Are there any plans for a true Legacy Wallet for all currencies in 3.0 or beyond?

[Heezdedjim]

Especially with the way people are being encouraged more than ever to have tons of alts, and the talk about even raising the 22-character per server cap, a true Legacy Wallet for all currencies and commendations would be an obvious and very welcome follow on to the Legacy Cargo Hold.

[goddgundam]

I agree about this been saying it for a while now make all currency legacy wide

[Andrellma]

Pretty sure the answer to this is no. Every time they address the issue, it's no.

 

Then again, Guild Ships, appearance changing, and player housing were no's for a long time, as well.

[NecroMayre]

Legacy wide credits don't see why it isn't a thing already, however commendations and other things won't work otherwise everyone just plays on one toon and gears all their alts without playing them much.

[Ratajack]

Especially with the way people are being encouraged more than ever to have tons of alts, and the talk about even raising the 22-character per server cap, a true Legacy Wallet for all currencies and commendations would be an obvious and very welcome follow on to the Legacy Cargo Hold.

 

We can't forget the restrictions against transferring credits between characters for F2P and preferred. Only the devs know difficult it would be to code a legacy wallet that maintains those restrictions while not holding hostage any credits that a subscriber has in the legacy wallet if that subscriber drops to preferred.

 

After all, subscribers can still transfer credits between characters as it stands. F2P and preferred cannot transfer credits.

 

As to the comms, etc., I would hope that those remain character bound. It is already possible to purchase mods with those comms on character A and send them to character B for a cost. I see no reason to allow that credit sink to be bypassed.

[EllieAnne]

We can't forget the restrictions against transferring credits between characters for F2P and preferred. Only the devs know difficult it would be to code a legacy wallet that maintains those restrictions while not holding hostage any credits that a subscriber has in the legacy wallet if that subscriber drops to preferred.

 

After all, subscribers can still transfer credits between characters as it stands. F2P and preferred cannot transfer credits.

 

And again the WABs come out and want to ruin a great idea for subs (you know, the people that pay for the game every month) because it would negatively impact preferred or F2Pers.

 

Guess what, if you are preferred there are restrictions. GET OVER IT!! Either pay for a subscription or if you are dropping to preferred by choice, plan ahead. As long as you don't actually lose your credits when dropping to preferred then what's the problem.

 

Subs get legacy bank, F2P and preferred don't. End of discussion. Devs make it so.

[Foambreaker]

Legacy wide credits don't see why it isn't a thing already, however commendations and other things won't work otherwise everyone just plays on one toon and gears all their alts without playing them much.

 

Agreed especially for PvP.

[Ratajack]

And again the WABs come out and want to ruin a great idea for subs (you know, the people that pay for the game every month) because it would negatively impact preferred or F2Pers.

 

Guess what, if you are preferred there are restrictions. GET OVER IT!! Either pay for a subscription or if you are dropping to preferred by choice, plan ahead. As long as you don't actually lose your credits when dropping to preferred then what's the problem.

 

Subs get legacy bank, F2P and preferred don't. End of discussion. Devs make it so.

 

The devs have repeatedly said "NO". End of discussion.

 

Except that it's not the end of discussion, is it? It seems that some players simply cannot accept it when the devs say "NO" and therefore will continue to demand that they get their way. "Devs make it so." sound familiar?

 

I do not know the reason why the devs have said "NO". I only know that the devs have said "NO" and unlike some others, I can accept that.

 

There have been many changes I would like to see and many changes I wish had not been made, but I accept the devs' decisions. I will continue to voice my opinion regarding potential or demanded changes, but I accept the devs decisions, even if those decisions are counter to what I would like to see.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Ratajack

[EllieAnne]

If they have said no and that it will not be considered, we would like to know why. Probably too busy reskinning the same crap to sell for CC when 3.0 comes out.

 

 

Do you have a link for where they dismissed the idea?

[Ratajack]

If they have said no and that it will not be considered, we would like to know why. Probably too busy reskinning the same crap to sell for CC when 3.0 comes out.

 

 

Do you have a link for where they dismissed the idea?

 

Google is your friend.

[Cernow]

Google is your friend.

