Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes, it has been promised. Under "Local Vault Storage" in Blog "How the Auction House Works" Eventually Companies and Settlements will have shared credit accounts and Local Vault options but those functions are not yet in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, it has been promised. Under "Local Vault Storage" in Blog "How the Auction House Works" Eventually Companies and Settlements will have shared credit accounts and Local Vault options but those functions are not yet in the game.
From your link (bolding added):
"Each character has their own Abadar credit account and Local Vault and credit accounts and Local Vault storage is not shared across all the characters on an account.
Eventually Companies and Settlements will have shared credit accounts and Local Vault options but those functions are not yet in the game."
So Company and Settlement banks have been promised. Shared banking between character on one account has not, at least according to that link.
---
IF your characters belong to the same company and/or settlement, they would be able to pass stuff back and forth through that connection they share. Such characters would generally have compatible alignment, reputation, and in-game goals.
Imo, There's no reason or logic (or advantage to the game) behind two totally dissimilar characters, like a CE bandit and a LG monk equitably sharing all of their worldly possessions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Smallholdings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes, it has been promised. Under "Local Vault Storage" in Blog "How the Auction House Works" Eventually Companies and Settlements will have shared credit accounts and Local Vault options but those functions are not yet in the game.From your link (bolding added):
"Each character has their own Abadar credit account and Local Vault and credit accounts and Local Vault storage is not shared across all the characters on an account.
Eventually Companies and Settlements will have shared credit accounts and Local Vault options but those functions are not yet in the game."
So Company and Settlement banks have been promised. Shared banking between character on one account has not, at least according to that link.
---
IF your characters belong to the same company and/or settlement, they would be able to pass stuff back and forth through that connection they share. Such characters would generally have compatible alignment, reputation, and in-game goals.
Imo, There's no reason or logic (or advantage to the game) behind two totally dissimilar characters, like a CE bandit and a LG monk equitably sharing all of their worldly possessions.
It is a player account based feature not a role playing one. There is no alignment in the game, not for many months or a year or more.
Would also see shared banking as beibg more useful than the AH being improved, because a shared bank also improves the AH, not the other way around.
I wonder if trading between characters, beyond the company level, will be implemented with the Smallholds (and whatever player-crafted equivalents eventually happen). Even at my modest level, it takes a good half hour clean-up session to get everything where it has to be between characters. Some of that is just a slow connection issue, but sheesh...
I do agree with the RP aspect that Yrme mentioned, but that does come down to the individual player style.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree this is sorely needed. I was hoping they could put in a PO Box type system as a stop-gap measure before their more advanced systems are implemented.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Shared vault on same account -> Stupid very bad idea especially with people having characters in opposing settlements
Shared vault for settlement -> I have no opinion on this as have not thought it through
Shared vault for members of company -> Great Idea, bit like a fleet hanger, we need this very soon
MY VOTE -> give us company vaults and if people want to transfer between characters they can put them in the same company
I like to imagine my characters as a little group (or adventuring party if you like). I certainly can't play more than one at time, but in the story in my head they interact a bit. Allowing them to trade or "interact" with each other makes sense to me. Making it easier (or even just possible for some) should actually give us more time to interact with the other real people out there.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shared vault on same account -> Stupid very bad idea especially with people having characters in opposing settlementsYeah, that could pretty much destroy any need to trade at all.
The Settlement Banks would still be independent of each other. You would still have to transport an item from one bank to another overland.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Settlement Banks would still be independent of each other. You would still have to transport an item from one bank to another overland.Shared vault on same account -> Stupid very bad idea especially with people having characters in opposing settlementsYeah, that could pretty much destroy any need to trade at all.
That be true and teh same deal would apply if we had inter-character contracts.
Though considering how an awful lot of people seem to have put DTs in the enemy camp I am still concerned it is opening up a big can of worms compared to company vaults.
To have some means of trading from one character to another (on same account) is desperately needed.
What is the ETA on these features?
GW is SELLING Camps and Small Holdings.
Why would they neuter those sales by offering the same effect for free?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
GW is SELLING Camps and Small Holdings.
Why would they neuter those sales by offering the same effect for free?
Because they've said they won't let anyojne get anything with cash that they can't functionally match with in-game resources. Off the top, Camps and small-holdings don't have to be bought, they can also be built.
So far, GW seems to be very forward about the intent that anything physical you can purchase will have an in-game crafted equivalent, or at least that purchasing things shouldn't give any characters an unfair advantage. The only advantage, that I have heard of, that the purchased items have is that they will be re-deployable after being destroyed (as those mechanics are added)(and exempting the tavern and maybe other stuff from actual destruction...if I remember correctly).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For me personally, a shared company bank would fix the problem, since both of my Twins are in the same company, and I'm waiting to create a third character until more roles enter the game.
