Bind on legacy

[Thermonuked]

now that its possible to have items which are bind on legacy, i suggest that all bind on pickup items get made bind on legacy, as myself and a number of others have all recieved bind on pickup items which are useless for the characters they are on, but would be of use to other characters i have, such as things like the schematics from ops/flashpoints which are random rolled if nobody wants them, i currently have about a dozen schematics which i could use on alts, but are useless for the characters that have them, not to mention all the armour, weapons etc which i've been awarded along the way, which end up sat in my cargo bay or sold to a vendor.

 

i'm not saying that items which have already been used should be allowed to be traded, they should indeed stay bound to that character, but plz, change bind on pickups to bind on legacy

[Socialist]

now that its possible to have items which are bind on legacy, i suggest that all bind on pickup items get made bind on legacy, as myself and a number of others have all recieved bind on pickup items which are useless for the characters they are on, but would be of use to other characters i have, such as things like the schematics from ops/flashpoints which are random rolled if nobody wants them, i currently have about a dozen schematics which i could use on alts, but are useless for the characters that have them, not to mention all the armour, weapons etc which i've been awarded along the way, which end up sat in my cargo bay or sold to a vendor.

 

i'm not saying that items which have already been used should be allowed to be traded, they should indeed stay bound to that character, but plz, change bind on pickups to bind on legacy

 

and legacy cross-faction trade.

 

I've got a ludicrous amount of creds on my Imperials but am basically broke with my pubs.

[G-Girl]

and legacy cross-faction trade.

 

I've got a ludicrous amount of creds on my Imperials but am basically broke with my pubs.

 

You can email credits cross-legacy.

[JWagner]

You can email credits cross-legacy.

 

I can verify this.

I wasn't sure, so I tried it, but it definitely sent the credits correctly.

[Socialist]

You can email credits cross-legacy.

 

I once tried it to no avail.

 

 

But t'was before 1.2

 

Good lord, I'll try it.

[Ashyel]

The problem is that if they did this, you'd have Sith Warriors going into a Flashpoint and "Needing" on Operative gloves or whathaveyou because they'll claim their Operative can use it.

 

I think they're looking at a system where there's going to be "Greed", "Need" and a 3rd option that is higher priority than Need, but which is greyed out if you're not the class or crew skill that the item was designed for. That way, you can "Need" on an item for your companion or alt. But if it's Willpower gear, and you're a Trooper, the Consular in your party can overrule you and take that item for themselves if it's an upgrade.

 

That's actually a really nice system IMO because it makes it impossible to take loot that wasn't designed for you unless the true recipient class is absent or passes on it.

 

If they implemented such a system, then your suggestion might actually be a good one. But with the current Need/Greed system, it would cause too much griefing.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Ashyel

[IamZongo]

I do think there may be some griefing with it however using rift as an example you would need different gear for your different builds my cleric for example needed tank gear and healing gear however i never ran into a situation where people would need on something for an offspec it was generally accepted that you could only roll need for your current spec....i think that most people would either roll greed or if no one had a need for the item they would ask if its ok to roll need for an alt, but yes there are always those few idiots out there

[Ashyel]

I do think there may be some griefing with it however using rift as an example you would need different gear for your different builds my cleric for example needed tank gear and healing gear however i never ran into a situation where people would need on something for an offspec it was generally accepted that you could only roll need for your current spec....i think that most people would either roll greed or if no one had a need for the item they would ask if its ok to roll need for an alt, but yes there are always those few idiots out there

Yes, in principle I like the idea. But the problem is the Need/Greed system. So I'd be a fan of your idea once they change it.

 

And Bioware might change it as they recognise the companion dynamic makes a different system necessary.

[Kirameki]

The problem is that if they did this, you'd have Sith Warriors going into a Flashpoint and "Needing" on Operative gloves or whathaveyou because they'll claim their Operative can use it.

 

I think they're looking at a system where there's going to be "Greed", "Need" and a 3rd option that is higher priority than Need, but which is greyed out if you're not the class or crew skill that the item was designed for. That way, you can "Need" on an item for your companion or alt. But if it's Willpower gear, and you're a Trooper, the Consular in your party can overrule you and take that item for themselves if it's an upgrade.

 

That's actually a really nice system IMO because it makes it impossible to take loot that wasn't designed for you unless the true recipient class is absent or passes on it.

 

If they implemented such a system, then your suggestion might actually be a good one. But with the current Need/Greed system, it would cause too much griefing.

 

Indeed.