 

Lame copout reply. You can't claim to have a definitive answer and then fail to back it up with a proper reference when asked. Google does not uncover the answer, despite your claim that the idea has been rejected "repeatedly".

[BuriDogshin]

Odds are the effort needed to do this -- altering the structure of basic records in the game database and the bottom-level code that handles credit transactions -- is substantial and creates a pretty high risk of game-breaking bugs and exploits (like the gold-duping bugs some other games suffered), especially given the complexities of credit limits on F2P and Preferred.

 

And what's the benefit gained from taking such a risk? You don't have to manage the credits on your toons? Don't have to occasionally mail credits from one to the other? Those are trifling hassles, compared to, say, trying to find which toon has that last bit of Beryllius you need to do a crafting, or that Reflex barrel you were saving for when you leveled an Aim based toon -- problems Legacy Storage helps address, BTW.

 

I'd rather the devs spent their time on changes that brought substantial value to the game instead of implementing a Legacy credit store. Even just preventing cloaks from dragging on the ground when using speeders would be more valuable, in my eyes.

 

And as to Legacy-shared comms: I'd actively oppose that, if it had a chance of happening. But it doesn't.

[Ratajack]

Lame copout reply. You can't claim to have a definitive answer and then fail to back it up with a proper reference when asked. Google does not uncover the answer, despite your claim that the idea has been rejected "repeatedly".

 

I'm not going to do the research for that poster, or for you.

 

Even a few posts up, a poster makes the statement that every time the devs have been asked about legacy credit storage, the answer has been "NO". Check out the other threads on this topic.

 

I'm not objecting to legacy credit storage. In fact, I would welcome it, if it could be done is a manner that maintains the restrictions against transferring credits between characters for F2P and preferred and also does not hold hostage any credits if a subscriber drops to preferred.

[Drockter]

I believe that there may eventually be a credit wallet. I don't believe F2P nor Preferred will get it however, due to the restrictions... and I can kind of see the point there.

 

As for comms, I don't think it will happen. But who knows... playing content on Main A to earn comms, results in the same comm award as playing the same content on Alt B (so they don't lose any "playability". Nor have they locked out the whole moving Comm gear (mods) over to alts via Legacy items... so I can't say it won't happen. Although the legacy movement is a good way to remove some credits from the economy I suppose. 8 pieces (22 individual mods) @ ~8k (depending on level) per mod = around 200K to move, and another 200K to load into gear on the alt (unless you use the legacy gear itself).

 

Never say never...

[Cernow]

I'm not going to do the research for that poster, or for you.

 

Even a few posts up, a poster makes the statement that every time the devs have been asked about legacy credit storage, the answer has been "NO". Check out the other threads on this topic.

 

I have.

 

If you search for "legacy wallet" or "account wallet" (or variations) on the forums here you will find a number of threads. But none of them contain any official yellow posts or links to official responses. Just plenty of posters claiming they speak for the devs, as usual.

[Ratajack]

I have.

 

If you search for "legacy wallet" or "account wallet" (or variations) on the forums here you will find a number of threads. But none of them contain any official yellow posts or links to official responses. Just plenty of posters claiming they speak for the devs, as usual.

 

The statements may have been made in a podcast which would not necessarily translate into a yellow post. I cannot say for certain. I only know that we have legacy storage and no legacy credit storage and everything i have heard indicates that the devs have said "NO" to legacy credits. These three factors all seem consistent to me.

 

If you are going to insist that I, and all those other posters are wrong, then feel free to continue to demand that the devs cater to you and your desires. Let me know how that works out for you.

[Cernow]

The statements may have been made in a podcast which would not necessarily translate into a yellow post. I cannot say for certain. I only know that we have legacy storage and no legacy credit storage and everything i have heard indicates that the devs have said "NO" to legacy credits. These three factors all seem consistent to me.

 

If you are going to insist that I, and all those other posters are wrong, then feel free to continue to demand that the devs cater to you and your desires. Let me know how that works out for you.

 

I haven't demanded anything. Nor I believe has the OP. Asking "are there any plans" doesn't equate to a demand. But yes, I'll feel free to continue suggesting (so much better than demanding, I'm sure you'll agree) things I feel would benefit the game if they were introduced.

