1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Missions Viceroy Armour Skullcandy Edition

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by Few Scars, Jul 16, 2013.

  1. Few Scars

    Few Scars Administrator Staff Member PAF Administrator Arkadia Adviser

    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    154
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Thoughts please.I have been discussing with various players and the bound armour idea is not well received. The whole basis of EU economy is the ability to trade. This Viceroy Skullcandy edition is aimed at getting new players owning a nice piece of armour. They should be able to upgrade without losing Peds however. The question is, do the playerbase want to see more bounded items ingame?
     
  2. Nor Alien

    Nor Alien Active Member

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I dont always buy things because they make great financial sense. I sometimes buy things because I just want it, or someone else wants it. I don't think that everything in game has to be sellable. I think some should be status driven and/or just cause it is cool to have. In this case this does add to the game as people will spend money just to have it or to show they were part of the game when this came out. Sort of like the SGA gun I looted myself. Still have it and most likely will in the very far future.

    I didn't come here to make money. I came for the entertainment. In fact my Ava will most likely be here till the end with all it's stuff still on it. LoL There are others who feel the same so for these people, this does add to the game.

    I don't think this is the last we will see of Skullcandy. I think there will be more in the future.

    Just for the record, I understand why people feel this is bad for the game. If this is done in moderation, then it's a good thing. :)
     
  3. harmony

    harmony Active Member Pro Users

    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Well i aborted the viceroy mission, but that was mostly because i have better armor available myself.
    If i can get something that improves my gameplay i don't mind too much that it can't be traded. Mainly because whenever i buy something i immediately consider any markup paid to be lost. Ofc i would prefer it to be tradeable so that i can sell it for a profit but it not being tradable won't stop me.
     
  4. Lighterthief

    Lighterthief Member

    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Well i like the bound armor

    actually in this game i kinda like the idea of having items that i have earned, makes a change from "who has the most $"
    the mission to get the armor was a bit boring, so maybe that could be tweaked but in principle bound items are ok with me.

    i really dont see the problem
     
  5. AxeMurderer

    AxeMurderer Active Member Pro Users

    Messages:
    477
    Likes Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    43
    You risk to be named blind man.
    So I'm gonna say it like "I don't think there is problem"
     
  6. slither

    slither Active Member

    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I think there's a huge problem if it gets out of hand, but a few items earned from long hard missions could be ok.

    The viceroy mission was poor. I grabbed most the stuff from storage on caly then flew over and 'bought' my set.

    I hate the fact that we had to pay over tt to get the armour. It sets a nasty presidence where MA sell us items instead of us looting them or earning them via a mission.
     
  7. Lucky_A

    Lucky_A Member

    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    What if it was a mid-lvl UL laser/blp/MF gun instead of an armor set ? Would ppl be so troubled by this soulbound aspect and 150% MU payment then ? :D

    Overall is an idea from A-Team, a try out if u wish ... and depending on how this goes we might see more such attempts in the future. Calculated 600.02 PED TT in materials with 114.22% average "street MU" on them on Ark ... that's 685 PED overall for a 400 PED untradeable armor set ... not a small price to pay but many will, heck - even I will, cause we never know what future brings and this might turn out to be a smart move - if not, I just wasted 1 day worth of hunting @normal now days MA returns :D ... those r my thoughts ;)
     
  8. Lighterthief

    Lighterthief Member

    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    18
    maybe i am missing something.....
    why is it a problem if the cost is above tt?


    if i buy some armor from auction its over tt, and if i try to hunt a mob for a specific drop im sure as hell gunna pay waaaay over the tt amount, if i do a deal with a crafter its not gunna be at tt value... so what am i missing here? In fact i struggle to think of the last items i have bought for tt that isnt ammo.....


    it seems we are all used to markup and items having variable costs, so is the problem that this markup is not going straight into a crafter/traders pocket? or is it that we would prefer ma to take their income straight from loot rather than looking at other income streams?


    if... and thats a big if..... income generated from bound items enabled a better return hunting/mining/crafting etc, would it be such a problem?
     
