does GGG even ban RMTers

"

Antnee a écrit :

All of the gear on my level 90 Domination witch (who soloed every map boss at one point) was self found, with the exception of the Dream Fragments I switch out for Merveil.

what about orbs to roll maps? hell, what about maps themselves?

was it fek-it-one-alch?
was it magic/packsize?

i gave up at some point

@knac84: Looks like we are arguing mostly about semantics. Everything I wrote was an example of the most constructive course of action for an individual player, as far as I understand it. It is not a solution by your definition - it is a method and an approach to the game. I wrote it because a lot of people seem to suffer from unrealistic expectations or a nonconstructive approach.

Solutions as in "what can be done to alleviate the problem from a game design standpoint" are an entirely different subject.

To sum it up, we are talking about different things. I tried to define my posts as clearly as possible, but I guess I didn't succeed.

"

CCR5 a écrit :

"

Antnee a écrit :

All of the gear on my level 90 Domination witch (who soloed every map boss at one point) was self found, with the exception of the Dream Fragments I switch out for Merveil.

what about orbs to roll maps? hell, what about maps themselves?

was it fek-it-one-alch?
was it magic/packsize?

i gave up at some point

Even that. I got a little help from guildies, who would donate an orb here or there on a case by case basis (at around maplevel 75). I could have done without by grinding a few lower level maps. Typically, until I got to the 70's tier, I just alched and ran. After that, I tried to roll the highest IIQ, pack size was a welcome bonus.

I never bought a single map, save the shrine I bought to make the unid courtyard. We are getting a bit off track though.

"

Antnee a écrit :

I will always agree with letting ten criminals go to prevent one innocent person from suffering an injustice. I'm pretty sure this is what the devs are thinking as well.

What is happening is that ten criminals don't even get investigated because one of them might, in a remote, theoretical scenario, be an innocent person.

"

Mivo a écrit :

"

Antnee a écrit :

I will always agree with letting ten criminals go to prevent one innocent person from suffering an injustice. I'm pretty sure this is what the devs are thinking as well.

What is happening is that ten criminals don't even get investigated because one of them might, in a remote, theoretical scenario, be an innocent person.

Didn't knew that support staff is discussing with us here.

"

Mivo a écrit :

"

Antnee a écrit :

I will always agree with letting ten criminals go to prevent one innocent person from suffering an injustice. I'm pretty sure this is what the devs are thinking as well.

What is happening is that ten criminals don't even get investigated because one of them might, in a remote, theoretical scenario, be an innocent person.

That's exactly right.

I think we also need to remember, here, that the "department of justice" numbers in the single digits. A handful of people (if that, it could be as few as one person!) against an army. A daunting task, wouldn't you say so?

This definitely can give the impression that nothing is being done, even though its plausible that the DOJ is working full time banning and investigating accounts. The entire internet is watching, and "catches" an exponential amount more than our DOJ.

If I were to point out that RMTers and their bots help lower prices by lowering scarcity and thereby help everyone get what they want a little easier. I assume I will just get flamed?

"

Bars a écrit :

@knac84: Looks like we are arguing mostly about semantics. Everything I wrote was an example of the most constructive course of action for an individual player, as far as I understand it. It is not a solution by your definition - it is a method and an approach to the game. I wrote it because a lot of people seem to suffer from unrealistic expectations or a nonconstructive approach.

Solutions as in "what can be done to alleviate the problem from a game design standpoint" are an entirely different subject.

To sum it up, we are talking about different things. I tried to define my posts as clearly as possible, but I guess I didn't succeed.

We can agree on that. Maybe you are right if you are addressing the OP. Is getting bitter about GGG's perceived course of action as a personal approach worth it? I agree with you, what you underline is a better course of action as INDIVIDUAL players. If it's a choice between 'Do that or move on' yes, is better than 'get bitter, and bitch in the forums about RMT' from an individual point of view... However, if I was a GGG dev, I would be asking myself why people is perceiving the we don't care about RMT, and how can we reduce this perception?


But if we are questioning what GGG is or can do to fight the problem, if it's enough, if there are other ways of doing it etc. we shouldn't decide or discuss upon our personal ways of copping with RMT.


I think is better to try discuss how GGG could try to alleviate the problem, shift perception, etc. instead of how we personally approach the RMT problem (in principle I agree with your view about this, otherwise I would have already quit over the rage as is not a new problem!). If anything because in the long run is healthier for the game (and I truly believe, that on that everybody which is not profiting from the situation can agree), and as people who like (or liked at some point) and supports the game, it would be the best thing to do. Ignoring it is not going to make it go away.

"

christophenuss a écrit :

If I were to point out that RMTers and their bots help lower prices by lowering scarcity and thereby help everyone get what they want a little easier. I assume I will just get flamed?

Well, that's because that's not how it works. As said in a previous comment, the underlying real problem is how the game economy is designed, and the problem is the game naturally devalue's player effort over time (in other words: over time item's value tends to zero, except BiS items which tend to increase; but if we could run a simulation of the game indefinitively even these would tend to zero). RMT just makes the process (much) faster. Some designers think this is great design, numbers tell otherwise (and is not because the game is hardcore or not, as this has nothing to do with 'hardcoreness') then proceed wonder people lose interest so fast in those games.


I've played plenty of online games with live economies (where transactions and economic activity matter a lot), and if there is a clear line between how bad or good these games, was how the game achieves a good balance and price stability over time or the game has self-destructive trends. All those games had RMT, in good games most people didn't give a fuck about RMT, added plus if you could actually destroy those RMT acquired goods (in PoE that would be the equivalent of CT where some tiems are destroyed on kill) GGG's way to fix this is 'temporal leagues' and resets, some badly designed currency sinks (paying for content access; infintie layers of RNG). Real fixes involve either detach player dependency of economies (we have enough SF players who do not need to demonstrate anything to anyone talking about how bad the situation is right now in this thread; I mean players with actual real endgame experience as SF players, not someone with a lvl 65-75 char) so they can self-adjust their pace and progress in game, or a proper implementation of an economy where effort devaluation is not the main on-going theme.

"

Antnee a écrit :

This definitely can give the impression that nothing is being done, even though its plausible that the DOJ is working full time banning and investigating accounts.

I disagree on the plausibility. It is not plausible when the evidence is right in front of everyone's noses, at least in some cases, and everyone can see that nothing is happening to the person. If one of the most notorious RMTers not only doesn't face visible consequences, but instead gets a t-shirt, it's not unreasonable to conclude that much less obvious RMTers likewise may not have to fear suspensions or account terminations. Consider how much extreme, public pressure and very obvious, almost obnoxious, RMTing and behavior it took before P. was eventually banned.

Of course it is speculation, to a degree. But what evidence is there that GGG actively takes action against RMTers? We don't even see complaints about "wrongfully" having been punished, which I am sure we would find here (but more importantly: elsewhere) if people actually did get banned for RMTing. The evidence is in the absence of these complaints.

I guess the thread evolved into several parallel discussions, which naturally leads to a big mess.



We have now reached a point of complete agreement. I am content.

*gently steers the thread towards more constructive discussion*

*looks at signature and smiles wistfully*