Suggestion: Have the ability to redirect your allocated pp goods to other player

[Julio Montega]

Ahoy lads,
here is a quick suggestion:

As i am primarily a combat pilot, and i still get my allocated tons of pp goods per half hour,
i would love to be able put them to use, by allocating my share of it to another player.
This way, we can help out new players within our power and have the ressources at the right people's hands.

I suppose an option in the friends menu, to allocate your rate to a player in the vicinity or on your friendslist
would fit, granting them your share of the pp goods as long as you stay online.
This feature however would require some sort of activity detection on the giving player,
to prevent afk abuse.

Thoughts?

 

[Julio Montega]

/ bump
No thoughts so far?

 

[CMDR Zantiry Kaine]

Maybe something as simple as PP goods not being flagged as stolen if traded to a friend or wing member. Not sure if they made it so you can drop cargo to wingmates without the flag yet but that would be a start.

 

[Flavourless]

You could fast track allocation and then reallocate. Its just (yet) another credit transfer thread.

 

[badwolf77]

One of the problems of any kind of resource transfer in an MMO environment is either sockpuppeting (spending real money on multiple commanders to rapidly advance the development of one of them) or good old fashioned real-life exortion or bullying (give me all your PP goods, or I'll follow you around and gank you on sight -- or worse).

I suspect that's why the current ability to transfer resources in-game is so restricted and I don't envy the devs that decision.

 

[Mohrgan]

I think each player should earn his keep. It would be a problem if one player could 'fund' others to gain rank, and gain access to rewards. Even new players should have to pull their weight.

 

[Kitiara]

One of the problems of any kind of resource transfer in an MMO environment is either sockpuppeting (spending real money on multiple commanders to rapidly advance the development of one of them) or good old fashioned real-life exortion or bullying (give me all your PP goods, or I'll follow you around and gank you on sight -- or worse).

I suspect that's why the current ability to transfer resources in-game is so restricted and I don't envy the devs that decision.

The first of those two I can't really see a downside to. If someone wants to purchase 2, 3, 4 or 20 copies of the game, then they should be able to play which ever of them they want at any one time (whether that's one by one or multiple accounts at the same time).

If they could transfer PP supplies to each other, what real difference would it make? THey get to maintain rank 5 with less effort per week on an account if they use one main and the others to assist. Or they get to spend much more effort on it by trying to get multiple commanders up the ranks.

Your second point I think is perhaps a little alarmist. But would be covered under Frontier's existing policies on harassment of other players

 

[CMDR Ged Satti]

I think each player should earn his keep. It would be a problem if one player could 'fund' others to gain rank, and gain access to rewards. Even new players should have to pull their weight.

I don't disagree in general, but I have some RL friends I play with, one of which plays much less than the rest of us. Thus he has much less money. It would be nice if we could toss a little cash his way so that he can at least afford a decent FSD so that the whole group doesn't have to do 8 LY jumps to stay together. It's not a long term problem though, as we can always take him to civil war combat sites and help him earn some shiny bounties that way.

 

[Julio Montega]

I think each player should earn his keep. It would be a problem if one player could 'fund' others to gain rank, and gain access to rewards. Even new players should have to pull their weight.

The idea behind this is, that i as a combat player don't use my allocated goods at all,
but a smart tactical thinking trader could use my allocation to further the goals of the power.

You could fast track allocation and then reallocate. Its just (yet) another credit transfer thread.

Ok fair enough, didn't think about that. I am kind of against being able to fast track at all, have it prohibited while being in the "transfer mode" maybe?

 

[Mohrgan]

I don't disagree in general, but I have some RL friends I play with, one of which plays much less than the rest of us. Thus he has much less money. It would be nice if we could toss a little cash his way so that he can at least afford a decent FSD so that the whole group doesn't have to do 8 LY jumps to stay together. It's not a long term problem though, as we can always take him to civil war combat sites and help him earn some shiny bounties that way.

I have real sympathy for your wing-mates situation. He gets out of the game what he can afford to put in. Your idea of covering him in CZ's and the like is good, and there is nothing stopping you from dropping him some canisters when you can. I have a bigger problem passing PP merits around, there is little value in them, they are in-game tokens used to alter politics. They should be earned individually.

 

[badwolf77]

The first of those two I can't really see a downside to. If someone wants to purchase 2, 3, 4 or 20 copies of the game, then they should be able to play which ever of them they want at any one time (whether that's one by one or multiple accounts at the same time).

It's not about playing one at a time, but about all the resources that are per-player-limited (eg. PP materiel) being redirected to the 'main' commander.

This is pay to win and generally regarded as bad.

Your second point I think is perhaps a little alarmist. But would be covered under Frontier's existing policies on harassment of other players

Alarmist? It's taken seriously enough that many games have some kind of mechanism to try to prevent it -- eg. transfers not permitted from lower to higher players,etc. Now I admit we've an older playerbase than most so are probably less likely to have a bullying problem, but a few lines in the EULA aren't going to cut it.