Legacy Banks

[Monumenta]

Those who are not mature enough to accept an answer they do not like can feel free to continue to bang their fists on the floor and hold their breath until they turn blue, if it makes them feel better, though.

 

See, it's funny how you don't see that is exactly what you are doing in this thread. Good luck with your self awareness in the future. People want to suggest this, it's immature for you to get up in arms about it.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

See, it's funny how you don't see that is exactly what you are doing in this thread. Good luck with your self awareness in the future. People want to suggest this, it's immature for you to get up in arms about it.

 

People HAVE suggested it and those suggestions HAVE BEEN answered.

 

Some are mature enough to accept that answer and others feel the need to whine, cry, throw themselves on the floor and continuously pester the devs like petulant children because they do not like the answer they were given.

 

Let me ask you again. How mature does this sound to you:

 

"Mommy, buy me this toy"

 

"No."

 

"But, I REALLY want this toy."

 

"MOMMY!!!!!!! I REALLY want this toy!!! Buy it for me!!!!"

 

"MOMMY!!!!! You NEVER listen to me!!!! I said, I REALLY want this toy!!!! Buy it for me!!!!!"

[Monumenta]

People HAVE suggested it and those suggestions HAVE BEEN answered.

 

Some are mature enough to accept that answer and others feel the need to whine, cry, throw themselves on the floor and continuously pester the devs like petulant children because they do not like the answer they were given.

 

Let me ask you again. How mature does this sound to you:

 

"Mommy, buy me this toy"

 

"No."

 

"But, I REALLY want this toy."

 

"MOMMY!!!!!!! I REALLY want this toy!!! Buy it for me!!!!"

 

"MOMMY!!!!! You NEVER listen to me!!!! I said, I REALLY want this toy!!!! Buy it for me!!!!!"

 

you are missing the point, here it is- ^that sounds more immature and like crying than the suggestions you claim do

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=537183&highlight=party+jawa

 

^ example of something that was asked for for at least 4 years before the devs compromised and gave players something

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=890140&highlight=party+jawa

 

^ heres a thread where you try to use the exact same kind of argument to stop it, I like the part at the end when you fail

 

at least get new lines

 

and again, it is not immature to suggest in the suggestion forum, your inane cut and paste attacks on suggesters is.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

you are missing the point, here it is- ^that sounds more immature and like crying than the suggestions you claim do

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=537183&highlight=party+jawa

 

^ example of something that was asked for for at least 4 years before the devs compromised and gave players something,

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=890140&highlight=party+jawa

 

^ heres a thread where you try to use the exact same kind of argument to stop it, I like the part at the end when you fail

 

at least get new lines

 

and again, it is not immature to suggest in the suggestion forum, your inane cut and paste attacks on suggesters is.

 

Some people fail to recognize that while Johnny making a suggestion ONCE, maybe twice, may not be immature, his CONTINUING to pester the devs after they have responded simply because Johnny does not like the answer he was given, IS.

 

Can the devs change their minds? Certainly they can, and I have said many times that I would welcome a legacy credit storage, PROVIDED it can be implemented in such a way as to maintain ANY AND ALL credit restrictions that apply to F2P and preferred players while NOT holding hostage any credits in legacy storage should a player drop from subscriber to preferred.

 

BTW, the party Jawa DOES remain an exclusive subscriber reward for those that actually MET the criteria to be eligible to receive it.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Ratajack

[Monumenta]

Some people fail to recognize that while Johnny making a suggestion ONCE, maybe twice, may not be immature, his CONTINUING to pester the devs after they have responded simply because Johnny does not like the answer he was given, IS.

 

Can the devs change their minds? Certainly they can, and I have said many times that I would welcome a legacy credit storage, PROVIDED it can be implemented in such a way as to maintain ANY AND ALL credit restrictions that apply to F2P and preferred players while NOT holding hostage any credits in legacy storage should a player drop from subscriber to preferred.

 

The examples I gave show you are wrong about the way the suggestion forum effects the devs opinions and work, black and white.

 

Also you fail to recognize that it is not the same posters over and over, you are the only one saying the same thing repeatedly, there is new support for this idea all the time (with or without the weird caveat you keep repeating about preferred players) get over it Johnny quit pestering people with the same thing over and over.

 

See what I did^? You're Johnny...

Edited December 19, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

The examples I gave show you are wrong about the way the suggestion forum effects the devs opinions and work, black and white.