 

In Warhammer there was a Need on Roll option. No matter if the lovely marauder rolled need on witch elf stuff, the witch elf got it when it rolled need. (ofcourse the party had to turn Need on Roll on because it was not automatic but whole party could see if it was on and if not ask leader to put it on or leave group )

[Vylettes]

The problem is that if they did this, you'd have Sith Warriors going into a Flashpoint and "Needing" on Operative gloves or whathaveyou because they'll claim their Operative can use it.

 

I think they're looking at a system where there's going to be "Greed", "Need" and a 3rd option that is higher priority than Need, but which is greyed out if you're not the class or crew skill that the item was designed for. That way, you can "Need" on an item for your companion or alt. But if it's Willpower gear, and you're a Trooper, the Consular in your party can overrule you and take that item for themselves if it's an upgrade.

 

That's actually a really nice system IMO because it makes it impossible to take loot that wasn't designed for you unless the true recipient class is absent or passes on it.

 

If they implemented such a system, then your suggestion might actually be a good one. But with the current Need/Greed system, it would cause too much griefing.

 

You didn't notice the bind on legacy orange items that you can buy on drumond kaas/coruscant? Have your alt buy their legacy orange gear, send it to the character with the gear and they can basically mod it up and send it back and the alt can wear it

 

All you would miss is the set bonus, but face it, you only need to grab some tionese pieces for set bonus, fill them with columni or rakata mods and you are gtg, Until you get those pieces you can wear your legacy gear with all the columni/rakata mods your other legacy chars sent you.

 

So this means that yes, a bounty hunter with a warrior alt could possibly want to roll on the warrior gear, rip the mods and mail to his warrior in a piece of legacy gear.

[Ashyel]

Obviously everyone knows about the new legacy gear. But I didn't know you could use the legacy gear as a vessel to transport bound modifications. I'll have to try that.

 

I assumed that the kits were Bind on Legacy but when you bought the item on your alt, it was a bound item. But I've not really tried it.

[Vincynt]

The problem is that if they did this, you'd have Sith Warriors going into a Flashpoint and "Needing" on Operative gloves or whathaveyou because they'll claim their Operative can use it.

 

You already have people doing that for their companions, I don't think it would really change anything. The other way to go about it I suppose is making quest rewards bind on legacy, but most quest rewards are tailored for the character you're playing or his/her companions.

[Vylettes]

Obviously everyone knows about the new legacy gear. But I didn't know you could use the legacy gear as a vessel to transport bound modifications. I'll have to try that.

 

I assumed that the kits were Bind on Legacy but when you bought the item on your alt, it was a bound item. But I've not really tried it.

 

They are bind on legacy, you can use any of it to vessel mods over. But only a 'inquisitor' can buy the inquisitor gear. So if you intend to wear the legacy gear, buy it with the character who will be wearing it, mail it to the char who has the mods to fill it up then mail it back. Saves you the step of having to pull the mods out and put into gear you can wear right away.

 

This DOES work, I have alrdy kitted out my sage with my sorcs half a bankfull of spare columni pieces.

[oPURT]

now that its possible to have items which are bind on legacy, i suggest that all bind on pickup items get made bind on legacy,

 

No way. Then everyone would just level up one main toon and then use that toon to gear up every alt they ever decided to level up. Sorry, this idea is stupid and will never happen.

[uniz]

The problem is that if they did this, you'd have Sith Warriors going into a Flashpoint and "Needing" on Operative gloves or whathaveyou because they'll claim their Operative can use it.

 

I think they're looking at a system where there's going to be "Greed", "Need" and a 3rd option that is higher priority than Need, but which is greyed out if you're not the class or crew skill that the item was designed for. That way, you can "Need" on an item for your companion or alt. But if it's Willpower gear, and you're a Trooper, the Consular in your party can overrule you and take that item for themselves if it's an upgrade.

 

That's actually a really nice system IMO because it makes it impossible to take loot that wasn't designed for you unless the true recipient class is absent or passes on it.

 

If they implemented such a system, then your suggestion might actually be a good one. But with the current Need/Greed system, it would cause too much griefing.

 

no reason for a third option. you just dont have the need option if a willpower item drops and you are a aim user. if rift can implement this soon after thier lfd exploiters obused the need and 30 min free trade option when it first came out bioware surely can. sadly it is a must have for any lfd now days as mmo selfishness is the norm rather the exception.

[Vylettes]

No way. Then everyone would just level up one main toon and then use that toon to gear up every alt they ever decided to level up. Sorry, this idea is stupid and will never happen.

 

Read up ^^ you can already pass everything but the set bonus onto any character in legacy.

[FooBard]

i suggest that all bind on pickup items get made bind on legacy

No, because then people can just farm HM's and OP's with their fully geared toons and pass the Rakata and Columi gear over to their alts.

