Eliminate Donation Restrictions

ALsoccer19
36 posts Member
edited August 5
Please consider eliminating the restriction on what gear we can donate to our guild mates. My guild’s GP is so high that the gear we need isn’t available to be donated. If I have higher-end gear that I can spare I would like to be able to give it to one of my guild mates who does.

Replies

  • TVF
    25062 posts Member
    Opens the door to abuse.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    Opens the door to abuse.

    Quite true
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    Opens the door to abuse.

    What abuse exactly?
  • TVF
    25062 posts Member
    Nebulous wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Opens the door to abuse.

    What abuse exactly?

    Alt accounts dumping gear to the main.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    Hmm, we currently have gear donations where this could or could not already happen.

    A player would need to get alts to get the gear he or she needs. So the alt still has to earn the gear Which is realistic. Then if not in the same guild, guild swap and face a 24hr donation ban. Or be in the same guild as his/her Alts and transfer 2-5 gears per day. But, Being in a guild with alts could be harmful to Tb/tw/raid rewards.

    I’m curious why an alt, which is acceptable, earning gear to pass off is seen as abuse.
  • Well just as an example ...
    some people spend lots of money on this game. Sometimes one-time purchase gear packs become available. If there were no restrictions on gear transfers, it is conceivable that some people might use alternate accounts to buy several of these packs and then funnel all that gear to their primary account.
    Consider the extreme idea of some lunatic opening 50 brand new accounts and puts them all in the same guild. He buys the hyperdrive pack for all of them and then funnels all the gear to one account for a superboost vs his competitors.
    That might qualify as abusing the system.
  • Kyno
    25104 posts Moderator
    Well just as an example ...
    some people spend lots of money on this game. Sometimes one-time purchase gear packs become available. If there were no restrictions on gear transfers, it is conceivable that some people might use alternate accounts to buy several of these packs and then funnel all that gear to their primary account.
    Consider the extreme idea of some lunatic opening 50 brand new accounts and puts them all in the same guild. He buys the hyperdrive pack for all of them and then funnels all the gear to one account for a superboost vs his competitors.
    That might qualify as abusing the system.

    You wouldnt need to buy anything.

    Just imagine a month of farming only dedicated to one of each of the top 5/10(or up to 49) pieces you need (depending on how many alts someone can handle), then a timely guild change and 24 hours later it's all transferred to your account..... you would never have stun gun problem again.

    This doesn't seem to be what the OP is asking for. They seem to only want the type restriction removed, not the quantity.

    That seems reasonable.
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    edited August 6
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.
  • Kyno
    25104 posts Moderator
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking

    Since I didn't comment before this, not sure why i would have read it....
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking

    Since I didn't comment before this, not sure why i would have read it....

    I didn’t Quote you. I just made a general statement cuz it did seem to me folks assumed the Op meant remove the limits (where multiple requests a day or quantity per request).
  • Kyno
    25104 posts Moderator
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking

    Since I didn't comment before this, not sure why i would have read it....

    I didn’t Quote you. I just made a general statement cuz it did seem to me folks assumed the Op meant remove the limits (where multiple requests a day or quantity per request).

    gotcha.
  • Kyno
    25104 posts Moderator
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.

    as i said, there is no need to purchase, you could just farm them and increase your farm 49x.
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.

    as i said, there is no need to purchase, you could just farm them and increase your farm 49x.

    Let’s look at this a bit.

    When Do we consider abuse to happen? Is there any requirement? If this person plays 50 accounts to acquire gear to redistribute the gear to a main, should it still be considered abuse? There would be a lot of sustained effort to login and play this many accounts indefinitely. Is abuse only for those who try to use minimal or unsustainable effort to get a benefit or does effort not matter even if it’s an incredible amount of work?

    Let’s look at two scenarios.

    The alt overlord plays in his/her own guild surrounded by 49 alts. Because we feel this player doesn’t pay, it’s okay to assume these 49 alts are woefully underbuilt. Does the impact of lessor rewards from tw/Tb/raid ticket grinding alleviate the idea of abuse? Is it still abuse for a player to lose out on those reward gears to accumulate stun guns? Does it still make sense to claim this will be an authentic excuse to block changes to donations? Is this gear accumulation/distribution inefficient For his/her main and if so, Could we convince players this is inefficient compared to just asking the other guild members to donate.

    Let’s say the player is actually in a top tier guild which is capable of the highest end rewards of tw/Tb/raids. How often can this player Actually guild swap and face 2 x 24hr Donation bans and not lock himself/herself out of tw/Tb? 3 times a month or so? Would this still be considered abuse to actually play 49 other accounts and swap back and forth for 3 stun guns a month?