  9. ruskea

    ruskea Member

    Messages:
    258
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    yeah.. ppl dont seem to see the bigger picture in this.. everyones just "its okey.. it looks nice and i dont care its soulbound and exact copy of gremlin" game designers see that holy shit.. ppl actually paid 150% MU from an armor that cant be sold back to even TT lets make more of these.. then more and more will come coz u ignorant ppl keep on buying em.. then soon all the new stuff are soulbound.. and then u start saying "Wtf this aint what i ordered (oh yes u did)"
     
  10. SLD

    SLD Member

    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I don't mind the idea of bonded items, but do not like at all the idea of an item that can never be sold to TT. Not being able to trade to other avatars makes sense, and will limit this armors impact on the economy. But.. This idea that any mission item must be worthless (to TT), so people don't farm for "free" stuff should only apply to items that are actually or close to "free". This armor is far from being free, and so should be in a different mission reward item class. Looks like Greed to me, to introduce items that cannot be sold to TT, and then offer some BS about "most people don't withdraw, so we assumed that means they don't want that ped back (ever?)" type of explanation.

    I'm glad they don't own any banks, if that's the sort of logic they go by, when planning ways to take my $... Let's say I deposit $100 into my bank savings account every month for 10 years, and never made a withdrawal, does this mean I don't want that money back? I didn't withdraw so I guess that means the bank can just go ahead and keep my money right??? NOPE!!

    Bonded: Yes, thats fine.
    Tradeable to avatars: No, it's mine, go get your own! :D
    Tradeable to TT: Yes, it's a must!

    Bottom line is that we had to pay 150% MU or more to get this item, so even if it were TT'able by the owner, MA/Ark/Whoever has already made a profit. Why be greedy and keep ALL the ped, is this ped earned by the MU not enough?
     
  11. KikkiJikki

    KikkiJikki Well-Known Member Pro Users

    Messages:
    3,323
    Likes Received:
    440
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I agree with you up to this point in your post. However right now game mechanics prevent the item being both avatar bound and TT'able. It's one or the other. Only MA can change this. Hopefully they will. It's not greed, but utilisation of game features as they currently exist.
     
  12. Gewitter

    Gewitter Active Member

    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I thought a lot about this issue, and despite the fact that initially it caused my anger,
    Now I inclined to think that this idea has a right to exist.
    First, armor is not so strong, and if you can see that gremlin has not fallen in price.
    Second, there are people here who came to play (or spend time and money), not to make money, so they are entitled to buy armor, making a simple mission, rather than just paying money (you do not need to buy everything you need in the market, you can go to hunt and bring all this to NPC)
    Therefore, despite the fact that this armor upsets the balance and can displace the gremlin, it may have a right to exist.
    And maybe I'll buy it to myself because it looks original, and I'm not lose too many money. If it is pleasing to the A-Team, well!
    But here is the introduction of a significant number of competing easily accessible items with similar characteristics can really shake the balance of the game, and I against such moves.
     
  13. KMax

    KMax Well-Known Member Pro Users

    Messages:
    1,034
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I myself see no real issue with this effecting the game in anyway.

    Do I wish it was at least sell-able for tt value? Sure, the fact that it isn't really doesn't bother me as I consider it an investment and a prestige item to own that you can only get via the mission, no way else period. Which I think is great concept to add to the game and gives great potential to planet partners to broaden their advertising effectiveness.

    Sure I understand how people think it effects the over all concept of RCE but in a way it doesn't. You have the option to not do the mission, hence if you don't do the mission you have no bound items, that issue is solved. If more items get introduced just don't get them, if it doesn't work with your own goals.

    But it does fix a few things that are broken in the current RCE model also and effect the game greatly and cause people to get even more frustrated and quite. One being how some pray on the lack of knowledge of others when they first join the game, great example is selling tt items for sometimes 4 times plus what they are worth to new players that do not know they can get the item for much cheaper from the trade terminals themselves. I believe all TT items should be avatar bound and only sellable back to the trade termial period. I have talked with way to many new players that were pissed because they were dupped when they started because of this very action, heck when cyrene came out I bought an item for 250% markup because it was nice item, few hours later I flew to Cyrene and seen it was a tt item, that was a true pisser to see that, and yes it really is an annoying and big issue with this game IMHO. Arkadia was nice enough to add TT to the item name which helps, more PP's should do the exact same in an effort to counter this activity.

    This armor falls into that same category, people get it and then sell it for 600+% markup and then that poor soul later finds out about the mission and then get all upset because he could have gotten it for a fraction of that markup. This is a great way to stop that from happening, again IMHO.

    The way it was introduced allowed for economic growth also, it brought some TT fodder materials back to having markup and worth trading again.

    It does not effect the armor industry much as the only real comparable armor one-one it can be compared with is Gremlin which is a looted only armor and you can freely go and buy that instead for less markup if you want. It is not that great of an armor to effect the sales of the armor sets crafters make their money on, I don't think. Anyways I still own and buy much bigger armor.

