

Should we prevent items being sent to inactive players?


  • Please log in to reply
314 replies to this topic

Poll: Should we prevent items being sent to inactive players? (486 member(s) have cast votes)

Should we prevent items being sent to inactive players?

  1. Voted No (514 votes [87.41%])

    Percentage of vote: 87.41%

  2. Voted Yes (74 votes [12.59%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.59%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 fs_johnyvamp

fs_johnyvamp
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:47

No, inactives can set their preferences to allow only guild members to send them items. Lots of guilds use inactives for BP space.

EDIT: Thank you dev team for seeking everyone's input on this. I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates it.

#42 fs_mihaajlo

fs_mihaajlo
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:49

I say no. If ppl decide to leave the game, they're free to "donate" their bp slots to their guild 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)

+1
nothing else to say really..... if players donate $$, or put hard effort to upgrade bp, then leave game, why guild should lost their bp??

#43 fs_fradiavolo

fs_fradiavolo
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:51

We had players who had to stop playing (or for a while) spending lots of last fsp in increasing BP storage, so they could be used by guild.
If a stopping player decides to donate all his gear and fsp to guild that is alright too, so should this be

#44 Sacred

Sacred

    New Member

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • United States of America

Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:56

I'm going to have to say no to this. If they are inactive and they choose to stay in the guild, they are still guild property and need to contribute in some way. Thus, since they are inactive, we can use them as extra storage for items that cant fit in the Guild Store or on currently active guild mates.

#45 doogonzee

doogonzee

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 46 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 14:56

I say no, that would be a low kick, hope you know better than that...

Btw, where do you find all those ideas for updates, or better... for fixing minor things, or things that aren't broken...

I believe that most of the players would like to see new buffs, now that's a thing to think about...

#46 fs_deathark

fs_deathark
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:01

i have to agree with kittles if they are protected for GVG and PVP prestige then no go on using thier back pack people here are claiming they are still part of the guild then let them be a part of the GUILD vs GUILD conflicts, otherwise it seems like your catering to the guilds who hoard the inactive mules, there definantly needs to be some RISK involved with holding inactives. by risk i dont mean oh you might miss out on a player joining you....

#47 fs_evfisher

fs_evfisher
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:01

NO, what if a player goes inactive due to a real life circumstance, then can come back in say a couple of months, we would not want them to lose all they and us have worked for previously.

#48 fs_wvmountain

fs_wvmountain
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:03

I am very mixed about this. I think inactive accounts should be culled from the game but since they aren't, they should be treated like any other account in the guild which means the bp slots should still be accessible. However, this also means they should be allowed to be hit in gvg conflicts. This is just another instance of the vast majority of the player base wanting the benefits of something without having any adverse consequences. Let us keep our inactives for bp storage and xp but don't let other people hit them.

Hoof, if inactive accounts were purged from the system, would that speed up servers any? That may be a silly question but I have no knowledge of such things.

#49 Kedyn

Kedyn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 698 posts
  • Badge
  • United States of America

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:06

I'm going to have to say no to this. If they are inactive and they choose to stay in the guild, they are still guild property and need to contribute in some way. Thus, since they are inactive, we can use them as extra storage for items that cant fit in the Guild Store or on currently active guild mates.



Yea but there should be some ramifications to holding onto inactives as well. Since they are inactive they contribute to the guild by having BP.. but you also CHOOSE to hold onto them.

As Venom said before.. if you can't GVG or PVP them, then you shouldn't be able to use them for storage. Or you should have to pay an increased fee to hold them in the guild.. maybe 10x or 100x the gold cost of a single member?

As it's been mentioned before.. there are only two reasons to hold onto inactives.. Guild XP contributed and backpack slots. One is an easy thing to get by recruiting a new member and holding onto that member. The other is another easy thing to get by farming/buffing or any other way to make FSP in the game.. but you are in essence cheating the game by using backpack slots this way. If you hold onto inactives.. there should be some penalty against the guild.. whether it be GVG or not.

I bet that a lot of the higher guilds who are going for GVG and who kicked many inactives, have lost MANY backpack slots. Also, why not try looking at the gear you ACTUALLY NEED.. I know if I had to make a choice on items my guild needed, there would be tons of easy cuts to make to the gear that is in storage. I bet most guilds could easily cut down on gear that isn't being used/needed if they had to.