 

Bad idea.

[Ashyel]

no reason for a third option. you just dont have the need option if a willpower item drops and you are a aim user.

Neah, there has to be some way to distinguish someone who wants an item for a good reason, and someone who would simply vendor it.

 

People never pass, they always greed. Greed is basically the "I'm going to sell it" button.

 

Must Have - Want for this main character's class.

Need - Want for companion. Want the crystal / enhancement. Want for an alt.

Greed - Not going to say no to free credits.

[Socialist]

No, because then people can just farm HM's and OP's with their fully geared toons and pass the Rakata and Columi gear over to their alts.

 

Bad idea.

 

I can't see how is this bad.

[Marrond]

I can't see how is this bad.

Well it would be nice to have feature you write off (personally I would get rid of the whole BoP/BoE thing - one of the things I hated in WoW-like games was that once you used something it became garbage after you changed equipment - nothing more to do with just sell it for 3 credits...) but it would be as players mentioned above. You wouldn't ever get any item for you because someone would take all possible items for his other characters...

[Thermonuked]

i know a lot of ppl who's companions are wearing full columi/rakata/champion/battlemaster gear, maybe you are on a server where there are a lot of children running pugs who need on everything even if they cant use it, but so far on my server that hasnt been an issue.

 

also, in order to run a lot of the HM fp's, you need to have most if not all of the team in mostly rakata gear, so what happens to the armour that drops when ppl already have it? everyone greeds for companions, heck, the reason why i made this post in the first place, is because so many of the ppl i run ops with already have decent gear and usually pass on everything they already have, so then RNG decides that i should want a trooper chest piece for my sentinel, or an armormech schematic when i have artifice.

 

also, it has happened too many times when a raid is organised, that certain proffessions are needed more than others, and we have to do the decent thing and run your fully geared healer/tank instead of the DPS alt that needs the gear, when that happens its also nice to let ppl need for things the alt can use instead of the things the main doesnt, as without them, the raid wouldnt happen.

[XavinNydek]

(personally I would get rid of the whole BoP/BoE thing

The main reason for binds is to deter account theft from gold sellers. If everything valuable is bound, there is less reason to try hard to compromise accounts. If they could steal it all and sell it on the other hand... it's not pretty.

[Rob_of_Korriban]

The problem is that if they did this, you'd have Sith Warriors going into a Flashpoint and "Needing" on Operative gloves or whathaveyou because they'll claim their Operative can use it.

 

I think they're looking at a system where there's going to be "Greed", "Need" and a 3rd option that is higher priority than Need, but which is greyed out if you're not the class or crew skill that the item was designed for. That way, you can "Need" on an item for your companion or alt. But if it's Willpower gear, and you're a Trooper, the Consular in your party can overrule you and take that item for themselves if it's an upgrade.

 

That's actually a really nice system IMO because it makes it impossible to take loot that wasn't designed for you unless the true recipient class is absent or passes on it.

 

If they implemented such a system, then your suggestion might actually be a good one. But with the current Need/Greed system, it would cause too much griefing.

 

 

I completely disagree with you. What's to stop players simply greeding and selling it at the npc shop.

 

Legacy is supposed to be a unique feature to the game, when items are not bound to your legacy it makes legacy pretty pointless. Second point, most of the time when I do flashpoints, I select pass for what I don't need. Then when there is something I do need, it's always someone else that gets it. I end up leaving with nothing, but wasted time and a small handful of credits.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Rob_of_Korriban

[Foobert]

The main reason for binds is to deter account theft from gold sellers. If everything valuable is bound, there is less reason to try hard to compromise accounts. If they could steal it all and sell it on the other hand... it's not pretty.

 

That's not true. The reason for binding is because there is no item destruction in the game (the item doesn't go away even if durability goes to zero, it just needs to be repaired for the stats to reapply). If you didn't have bound items in such a system, the market would eventually be flooded with excessively increasing amounts of hand-me-down gear that people levelled out of. In PVP-heavy games with a crafting-based economy, destructible items, and "lose everything you're carrying when you die" mechanic like in Eve Online, you don't need binds because the item destruction rate balances the item creation/drop rate.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Foobert

[AshlaBoga]

I completely disagree with you. What's to stop players simply greeding and selling it at the npc shop.

 

Legacy is supposed to be a unique feature to the game, when items are not bound to your legacy it makes legacy pretty pointless. Second point, most of the time when I do flashpoints, I select pass for what I don't need. Then when there is something I do need, it's always someone else that gets it. I end up leaving with nothing, but wasted time and a small handful of credits.

 

... 6 months. That's one bloody heck of a necro.

 

I have only this to say - CLICK ME!