 

Also you fail to recognize that it is not the same posters over and over, you are the only one saying the same thing repeatedly, there is new support for this idea all the time (with or without the weird caveat you keep repeating about preferred players) get over it Johnny quit pestering people with the same thing over and over.

 

See what I did^? You're Johnny...

 

Some posters are starting to sound like Pee Wee Herman, I see.

 

"I know you are, but what am I?"

 

I guess truth, logic and rationality really are the enemies of the entitled masses.

[Lillythiel]

Well, well... a good example of how to ruin a thread.

 

Just because someone said "no" the first time, it doesn't mean that person can't change it's mind later on. BioWare introduced thissemi-f2p ('demo') business model several years ago and many things have happened that could made them change their mind. F.e. a GC system that is limited to subscribers (BioWare also removed the weekly passes); Or the fact that a higher the class level might cause higher selling selling prices and higher repair costs (a GC crate item f.e. can be worth 50k+); Or that the fact that the inflation changed the value of credits.

 

Furthermore, the proposal can be combined with other ideas as well. F.e. should BioWare introduce GC components, they won't just introduce gear vendors, but probably all kinds of vendors. These components might therefore become a kind of 'currency' on it's own. Anything that is currently available for credits (or cartel coins) only, could also be obtainable via GC components (housings, decorations, personal character advantages, etc.). And players might ask for more convenient ways to store these components as well.

 

All in all, I don't see any good argument not to add an additional 'slot' in the legacy storage that allows players to store credits (like they could hoard items worth the same amount). And similar to crafting materials, the GTN and vendors might be able retrieve the requested amount of credits from there as well, if needed. And if really needed, they could limit this option to subsribers only.

[Ratajack]

Well, well... a good example of how to ruin a thread.

 

Just because someone said "no" the first time, it doesn't mean that person can't change it's mind later on. BioWare introduced thissemi-f2p ('demo') business model several years ago and many things have happened that could made them change their mind. F.e. a GC system that is limited to subscribers (BioWare also removed the weekly passes); Or the fact that a higher the class level might cause higher selling selling prices and higher repair costs (a GC crate item f.e. can be worth 50k+); Or that the fact that the inflation changed the value of credits.

 

Furthermore, the proposal can be combined with other ideas as well. F.e. should BioWare introduce GC components, they won't just introduce gear vendors, but probably all kinds of vendors. These components might therefore become a kind of 'currency' on it's own. Anything that is currently available for credits (or cartel coins) only, could also be obtainable via GC components (housings, decorations, personal character advantages, etc.). And players might ask for more convenient ways to store these components as well.

 

All in all, I don't see any good argument not to add an additional 'slot' in the legacy storage that allows players to store credits (like they could hoard items worth the same amount). And similar to crafting materials, the GTN and vendors might be able retrieve the requested amount of credits from there as well, if needed. And if really needed, they could limit this option to subsribers only.

 

Sure, they COULD change their minds, but they have given absolutely no indication that they are even considering changing their minds despite the continued pestering.

 

What would be your answer to the question I have posed numerous times?

 

How does BW implement a legacy credit storage in such a manner that it maintains ANY AND ALL credit restrictions while not holding hostage any credits in legacy storage should a player drop from subscriber to preferred?

 

Some people have chosen to simply ignore this issue, possibly in the hopes that ignoring it will make it go away. Whether or not BW chooses to ignore this issue is another matter.

[Monumenta]

Well, well... a good example of how to ruin a thread.

 

Just because someone said "no" the first time, it doesn't mean that person can't change it's mind later on. BioWare introduced thissemi-f2p ('demo') business model several years ago and many things have happened that could made them change their mind. F.e. a GC system that is limited to subscribers (BioWare also removed the weekly passes); Or the fact that a higher the class level might cause higher selling selling prices and higher repair costs (a GC crate item f.e. can be worth 50k+); Or that the fact that the inflation changed the value of credits.

 

Furthermore, the proposal can be combined with other ideas as well. F.e. should BioWare introduce GC components, they won't just introduce gear vendors, but probably all kinds of vendors. These components might therefore become a kind of 'currency' on it's own. Anything that is currently available for credits (or cartel coins) only, could also be obtainable via GC components (housings, decorations, personal character advantages, etc.). And players might ask for more convenient ways to store these components as well.

 

All in all, I don't see any good argument not to add an additional 'slot' in the legacy storage that allows players to store credits (like they could hoard items worth the same amount). And similar to crafting materials, the GTN and vendors might be able retrieve the requested amount of credits from there as well, if needed. And if really needed, they could limit this option to subsribers only.

 

F2P itself is a great example of something much bigger than this the devs said outright they would never do then reversed their decision on. Spoiler- The world did not end.

 

Ratattacks strawman question about going preferred is a red herring and he only repeats it because he means to stifle conversation not promote it, the answer is as you and others have stated repeatedly, subs only, if you go preferred it goes to escrow (before you ask- prob whichever character you log into first.) There is no rational reason these legacy bank credits should be treated any different than any other credits.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Monumenta

[MollyDresden]

Or we could continue to ask for things we find reasonable in the suggestion forum, regardless of you policing it for subjects you believe we should accept as having been decided.

 

Exactly. Because it's not like BW is always 100% true to every decision they make and never go back on it or amend it in any way. Most companies that rely on paying customers aren't.

[JEDIKATT]

Yhis topic shuold have been called credits banks for every one

[ShezarX]

I have to disagree with Ratajack's opinion and condemn his repeated spamming of the same.

"Pestering" the devs is the purpose of this suggestion box even if they say "no" at first. Obviously the spamming of ONEs opinion is wrong. But if enough different people request this feature, BW will find a way to make it happen. I don't care how they implement it with the whole prefered player base. It's a feature I would like to see, so I support this suggestion.

 

Just to illustrate: It's like casting a vote... they say no... we still cast the vote in favor of this feature. The more people vote for it, the more likely it is that the devs will implement it in some way or other.

 

So... I vote legacy credit storage and I wish you all a nice day!

[Seadd-Talan]

Do free to play people even have access to legacy cargo holds? They can't access ship cargo holds, so I can't imagine they would be able to use the Legacy one. Correct me if I am wrong. However, if they can't access Legacy Cargo Holds, then they won't be allowed access to a Legacy Bank, so I don't think the legacy bank will affect the credit cap for free to play. But I could be wrong about free to play not being able to access legacy cargo holds, so please let me know if I am wrong.

[Monumenta]

Do free to play people even have access to legacy cargo holds? They can't access ship cargo holds, so I can't imagine they would be able to use the Legacy one. Correct me if I am wrong. However, if they can't access Legacy Cargo Holds, then they won't be allowed access to a Legacy Bank, so I don't think the legacy bank will affect the credit cap for free to play. But I could be wrong about free to play not being able to access legacy cargo holds, so please let me know if I am wrong.

 

there's an unlock on the CM for f2p and preferred but there's no reason it couldn't be greyed out for them like the credit storage in a guild bank.

[Ratajack]

there's an unlock on the CM for f2p and preferred but there's no reason it couldn't be greyed out for them like the credit storage in a guild bank.

 

That still does not address the issue of a player dropping from subscriber to preferred and what would happen to any credits that player had in legacy storage.

 

Of course, it IS far easier to simply say "I don't care about them. I want this so BW owes it to me to let me have it and to heck with anyone else."

[Monumenta]

That still does not address the issue of a player dropping from subscriber to preferred and what would happen to any credits that player had in legacy storage.

 

Of course, it IS far easier to simply say "I don't care about them. I want this so BW owes it to me to let me have it and to heck with anyone else."

 

escrow, already answered that one back in comment #35

Edited December 31, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

escrow, already answered that one back in comment #35

 

And in your "escrow" suggestion you chose to completely ignore the restriction that F2P and preferred have with regards to not being able to transfer credits.

 

So, once again, I will ask how does BW implement a legacy credit storage in such a way as to maintain ANY AND ALL credit restrictions that apply to F2P and preferred players while NOT holding hostage any credits in legacy storage should a player drop from subscriber to preferred?

 

 

Of course, as I said, it IS far easier to simply say "I don't care about them. I want this, so BW owed it to me to let me have what I want and to heck with everyone else".

[Monumenta]

And in your "escrow" suggestion you chose to completely ignore the restriction that F2P and preferred have with regards to not being able to transfer credits.

 

So, once again, I will ask how does BW implement a legacy credit storage in such a way as to maintain ANY AND ALL credit restrictions that apply to F2P and preferred players while NOT holding hostage any credits in legacy storage should a player drop from subscriber to preferred?

 

 

Of course, as I said, it IS far easier to simply say "I don't care about them. I want this, so BW owed it to me to let me have what I want and to heck with everyone else".

 

You now make no sense, it would go to the escrow of the first character they logged into.

 

Your question is literally, completely, and emphatically answered and you repeat it as if you didn't read it, as if you only mean to stifle conversation about this.