#50 Prezze

Prezze

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 771 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:09

I am very mixed about this. I think inactive accounts should be culled from the game but since they aren't, they should be treated like any other account in the guild which means the bp slots should still be accessible. However, this also means they should be allowed to be hit in gvg conflicts. This is just another instance of the vast majority of the player base wanting the benefits of something without having any adverse consequences. Let us keep our inactives for bp storage and xp but don't let other people hit them.

Hoof, if inactive accounts were purged from the system, would that speed up servers any? That may be a silly question but I have no knowledge of such things.


What alot of people seem to forget is that alot of guilds would die out if this change happens.


The only solution to this problem with keeping inactives for backpack means lowering the price of guildstore slots to 15 fsp like backpack for a player (thus removing the option cheaper to upgrade the founder then guildstoreslots). However if that should happen you can't expect people to suddenly come up with the amount necessary to immediatly replace guildtagged equipment and inactive player might be holding.

#51 fs_titziano

fs_titziano
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:11

Aswell i vote NO..As some before me sayed "those BP from inactive players could make the difference in small guilds".

#52 kofc14987

kofc14987

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:11

Many players retire and do so for various reasons. Some get bored, some get tired of the direction HCS is taking the game, I know some who quit when the game was lagging like no other. If the guild wants to keep them in the guild at that time and the player freely "donates" the use of their backpack to the guild, then there should be no reason, other than greed by the Cows, to not allow the backpacks that player PAID for to be used by the guild. I have a few packpack slots and when I decide to retire, I will probably do so, selling all current items, donating that to the guild and then they can decide how long to keep my inactive account in the guild. I paid for the slots, I should be able to decide how they are used.

#53 skidoodle

skidoodle

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • United States of America

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:13

I have an idea..... if HCS wants to make some kind of an adjustment...how about making BP spaces transferable so that retiring players can send their extra BP spaces to other players? BP spaces are a commodity and should be able to be given to whoever we want, just like gear, fsp and gold. The reason I buy extra BP space is strictly for guild storage. If I retired from the game or went inactive and HCS enforces this potential game change of no one being able to use my space, then let me give it away.

#54 fs_zappac

fs_zappac
  • Guests

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:14

Uhmm, first of all.. Smaller guilds like the one I'm in would be doomed if sending tagged items to inactive accounts would be terminated.. + They're doing it to keep the item flow normal (even if not, just doing it to help the guild out:) so there wont be a flood of items and sudden urge to sell some of them away due too many items which people can't hold in their Guild storage or their own BP. So simply NO. :roll:

#55 djb306

djb306

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:14

i vote no for sure

if i were to go inactive tomorrow i would want to remain in my guild so that they could use my bp which i have paid for myself and it is my right to do so, and my guilds choice in wether they decide to use my BP or get rid of me once ive decided to leave the game.

however since this question is linked with prestige gain and GvG from inactive members and most people probably dont want the option of inactives being able to be hit, then hcs could do 2 things, a) like most have already suggested, reduce the cost of guild store slots to the same price as personal BP slots, and B) give a quitting member the option to transfer his/her ALREADY PAID FOR bp slots to guild slots before they quit

#56 Prezze

Prezze

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 771 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:17

I'm going to have to say no to this. If they are inactive and they choose to stay in the guild, they are still guild property and need to contribute in some way. Thus, since they are inactive, we can use them as extra storage for items that cant fit in the Guild Store or on currently active guild mates.



Yea but there should be some ramifications to holding onto inactives as well. Since they are inactive they contribute to the guild by having BP.. but you also CHOOSE to hold onto them.

As Venom said before.. if you can't GVG or PVP them, then you shouldn't be able to use them for storage. Or you should have to pay an increased fee to hold them in the guild.. maybe 10x or 100x the gold cost of a single member?

As it's been mentioned before.. there are only two reasons to hold onto inactives.. Guild XP contributed and backpack slots. One is an easy thing to get by recruiting a new member and holding onto that member. The other is another easy thing to get by farming/buffing or any other way to make FSP in the game.. but you are in essence cheating the game by using backpack slots this way. If you hold onto inactives.. there should be some penalty against the guild.. whether it be GVG or not.