    I am genuinely interested in what constitutes abuse and does it have varying degrees? Can abuse be offset in anyway? Do we really think this would be abuse or do we just think it is cuz someone said it would be? Do we imagine worst case scenarios and then think everyone will do it?
  • Kyno
    25104 posts Moderator
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.

    as i said, there is no need to purchase, you could just farm them and increase your farm 49x.

    Let’s look at this a bit.

    When Do we consider abuse to happen? Is there any requirement? If this person plays 50 accounts to acquire gear to redistribute the gear to a main, should it still be considered abuse? There would be a lot of sustained effort to login and play this many accounts indefinitely. Is abuse only for those who try to use minimal or unsustainable effort to get a benefit or does effort not matter even if it’s an incredible amount of work?

    Let’s look at two scenarios.

    The alt overlord plays in his/her own guild surrounded by 49 alts. Because we feel this player doesn’t pay, it’s okay to assume these 49 alts are woefully underbuilt. Does the impact of lessor rewards from tw/Tb/raid ticket grinding alleviate the idea of abuse? Is it still abuse for a player to lose out on those reward gears to accumulate stun guns? Does it still make sense to claim this will be an authentic excuse to block changes to donations? Is this gear accumulation/distribution inefficient For his/her main and if so, Could we convince players this is inefficient compared to just asking the other guild members to donate.

    Let’s say the player is actually in a top tier guild which is capable of the highest end rewards of tw/Tb/raids. How often can this player Actually guild swap and face 2 x 24hr Donation bans and not lock himself/herself out of tw/Tb? 3 times a month or so? Would this still be considered abuse to actually play 49 other accounts and swap back and forth for 3 stun guns a month?

    I am genuinely interested in what constitutes abuse and does it have varying degrees? Can abuse be offset in anyway? Do we really think this would be abuse or do we just think it is cuz someone said it would be? Do we imagine worst case scenarios and then think everyone will do it?

    abuse would revolve around the in game economy and what is established by the dev team. so the current setup has limitation on what can be donated and how much of each. this was done for a reason, which is all around the gating of progress to give the game a pace. things that allow a player to openly violate this pace through some means (even if it involves actually playing, but on multiple accounts) could be considered abuse.

    if the players actions dont violate the limits set by the dev team then it doesn't seem to be abuse, which is why they put those limitations in place. if a player wanted to run through all the hoops to make that work and they see a benefit, great. the limitations on all the donations and switching are in place to ensure that doing so will not allow a player to out pace others to any extent that is "not ok"

    the goal of the business model used in this game is, if you want to have a faster pace you can get it through $$. every other action is controlled to fall within the "norm", and even $$ has its own "norm" or pace based on all the in game economics and balance.
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.

    as i said, there is no need to purchase, you could just farm them and increase your farm 49x.

    Let’s look at this a bit.

    When Do we consider abuse to happen? Is there any requirement? If this person plays 50 accounts to acquire gear to redistribute the gear to a main, should it still be considered abuse? There would be a lot of sustained effort to login and play this many accounts indefinitely. Is abuse only for those who try to use minimal or unsustainable effort to get a benefit or does effort not matter even if it’s an incredible amount of work?

    Let’s look at two scenarios.

    The alt overlord plays in his/her own guild surrounded by 49 alts. Because we feel this player doesn’t pay, it’s okay to assume these 49 alts are woefully underbuilt. Does the impact of lessor rewards from tw/Tb/raid ticket grinding alleviate the idea of abuse? Is it still abuse for a player to lose out on those reward gears to accumulate stun guns? Does it still make sense to claim this will be an authentic excuse to block changes to donations? Is this gear accumulation/distribution inefficient For his/her main and if so, Could we convince players this is inefficient compared to just asking the other guild members to donate.

    Let’s say the player is actually in a top tier guild which is capable of the highest end rewards of tw/Tb/raids. How often can this player Actually guild swap and face 2 x 24hr Donation bans and not lock himself/herself out of tw/Tb? 3 times a month or so? Would this still be considered abuse to actually play 49 other accounts and swap back and forth for 3 stun guns a month?

    I am genuinely interested in what constitutes abuse and does it have varying degrees? Can abuse be offset in anyway? Do we really think this would be abuse or do we just think it is cuz someone said it would be? Do we imagine worst case scenarios and then think everyone will do it?

    abuse would revolve around the in game economy and what is established by the dev team. so the current setup has limitation on what can be donated and how much of each. this was done for a reason, which is all around the gating of progress to give the game a pace. things that allow a player to openly violate this pace through some means (even if it involves actually playing, but on multiple accounts) could be considered abuse.

    if the players actions dont violate the limits set by the dev team then it doesn't seem to be abuse, which is why they put those limitations in place. if a player wanted to run through all the hoops to make that work and they see a benefit, great. the limitations on all the donations and switching are in place to ensure that doing so will not allow a player to out pace others to any extent that is "not ok"

    the goal of the business model used in this game is, if you want to have a faster pace you can get it through $$. every other action is controlled to fall within the "norm", and even $$ has its own "norm" or pace based on all the in game economics and balance.

