tomcn Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 There have been several threads recently about BoP versus BtL. These threads got me thinking about how these kinds of systems would actually need to work, in order to keep the game healthy. My goal here is to list some possible systems, and begin a discussion about the pros and cons of each. The assumption is that these systems are complementary, not exclusive -- Bioware could implement none, some, or all, of these systems. System 1 - modeled after Gree offhands This system would offer reusable BtL Earchip, Implant, and Relic containers. There would be 3 different kinds of containers. The containers would be available for sale from an NPC rep vendor, would have a certain rep level requirement in order to purchase, and would cost some number of BtL event mission reward tokens (similar to Gray Helix components). A player would have to purchase all 3 kinds of containers in order to be able to move Earchips, Implants, and Relics between alts. The UI would work as follows: Right-Click the empty container, and a UI box opens with a single slot. You can then right-click a compatible item in your inventory to slot the item into the container. To rip an item from a full container, you would right-click the container, then right-click the slotted item to rip it. There would be a rip cost to pull an item from a full container; the rip cost would be similar to the existing rip costs for a comparable-level mod. This system would serve two purposes: encourage event participation, and a modest credit sink. System 2 - credit sink This system would offer consumable single-use BtL containers. The containers would accept any single item; not restricted to certain kinds of items like System 1. The containers would be available for sale from an NPC vendor (not a rep vendor) for a large amount of credits, e.g 1 million credits, or 2 million credits, something like that. The containers would not be resellable or tradable (they would be BtL). The UI would work like the System 1 containers, except there would be no rip cost. This system would enable a player to move any BoP item from one alt to another, for a large fee in credits. This system would serve as a large credit sink, similar to the Tauntaun vendor on Hoth, or the casino. System 3 - Cartel Market This system would offer consumable single-use BtL containers. The containers would accept any single item; not restricted to certain kinds of items like System 1. The containers would be available for direct sale from the Cartel Market, e.g 1000 Cartel Coins, or something like that. The containers would not be resellable or tradable (they would be BtL). The UI would work like the System 1 containers, except there would be no rip cost. This system would enable a player to move any BoP item from one alt to another, for a fee in Cartel Coins. The fee would need to be at least comparable to the Collections unlock cost for Ultra Rare items, to avoid impacting Bioware's unlock revenue. This system would serve as a convenience system for players, and as a money-maker for Bioware. Note that I did not list any system that would enable containers to be sellable or tradable. That was deliberate. I share concerns of folks who feel that the existing credit sinks in the game need to be preserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icebergy Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Leave BoP as is. The fact that you can already send stuff to alts through placing mods in legacy gear is borderline too much as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deewe Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Leave BoP as is. The fact that you can already send stuff to alts through placing mods in legacy gear is borderline too much as is. It's a bug actually, that the devs never dare fix... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dipstik Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 (edited) legacy modules, like dye modules. i like the container idea too Edited July 23, 2014 by dipstik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khevar Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 (edited) It's a bug actually, that the devs never dare fix... I've seen posters make this claim periodically since 1.2 dropped, but I haven't been able to find any developer quotes that confirm this fact. Are you sure you're not confusing this with the "learn other players schematics" trick? I have seen a yellow post on that topic confirming it was unintended side-effect Edited July 23, 2014 by Khevar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratajack Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 I've seen posters make this claim periodically since 1.2 dropped, but I haven't been able to find any developer quotes that confirm this fact. Are you sure you're not confusing this with the "learn other players schematics" trick? I have seen a yellow post on that topic confirming it was unintended side-effect I linked a few threads from this and other sites in another thread, but cannot find that post. While I do not remember any of the threads from this site specifically saying it was a bug, several of them do seem to be addressing what was originally considered a bug and was later accepted by the devs due to the cost of ripping mods. IMO, it may also have had something to do with the difficulty of coding legacy gear so that it cannot be sent between characters with bound mods in place. Many threads from other sites seem to support that the moving of bound mods was not originally intended with legacy gear, but was later declared an acceptable use of legacy gear. Here are a few: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=454232 http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=496053 Check this site from April 2012, shortly after the introduction of legacy gear: *********.com/forums/mmo/star-wars-old-republic/swtor-exploits/348554-transfer-bm-wh-mods-between-alts-using-legacy.html replace the asterixes with owned core (all one word, obviously--apparently the censor is working overtime) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratajack Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 There have been several threads recently about BoP versus BtL. These threads got me thinking about how these kinds of systems would actually need to work, in order to keep the game healthy. My goal here is to list some possible systems, and begin a discussion about the pros and cons of each. The assumption is that these systems are complementary, not exclusive -- Bioware could implement none, some, or all, of these systems. System 1 - modeled after Gree offhands This system would offer reusable BtL Earchip, Implant, and Relic containers. There would be 3 different kinds of containers. The containers would be available for sale from an NPC rep vendor, would have a certain rep level requirement in order to purchase, and would cost some number of BtL event mission reward tokens (similar to Gray Helix components). A player would have to purchase all 3 kinds of containers in order to be able to move Earchips, Implants, and Relics between alts. The UI would work as follows: Right-Click the empty container, and a UI box opens with a single slot. You can then right-click a compatible item in your inventory to slot the item into the container. To rip an item from a full container, you would right-click the container, then right-click the slotted item to rip it. There would be a rip cost to pull an item from a full container; the rip cost would be similar to the existing rip costs for a comparable-level mod. This system would serve two purposes: encourage event participation, and a modest credit sink. System 2 - credit sink This system would offer consumable single-use BtL containers. The containers would accept any single item; not restricted to certain kinds of items like System 1. The containers would be available for sale from an NPC vendor (not a rep vendor) for a large amount of credits, e.g 1 million credits, or 2 million credits, something like that. The containers would not be resellable or tradable (they would be BtL). The UI would work like the System 1 containers, except there would be no rip cost. This system would enable a player to move any BoP item from one alt to another, for a large fee in credits. This system would serve as a large credit sink, similar to the Tauntaun vendor on Hoth, or the casino. System 3 - Cartel Market This system would offer consumable single-use BtL containers. The containers would accept any single item; not restricted to certain kinds of items like System 1. The containers would be available for direct sale from the Cartel Market, e.g 1000 Cartel Coins, or something like that. The containers would not be resellable or tradable (they would be BtL). The UI would work like the System 1 containers, except there would be no rip cost. This system would enable a player to move any BoP item from one alt to another, for a fee in Cartel Coins. The fee would need to be at least comparable to the Collections unlock cost for Ultra Rare items, to avoid impacting Bioware's unlock revenue. This system would serve as a convenience system for players, and as a money-maker for Bioware. Note that I did not list any system that would enable containers to be sellable or tradable. That was deliberate. I share concerns of folks who feel that the existing credit sinks in the game need to be preserved. I do not believe that everything should be made legacy bound or even be enabled to be shared between characters. Some things, IMO, should have to be earned by the using the character intended to receive them. These things, IMO, include those earpieces, relics, implants, etc. obtained from OPS, especially the top tier ones. I do understand the desire for more flexibility when it comes to appearance, though. This is why I support the implementation of a means to convert empty orange shells, and only empty orange shells, from bound to character to legacy bound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuriDogshin Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 At the end of the day, my strongest argument against changing the binding system is simple and irrefutable:I would rather BW spent their resources on bug fixes and new content.YMMV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerba Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) Since you are asking for pro and con arguments, here's why I don't think this will work: Your solution only works for end-game armor. No player will pay 1 million credits to move a level 30 earpiece.In order for those containers to be in demand, they need to be cheaper than the cost of a BoE item from a crafter, so less than a million I'd say. And in that case, it would decrease the demand for crafted items, which would hurt the game more than allowing people to transfer bound items. System 3 would also hurt crafters and I can already see people calling something like that P2W.We don't even know the dev's stance on this. As of right now, we can only assume that the devs want to keep the current system the same - e.g. you can only move items with legacy armor, and earpieces/implants/relics are not supposed to be mailed. Until we get a developer comment on this, all of this is speculation. Edited July 24, 2014 by Jerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NajeeSensei Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) OP these are pretty great ideas that you have come up with. However, I think the current BoP system is fine as is and should not be changed but I wouldn't be upset if they used your ideas. Edited July 24, 2014 by NajeeSensei Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts