Thoughts on Player Stalls

[Darwoth]

making an occupy wall street change after so many have already invested so the lag behinds can sell crickets will do nothing but piss off everyone and cause people to largely not bother renting the stands anymore to begin with, i have invested 40k in stalls across the servers and pay thousands of silver a week in upkeep.


to have that **** on for some new idiotic system that is "fair" for those that snoozed and losed would see me severely downgrade or simply not using stalls at all and most folks i know that have them share a similar mindset, as such the only thing that will happen is instead of all the stalls being taken and removing x amount of silver per week from the economy is that most stalls will be empty and remove zero silver per week.

one of the primary themes in most games (including this one if you have read any of the developers posts about limited resources, the reasoning for permadeath and so on) is to strive to get more/better/rare/hard to get **** than the other guy.

[Procne]

making an occupy wall street change after so many have already invested so the lag behinds can sell crickets will do nothing but piss off everyone and cause people to largely not bother renting the stands anymore to begin with, i have invested 40k in stalls across the servers and pay thousands of silver a week in upkeep.

Well, you seem to say "your problem" to people who never had chance to buy a stall. I could say "your problem" to your spending of 40k silver on stalls across all servers.

to have that **** on for some new idiotic system that is "fair" for those that snoozed and losed would see me severely downgrade or simply not using stalls at all and most folks i know that have them share a similar mindset, as such the only thing that will happen is instead of all the stalls being taken and removing x amount of silver per week from the economy is that most stalls will be empty and remove zero silver per week.

It's not about being "fair". It's about the fact that implemented game feature is completely unavailable to people who started playing after it was added. And while it's unavailable to them, it's also unused, because stalls were bought only to prevent others from using them or their owners no longer play.

one of the primary themes in most games (including this one if you have read any of the developers posts about limited resources, the reasoning for permadeath and so on) is to strive to get more/better/rare/hard to get **** than the other guy.

Do that. Sell better stuff, more of it, and at cheaper prices.
Following the theme you mentioned, it would be great if game allowed for a single determined person to destroy everyone else. Which would completely kill the game. Apart from the extreme competition game should provide fun, even to those who are not winning in the competition of yours. Because if they have no fun they won't play and there won't be anyone to compete with.

If stalls offer fun features to players and trade is planned as a major part of the game (IF) then I really don't see a reason why the control over it should be reserved only to select people who were lucky enough to be online at specific time.

[MagicManICT]

It's not about being "fair". It's about the fact that implemented game feature is completely unavailable to people who started playing after it was added. And while it's unavailable to them, it's also unused, because stalls were bought only to prevent others from using them or their owners no longer play.

So I should complain that my alliance in EVE didn't get to carve out its own little niche of nullsec with no military effort because I started after that functionality was added? (Same can be said for any limited "feature X" in a competitive game envirnoment.)

The question isn't whether its fair or not to the new players, but whether it is even a fair game design. Does it meet the developers goals? Does it provide interesting game mechanics to the players? Can it be abused in such a way as to break game mechanics?

[Procne]

If we are talking about developer goals then I see this when comparing Salem to Haven & Hearth, and how Salem was changed over the beta period:
- purity zones were removed. So nomore race to get established in such zone, and purity can be increased by work.
- caps on humours were introduced, so that it's easier to catch up with veteran players
- There are no caves or other strategically important locations, which provide major boosts to people who manage to get hold of those early.
- Metal nodes are common and available to everyone

In the end it looks to me like devs want players to be able to achieve anything with time, no matter when they started.

And besides that, personally I think that any features added to the game, which are then reserved by players not to use them, but to prevent others from using them, are kinda broken.

[Sevenless]

It's not about being "fair". It's about the fact that implemented game feature is completely unavailable to people who started playing after it was added. And while it's unavailable to them, it's also unused, because stalls were bought only to prevent others from using them or their owners no longer play.

So I should complain that my alliance in EVE didn't get to carve out its own little niche of nullsec with no military effort because I started after that functionality was added? (Same can be said for any limited "feature X" in a competitive game envirnoment.)

The question isn't whether its fair or not to the new players, but whether it is even a fair game design. Does it meet the developers goals? Does it provide interesting game mechanics to the players? Can it be abused in such a way as to break game mechanics?

Imperfect line to draw between the two types. If an entire eve alliance went inactive, you could easily take the space from them. Furthermore, you can at least attempt to wrest control of the space from the owners.

Right now stalls are simply untouchable if the owner isn't playing or doesn't feel like giving anyone else a chance..

[EnderWiggin]

So I should complain that my alliance in EVE didn't get to carve out its own little niche of nullsec with no military effort because I started after that functionality was added? (Same can be said for any limited "feature X" in a competitive game envirnoment.)

Difference with stalls is that you can try to fight owners of those nullsec zones. While you can't do anything to get stall that is already owned by someone. You can't even know for sure who owns particular stall.

[Darwoth]

i am sure they will add several more batches of stalls, then everyone can have several more chances at not bothering to buy one and ***** about it later. stalls are real estate, just like that within games with traditional forms of player housing. eventually there are more players that want houses than there are house spots, and then people sell them for xyz amount.

there is nothing wrong with that system and it adds something of value, which the game sorely lacks of current.

i had a stall within 30 minutes of jamestown opening because i bought silver and got one, it was a full day before the next was claimed and an entire week before the original spots were filled out, roanoke was even longer. the extra batch of stalls had spots available for two full days before they were purchased. anyone could have bought a stall if they wanted one bad enough at any time, but they didn't. so now it is suddenly "not fair" and needs to be changed to ***** over everyone that did buy one.

[darnokpl]

i am sure they will add several more batches of stalls, then everyone can have several more chances at not bothering to buy one and ***** about it later. stalls are real estate, just like that within games with traditional forms of player housing. eventually there are more players that want houses than there are house spots, and then people sell them for xyz amount.

there is nothing wrong with that system and it adds something of value, which the game sorely lacks of current.
...

Stop crying about competition (joke )

Yea I know that if we get 100 stalls in town it will be bad for prices, but they should limit stalls by skill and then add more stalls if people want them.
If you get skill let's call it Merchant or Trader you can own 1 stall by this character.

It should enforce people to make groups and split characters development paths at beginning of new server.
For example: one person gets trader skills, second town bell, third murder would be more successive that just single person with 100$ invested in game.

Difference with stalls is that you can try to fight owners of those nullsec zones. While you can't do anything to get stall that is already owned by someone. You can't even know for sure who owns particular stall.

I want to buy stall without putting silver from town-bank into purses

Stall UI should be improved, not only by putting there owner name:

- There should be permission management for other players, so they can add items or change prices while owner is offline.
- Input boxes with white background sucks (sorry Devs, but it is truth! game UI is climate, but input boxes not), some more climate background please.
- I want to see prices after I pay tax too, for every item I sell.
- I want to take only part of silver from stall.
- Add tabs in stall (optional for additional rent), tabs can be set to buy or sell, so I can pick also what I want to buy from people while I am offline.

[Darwoth]

no actually it is just fine how it works, much like the real world i have an equal chance as the next guy at spending my money and buying something until supplies run out, if supplies run out tough **** for me i should of gotten the item while they were available.

[MagicManICT]

@Sevenless and EnderWiggin: yes, I realize it's not a very good analogy which is why I added the parenthetical blurb at the end. I suppose a better analogy would be in Entropia and shop or land ownership, but I didn't think as many would be as familiar with the game or mechanic.

The stalls do have a limited silver capacity. If the player owning said stall quits, the silver will eventually run out and the stall defaults back to unowned.