I bet that a lot of the higher guilds who are going for GVG and who kicked many inactives, have lost MANY backpack slots. Also, why not try looking at the gear you ACTUALLY NEED.. I know if I had to make a choice on items my guild needed, there would be tons of easy cuts to make to the gear that is in storage. I bet most guilds could easily cut down on gear that isn't being used/needed if they had to.


I don't see that an easy option. One guildstoreslot costs 50 fsp... that's alot of buffing you'll have to do to make that up for one slot.

Also for a difference in pricing HCS put up

backpack slots 15 fsp (before they were 30)
guildstore slots 50 fsp

what will any founder do this his own character? Upgrade himself and use his backpack as the guildstore. However every player will eventually quit.

What for the smaller guilds then? There will be alot of guilds who just upgraded members to keep backpack instead of the guildstore. So because they made the logical decision back then, you suddenly want to change that fact. Through a problem that is actually cause by the pricing in backpack and guildstore

#57 Prezze

Prezze

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 771 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:20

Only way I would vote YES on this is

1) Send out a newsfeed that in 6 months this update will take place.
=> gives smaller guilds the option to prepare themselves for it

2) Lower the price of guildstore slots to 15 fsp

3) Triple the current guildstore slots a guild already purchased against the 50 fsp

Note

all three have to be fullfilled otherwise this is just a no

#58 Scathian

Scathian

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 309 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:20

No, inactives are the only reason some guilds can keep functioning with storage space. it is just to expense otherwise as others have said. but a good idea is to make it so that you can only send to inactives of your OWN guild. this A) prevents what i feel is a low tactic during wars (not that i have ever heard of it happening but that fact remains that it could) of the opposing guild filling up your inactives (if any) thus 'starving' your guild into submission with permanent consequences. B) it would stop multies from creating accounts and then just using them as cheap, long term storage. yes it wouldn't stop it from happening, but it would force the multi to log the extras in more often and thus raise the risk getting caught :D

#59 Kedyn

Kedyn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 698 posts
  • Badge
  • United States of America

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:20

Many people seem to forget the reasoning behind the prices for individual backpack slots compared to guild storage slots...

Guild storage slots are more expensive because there are up to 124 guild members that can use them to put anything in (guild tagged or untagged items or defensive armor). The reason people take the opportunity to buy individual backpack slots at a cheaper rate than guild slots is to save FSP in the short run (also, this is already cheating the game of should be FSP). You are saving yourself 35 FSP per slot, but also remember this, you are doing it at a risk. If you work together with your guild to buy 5 backpack spaces for your founder or another member, you take the risk of that person going inactive or leaving the guild for another. That's life.

Guild storage costs are a little high though. They did lower the backpack costs a long time ago to half what they were. Maybe guild storage spaces should be halved as well. There will still be some difference for having a community storage slot compared to an individuals backpack space (which should be considered their own property, and they can do what they want with it).

I don't mind if inactives are kept for BP space. It will save a lot of people FSP. The only thing I'm trying to say is that there should be some RISK involved in keeping these inactives. There should be no protection to those who hold onto inactives for BP spaces. They should be allowed to be GVG and PVP targets since they would be considered "guild property". IF you hold onto them for memories, then maybe HCS can find a way to have a tag placed on those characters where they can't hold items or be hit by anyone.

And for those who think this is a money ploy by HCS.. grow up please. Think about it, if everyone wants inactives untouchable, shouldn't there be an equal and opposite consequence to that? "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction".. that's how it should stay.

#60 MaximusGR

MaximusGR

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,177 posts

Posted 22 December 2009 - 15:21

I dont think this is a good idea. imagine if FFS lost all of their Guild Gear after what happened to their Founder. At least they are, or ARE, able to retrieve their Guild Tagged Gear. Unless i'm wrong. But also imagine that small guilds can't afford to upgrade to make more room in their Guild Store. An inactive member that has a lot of Backpack space may be all that allows these guilds to continue to even play anymore.

I voted NO


We didnt lose anything from RETSNOM's termination simply because our aim is to have all of the guild items in the Guild store.

I am voting YES on this suggestion. It will force players to mostly buy use their own items and not be relied on the 1000 items that a guild might have. That will liven up the LE items market and increase donations to HCS.

HOWEVER there has to be gradual implementation of this, transition from backpack mules to GS slots is neither cheap nor easy..Hand out a +25% donation bonus and reduce the price of GS slots to 20 FSP for a month :)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: