How will block / ignore / function over to general gameplay and trade?

Let´s say i run my tannery and leather armor shop in a node. During my hunts and trade routes, i encounter a very toxic player. This player ends up being blocked by me and put on ignore or whatever the feature is called.

Now...the question.

I have Blocked / Ignored Player X.
Player X comes to my stall. Can player X browse and shop even after i put him / her on block?

I would like to ask if a system as follows have been talked about, or considered?

* A player that owns / runs a store or stall, aka anything that sells items will have access to an ability to control their business. This by connecting their Block / ignore list to cross check the names of the player that want to shop.
* If the customer wanting to shop is blocked or ignored, the store will be closed to said player.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Vhaeyne

Dygz wrote: »

Just because you see someone in the world does not mean you will trade with them. It does not mean that you will allow the workers at your stall to sell to people you have blocked.
Blocking them does not prevent you from seeing them and does not prevent them from seeing your stall. It just prevents them from buying your stuff.
And, that is excellent RP.

If you were RPing with someone, I am very skeptical that you would block/ignore them.

Saying that this is excellent RP is a little crazy.

ThexBlackxKnight

Blocking people from trade is dumb , much better to take the gold of the people you don't like. You can call me whatever you want , I still got your money.

Dygz

Part of roleplaying is having workers that will not sell to people on your block list.
Also, shunning specific characters would be RP.

Dygz

ThexBlackxKnight wrote: »

Blocking people from trade is dumb , much better to take the gold of the people you don't like. You can call me whatever you want , I still got your money.

Not if I shun you and refuse to sell to you.
You can call me whatever you want. You won't have my money.

ThexBlackxKnight

Dygz wrote: »

ThexBlackxKnight wrote: »

Blocking people from trade is dumb , much better to take the gold of the people you don't like. You can call me whatever you want , I still got your money.

Not if I shun you and refuse to sell to you.
You can call me whatever you want. You won't have my money.

Not really talking about the people that don't want to do business with me. If you hate me fine , still want to drop 2k gold into my wallet for this item fine, not going to turn that down and Ill be richer and other person will be poorer for it.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

Part of roleplaying is having workers that will not sell to people on your block list.
Also, shunning specific characters would be RP.

Having an RP only feature that serves to do nothing other than pissing off other players is not a good thing to add to a game.

Add RP stuff it is fairly easy and doesn't affect the general population in any negative way, sure. As soon as it starts seeing other players having to log out, log in to another character, buy the item, set the item in a location that the first character has access to, log out of the alt, log back in to the main and pick up aaid item, then the feature being discussed should not be discussed in RP terms at all.

Grihm

Noaani wrote: »

Having an RP only feature that serves to do nothing other than pissing off other players is not a good thing to add to a game.

Add RP stuff it is fairly easy and doesn't affect the general population in any negative way, sure. As soon as it starts seeing other players having to log out, log in to another character, buy the item, set the item in a location that the first character has access to, log out of the alt, log back in to the main and pick up aaid item, then the feature being discussed should not be discussed in RP terms at all.

We mentioned this as well before.
The system in this can very easy encompass and work on an account wide range.

If i as a player spam you with messages, i follow you around while you RP and annoy you, i interrupt your events, i harass you and being a generally disruptive person, you should have the option to remedy this.

Use the /ignore if you just don´t want to see any of my messages, and if you feel this is enough.
If you feel i have created so much annoyance, it should be your right to place a /blacklist or /ban on me.

/ignore = Removes messages and option to communicate
/ban /blacklist = Bans player and account alts from all sorts of communication AND trade.

In any general trade house, i would not see your items while browsing, and if i were in your store or stall, i would simple get a notification that i have been blacklisted from your business.

The system is not advanced, it´s nothing new, and it certainly is not only there for p***ing off players. The system would be in place to ensure a player has the level of tools to moderate it´s surroundings, and remove toxic or unwanted behaviour.

Dygz

If a player wants to have an alt that is friendly with me buy an item from my stall, I'm fine with that.
That is good RP.
My characters should have animosity with other characters; not with the player.
I'm OK with nudging another player into using an alt.

Especially since I plan on having a Corrupted Zombie Alt.

Noaani

Grihm wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Having an RP only feature that serves to do nothing other than pissing off other players is not a good thing to add to a game.

Add RP stuff it is fairly easy and doesn't affect the general population in any negative way, sure. As soon as it starts seeing other players having to log out, log in to another character, buy the item, set the item in a location that the first character has access to, log out of the alt, log back in to the main and pick up aaid item, then the feature being discussed should not be discussed in RP terms at all.

We mentioned this as well before.
The system in this can very easy encompass and work on an account wide range.

If i as a player spam you with messages, i follow you around while you RP and annoy you, i interrupt your events, i harass you and being a generally disruptive person, you should have the option to remedy this.

Use the /ignore if you just don´t want to see any of my messages, and if you feel this is enough.
If you feel i have created so much annoyance, it should be your right to place a /blacklist or /ban on me.

/ignore = Removes messages and option to communicate
/ban /blacklist = Bans player and account alts from all sorts of communication AND trade.

In any general trade house, i would not see your items while browsing, and if i were in your store or stall, i would simple get a notification that i have been blacklisted from your business.

The system is not advanced, it´s nothing new, and it certainly is not only there for p***ing off players. The system would be in place to ensure a player has the level of tools to moderate it´s surroundings, and remove toxic or unwanted behaviour.

Place rival guild on blacklist.

Ask new recruits to purchase item from your store.

Those not able to are spies.

It is not rocket science to see how *ANY* system that affects an entire account (even achievements) can be used to determine spies.

Grihm

@Noaani So then, do not harass, ruin RP, troll etc a player and don´t end up on that list.

If someone puts you on that list anyway....is that not the players right, as in any game?
As for the spy problem, sure..that can be a problem...but why should that specific problem then count, if the harassed players enjoyment of the game should not?

Also, why would a spy be that fantastically interested in a characters store? I would venture a guess, a spy can do monumental harm in information-gathering in other ways, but you seem to be stuck at just one. Infiltrate among the soldiers or politicians i feel would be a better choice, than to browse a dagger selection.

Noaani

Grihm wrote: »

Noaani So then, do not harass, ruin RP, troll etc a player and don´t end up on that list.

Did you even read the post? I even made it short so that it wasn't too much to ask for people to do so before replying.

I am not talking about using the blacklist as you are talking about using it. I am talking about using it as a tool to identify spies coming in to your guild.

I have no real desire to prevent anyone buying anything I am selling. If I am selling it, it is because it is of no real use to me or my guild, and anyone that has use for it is welcome to it.

Thus, my blacklist is empty.

Now, if we are recruiting some people, and I place the name of every member of any rival guilds we have on my blacklist and tell that new recruit to purchase an item off my store, if that recruit is unable to do so, then I am able to say with 100% certainty that the player has a character in a rival guild.

As such, they are likely a spy.

Dygz

Again...this seems like the same mechanics as Permissions for a Freehold.
Seems like we should be able to set a whitelist, a blacklist or open to public for our stalls.
I don't understand why that is controversial.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

Again...this seems like the same mechanics as Permissions for a Freehold.
Seems like we should be able to set a whitelist, a blacklist or open to public for our stalls.
I don't understand why that is controversial.

The controversy is because if this is account wide, it destroys espionage - and if it is not account wide, it is simply an ineffective annoyance.

I don't understand why you don't understand this.

Grihm

Noaani wrote: »

Grihm wrote: »

Noaani So then, do not harass, ruin RP, troll etc a player and don´t end up on that list.

Did you even read the post? I even made it short so that it wasn't too much to ask for people to do so before replying.

I am not talking about using the blacklist as you are talking about using it. I am talking about using it as a tool to identify spies coming in to your guild.

I have no real desire to prevent anyone buying anything I am selling. If I am selling it, it is because it is of no real use to me or my guild, and anyone that has use for it is welcome to it.

Thus, my blacklist is empty.

Now, if we are recruiting some people, and I place the name of every member of any rival guilds we have on my blacklist and tell that new recruit to purchase an item off my store, if that recruit is unable to do so, then I am able to say with 100% certainty that the player has a character in a rival guild.

As such, they are likely a spy.

That sounds like a very thin example tbh..but If that would be the case, then for sure the system should be tweaked. A system should work overall for all, and let´s say that example of yours are the tipping scale of it all, then the system should be tweaked, no doubt.

It should not be fully ignored, because that´s just to give in to the player base that want to be disruptive and toxic.

As for your comment to Dygz " The controversy is because if this is account wide, it destroys espionage - and if it is not account wide, it is simply an ineffective annoyance.

I don't understand why you don't understand this. "

Can you please explain what sort of espionage you are planning, that has the necessity for you to buy items from someone? I really don´t see the thread in that example.

Dygz

Noanni is the only person on my ignore list.
That way, I'm not tempted to respond to their absurdities and it cuts down on pages of meaningless banter.

Blocks should be by character; not by account.
I don't know why it would matter if a spy is trying to buy my stuff. If a spy wants to buy my stuff they can.
I would imagine the guilds I don't want buying my stuff, we would be at war with and probably wouldn't be able to buy stuff from my stall anyway.

Noaani

Grihm wrote: »

That sounds like a very thin example tbh.

It sounds like what literally every guild that is concerned with being spied on would do. Nothing 'thin' about that.

Grihm wrote: »

Can you please explain what sort of espionage you are planning, that has the necessity for you to buy items from someone? I really don´t see the thread in that example.

You are still not getting it.

The point if making a new recruit buy an item is to prove they dont have a character in a rival guild. Nothing more, nothing less.

If they have a character in a rival guild, I have all characters of that rival guild on my blacklist, and that blacklist was account wide, then ONLY people with characters in rival guilds are unable to buy from me.

If a new recruit is given the test of buying a specific item off me and is unable, they have a character in that rival guild.

What this means is that all inter-guild espionage is almost entirely killed off, as you can always see if a recruit is an alt of someone from another guild.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

Noanni is the only person on my ignore list.

My thoughts on this from an earlier thread.

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

At this point I think it'd just be easier to entirely ignore Dygz's opinions on dwarves if not most everything.

One of the best things that has happened to me know these forums is that I pissed Dygz off enough for him to ignore me.

This is far better than me ignoring him, as it means I can still read his opinions on the game and be amused by several aspects of them. It also means that in a thread on a topic I care about, I can point out why his comments are incorrect (which they usually are) and not need to worry about getting in to a pointless debate with him when he inevitably contradicts himself and then tries to say that he didn't say the exact words he said earlier.

Grihm

No @Noaani , it really does not sound like something " literally every guild " would do. You speak for your own guild perhaps, but no...i do not think this is " literally every guilds " top prio.

I do get it, but you are dead focused on this single example. It will not fall or stand on just " this " one. Also, i have a really hard time seeing roleplayers getting into this. I would see it as not abuse in the full meaning of the word, but a bit of grey market system check to see if anyone was blacklisted. By that action, you yourself are ruining the espionage, because for some reason, you play a secret shopper game-host.

Why not just let anyone join the guild as intended and NOT force them to go shopping, so you can get info from the games internal systems check, and use that to scratch RP and espionage gameplay?

You are creating a problem that does not exist, because you do not like a system that can assist the players being harassed or forced. The system IS fully for making sure a single player or a less ´confronting player or guild does not become

* Harassed and forced to hang around their abusers
* Targeted and forced to sell to rivals for low sums, unless they will keep getting ganked
* Threatened and or blackmailed into submission and free workforce for the abusers

And please do me a favor, do not say these things do not happen in online games. Such a comment would be very disrespectful and a blatant lie in the face of players being abused daily.

Noaani

Grihm wrote: »

No Noaani , it really does not sound like something " literally every guild " would do.

You need to learn to read.

I didnt say literally every guild would do it, I said literally every guild that was concerned about being spied on would do it.

Here is the quote for you.

Noaani wrote: »

Grihm wrote: »

That sounds like a very thin example tbh.

It sounds like what literally every guild that is concerned with being spied on would do.

The sets 'every guild' and 'every guild concerned with being spied on' are very different sets.

You seem to think this is a single example. It is not.

Intrepid have said they want espionage to be a thing in Ashes - so any system that makes it trivial to detect obviously cant be a part of the game.

As to the rest it your post - as I said earlier I am not proposing anything.

Yes, players of online games can be dicks and can harass other players. Yes, an ignore feature that works on the whole account is one way to lessen that (not prevent it, to be clear). However, there are other things publishers can do, and since Intrepid want espionage in this game, they have to look at those other avenues.

As to the three examples you gave, the proposal to allow players to have a blacklist of players they dont sell to isnt going to stop any of that. If a player or guild were the kind of people that would do any of the things you listed, they dont need the marketplace at all,they can force that player to trade directly with them - in fact,I would argue that this would be how they would prefer to go about it. If I were forcing you to sell to me at a low rate, I wouldn't be doing that via the in game marketplace where anyone could buy it at that price.

Grihm

Noaani wrote: »

Grihm wrote: »

No Noaani , it really does not sound like something " literally every guild " would do.

You need to learn to read.

I didnt say literally every guild would do it, I said literally every guild that was concerned about being spied on would do it.

Here is the quote for you.

Noaani wrote: »

Grihm wrote: »

That sounds like a very thin example tbh.

It sounds like what literally every guild that is concerned with being spied on would do.

The sets 'every guild' and 'every guild concerned with being spied on' are very different sets.

You seem to think this is a single example. It is not.

Intrepid have said they want espionage to be a thing in Ashes - so any system that makes it trivial to detect obviously cant be a part of the game.

As to the rest it your post - as I said earlier I am not proposing anything.

Yes, players of online games can be dicks and can harass other players. Yes, an ignore feature that works on the whole account is one way to lessen that (not prevent it, to be clear). However, there are other things publishers can do, and since Intrepid want espionage in this game, they have to look at those other avenues.

As to the three examples you gave, the proposal to allow players to have a blacklist of players they dont sell to isnt going to stop any of that. If a player or guild were the kind of people that would do any of the things you listed, they dont need the marketplace at all,they can force that player to trade directly with them - in fact,I would argue that this would be how they would prefer to go about it. If I were forcing you to sell to me at a low rate, I wouldn't be doing that via the in game marketplace where anyone could buy it at that price.

Personally, i feel you have a very odd way of looking at this espionage deal. You said before that "" If a new recruit is given the test of buying a specific item off me and is unable, they have a character in that rival guild.

What this means is that all inter-guild espionage is almost entirely killed off, as you can always see if a recruit is an alt of someone from another guild.""

Is that really a valid way to find that out? You would be using off game elements / information to benefit in game. Explanation: You know a ban / block system exists in the game, so instead of letting it work out organically in game, you would prefer to set up a strange " So my scouts and spies, before you get this mission, off to that vendor and buy stuff " test.

You create a non existing problem, to promote a Ney vote for a possible system that could ensure safety and the enjoyment of targeted players ahead.

You sound very keen on having this system of shielding not being implemented.
Part from the possibility of a spy not being able to spy properly for some reason, What else?

A system does not simply stand or fall on one single consequence, so elaborate how this would ruin the espionage part of Ashes.

Since you are clearly this invested in seeing this system not being used, i would assume you have several examples of the reason to vote it away.

Child Item