Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 43

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 82

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 86

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 98

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 102

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 172

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/init.php on line 371

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/class_core.php on line 2290

Deprecated: Function set_magic_quotes_runtime() is deprecated in /home/forums/public_html/includes/class_core.php on line 1488
Trade Question [Archive] - Ryzom

PDA

View Full Version : Trade Question


jonasq
October 3rd, 2006, 10:27 AM
Hi there....

I'm from Leanon, where the Outposts are not so well divided (90% for the karas, yeah :D ), and therefore we have some needs:

We are highly interested in modified vedice sap at quality 250, at leanon it's only in the "purified" version present.

The Ring should be the place to trade, as long as its possible. :D

PM me, with what you wanna trade for (sup ZUN, AEN armoury, ... )

best regards
Mikira
CorobieMargus
Leanon

vguerin
October 3rd, 2006, 10:51 PM
I'm from Leanon, where the Outposts are not so well divided (90% for the karas, yeah :D ), and therefore we have some needs:

We are highly interested in modified vedice sap at quality 250, at leanon it's only in the "purified" version present.

The Ring should be the place to trade, as long as its possible. :D

PM me, with what you wanna trade for (sup ZUN, AEN armoury, ... )I think this is a perfect example of why inter-server trading should not be allowed. Each server is supposed to make thier own legacy, if you can buy/trade for items not available on your server you are upsetting the natural (in)balance of your own server.

jonasq
October 3rd, 2006, 11:05 PM
Thats correct.

But as long as Nevrax says, it works as intended, why not use this "feature"?

So, if any is interested, send a pm and nobody got hurt :D

good eve
Mikira
CoMa
Leanon

raynes
October 3rd, 2006, 11:15 PM
I think this is a perfect example of why inter-server trading should not be allowed. Each server is supposed to make thier own legacy, if you can buy/trade for items not available on your server you are upsetting the natural (in)balance of your own server.

There you go reliving how the game was supposed to be... ;)

grimjim
October 3rd, 2006, 11:31 PM
There you go reliving how the game was supposed to be... ;)

And so ironic.

larwood
October 4th, 2006, 01:23 AM
I would like to point out that the Original Poster is a Matis (as suggested by the avatar) and Karavan. And from what I've gathered about blanket statements, and all encompasing finger-pointing/generalizations from the recent posts that seem to be based on market research/demofreakingraphics.... Most people who play Karavan toons, are more likely to support farming/smuggling goods from one server to another.... therefore I join in with Jackoba in saying we should move all the karavan players to another server! :)

NOTE:The above post was 74% sarcastic, 18% exaggerated, and 8% unnecessary. But I couldn't resist with all the finger-pointing thats been going on lately. By no means do i mean to offend, just to hopefully get some laughs.

So there :)


And no, i won't trade with you cross-server.

vguerin
October 4th, 2006, 03:57 AM
I would like to point out that the Original Poster is a Matis (as suggested by the avatar) and Karavan.The Avatar must be fake, no Matis would think 90/10 Karavan is not a perfect ratio :P

kuroari
October 4th, 2006, 04:02 AM
The Avatar must be fake, no Matis would think 90/10 Karavan is not a perfect ratio :P

Lmao :p -point well taken

kibsword
October 4th, 2006, 04:12 AM
No a true Matis would think 100/0 Karavan ratio is the perfect ratio! :D

grimjim
October 4th, 2006, 07:44 AM
I would like to point out that the Original Poster is a Matis (as suggested by the avatar) and Karavan. And from what I've gathered about blanket statements, and all encompasing finger-pointing/generalizations from the recent posts that seem to be based on market research/demofreakingraphics.... Most people who play Karavan toons, are more likely to support farming/smuggling goods from one server to another.... therefore I join in with Jackoba in saying we should move all the karavan players to another server! :)

NOTE:The above post was 74% sarcastic, 18% exaggerated, and 8% unnecessary. But I couldn't resist with all the finger-pointing thats been going on lately. By no means do i mean to offend, just to hopefully get some laughs.

So there :)


And no, i won't trade with you cross-server.


Many a true word spoken in jest.

sidusar
October 4th, 2006, 05:30 PM
So.... because 90% of the outposts there are in karavan hands, they only have purified (kami) vedice sap? :confused:

philu
October 4th, 2006, 05:33 PM
So.... because 90% of the outposts there are in karavan hands, they only have purified (kami) vedice sap? :confused:

Methinks they have it the wrong way round*. ;)








* For those that don't know: modified = Karavan, purified = Kami.

xolghost
October 4th, 2006, 05:34 PM
A hint from Leanon.... the 90% mentioned have been an I-wish-we-had-as-well... AFAIK, there's "only" one-and-a-half 250 OPs in Karavan hands as of this exact time ;)

rothimar
October 4th, 2006, 05:48 PM
Either way... the resources exist on each server, and the players on each server should get their own supplies from their own environments. I don't want to deal with the political influences of another server bleeding over onto Arispotle, regardless of faction.

