P2W Option: Reject White Salvage Drops

[CaptainLupis]

It's not something I'm ever likely to use, but if it were easy to implement I really can't see the issue with having the option. If someone is just going to end up deleting the salvage anyway they might as well have the option to autoreject it instead. If, as I said, it is easy to implement. If however it's something that would take a lot of time/resources then I would rather they worked on something else.

[ZacKing]

35 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Interestingly, from said poster, suggesting ideas that would take far longer to implement (on other threads) and be a benefit for far less people..

According to what metrics?  sorry there's people who disagree with your idea, but let's not start making guesses as to what takes more time and what is of more benefit to more people.  that's for Homecoming people to decide.

[Zeraphia]

12 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

According to what metrics?  sorry there's people who disagree with your idea, but let's not start making guesses as to what takes more time and what is of more benefit to more people.  that's for Homecoming people to decide.

Again, this idea can theoretically benefit *everyone* any AT, any level who wishes to use it... very few of the overall population for what I was referencing in comparison can gain a benefit out of what was referenced (something I purposefully left as a general statement and did not go into specifics of). 

 

Sure, but then again, you were the one who brought up the "it's not worth the dev time!" argument, if you truly stand by the "that's for Homecoming people to decide" approach, then you shouldn't have made that comment in order to discredit an idea you disagree with in the first place. 

 

None of that addresses the majority of the post in how the rhetoric and language were used abrasively. Disagreeing with the idea was not the core of the post, it was the way in which people chose to behave.

Edited May 14, 2020 by Zeraphia

[MTeague]

3 hours ago, Greycat said:

.... side note, I wish that argument would stop being used. It's fine to say "This would take a lot of dev time," because it's surprising what would, but until someone here hires them and has to assign people to projects...

also "This would take a lot of dev time", is very frequently, a Scientific WIld A** Guess (SWAG).  

 

Now, when someone goes completely off the rails like um.... *cough* i did *cough* in a thread about Player Created Signature Powers, okay, even a cursory glance of including entirely new interfaces and powers, yea, that's firmly in the "it would be cool if we had infinite time" category.  When it takes most of a page to describe it, yea, it ain't small. 

 

but  "autoreject option for white salvage"?  there's already other autoreject options out there. None for salvage, sure.  But for small inspirations, etc. So this MIGHT be as simple as copy/paste and tweak a few lines of code documentation.  It also MIGHT be something that would take 3 weeks or more of concerted effort on this and nothing but this and make the programmer in question wish they'd never picked up the idea in the first place.  And unless any of us have actually looked at the source code and know the language it's written in, we're speculating. 

Edited May 14, 2020 by MTeague

[Greycat]

10 minutes ago, MTeague said:

also "This would take a lot of dev time", is very frequently, a Scientific WIld A** Guess (SWAG).  

 

Now, when someone goes completely off the rails like um.... *cough* i did *cough* in a thread about Player Created Signature Powers, okay, even a cursory glance of including entirely new interfaces and powers, yea, that's firmly in the "it would be cool if we had infinite time" category.  When it takes most of a page to describe it, yea, it ain't small. 

 

but  "autoreject option for white salvage"?  there's already other autoreject options out there. None for salvage, sure.  But for small inspirations, etc. So this MIGHT be as simple as copy/paste and tweak a few lines of code documentation.  It also MIGHT be something that would take 3 weeks or more of concerted effort on this and nothing but this and make the programmer in question wish they'd never picked up the idea in the first place.  And unless any of us have actually looked at the source code and know the language it's written in, we're speculating. 

And even "oh, should be easy" or "they have it" can have ... odd results.

 

While I wouldn't say it was *easy,* I think it was the issue they brought in the popup temp power tray? When that was on beta, it *completely screwed up* three entire ATs - Warshades, PBs and Dominators - by messing with their inherent. THey had no idea why, speculation was that it "moved" the power (the shapeshift or Domination button) somewhere.

 

So, yeah. Unintended consequences. 😄

 

[ShardWarrior]

5 hours ago, Zeraphia said:

Sure, but then again, you were the one who brought up the "it's not worth the dev time!" argument, if you truly stand by the "that's for Homecoming people to decide" approach, then you shouldn't have made that comment in order to discredit an idea you disagree with in the first place. 

Someone can have the opinion your idea is not worth the developer time while acknowledging it is up to the Homecoming staff to decide.  These things are not mutually exclusive of each other. 

 

There are many ideas and suggestions posted on these forums that can benefit everyone.  That does not mean all of them can or should or ever will be done. 

