Don't get me wrong, Cardinal, I totally support this from a "it's still a hell of a lot better than the current proposition" perspective. Honestly, I think this is what they should have *started* at instead of going Full Monty on us. I really think we'd *all* be less testy and having much more productive discussion on the subject if a significant segment of the playerbase didn't feel like their backs were against a wall on this subject.
That being said, anything they can do to make clans more than a private chat channel (used mostly for LFG) I would strongly support. I don't want clans to turn into "trade cartels" either. But, I personally hate the "only can have it if you're a friend/clanmate after it dropped" restriction - although you didn't propose this it seems to be a prevalent idea. I just have to say that you and I could be friends. I think it would be really shitty if we decide to be BFFs three months into RoS and suddenly you're not able to have any loot from before that. It's almost like we have to plan out our friends/clanmates.... and to me that's such a bizarre and artificial restriction. It's not very organic, it's not very intuitive.
So, I hope they really stray from that particular notion. It makes sense if you're looking at a "use this to stop traders" perspective, but if you look at it as a holistic solution to a problem, it's very janky and confusing.
Ultimately, I just don't feel that lobbing off 99% of trading produces a very good place to have reasonable, cool-headed, discussion on the subject. That is Blizzard's fault for not playing it cool, for not really even discussing this with us. The fact that there really hasn't been much back-and-forth despite a pretty significant portion of the population wanting LESS RESTRICTIONS on trading is kinda hurtful. We don't even have the decency to understand what they're trying to accomplish and why they think this is the best way to do it.
And, I fully expect something more "meaty" than "we think it's most fun to find your gear from monsters." All of us get that, and all of us agree with that. That doesn't mean we want that to be the ONLY way. Even if I only execute one trade per year, I don't want to hear "you MUST find items from monsters, Nick" ... it's just too totalitarian and absolutist. Let me be the big boy I am and let me figure out if I want to make a trade for a particular item or if I want to keep grinding it. Perhaps this week I'll want to grind it out, but after four months I'll be ready to admit that RNG kicked my ass and move on. I am old enough and smart enough to evaluate that on my own, though. And if I am the cause of my own dissatisfaction with the game... well chalk that up to living and learning.
Quote from Bleu42»
I'm not an elitist jaggoff who says people have to play the way I want to play.
..snip..
AND having playing the game the best way to acquire sought after items.
No offense, but it does seem to me that you are of the opinion that anyone who "acquires sought-after items" in any means other than killing monsters is "playing the game wrong."
Can't you be a TAD bit more open to the idea that a large portion of us don't want to be trading 24/7. Hell, some of us might not even execute one trade per month. But we still want that option, and that we are not "playing the game wrong?" It's really, really, getting old to hear this (strawman) argument that everyone who trades isn't "playing the game." If I acquire 95% of my items from monsters, hell 90%, isn't that still PLAYING THE GAME 90%+ of the time? Isn't that a pretty damned reasonable threshold? Why does it have to be 99.9999999% or more?
The whole problem with the "anti-trading bloc" argument is the "if you're not getting as close to 100% of your items from monsters as humanly possible then you're not playing the game properly" train of thought leaves NO ROOM FOR ANY NEGOTIATION OR COMPROMISE. It's "play my way or get the fuck out!"
If we're talking about a compromise... that's a horrible starting point. It really comes off as one side refuses to even listen. Their only perspective is "my way or the highway." And, frankly, it may seem good in the short term when you're getting your way, but that's an atrocious way to design a game with millions of players. It can *never* be anyone's way or the highway, even Blizzard's. There are too many parties that have a vested interest in the game for any discussion to be that black-and-white.
In a Clan trading scenario, I'd like to see how people "trade themselves to the top." Especially when a self-found player can grind, farm and gamble to pretty much the same place. Will it take more time? Perhaps. But playing with lots of people to help you will always take LESS time to get strong than playing on one's own. Always.
Well, now you've just given the lunatics an anti-clan argument! ACCESS TO MORE PEOPLE IS AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE! /laugh
I'm for some form of clan/friends trading. The one thing I'd caution is that if you make it clan-only then you're basically mandating that someone joins a clan. Whereas if it's friends & clan, joining a clan becomes a bit more optional.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That being said, anything they can do to make clans more than a private chat channel (used mostly for LFG) I would strongly support. I don't want clans to turn into "trade cartels" either. But, I personally hate the "only can have it if you're a friend/clanmate after it dropped" restriction - although you didn't propose this it seems to be a prevalent idea. I just have to say that you and I could be friends. I think it would be really shitty if we decide to be BFFs three months into RoS and suddenly you're not able to have any loot from before that. It's almost like we have to plan out our friends/clanmates.... and to me that's such a bizarre and artificial restriction. It's not very organic, it's not very intuitive.
So, I hope they really stray from that particular notion. It makes sense if you're looking at a "use this to stop traders" perspective, but if you look at it as a holistic solution to a problem, it's very janky and confusing.
Ultimately, I just don't feel that lobbing off 99% of trading produces a very good place to have reasonable, cool-headed, discussion on the subject. That is Blizzard's fault for not playing it cool, for not really even discussing this with us. The fact that there really hasn't been much back-and-forth despite a pretty significant portion of the population wanting LESS RESTRICTIONS on trading is kinda hurtful. We don't even have the decency to understand what they're trying to accomplish and why they think this is the best way to do it.
And, I fully expect something more "meaty" than "we think it's most fun to find your gear from monsters." All of us get that, and all of us agree with that. That doesn't mean we want that to be the ONLY way. Even if I only execute one trade per year, I don't want to hear "you MUST find items from monsters, Nick" ... it's just too totalitarian and absolutist. Let me be the big boy I am and let me figure out if I want to make a trade for a particular item or if I want to keep grinding it. Perhaps this week I'll want to grind it out, but after four months I'll be ready to admit that RNG kicked my ass and move on. I am old enough and smart enough to evaluate that on my own, though. And if I am the cause of my own dissatisfaction with the game... well chalk that up to living and learning.
No offense, but it does seem to me that you are of the opinion that anyone who "acquires sought-after items" in any means other than killing monsters is "playing the game wrong."
Can't you be a TAD bit more open to the idea that a large portion of us don't want to be trading 24/7. Hell, some of us might not even execute one trade per month. But we still want that option, and that we are not "playing the game wrong?" It's really, really, getting old to hear this (strawman) argument that everyone who trades isn't "playing the game." If I acquire 95% of my items from monsters, hell 90%, isn't that still PLAYING THE GAME 90%+ of the time? Isn't that a pretty damned reasonable threshold? Why does it have to be 99.9999999% or more?
The whole problem with the "anti-trading bloc" argument is the "if you're not getting as close to 100% of your items from monsters as humanly possible then you're not playing the game properly" train of thought leaves NO ROOM FOR ANY NEGOTIATION OR COMPROMISE. It's "play my way or get the fuck out!"
If we're talking about a compromise... that's a horrible starting point. It really comes off as one side refuses to even listen. Their only perspective is "my way or the highway." And, frankly, it may seem good in the short term when you're getting your way, but that's an atrocious way to design a game with millions of players. It can *never* be anyone's way or the highway, even Blizzard's. There are too many parties that have a vested interest in the game for any discussion to be that black-and-white.
I'm for some form of clan/friends trading. The one thing I'd caution is that if you make it clan-only then you're basically mandating that someone joins a clan. Whereas if it's friends & clan, joining a clan becomes a bit more optional.