    Yes. I agree for the why we have what we have. But I’m saying, _if_ they removed the economy gate, how would it be abuse? That ain’t the same argument as controlling the Economy.
  • Kyno
    25104 posts Moderator
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.

    as i said, there is no need to purchase, you could just farm them and increase your farm 49x.

    Let’s look at this a bit.

    When Do we consider abuse to happen? Is there any requirement? If this person plays 50 accounts to acquire gear to redistribute the gear to a main, should it still be considered abuse? There would be a lot of sustained effort to login and play this many accounts indefinitely. Is abuse only for those who try to use minimal or unsustainable effort to get a benefit or does effort not matter even if it’s an incredible amount of work?

    Let’s look at two scenarios.

    The alt overlord plays in his/her own guild surrounded by 49 alts. Because we feel this player doesn’t pay, it’s okay to assume these 49 alts are woefully underbuilt. Does the impact of lessor rewards from tw/Tb/raid ticket grinding alleviate the idea of abuse? Is it still abuse for a player to lose out on those reward gears to accumulate stun guns? Does it still make sense to claim this will be an authentic excuse to block changes to donations? Is this gear accumulation/distribution inefficient For his/her main and if so, Could we convince players this is inefficient compared to just asking the other guild members to donate.

    Let’s say the player is actually in a top tier guild which is capable of the highest end rewards of tw/Tb/raids. How often can this player Actually guild swap and face 2 x 24hr Donation bans and not lock himself/herself out of tw/Tb? 3 times a month or so? Would this still be considered abuse to actually play 49 other accounts and swap back and forth for 3 stun guns a month?

    I am genuinely interested in what constitutes abuse and does it have varying degrees? Can abuse be offset in anyway? Do we really think this would be abuse or do we just think it is cuz someone said it would be? Do we imagine worst case scenarios and then think everyone will do it?

    abuse would revolve around the in game economy and what is established by the dev team. so the current setup has limitation on what can be donated and how much of each. this was done for a reason, which is all around the gating of progress to give the game a pace. things that allow a player to openly violate this pace through some means (even if it involves actually playing, but on multiple accounts) could be considered abuse.

    if the players actions dont violate the limits set by the dev team then it doesn't seem to be abuse, which is why they put those limitations in place. if a player wanted to run through all the hoops to make that work and they see a benefit, great. the limitations on all the donations and switching are in place to ensure that doing so will not allow a player to out pace others to any extent that is "not ok"

    the goal of the business model used in this game is, if you want to have a faster pace you can get it through $$. every other action is controlled to fall within the "norm", and even $$ has its own "norm" or pace based on all the in game economics and balance.

    Yes. I agree for the why we have what we have. But I’m saying, _if_ they removed the economy gate, how would it be abuse? That ain’t the same argument as controlling the Economy.

    if they remove it, then they are obviously ok with it and therefore its not abuse. the reason they wont remove it is because there is an economy gated pace to the game they are trying to maintain. which is why the initial response to questions of this nature (especially when misinterpreted) is that it just opens the door for abuse.
  • Nebulous
    1464 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nebulous wrote: »
    Thanks for finally reading what the op was asking.

    In the case of the 49 hyperdrive bundles, so what if the amount limit was removed in this case, which wasn’t the topic anyway. If the player spent 4900 dollars to transfer 49 stun guns a day it would take ~490 days to transfers the same amount of stun guns (about 10 bucks a stun gun) he could have just bought with the 4900 dollars. Seems a really weird way to do it.

    as i said, there is no need to purchase, you could just farm them and increase your farm 49x.

    Let’s look at this a bit.

    When Do we consider abuse to happen? Is there any requirement? If this person plays 50 accounts to acquire gear to redistribute the gear to a main, should it still be considered abuse? There would be a lot of sustained effort to login and play this many accounts indefinitely. Is abuse only for those who try to use minimal or unsustainable effort to get a benefit or does effort not matter even if it’s an incredible amount of work?

    Let’s look at two scenarios.