[tidge]

17 hours ago, Greycat said:

Yes, the person posting it should be prepared to defend their post. (Or abandon it if it's one of those "Oh. Wow, I didn't know that, yeah, that wouldn't work" or "I didn't know a solution already existed in game!" items.)

[ZacKing]

16 hours ago, Zeraphia said:

Again, this idea can theoretically benefit *everyone* any AT, any level who wishes to use it... very few of the overall population for what I was referencing in comparison can gain a benefit out of what was referenced (something I purposefully left as a general statement and did not go into specifics of). 

 

Sure, but then again, you were the one who brought up the "it's not worth the dev time!" argument, if you truly stand by the "that's for Homecoming people to decide" approach, then you shouldn't have made that comment in order to discredit an idea you disagree with in the first place. 

 

None of that addresses the majority of the post in how the rhetoric and language were used abrasively. Disagreeing with the idea was not the core of the post, it was the way in which people chose to behave.

Man there are a ton of ideas on here that can have a benefit for everyone.  Doesn't mean they're all good ideas or worth the time.  And yeah, I don't think it's worth the dev time but it is up to them to decide what they want to spend their time doing. 

[Yomo Kimyata]

There's a lot to unpack here, but I'm going to take the suggestion in the title on a stand alone basis.

 

Three suggestions that I could ultimately support:

 

1.  Grant the option to turn off all salvage drops, not just some.  You don't get a shot at orange unless you deal with white and yellow.

2.  Turn off the red notification that salvage is full.  I'm guessing that those aesthetics are part of the annoyance.

3.  Cut the drop rates of all salvage, not just some, by some percentage.  50%?  90%?

 

I stand by the thought that ultimately Homecoming devs get to decide what they think is important and why.  At the same time, in my opinion, this is of such low importance that I'd prefer that the devs don't even waste their time reading the thread if it takes 30 seconds away from something that I personally deem important for myself or for the HC system.

 

[tidge]

4 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

Three suggestions that I could ultimately support:

 

3.  Cut the drop rates of all salvage, not just some, by some percentage.  50%?  90%?

[Zeraphia]

19 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

1.  Grant the option to turn off all salvage drops, not just some.  You don't get a shot at orange unless you deal with white and yellow.

There isn't a precedent for select salvage rarity types to be rejected, there isn't currently any at all. You can reject specific smaller inspirations and white recipes. I don't understand the logic to block off salvage entirely whereas others you still get the other rarity drops. 

 

This seems like trying to add taxes on ideas/things that don't need to be taxed. It's not overpowered, it won't affect the economy, there's not really a reason to go after all salvage instead of just sorting by rarities.

 

Though by no means was I suggesting to exclusively have only white salvage as an option to reject, I'm all for having all types of salvage rejectable. 

[Yomo Kimyata]

On 5/17/2020 at 7:54 AM, Zeraphia said:

There isn't a precedent for select salvage rarity types to be rejected, there isn't currently any at all. You can reject specific smaller inspirations and white recipes. I don't understand the logic to block off salvage entirely whereas others you still get the other rarity drops. 

 

This seems like trying to add taxes on ideas/things that don't need to be taxed. It's not overpowered, it won't affect the economy, there's not really a reason to go after all salvage instead of just sorting by rarities.

 

Though by no means was I suggesting to exclusively have only white salvage as an option to reject, I'm all for having all types of salvage rejectable. 

Like I said, there's a lot to unpack from this thread.  Having a flow of white and yellow salvage, which is entirely player-provided, is critical to the invention system.  If you want to opt out of that system entirely, have at it.  But I don't understand why you want to get the benefit of orange drops while letting the other little people provide your whites and yellows.  No, I think that all or nothing is probably the best solution.  All is the current default, so I'd expect that to continue.

 

RE: your tax comment, I don't understand your usage of the term tax.  If a child asks for ten lollipops and his parent gives him one, there was not a nine lollipop tax?

[Zeraphia]

19 minutes ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

Like I said, there's a lot to unpack from this thread.  Having a flow of white and yellow salvage, which is entirely player-provided, is critical to the invention system.  If you want to opt out of that system entirely, have at it.  But I don't understand why you want to get the benefit of orange drops while letting the other little people provide your whites and yellows.  No, I think that all or nothing is probably the best solution.  All is the current default, so I'd expect that to continue.

 

RE: your tax comment, I don't understand your usage of the term tax.  If a child asks for ten lollipops and his parent gives him one, there was not a nine lollipop tax?

Your comment is under a few assumptions:

 

1. That players providing the salvage is critical, thus the salvage should be dropped/mandatory. Normally yes, but it leaves out significant details like the fact the salvage is infinitely seeded, there is a size-able population that won't use it, there is ALREADY a significant population that is just DELETING the salvage as we speak (self-included) and a lot that are just vendoring it, therefore a lot of it already isn't even going into the AH to make this argument very concrete.