    To fix the bad aspects of some things it requires change, sure it can effect the RCE nature in a very small scale but it only does so for the people that get the items, it does not effect the game in it's entirety unless every item becomes this way and really? REALLY? do you think they will do that? I doubt that and people are just going overboard with their presumptions, these types of items will be few and far in between and will not effect any RCE aspect at all, you can invest, play and withdraw as you normally do. If you don't get these items then you are completely un-effected by being stuck with the items and not being able to sell them when you cash out.

    Options are nice to have, I for one like this concept and the way it was implemented and added to the game as a whole and think it opened up opportunities for PP's and players alike. Such as on player side like attributes we can now have prestige items as well saying hey I was foolish enough to get this, but at least I can say I got it, just like I was foolish enough to grind 50k mobs to get 1 point of some attribute instead of getting a huge skill increase I can actually really use to my benefit. An on PP side has ability to draw players to the planet for short time to do these missions to get the items and maybe stay a bit longer to do some other activities.

    Not everything in life is bought to sell again for profit, some things people just want to say they have it. The same goes here, I could care less if I could ever sell the armor but I can say I was one of the first to get it when it came out.

    Just my thoughts and ramblings about the topic, if you disagree please ignore and move on, you will not convince me otherwise from what I have stated. So waste of time trying and typing, I have thought long and hard about this and this is my conclusion.
     
  14. Jennson

    Jennson Member

    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    8
    It messes up my Avatar-accounting, so i didn't bother with the armor. For me an armor doesn't need to look cool, i care for it's attributes and i already own Grem, so for me it is not worth to pay 70$ for an armor which has no use for me and needs to be substracted from my avatar value each time i calculate my sheets
     
  15. tbarmike

    tbarmike New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Even if I choose to not do the mission, the economy is affected by each and every individual who does complete the mission. The PEDs used to "complete" the mission (in any form, loot or PEDs) are permanently removed from the economy. They can never be used again. A healthy economy requires value to cycle. The aquisition of the materials required to complete the mission, has had a short term increase in MU, but the cycling of those PED has forever ceased. The economy and its market shrinks for each suit "purchased". The "TT fodder" materials used to complete the mission will once again become TT fodder, except now there will be even less PED available to purchase it (and everything else). Even selling to the TT is cycling. More Importantly, the MU of everything else will be lessened with each PED locked this way.
     
  16. TimUnleashed

    TimUnleashed Forum Official Pro Users

    Messages:
    1,173
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Sorry for posting after 7 days of inactivity in the thread (doesn't quite count as a necro does it?), but I've been busy IRL.

    I like the way you're thinking tbarmike, but I suppose your analysis only works on the assumption that no more deposits are made.

    If acquiring the items you need to buy the stuff off the mission broker means you decide to deposit more, then money is being injected into the economy before being removed again. So it's probably not as bad as it seems - particularly given that people seem to be saying they're happy to buy it just because it looks good.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing pushes the pendulum the other way, and has the net effect of a bigger economy.

    It also seems like people aren't paying much attention to any impact that increase MU on TT food might have on the economy. I think this can have a positive effect too.

    Overall then, at the very least, it seems to me that this whole thing isn't as bad as some people are making it seem, and overall could in fact be a positive thing for the game. I would guess too that Arkadia Studios is aiming to make things better, not worse, and I know David Dobson is well aware of the importance of the size of an economy to its fluidity, functionality and prosperity.
     
  17. Gypsy

    Gypsy New Member

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Seeing I've spent most of the last 5 years wearing Gremlin, I'm happy to be bound to this armour and sell my Gremlin.
     
  18. the-unknown

    the-unknown Member

    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Only problem with bounded armor is you can't sell off low tier armor pieces in exchange for higher tiered stuff.

    Which might be a deal breaker for some people.
     
  19. OZtwo

    OZtwo Active Member

    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    And now maybe you get why this wasn't a great idea since you did exactly what was hopped for. For this type of game here, MA did this to get PEDs out of the game putting in the books what PEDs will no longer be owed to the user. The only reason this is a very bad idea is if MA fines that people did like this and does it more -- as they will since again, less money lost to them. Keep it up, this no longer will be a RCE and just a pay per month game. But then again, as I said from the beginning, maybe this isn't a bad idea. Also this sure would solve the pirate dilemma we are having these days.
     
  20. ElbryanWolf

    ElbryanWolf Member

    Messages:
    152
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    This will force people to tier it themselves instead. It will be longer, but isn't it the point of tiering stuff? Skilling and making your items more powerfull or usefull? I like he idea of the bound armor... now I just need to complete the whole mission before it gets pulled (limited time offer type thing). Cheers!