 

I also haven't said you're wrong, simply asked you to link your source of information. Because saying "The devs have repeatedly said "NO". End of discussion." would seem to indicate you have access to some pretty definitive official information on the subject. Or are you just another of the many self-appointed moderators that populate these forums?

Edited October 28, 2014 by Cernow

[DimmuJanKaarl]

I never, ever buy the argument that "it's too hard to do and would take up too many dev resources." If that were the case they wouldn't have done half the stuff the have done to this point. They have all the tools and human resources in place to do virtually anything we can dream up. The real reason most QoL improvements don't make it into the game is because the higher-ups still cling to the outdated dogma that says MMO developers have to do anything and everything they can to slow up player progression in terms of in-game currency and higher-powered gear accrual simply because they want to increase the amount of time players spend in the game. Sometimes -- more often than not, it seems -- "anything" means doing nothing at all. They shelve the idea or throw it out completely. In the case of currency accrual, the devs know that the added inconvenience of accruing credits on a per-character basis will largely cause players to fail to acknowledge how much they have in total and the sheer inconvenience of mailing credits around will cause them to spend more time on a single character trying to accrue credits playing various content. The idea is that rather than farm a single credit source (say the highest credit-to-time ratio weekly, e.g.) over and over across characters, players tend to opt for travelling around the galaxy and traversing planets and clearing content sequentially while various activities are still on lockout.

 

Bottom line, the devs put a lot of time into figuring out what to leave out and what to nerf in order to minimize progression.

Edited October 28, 2014 by DimmuJanKaarl

[EllieAnne]

Think is, a legacy wallet would make for an excellent credit sink. Think about how many high-ticket items you would buy if convenient rather than moving cash around. There's a reason cheap impulse items are placed near the counter in stores.

[Ratajack]

Think is, a legacy wallet would make for an excellent credit sink. Think about how many high-ticket items you would buy if convenient rather than moving cash around. There's a reason cheap impulse items are placed near the counter in stores.

 

The GTN is hardly a credit sink. It is a credit moving system, NOT a credit sink.

[EllieAnne]

The GTN is hardly a credit sink. It is a credit moving system, NOT a credit sink.

Really because I thought GTN charged a commission.

[BuriDogshin]

Really because I thought GTN charged a commission.

It does, 6% or so.

[errant_knight]

And again the WABs come out and want to ruin a great idea for subs (you know, the people that pay for the game every month) because it would negatively impact preferred or F2Pers.

 

Guess what, if you are preferred there are restrictions. GET OVER IT!! Either pay for a subscription or if you are dropping to preferred by choice, plan ahead. As long as you don't actually lose your credits when dropping to preferred then what's the problem.

 

Subs get legacy bank, F2P and preferred don't. End of discussion. Devs make it so.

 

You reallize that's completely unrealistic, right? F2P may not be ideal, but it's making good coin for the game. They aren't going to undermine it because a few subscribers don't like mailing cash between characters. As F2P exists, it has incentive to subscribe, but is still playable with cash spent to add playability adding a constant financial stream. Any message sent that the F2P people aren't wanted in new content (In this case, crafting for conquest, in which a legacy bank is essential) isn't going to fly.

[LordArtemis]

They could use the current guild bank as a template if they ever changed their minds. Naturally they have done so many times in the past.

 

It all depends on how much players desire a feature, and if it is possible...one could speculate it is possible based on the idea that it exists with the guild bank.

 

That, of course, does not mean that automatically translates into something that is easy to do. There could be any number of unforeseen technical problems that may stand in the way of anything like this being added in the future.

 

I accept it is not an option at this time. I hold out hope it may become an option in the future...or at the very least, some kind of drop down list for my legacy characters in the mail recipient box.

[Thoronmir]

I accept it is not an option at this time. I hold out hope it may become an option in the future...or at the very least, some kind of drop down list for my legacy characters in the mail recipient box.

Amen. Adding my alts to each other's Friend List does not solve my problems with cross-faction mailing. The system knows who my Legacy characters are (it will warn me if I try to send something to anyone who is not a Legacy character, a Guildmate, or a Friend). So why can't the system share that info with the mailbox?