2. It assumes again as addressed above, the fact that players are even selling the salvage on the AH, when the reality is that a size-able portion are not, I'd actually venture to say *most* are not.

3. It also assumes that there isn't distinctions already between the rarities of reject-able items (recipes/inspirations). We already have options to reject inspirations by the category of what it enhances/does and how large of an inspiration it is, as well as enabling/disabling dual inspirations. The same is done for recipes. That begs the question, if this is already a precedent, why shouldn't you be able to reject salvage by rarity? Why is the tax on salvage rejection there for seemingly no reason?

4. It assumes that I even get the "salvage" from "little people" the salvage is seeded if they want to sell their salvage for that, then they are welcomed to. This doesn't stop the sales of the salvage itself nor does it force people who would've already sold the salvage not to sell it anymore. This is a weird argument that doesn't make logical sense, the same people who are already selling this salvage on the AH are the same people who will likely sell it afterwards. You also have no idea who is selling the salvage, you don't know if they're little or big, in fact a lot of the "losers" on the market are the ones selling high-end purples for cheap. 

 

A tax as used in this context is a "price to pay" (drawback) for the freedom to do something. The example you used is not a relevant example, is sort of wacky, and doesn't make a lot of sense...

Edited May 18, 2020 by Zeraphia

[AerialAssault]

It's really strange that common salvage is the red line here for some people, when you can already reject Very Rare Recipes, arguably much more lucrative and entirely based on players selling and buying, whereas common salvage is routinely seeded into the market to avoid the hyperinflation of salvage that plagued the Live servers.

[ShardWarrior]

1 hour ago, Zeraphia said:

That players providing the salvage is critical, thus the salvage should be dropped/mandatory. Normally yes, but it leaves out significant details like the fact the salvage is infinitely seeded, there is a size-able population that won't use it, there is ALREADY a significant population that is just DELETING the salvage as we speak (self-included) and a lot that are just vendoring it, therefore a lot of it already isn't even going into the AH to make this argument very concrete.

Seeding does not keep prices low for salvage.  Players providing white salvage to the market is what keeps the prices low.  See the post here that @Nanolathe posted earlier in the thread.

 

Saying that this will not affect the market is not accurate.

 

[Nerio72]

The people that would use this option probably aren't selling on AH already, chances are they are deleting it, so no it would PROBABLY not effect the market at all.

[ShardWarrior]

44 minutes ago, Nerio72 said:

The people that would use this option probably aren't selling on AH already, chances are they are deleting it, so no it would PROBABLY not effect the market at all.

I agree however there is no way to know what every individual would do for certain.   Given that seeding is dependent upon players to keep prices reasonable, I still do not think it is a good idea unless everyone is willing to go back to the insane prices we had on live.

[Nerio72]

Really the only ones that know are the ones that would decide whether this is worthwhile. The rest of us can continue guessing till the cows come home (Where are they? I'm starting to get worried...)

 

[blayzemaster]

13 hours ago, ShardWarrior said:

I agree however there is no way to know what every individual would do for certain.   Given that seeding is dependent upon players to keep prices reasonable, I still do not think it is a good idea unless everyone is willing to go back to the insane prices we had on live.

Isn't this a bit disingenuous? Granted I don't know the live prices, but seeding WILL keep the prices down, even if they get more expensive than they are currently.

 

Also, if prices get more expensive, you may have people turning the option off if it becomes vaguely profitable and therefore increase the lower cost supply, whereas at the moment many just delete it.

 

IMHO, I wonder how much this whole debate is people who hate the concept of the p2w vendor and therefore reject any expansion of it whatsoever. I think that's understandable, but the devs have already set precedent for rejecting things by rarity type.

Edited May 19, 2020 by blayzemaster

[Sovera]

17 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

Like I said, there's a lot to unpack from this thread.  Having a flow of white and yellow salvage, which is entirely player-provided, is critical to the invention system.  If you want to opt out of that system entirely, have at it.  But I don't understand why you want to get the benefit of orange drops while letting the other little people provide your whites and yellows.  No, I think that all or nothing is probably the best solution.  All is the current default, so I'd expect that to continue.

 

RE: your tax comment, I don't understand your usage of the term tax.  If a child asks for ten lollipops and his parent gives him one, there was not a nine lollipop tax?

I'm going to unpack this: You're trolling. I do not say this as a facile insult for someone who said something that I personally disagree with and thus I will ad hominem them. I predict that you typed it serious like but snickering in your room like trolls do when they think they are being smart.

