Private Gathering Tools & their trader

[No one]

Private Gathering Tools trader (the trader can be one person holding an item or more)
- the idea is to give anyone with enough determination to get a Private Tool to gather something
- also, these tools must be gained through hard work and / or trading skills

Idea is like this :one Independent Gathering Item costs 1k resources of the item's type
For example :
- Private Herb Basket - requires herbs
- Private Stone detector - requires stones
- Private Water ... - requires water
- Private Candy Box - as there can never be 500 candies at same time, then either reduce the admission (to 50-100) or accept Sticky Goop
and so on.


There are some tricks for these items:

1. One can get it
- for 500 resources and will receive a Temporary Tool with [u]dual function[/u] [b]for maximum 250 days[/b]
- [u]gathering item [/u]that collects the designed resource
- a [u]cauldron [/u]that must have at least 2 resources/day since its aquisition.
- can add from its own inventory up to 250 resources
- must gather 250 resources with this temporary tool

When 500 resources are stored (in total 1000 resources must be used), it is ready to be changed to the real item.

2. The Temporary Tool will not grant the resource collected but will store it (in the cauldron) .

3. If the Temporary Tool is not used / filled up to day it will vanish on first attempt to use it.
So, one Temporary Tool will must have on day X of its existence [u]at least[/u] X*2 stored resources.

4. The Temporary Tool or the final one Private Tool [b]cannot be traded[/b].


One more thing that all these items can do:
- Private Gathering Tools may come with an extra feature : "The box" (smth like a private treasury).
There will be just one of this for a person and can hold all temporary gathered resources. The box will spit out "small pack of <aromatic herbs/unknown herbs/water/candy>" containing 50 resources each, no more, no less.
or
- collect resources within themselves and once they have more then ... lets say 50, they can ask somebody to "unload" them. Same "small packs of..." will came out.



All this can be done automatically at ... lets say the old shop on the other side of UG.

Or a person can be granted through item
a) ability to trade/create them - only by ritual, so that no item will be exchanged (see the interdiction) - from 500 resources for the temporary item
b) ability to trade/create from filled Temporary Tool to final Private Tool
c) ability to unload the Private Tools / The box . At some point this can be very difficult due to large number of resources.

Restrictions - mostly can be done by ritual:
- over 500 days old (might done by a player).
- cannot have more then 3 items of same type
- have at least XX in the skill granted by the tool (if any)


Required implementation:
- Item to start rituals a, b & c. Maybe different items but for same person
- Rituals for a, b & c
- Item functionality for temporary & Private Tool



NOTES:
- "The box" would be preferred as storage for gathered resources as it will allow one player with 2 or more of similar Private tools use the resources gathered faster.
- the final results (the "small pack of ...") would finally solve the resource trading issue (trading a fixed & limited amount instead of all).
- the "small pack of ..." on use will revert to the normal amount of resources.


EDIT: As I've been notified, there might be cases when one cannot harvest those 250 mandatory resources.
In this case, to protect the investments, there should be possible to consume a WP to fill up that request (250 harvested resources). It will still remain the requirement to add the rest of 250 resources from inventory within 250 days from Temporary Tool creation.



PS: thank you for your [i]neg rep[/i] and not spamming the topic. A [b]written constructive feedback[/b] would be much more appreciated.

Edited January 30, 2013 by No one

[Pipstickz]

Could I not simply buy 1000 of some resource or pay someone else to do it? Lots of determination there.

Tools have land loyalty requirements for a reason, don't they? This would essentially make shared tools useless (well actually it would make people who actually used shared tools get twice the resources, shhh), so I really don't see the point.

[Seigheart]

Shared tools are there already, why is it necessary for people to obtain their own collecting tools? If they want a resource, but are not affiliated with a land, they should talk to someone who is... You know... interact with other people. If everything could be done by one person, this might as well be a singleplayer game.

[Chewett]

Having a specific and limited amount of independent items does mean you are more forced to deal and interact with people, i prefer it this way and with the limited an set amount of tools you can limit the amount of resources brought into play.

I feel the current system works better in terms of controlling supply and demand rather than having a system where everyone is attempting to gather resources and which will most definitely lead to problems.

I dont see that a system would be a good use of programming time when other systems are planned and are likely to be more useful to the general populace.

[No one]

Thank you for your feedback and for keeping the spam out.
These are some really good questions. Stay with me as everything I wrote above was with specific purpose and to the point, but below I will put details &amp; reasons for why I've chosen them.
[quote name='Pipstickz' timestamp='1359556312' post='131697']
Could I not simply buy 1000 of some resource or pay someone else to do it? Lots of determination there.

Tools have land loyalty requirements for a reason, don't they? This would essentially make shared tools useless ... so I really don't see the point.
[/quote]
Read my initial post again Pip.
1. [u]buy 1k resources ???[/u]
you can only use (buy and use) [u]at most 750[/u] resources. Yes, Herbs are cheap but how much does it costs 750 stones ? or fenths ? not to mention bones &amp; skulls.
The 1000 was chosen as being the largest most reasonable number of resources that one could consider &amp; afford. You might say that means nothing. Indeed , it is nothing when you use 3 items of same type at the same time (see the logs and you will notice them).

Also, what is the interval for 1 resource to be gathered ? 20minutes for 1 water ? 10 minutes for 1 herb ? 130 minute for 1 candy ? how long will it take for you to gather 250 resources with just that tool ? somewhere between 2500 minutes for herbs and 5000 minutes for water ... if you have unlimited resources.

Also, Chewett, can you please share with us a small statistic of the amount of resources of each type in MD at this moment? Well, these tools will create the reason to spend all those resources and will create "the need" for lots more.

Will it allow you to gather faster ? ---- Yes. It will worth a lot for those that have them.
Is that bad ? ---- I don't know ? What happend when nad was caught with 10 water buckets? What is he doing with all that water ? Is he afraid of competition ? No, I don't think so.

2. [u]shared tools useless [/u]?
Ha. Shared tools will never be more useless then they are right now.
Sorry Chewett, i have to ask you again : how many cakes were created this month ? How many where created last months (keep me out for a better view of situation). oh, does anyone remembers the Tea ? how many resources are gathered ... monthly ? is it over 1k for all resources ? (don't be hasty, just check and share please).

So, Shared tools will now be used to maximum so that each can get their quota of 750 and all will use ... yes, correct ... the "newly useless" shared tools.

3. [u]Lots of determination there ???[/u]
Yes Pip, there is determination. Once you pay for your 750 resources you will need to work for your other 250 resources.
Indeed , there is the escape option of using a WP, you will say that this will make the Tool too cheap. Then you, my friend, it means that there are TOO DAMN MANY WPs.

Pip, have you read what I wrote ? really ? Look at this :
"have at least XX in the skill granted by the tool (if any)"
Consider it is a requirement of "10 herbalism" (because it should the the most common resource) , well ... that mean that the person has already gathered 500 herbs.
"10 Waterhandling" , for those that don't have access to 10 buckets, it is still about 500 water.

Do make the math for one person to gather himself all the resources for just one item. Now consider that many more will want to do it (I know I want to).

[quote name='Seigheart' timestamp='1359558506' post='131703']
Shared tools are there already, why is it necessary for people to obtain their own collecting tools? If they want a resource, but are not affiliated with a land, they should talk to someone who is... You know... interact with other people. If everything could be done by one person, this might as well be a singleplayer game.
[/quote]
I would generally ignore such question, but for the all to know, here it is:

4. [u]this might as well be a singleplayer game??[/u]
Is/was IAB playing alone at his gates ? was Z next to Bob? or Awiiya ... ? or SmartAlekRJ with his drachorns?

5. [u]Shared tools are there already ??[/u]
No, Shared tools are not there for all, at least not all for free. These tools will in time break the monopoles.


Private Tools are meant to be private and not trade-able. Meaning that if one manages to build one he alone can use it and take it with him when he leaves MD.
Talking with someone will be mandatory if not for getting the tools to gather the 750 resources himself but for buying them (again .. what is the price of 750 stones ??? How many stones are available in game at the moment ??? how many are/were collected EACH month ??)

Private tools might mean the death of shared tools, indeed, but only every single player will hold the maximum tools for all available resources. Until then there will always be a market for resources. ALWAYS. And all just because of some useless new tools that are not needed.

[quote name='Chewett' timestamp='1359572924' post='131715']
Having a specific and limited amount of independent items does mean you are more forced to deal and interact with people, i prefer it this way and with the limited an set amount of tools you can limit the amount of resources brought into play.

I feel the current system works better in terms of controlling supply and demand rather than having a system where everyone is attempting to gather resources and which will most definitely lead to problems.

I dont see that a system would be a good use of programming time when other systems are planned and are likely to be more useful to the general populace.
[/quote]
6. [u]forced to deal and interact with people ???[/u]
Indeed Chewett, it forces you to interact. But me personally I don't want that. I don't do RP, I used to be a fighter.
It is who I am and I am not alone.
I keep the interactions to the limit that I can handle &amp; accept. Why would you force me otherwise ? Isn't this game for all ?

7. [u]everyone is attempting to gather resources ??[/u]
are you sure ? Is it preferred that few (close to meaningless) gather resources ? and do what with them ? oh yea, in the future there will be something to do with them. This will take care that the future can be VERY FAR away / will give players something to do.

8. [u]will most definitely lead to problems??[/u]
Open your eyes, problems exists already, you just refuse to see it or you expect something else ? with all respect : can you please share with us what you think it will happen?


9. [u]with the limited an set amount of tools you can limit the amount of resources brought into play ???[/u]
I agree with you because currently there is no demand.
I disagree with you as most of the resources and tools are in the hands of few.


And best reason of all :

10.[quote name='Chewett' timestamp='1359572924' post='131715']
I dont see that a system would be a good use of programming time when other systems are planned and are likely to be more useful to the general populace.
[/quote]
Please let me know , I don't understand how :
- is "Dreaming" meant for general ppl ? I personally hate it, but it is getting on top of the list
- is "MP7" for general ppl ? who is using it ? Fang ? is that more important ?
- is "Illusions" for general ppl ? how many can use them ?5 ? 7 ? does that mean it is general ?
- do you want me to get into layout &amp; design ?

Thank you for your question Chewett, I do hope you will not get mad at me, but I don't see many "things for general ppl" (i know quite a few that are, but not as important as these tools).

These tools are for general ppl as it will create the "demand".
Also
- Lands may get income due to their resources &amp; shared items
- resources will generate trades, trades will invigorate the market for months if not years to come

__________________________________
Again, thank you for the feedback as it helps me get myself understood.
And thank you for not spamming this topic.



NOTE:
[b]If you think you know tips &amp; tricks on how to bypass some of the requirements ... good for you. Do consider that what you know is considered a spoiler and don't post it.[/b]

Edited January 30, 2013 by No one

[Chewett]

- is "Dreaming" meant for general ppl ? I personally hate it, but it is getting on top of the list - Mur work, Go complain to him
- is "MP7" for general ppl ? who is using it ? Fang ? is that more important ? - Mur work, Ditto
- is "Illusions" for general ppl ? how many can use them ?5 ? 7 ? does that mean it is general ? - This isnt getting nor has got any work...
- do you want me to get into layout &amp; design ? - im on holiday, as far as you know i can do nothing, but i choose to play around with some formatting.

There is a difference between a big system change, aka what you are proposing, Citizenship, treasury, tag system ect ect, and what you list above, which are minor fixes fitted around my week.

But this is both deviation and personal, so i shall wish you good luck on your idea, and leave this topic in peace.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Chewett

[Jubaris]

There is a lack of usage of resources and tools, that you pointed out No one, because there is not a goal for them to be used.
An important contest that would stimulate 'average Joe' to fight for and work would change that, but for now, you do not have any reason for mass-production of tea, for example, to pursue. So I don't think there's a problem about that inactivity in the concept of shared items themselves, rather a missing target for them to be used.
Not much a player can do nowdays other than interact with others, do random quests and research, enjoy some RP. There is no major event to enter its flow.

[Menhir]

[quote name='Rhaegar Targaryen' timestamp='1359588665' post='131727']
There is a lack of usage of resources and tools, that you pointed out No one, because there is not a goal for them to be used.
An important contest that would stimulate 'average Joe' to fight for and work would change that, but for now ...
[/quote]

I saw many nice ideas in the personal request topics as wishes which would make a lot of resources usable and people would use it. I always ask myself why do we have all the basic resources?

As dst pointed out here ->

[url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/13633-miningfishing-tools/"]http://magicduel.inv...gfishing-tools/[/url]

there is a need in a system which makes it easy for everyone to do something with all those resources. No ones idea is an extension of that as I see it. The questions for me are ->

Is there a need in the majority of the community to make resources more useful?

Is there a chance that all those item ideas from the list of wishes will be implemented one day?

Edited January 31, 2013 by Menhir

[Laphers]

If there is a way to potentially create more gathering items than actual resources then I would not support this idea.

Person A collects 1000 resources and gets a tool, Then collects 1000 resources and sells/gives them to Person B. Person B gets a tool and begins the same thing. Soon there are 4 people with tools, then 8 and so on. But there are a fixed maximum number of resources available to be harvested and a fixed regeneration rate. Having a potentially unlimited number of tools will ultimately be harmful to allowing resources to reach all players.

Those who deplete resources are not usually harvesting to gain resources but to keep them from others (the side benefit is that they are receiving the small amount). Unfortunately the resource regeneration works in favour of the depleters by letting them have a few days off before they have to deplete again. Those who do not deplete are bound by their trust in others and willingness to share resources with others. Having more tools in the hands of others will only assist those who deplete resources keep them from the majority of MDers.

Edit:

I question your amount of 750 resources as being an amount that is a maximum usable amount. I am currently carrying 1200 branches that I collected myself. When I became loyalty leader of the Woodcutters in Dec 2010 (before tool sharing) I started collecting lumber. That lumber was at 1200 when I gave it away in the middle of April 2011. I recently traded away over 1000 lumber again in Sept last year. So 750 seems quite low if you are patient.

10 of a collecting skill? I have 1 in water collecting. I've held a pail less than 5 times (and I've never depleted water to get that skill). Do you want to know what my woodcutting skill is? I can guess what Eon's herbalism skill was. This amount seems to be ridiculously low.

Edited January 31, 2013 by Laphers

[No one]

@Laphers: I already responded to your question
Have you ever tried to collect 1000 resources of one type ? Did you achieved this with just one item ? How long did it took ?

Are you, Laphers, afraid that the your land's resources will no longer be under your land's control ? or that they will get depleted ?

Please review my answers before pushing "post" as I already responded your quiestion:

[quote]9. [u][u]with the limited an set amount of tools you can limit the amount of resources brought into play ???[/u][/u]
I agree with you because currently there is no demand.
I disagree with you as most of the resources and tools are in the hands of few.
[/quote]

Or am I mistaken : you are afraid that you will no longer hold monopole / control over resources. buhoo
LR is the only land that can gather wood & other wooden resources. As long as your items are not shared (at least not for non-LR) you are feel safe. As long as you keep your land closed you feel safe. But the resources & tools are not about your own need of control, get a dog for that or a puppet.

[Laphers]

I have collected over 1000 of a resource. Once before the tools were shared and it took me 3.5 months (I believe that it was a single tool but I could be wrong). And twice since the tools were shared; once for branches and once for lumber (I haven't tracked how long it took me). 97% of the time I was holding a single tool.

I am not concerned with maintaining a land's control over any one resource. I do not agree with anyone's tactic with depleting resources as I feel that the only reason to do that is to limit others ability to get resources. If I was concerned with maintaining a monopoly over resources or tools then I would have spoken against Mur's plan for shared tools rather than supporting it. There are at least 2 people who have independent tools for woodcutting. As well there are at least two (non LR) people who have LR illusions so that's 4 people who potentially harvest wood products and not be controlled by LR so while there is a limit to who can harvest directly it is not a monopoly.

[No one]

Having already collected those 1k, then you should understand that this is not an issue of too many tools being in game at same time.
[quote name='Laphers' timestamp='1359625978' post='131755'] I do not agree with anyone's tactic with depleting resources as I feel that the only reason to do that is to limit others ability to get resources.[/quote]
I do agree with you on not agreeing with preventing others access to resources.
Most relevant example I can think of are the water tools. There are ONLY 3 shared items and guess who is getting them every week ? At least one is going to MB ppl even if they have access to their buckets.

As Chewett said, these tools will raise problems, but only in terms on having all resources depleted. This risk exists even now, the problem is that now, nobody cares. There is no need for resources, they just pile up.

Also, to consume significant amounts of resources would imply creating expensive recipes (50-60 and more resource) that would be unfair to not that active ppl.



By the way, creating the tools that I proposed here will offer something else (that nobody seems to ask / care) : the ability to transfer portions of resources.

[Grido]

Just to precede my post; I've definitely skimmed, rather than read, at least half the topic.


As memory serves, land specific tools are such to force interaction between lands, so that there has to be that interaction. If we take Tea, you get the herbs from LR, the water from MB, regardless how much is made you have to interact with both lands in some capacity in order to do it.

You say you shouldn't be forced to interact with others (or something) because you are a fighter, I say this is a community and that is precisely what should happen if you want to perform certain actions. This is a PvP, not a Single Player game as you seem to imagine. The players you state, did/do they play alone? Z has his tree, but also his alliance, he interacts with people there, likewise for Awii. RJ had his Drachs, and sporadically had quests for them. IaB you'll forgive me for not knowing what he's up to lately, but at least in the most part these players are not playing alone like you suggest.


Shared tools are only "useless" as you put it, because there's little to do with the resources after you've got them. What you propose will not solve this, it will delay it, and will end up a whole lot worse.

And you know that it's fully intentional that the resources bulk up right? And so transferring portions of resources isn't a good thing (or however to phrase it).

[No one]

[spoiler][/spoiler]

Edited January 31, 2013 by No one

[Chewett]

[quote name='No one' timestamp='1359655503' post='131778']
ok, I quit. Don't agree with me.

Fight the walls or ban me.
[/quote]

Its a shame really. We should listen to each others point of view instead of fighting someone who thinks differently...

I would encourage you to persue this no one

[Laphers]

Chewett is right. I will try to respond to the idea with suggestions instead.

I'm ambivalent towards the temporary tool so I won't speak to that.

What if the private tool were to have a limited number of uses? If it costs 1000 resources, what if it disappeared after collecting 1000 (or 1001, 1050 or 1500) resources. The owner could sell the collected resources at a profit (possibly) and come out ahead if they want/need to get a private tool again. If it did disappear, what if it didn't award the collecting stat gain until it was used up. So, you would have to lose the tool to gain the 20 on the stat.

I do like the idea about splitting resources but as Grido pointed out splitting large groups of resources goes against the original plan for resources.

[No one]

@Chewett & Grido: [size=1][On negative tone][/size] : follow my activity for the next months.


@Laphers:
Yes, it goes agains the original plan. But Grido doen't know why it is not advisable to have split resources, it is about the ID of the resources. 10k resources WOULD mean 10K records in database which is not a good thing for the server. but 10k resources in 50/100 packs is much more acceptable. Not to mention that packs could also be broken within 1-10 days to mix with the rest and thus limit the database size.

And "No", I wouldn't want it to dissapear. If you would have to work that hard to get a "Private Tool" (a not trade-able tool) you would not want it to get lost.