    The alt overlord plays in his/her own guild surrounded by 49 alts. Because we feel this player doesn’t pay, it’s okay to assume these 49 alts are woefully underbuilt. Does the impact of lessor rewards from tw/Tb/raid ticket grinding alleviate the idea of abuse? Is it still abuse for a player to lose out on those reward gears to accumulate stun guns? Does it still make sense to claim this will be an authentic excuse to block changes to donations? Is this gear accumulation/distribution inefficient For his/her main and if so, Could we convince players this is inefficient compared to just asking the other guild members to donate.

    Let’s say the player is actually in a top tier guild which is capable of the highest end rewards of tw/Tb/raids. How often can this player Actually guild swap and face 2 x 24hr Donation bans and not lock himself/herself out of tw/Tb? 3 times a month or so? Would this still be considered abuse to actually play 49 other accounts and swap back and forth for 3 stun guns a month?

    I am genuinely interested in what constitutes abuse and does it have varying degrees? Can abuse be offset in anyway? Do we really think this would be abuse or do we just think it is cuz someone said it would be? Do we imagine worst case scenarios and then think everyone will do it?

    abuse would revolve around the in game economy and what is established by the dev team. so the current setup has limitation on what can be donated and how much of each. this was done for a reason, which is all around the gating of progress to give the game a pace. things that allow a player to openly violate this pace through some means (even if it involves actually playing, but on multiple accounts) could be considered abuse.

    if the players actions dont violate the limits set by the dev team then it doesn't seem to be abuse, which is why they put those limitations in place. if a player wanted to run through all the hoops to make that work and they see a benefit, great. the limitations on all the donations and switching are in place to ensure that doing so will not allow a player to out pace others to any extent that is "not ok"

    the goal of the business model used in this game is, if you want to have a faster pace you can get it through $$. every other action is controlled to fall within the "norm", and even $$ has its own "norm" or pace based on all the in game economics and balance.

    Yes. I agree for the why we have what we have. But I’m saying, _if_ they removed the economy gate, how would it be abuse? That ain’t the same argument as controlling the Economy.

    if they remove it, then they are obviously ok with it and therefore its not abuse. the reason they wont remove it is because there is an economy gated pace to the game they are trying to maintain. which is why the initial response to questions of this nature (especially when misinterpreted) is that it just opens the door for abuse.


    Well, is this a contradictory post? The first two clauses are clear. Then it seems to circle back around. Cuz if we say it’s not abuse by virtue of CG expanding the limit, Then we shouldn’t just say it's abuse. If it were first communicated that it’s economic related, then maybe that makes more sense, but then we may not have had a constructive talk.

    My interpretation of what happened in This thread was a misunderstanding of what the OP actually asked for compounded with a blanket and incorrect application of the term abuse.
  • To get back to the original point, yes, I support expanding it so that we can receive 5 of all gear available up to G11. Some of the G12 gear should be capped at 2 like some raid gear currently is.
  • I'm good with the op's request. It is annoying in late game when you need mostly gear you cannot request or stun guns which everyone needs.

    Expanding the types of gear wouldn't break the game. A main could still only get 5 of the type of gear a day. Even if you included finishers at 5 per day, it would take 10 days just to distribute one. And most individuals are limited to 1 each on gear that you can receive 5 of. So to distribute 5 a day to yourself, you'd have to have 5 alts farming or buying the gear. That is pretty time consuming and not game breaking.

    Even if they raised it to 10 (which would be a good thing and far more realistic than unlimited), it would be difficult to accumulate too many. If they raised it to 10 and kept the one per person donation limit, it would take 10 alt accounts to get a 50 salvage piece in 5 days.

    Having an alt account or two in a guild to fill a spot and generate some raid tickets in an otherwise empty spot is manageable. But putting 10 in a guild just to benefit one account, would probably reduce the rewards coming in so it wouldn't be worth it in most cases.

    So just because removing all limits would allow a dump of an alt accounts stored up gear all at once, doesn't mean that the limits couldn't be expanded within the confines of the game without breaking it.

    Though a better way to fix the stun gun crunch is to add another tier to challenges with gear we actually need. They could even make it take gear 12 to beat or even relics so that it isn't obtainable right away.

    I'm ok with the first few teams being a grind even at low gear. But once you have several teams at g11 or g13, it shouldn't be a chore to get new characters over the g9 stun gun hump.

    And the new tier of challenges leaves no room for abuse. You beat the harder tier you get more gear. They still limit how much. But the mk 5 stun guns should drop as much as carbontis currently do.
  • OP here...I’m happy to see that my post created some lively discussion. Although it veered off topic a bit...

    Kyno hit the nail on the head...I only want the type of gear restriction removed...not the quantity.

    However, if we are discussing quantity Bulldog’s idea is cool with me. Allow a max of 5 G11 and under and a max of 2 G12.


Sign In or Register to comment.