 

None of it makes sense. I will pretend that you are serious (but we both know the truth, won't we?) and answer it.

 

- Players, like me, who lol at the idea of selling things for 100 inf when they make 20-25 millions out of 30 minutes running a Tinpex are deleting their white and yellow salvage. The option to reject it from the P2W is not going to affect your precious Market since we are not selling it there anyway. Players who sell their white salvage at the Market are not going to the P2W to purchase the option to not get salvage so your precious Market will keep on having it. I cringed at the line of 'if you're not selling your white and yellow salvage at the market then you don't deserve ANY salvage'.

- The options to not receive a certain type of inspiration (damage, wakies, greens) does not hinge on having ALL inspirations blocked from a player. This option is already in.

- The option to not receive a certain type of recipe (common, uncommon, rare, very rare) does not hinge on having ALL recipes blocked from a player. This option is already in.

 

 

Conclusion: you are either dumb (less people selling common salvage will increase the prices of the salvage that you are selling since scarcity ups value) or you are trolling, but I prefer to think you are just against the idea and thus trolling.

[ShardWarrior]

2 hours ago, blayzemaster said:

Isn't this a bit disingenuous? Granted I don't know the live prices, but seeding WILL keep the prices down, even if they get more expensive than they are currently.

Seeding is not keeping the prices down though.  Read the post from @Nanolathe.  Seed price for white salvage is around 10,000 inf.  Right now, most white salvage on the market goes for around 100 inf.  That is not seeding making prices go down. 

[blayzemaster]

26 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

Seeding is not keeping the prices down though.  Read the post from @Nanolathe.  Seed price for white salvage is around 10,000 inf.  Right now, most white salvage on the market goes for around 100 inf.  That is not seeding making prices go down. 

I was referring to live prices where, anecdoctally, I heard salvage could go for 2mill+. As I said, it will keep the price down because it won't go beyond 10k, even if that is more than currently.

 

The reality is that it will always be less than that, since many people clealry feel very strongly about selling their white salvage.

 

Hell, if it is 10,000 a pop, I WOULD sell mine. And then others would do the same and it would be less.

[Nanolathe]

14 minutes ago, blayzemaster said:

I was referring to live prices where, anecdoctally, I heard salvage could go for 2mill+. As I said, it will keep the price down because it won't go beyond 10k, even if that is more than currently.

 

The reality is that it will always be less than that, since many people clealry feel very strongly about selling their white salvage.

 

Hell, if it is 10,000 a pop, I WOULD sell mine. And then others would do the same and it would be less.

So, if I understand your position correctly, you want the prices to go up for everyone, because for you, it's not worth your time?

[blayzemaster]

7 minutes ago, Nanolathe said:

So, if I understand your position correctly, you want the prices to go up for everyone, because for you, it's not worth your time?

No, that is not my position. My position is that I don't believe the prices will go up because the people who would use this option already do not sell their salvage. The people who currently consider salvage worth selling will continue to do so and therefore there will always be a minimum amount in circulation, seeded or not.

 

If an option to reject the salvage is added, then if the price does increase, it will be minimal because as the price gets higher, it will be more profitable for people to undo the reject option and therefore sell it.

 

And finally, even if that is wrong, the price will always be hardcapped at 10k anyway. Unlike live, salvage is bucked by rarity and therefore you won't get the same price spikes or lack of supply for speciifc pieces.

 

 

Edited May 19, 2020 by blayzemaster

[Zeraphia]

12 minutes ago, Nanolathe said:

So, if I understand your position correctly, you want the prices to go up for everyone, because for you, it's not worth your time?

This is such an over-exaggeration in so many ways and it leaves out important details...

 

1. The people who aren't selling salvage now, are most likely the same people who would use the P2W reject option anyways, so you're not likely to even lose people there.

2. The people who are selling the salvage now, aren't likely going to stop because the option to will exist, again, as evidenced by even the thread, there are people who will still sell the salvage if this theoretically went live. 

3. The devs can easily seed the market if this were the case and it really did get "out of control" which is laughable, and most likely won't ever happen. See what it does to the salvage market, then decide if it has gotten out of control, last time I checked, inspirations and white recipes did not skyrocket out of control.

 

For the prices to go out of control or so high that it is truly worth noticing the difference it would require so much of the playerbase to use this option, or so much of them to already be selling, which is just flat not the case or is it going to be the case. 

 

If anything, it's a psuedo-positive even if your theory that the prices go up happens, because that means the people selling it get more profit by doing so. It is not the lose-lose you make this out to be.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Zeraphia