[Chewett]

[quote name='No one' timestamp='1359708402' post='131793']
@Laphers:
Yes, it goes agains the original plan. But Grido doen't know why it is not advisable to have split resources, it is about the ID of the resources. 10k resources WOULD mean 10K records in database which is not a good thing for the server. but 10k resources in 50/100 packs is much more acceptable. Not to mention that packs could also be broken within 1-10 days to mix with the rest and thus limit the database size.
[/quote]

Resources dont need to be individually addressable until you actually want to send batches, there is no reason why we cant implement something like being able to trade one or two using a third table. Which would most definitely not create 10k records for 10k resources unless you wanted to trade every single one individually, and if so have fun trying to manage that.

Mur has previously presented a reason as to why these items stack, its somewhere on the forum if people are interested. There is no technical reason not to provided clever programming.

[No one]

"Mur has previously presented a reason" if is as you say, is obsolete. Please provide a link for it if you mention it.
And there should not be needed a third/4th/Nth table, you can add the option when selecting the resource to specify the amount.

The reason I proposed the "packs of 50" was to give the ability to gift / trade "remotely" those resources.

After that I would have proposed a "Post office" where you can "drop" your package, the price of 1sc and the correspondent would receive a PM with a code (different from ITC).
Useless, might seem, but fun to use & good for those that are not online for too long.


_____
Have fun.

[Maebius]

[quote name='Chewett' timestamp='1359708773' post='131794']
Mur has previously presented a reason as to why these items stack, its somewhere on the forum if people are interested. There is no technical reason not to provided clever programming.
[/quote]

The link for comments about resources. I think they should remain "stacked" for similar reasons. It's been brought up a few times, and shot down more than that in-game when I've seen it discussed.
http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/10370-how-can-resources-be-fixed-unsplittable-groups/#entry90038

(edit: I picture it like Mind Power!?! Bigger doesn't mean more copies of you, it means more influence for you )


That said, I agree that discussion is always valid, even if it trends against the original post. New ideas can sometimes inspire tangents that Do work out. However, I feel that the shared tools are fine the way they are. I'd love me some large bundles of Herbs to get when I'm all alone wandering, but the current system is setup to encourage cooperation (or competition) between lands. It's up to us to coordinate that if necessary.
(granted, as also stated above, lack of "end uses" may be teh root problem, with why things other than Fenths and Stones are not as "in demand". But that's a different topic than what I believe No One is suggesting here.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Maebius

[Udgard]

I'd just like to mention, that when/if the council chooses to expand my item creation thingy, one of my first plans is to make a processing item that can process raws to semi-finished items. This is partly meant to be a form of making bundles, where you can change a bundle of a raw material to something new, just with a different name (for example, 100 lumber might turn into one of the plank items of the earlier raw material system).

[dst]

Why don't you create a recipe and send it to Chewett as he asked you to?

[Udgard]

Because I believe mid-level items should not need such a complex process such as cauldron (which requires cauldron item, cauldron recipe, multiple people etc). I've prepared a recipe for mid-level item using cauldron, yes, but if possible, I would like to strive for "processing items" that are much simpler (single item, most will be shared items, produces mid-level items with a simple click; raw resource consumed and mid-item created).

I'd rather keep cauldron-style items for end-products that are actually useful; we've already seen how tea, for example, is not being created in massive amount even though it has an effect. I think making mid-items follow cauldron-style would not be very fun.

Edit: and oh yeah chewy, I intended to PM this reason to you but was waiting for the result of the vote to came out.. and then kinda forgot to send you when the council confirmation didn't come out yet, sorry

Edited February 1, 2013 by Udgard

[dst]

Ah, so basically you want a let's call it "semi-cauldron" that will just turn X amount of resources into 1/2/n semi processed items. And those semis will be used for cauldron types. Did I get it right?

[Maebius]

[quote name='dst' timestamp='1359734637' post='131818']
Ah, so basically you want a let's call it "semi-cauldron" that will just turn X amount of resources into 1/2/n semi processed items. And those semis will be used for cauldron types. Did I get it right?
[/quote]

I like this implimentation. Cauldrons, to me, seem wonderful and awesome for the more "complex" items.
Something like turning 100 Lumber into 10 Wooden Planks, as I beleive Udgard was considering, would give at least a minor use to resources, as well as allow a bit more refinement in some fancier cauldron recipes.