Tree of Savior Forum

[Suggestion] for market system

General Discussion
#1

Blocking personal trade behind paywall is bad. I know the target is to mitigate RMT, but this is not the right way.

My suggestion:

Without the payment token, you can:

  • Trade once per hour (not accumulated)
  • Trade a maximum amount of 100k silver if you are < level 50, 200k if you are 50-100, 300k if you are 100-150, no restriction above. This applies to both giving and receiving ends, and market place as well
  • Have 1 market slot like we currently have

With payment token all restrictions are lifted.

That is all

Also I think limiting shout function to character level 100 and above would mitigate RMT advertising as well.

3 Likes
#2

how about:
players must have partied for over 100 hrs and killed 2000+ in-level-range monsters together in the party to be able to trade each other

(just a quick idea)

#3

two totally different publishers. why are people stupidly making accusations about our international version of the game based on what they are experiencing in a ā€œKOREANā€ obtā€¦ none of it makes any sense. NONE OF IT!!

#4

just for the record IMC hasnā€™t released any information about jack sht yet. can we all just wait until they do before we comment about their features?

#5

They havenā€™t released any information yet, but the dialogue is more than worth having. We need to define as a community what we the players want to see in the game. To some extent this is worth it for the self-developing publishers (heh) as well, as they would want to know what will keep us spending money and what will keep us spending money happily.

This is why weā€™re seeing so many threads on the monetization of this game - we all have our opinions and we all want to be heard.

#6

Iā€™m not sure what your sarcasm pointed at, but as you can see Iā€™m not trying to make daily life of free user harder. Those numbers are based on common needs when I played iCBT. As a normal player you wonā€™t need more than that.

[quote=ā€œry7737, post:4, topic:125779, full:trueā€]
just for the record IMC hasnā€™t released any information about jack sht yet. can we all just wait until they do before we comment about their features?
[/quote]I work in software business. Do you really think someone would spend time and effort implementing some features without intending to use it for the main audience? I am not the one shouting ā€œIMC is crap and should dieā€. I merely state a suggestion.

Also some kind of words from the GMs would silence a lot of noise we have around here. But none so far. And I waited for a while before posting this, not immediately after discovering the KR market system.

#7

err sry im not sarcasing (tho it sounds a bit like it)
just raising another idea here (the number is not after thorough thought tho)

#8

to this ā€”>"I work in software business. Do you really think someone would spend time and effort implementing some features without intending to use it for the main audience?"my answer= do you really think what was developed by one developer is going to be used by the other? just like that huh? lol.To this -->ā€œI am not the one shouting ā€œIMC is crap and should dieā€. I merely state a suggestion.ā€ my answer= you again confuse two totally separate companies.its quite literally impossible to say IMC couldnā€™t be crap in this scenario. they havnt done or said anything yet. hence the reason i said lets all just wait and see. your not the only one guilty of jumping to conclusions confusing one developers marketing strategy with one that hasnt been released yet.

#9

well when they ask you about it you make sure to put in your vote. if its not up for a vote. then none of you ever had a say in it anyway. you like the game? play it. you donā€™t like that game because of some of its marketing features? no one cares (yet). simply saying you donā€™t like the way one publisher did something isnt going to deter another company from doing what they want. they do what they believe it best for the game and its occupants and if you do not believe that. then please do yourself a huge favor and leave. we will enjoy it just as much with or without naysayers in it.

#10

Sigh, you confused between developer and publisher. You see, IMC is the developer for BOTH Korean and International version (and future SEA version too), there is only ONE developer here.

Nexon is the Korean publisher, just like Playone Asia will be the SEA publisher.

This is exactly why I have to say I work in the software business, because outsiders do not understand.

#11

well if you can tell the difference enough to correct me mr SIGH. then why the fk are we having this conversation?

#12

obviously you understand well enough they are separate from each other you just admitted it.

#13

i come to these forums for one reason and one reason only. to see if we have any fkin updates to our game and info at all. its not only missleading to read about this dumb sht koreans are doing but its also mind numbing to have to explain it to numb skulls that they are seperate. especially when those numb skulls know they are fkin seperate and admit it.

#14

I SAID wipe me down!!

#15

Usually I would just tell you to google it up, but I have some time now.

Developer is the one developing the game (duh, lol), they make the game, they code the game, they add feature into the game.

Publisher is the one distributing the game to the players, usually each publisher will have a region of effect, and some rules/restriction. For example WoW in China has to change skeleton model, or TOS in Korea has to go with this Net Cafe bonus stuff.

In simple comparison, if a store sells milk, it is a publisher. The factory that makes milk is the developer. 1 factory can supply milk for multiple stores, but itā€™s still the same milk, you see? It might have different label glued to it, but a factory cannot simply supply white milk to one and chocolate milk to another.

Also, your English hurts my eyes, please stop with the ā€˜fkingā€™, ā€˜dumbā€™, ā€˜shtā€™ and ā€˜numb skullsā€™ until you can write something sensible.

#17

publisher makes the rules on how a game is marketed. or did you miss that in your google search? LOL

#18

Simply talking about monetization issues for publishers is unlikely to change anything but itā€™s worth a shot.

#19

Yes, it is possible krToS will be different monetization with iToS, but we never know that, to kill RMT, they still will do something to protect the sustainability of the game. It is either let RMT Seller only earn the money, or Dev/Publisher only earn the money, or both together earn the money with current premium Token system, or no trading both also not earning the money.
I believe IMC is monitoring the feedback of this issue, it is still good if we keep help them brainstorming the better idea.

We all know, Trade System must be limit,
If not, it will only invite Massive Bots > RMT > P2W > Game Unsustainable > Fail.

To limit the trade system.

  1. We have friend list, and we also can add a ā€œTrade Listā€
  2. The Trade List can add up to maximum 3 players.
  3. Only these players you have unlocked the ā€œTradeā€ feature.
  4. Everytime you add a new player, it take 3 days to become active, and everytime you remove it, it takes 3 days again to refresh.
  5. In case you remove old trade list and add a new trade list, it takes 6 days to become available.
  6. Maybe need -2 TP for each trade, or need a level gap, so high level cannot transfer $$$ for lv1 character to sell.

Adding the decrease potential, and some material only able to trade once, it will definitely reduce the motivation or trade frequencies in the server.
And easier for developer to monitor the trade system and identify RMT seller.
For RMT seller, it will become 3 customers only in 6 days, it make them become unprofitable while the risk being caught is higher.

#20

i agree there always must be a source of checks and balances in place to combat bots taking over a perfectly good game. i like that a company tries to combat it. it just bothers me because i know IMC isnā€™t contracting us about our opinion on it. yet here we all are arguing about what one publisher did that another publisher may or may not do. its all just crazy.

#21

Itā€™s called a ā€˜suggestionā€™, itā€™s not a ā€˜do this or you dieā€™ argumentā€¦