If they existed, shared bank spaces for characters on an account should be localized, just like single character banks are now. If I had one character in Tavernhold and another in Phaeros, I wouldn't expect to be able to deposit an item in one city and withdraw it in the other. One character or the other would still have to run across the map to make that transfer. If I had characters in warring cities, one or the other would still have to sneak into enemy territory to make an exchange.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In the long term, GW might choose to have Reputation affect trade. That is, trading with low Rep characters might drag down one's Rep. (Trading with high Rep characters doesn't have to have the same effect. Rep entropy.) Note that when you trade, you see your trading partner's Reputation now - players who don't want to trade with low Rep types can choose not to.
Having a Rep drain from trading with low Rep allows for some players to act as fences, balancing their Rep above the "Low Rep" threshhold. There could even be a Fence skill, which could reduce, but might never quite eliminate the Rep hit for such trades. More interaction, not less.
If we had the ability to do drops into each other's banks, and also had a Rep system for trades, then characters would have to be able to specify the lowest Rep that could drop to their bank.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Though considering how an awful lot of people seem to have put DTs in the enemy camp I am still concerned it is opening up a big can of worms compared to company vaults.
Source for that statement?
Because they've said they won't let anyojne get anything with cash that they can't functionally match with in-game resources. Off the top, Camps and small-holdings don't have to be bought, they can also be built.GW is SELLING Camps and Small Holdings.
Why would they neuter those sales by offering the same effect for free?
What Caldeathe Baequiannia said, plus the brought items will survive forever. If they are destroyed you get them back after waiting for a few days. The crafted version would have to be remade.
And I think (not sure about that) that until you deploy them they are a token with 0 weight, while crafted camps have a weight (or at least the basic camp had a weight during the alpha testing).|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Though considering how an awful lot of people seem to have put DTs in the enemy camp I am still concerned it is opening up a big can of worms compared to company vaults.
Source for that statement?
General conversation with other players rather than specific examples. Comments along the lines of "we pretty much know what you guys are up to because ... ". I have no evidence that any of these alts are in positions of power or what the characters names are but people are happy to admit they exist.
Its also commonsense that in a game with a goodly percentage of EVE players where awoxing and corporate espionage is a lifestyle that the EVE habits of planting alt spies in any enemy corps will carry across. In EVE its almost impossible for a character to join any decent corp without a serious background check and usually providing an API key that shows the activity of any alts on the same account.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A shared bank would have to be an extension of the Local Vault, otherwise two characters sharing an account could trade between settlements without the risk of transporting the items.
It sounds like in GW's plan for the mature game, in order to transfer items between characters without trade you would have to belong to a company/settlement. I say this as shared storage has been promised for those, but not for (otherwise unrelated) characters on the same account.
This does fit in with other posts that have been made about joining up instead of going it alone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One think we need is containers to sort our stuff.
I am a collector and have a large number of researched pages that I don't want to use or trade away. But they clutter my bank and make finding green items harder. A container for them would be a good thing.
People playing alchemist and apothecaries will need them even more to separate the different kind of items they produce and they would be a great help for bank characters.
A "for Gunther" container would make their life way easier than having to check the request rooster in the forum.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One think we need is containers to sort our stuff.
I am a collector and have a large number of researched pages that I don't want to use or trade away. But they clutter my bank and make finding green items harder. A container for them would be a good thing.
People playing alchemist and apothecaries will need them even more to separate the different kind of items they produce and they would be a great help for bank characters.
A "for Gunther" container would make their life way easier than having to check the request rooster in the forum.
I currently solve this problem by putting the research pages in one settlement's bank and other stuff in other settlement banks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One case I can think of where a settlement (or deposite/withdraw list like Pino suggests) vault would be great is where someone has a craft order but plays in a different time zone as the crafter.
I have been trying to touch basis with someone from another company (same settlement) for days. It would be nice if I could drop off said crafted order in the vault for said person to pick up when they are online.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One case I can think of where a settlement (or deposite/withdraw list like Pino suggests) vault would be great is where someone has a craft order but plays in a different time zone as the crafter.
I have been trying to touch basis with someone from another company (same settlement) for days. It would be nice if I could drop off said crafted order in the vault for said person to pick up when they are online.
Yes, please!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One case I can think of where a settlement (or deposite/withdraw list like Pino suggests) vault would be great is where someone has a craft order but plays in a different time zone as the crafter.
I have been trying to touch basis with someone from another company (same settlement) for days. It would be nice if I could drop off said crafted order in the vault for said person to pick up when they are online.
Which is exactly what I have proposed on ideascale. Please vote for it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A shared bank would have to be an extension of the Local Vault, otherwise two characters sharing an account could trade between settlements without the risk of transporting the items.
It sounds like in GW's plan for the mature game, in order to transfer items between characters without trade you would have to belong to a company/settlement. I say this as shared storage has been promised for those, but not for (otherwise unrelated) characters on the same account.
This does fit in with other posts that have been made about joining up instead of going it alone.
Even at the Company/Settlement level, only local shared banks have been promised. "Everyone in The Company sees the shared bank when they're in The Settlement, but they see a different shared bank when they're in The Other Settlement." GW doesn't want anyone to be able to teleport goods across the River Kingdoms, whether they're solo players or members of a Company/Settlement.