Edited December 31, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

You now make no sense, it would go to the escrow of the first character they logged into.

 

Your question is literally, completely, and emphatically answered and you repeat it as if you didn't read it, as if you only mean to stifle conversation about this.

 

Johnny is a subscriber and has 10 characters, 9 of whom put 1 million credits into legacy storage, leaving 50,000 in each character's personal credits, the last character has seldom been played and only has 25,000 credits.

 

Johnny drops to preferred. 9 of his character's have 50,000 credits, 300,000 below the credit cap. The last character has 25,000 credits, 325,000 below the credit cap.

 

The first character he logs into after dropping to preferred is the newest, with only 25,000 credits. Under your proposal, the entire balance in legacy credit storage would be given to the player who NEVER put a single credit into legacy credit storage, effectively transferring all those credits to that character, with the side effect of leaving all his other characters with a balance of 50,000 credits, despite the fact that they all are 300,000 UNDER the credit cap.

 

Your "proposal" effectively bypassed the restriction that F2P and preferred have against transferring credits, while also holding those credits hostage (keeping them away) from his other characters who still have 300,000 credits before they hit the credit cap.

 

 

You also attack me as if I am the sole reason that legacy credit storage has not been implemented, despite the fact that I have stated numerous times that I would like to see a legacy credit storage. The biggest difference between us in regards to our desires to see legacy credit storage is that I acknowledge that it would open up a huge can of worms and is far more difficult to implement properly than a simple "I want this, so let me have it and to heck with anyone else" would be.

 

Along time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, BW made the decision not to implement legacy credit storage. Only they know the reasons, but I am guessing it is due, at least in part, to the restrctions that apply to F2P and preferred.

[Monumenta]

You also attack me as if I am the sole reason that legacy credit storage has not been implemented

 

Wrong, I 'attack' your methods here in the forums, nothing more.

 

I see nothing wrong with the scenario you outlined above and dismiss your 'can of worms' as easily worked out by the devs.

[Ratajack]

Wrong, I 'attack' your methods here in the forums, nothing more.

 

I see nothing wrong with the scenario you outlined above and dismiss your 'can of worms' as easily worked out by the devs.

 

If it so easily worked out, then I would encourage you to "work it out" and forward that solution to the devs. You could even PM the solution to Eric Musco.

[Monumenta]

If it so easily worked out, then I would encourage you to "work it out" and forward that solution to the devs. You could even PM the solution to Eric Musco.

 

you seem to have missed the purpose of this forum somewhere

 

good luck

[Ratajack]

you seem to have missed the purpose of this forum somewhere

 

good luck

 

I am well aware of the purpose of this forum.

 

It is NOT for one sided "devs, give us this" "suggestions or demands, with no dissenting opinions.

 

It is NOT for Johnny to simply ignore ( or simply declare "Easily solved by the devs") the potential problems (or cans of worms that may be opened) with the implementation of any "suggestions" when Johnny has no idea as to how difficult it may actually be to solve those potential problems or if they can even be solved.

 

I notice that you chose not to try to "work it out" and provide a solution to the devs, despite your claims that it would be so easy and simple to do so. I'll take that as an admission that you acknowledge the difficulty in solving this particular can of worms. Feel free to prove me wrong by providing that "simple and easily worked out" solution to the devs, though.

[Monumenta]

I am well aware of the purpose of this forum.

 

It is NOT for one sided "devs, give us this" "suggestions or demands, with no dissenting opinions.

 

It is NOT for Johnny to simply ignore ( or simply declare "Easily solved by the devs") the potential problems (or cans of worms that may be opened) with the implementation of any "suggestions" when Johnny has no idea as to how difficult it may actually be to solve those potential problems or if they can even be solved.

 

I notice that you chose not to try to "work it out" and provide a solution to the devs, despite your claims that it would be so easy and simple to do so. I'll take that as an admission that you acknowledge the difficulty in solving this particular can of worms. Feel free to prove me wrong by providing that "simple and easily worked out" solution to the devs, though.

 

My suggestion doesn't have to be good enough for you, it's valid weather you continue your strawman or not.

Edited January 1, 2017 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

My suggestion doesn't have to be good enough for you, it's valid weather you continue your strawman or not.

 

I never said it had to be "good enough for me". I said it does not address the huge can of worms that legacy credit storage would open.

 

Ultimately, the question is "is your 'suggestion' good enough for BW?"

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that since they have NOT changed their minds about legacy credit storage that it Is NOT good enough for them.