I wouldn't want to see Arispotle unbalance another server, nor see another server unbalance Arispotle. I don't want to see the economy of another server damage that on Arispotle (or the other way around). I don't want to have to start setting my prices based on the going market in 3-4 different universes.

Allowing cross-server smuggling, in my humble yet firmly held opinion, is a very bad idea. The effects may or may not be immediate, but there will be effects. Especially if they launch Cho with smuggling enabled.

There are so many considerations that go into a server's balance. Allowing populations from various servers suddenly begin to trade resources could very well throw that balance off.

xolghost
October 4th, 2006, 05:54 PM
While I totally agree with you, Andarr, I'd bet my best gear on the fact that the OP's needs have already been satisfied, or at least offered to be, by one of Arispotle's, maybe Aniro's.
Why? Because we can....
Sad, isn't it?

rothimar
October 4th, 2006, 05:57 PM
While I totally agree with you, Andarr, I'd bet my best gear on the fact that the OP's needs have already been satisfied, or at least offered to be, by one of Arispotle's, maybe Aniro's.
Why? Because we can....
Sad isn't it?

Absolutely.

spoloh
October 4th, 2006, 06:10 PM
In my humble opinion you take it all way too subjectively sirs,

OOC: If the Devs don't say it's an exploit and correct it in the next patch then why not? After all the interserver exchange of opinions, ideas has been put into the ring, interserver visits have been put into the ring aswell. So why the ban on trade?

You don't like it - no problem - stay away from the trade :) Just like the neutrals are staying away from the PvP content.

Cause I understand those folks well and if I were a karavan from Leanon and not a kami from arispottle I'd welcome such trade with both arms outstretched. /OOC

Respectfully,

Spolloh

rothimar
October 4th, 2006, 06:34 PM
Cause I understand those folks well and if I were a karavan from Leanon and not a kami from arispottle I'd welcome such trade with both arms outstretched.

That's exactly the problem. Factions from one server assisting factions from another server. It is no longer how good you are, it's who you know on the other side.

calel
October 4th, 2006, 06:39 PM
You don't like it - no problem - stay away from the trade :) Just like the neutrals are staying away from the PvP content.


Perhaps you ought to read up on some of the older topics on 'neutrality' and PvP and see the errors of your statement. Because one is dubbed 'a neutral' by Nevrax for playing their role in this gameworld, this doesn't mean they can not or will not enjoy PvP content. There's plenty of examples around. If you feel like commenting on this, read up on those topics and posts and possibly start up a new thread if you want; no need to drag this one down the PvP road again.


I'll just quote beloved Jinovitch Matis we all love to hate *wink* ...

Each server is supposed to make thier own legacy, if you can buy/trade for items not available on your server you are upsetting the natural (in)balance of your own server.

... and will wholeheartedly agree with his statement.

Every server has it's own legacy, it's own (in)balance, it's own history shaped by their population. It's what makes them unique, it's our story!

kyesmith
October 4th, 2006, 07:46 PM
I dont mind the idea of trans server trading, will put more pressure on crafters but gives users a wider selection of goods.

grimjim
October 4th, 2006, 08:12 PM
Perhaps you ought to read up on some of the older topics on 'neutrality' and PvP and see the errors of your statement. Because one is dubbed 'a neutral' by Nevrax for playing their role in this gameworld, this doesn't mean they can not or will not enjoy PvP content. There's plenty of examples around. If you feel like commenting on this, read up on those topics and posts and possibly start up a new thread if you want; no need to drag this one down the PvP road again.

Equally as with PvP you have to consider that there is a knock on effect even on those that choose not to participate, a negative one.

sidusar
October 4th, 2006, 08:42 PM
You don't like it - no problem - stay away from the trade :)
If only it were that simple.

In addition to the PvP discussion, I'd like to refer to the old threads on botting. (= Using a piece of software to level your character to 250 foraging while you're afk, if anyone doesn't know.)

Imagine how the players had reacted if Nevrax had said: "You don't like botting - no problem - just don't do it then." :D

rothimar
October 4th, 2006, 08:56 PM
Well said, a good way to put it.

If only it were that simple.

In addition to the PvP discussion, I'd like to refer to the old threads on botting. (= Using a piece of software to level your character to 250 foraging while you're afk, if anyone doesn't know.)

Imagine how the players had reacted if Nevrax had said: "You don't like botting - no problem - just don't do it then." :D

iphdrunk
October 4th, 2006, 09:42 PM
Seems official,

For the time being:

- Ring trades will be available for players on the same shard, in what concerns "regular items"

- Ring specific "scenario mission items" will be available for free trade.

rothimar
October 4th, 2006, 09:50 PM
This does indeed seem to be an excellent solution for the time being, while the process is reviewed.

http://www.ryzom.com/news/archive/2006/10/04/cho-is-coming