Why are You Allowing Players to Trade Peerless Items with Each Other and it is not NOT Widely Known?

GooseyGoosey ✭✭
Dear, "Honest and Trustworthy" DB:

Why are you allowing players to trade items every month without making this information available to EVERYONE??!! We're wasting keepsakes, trying to make peerless items for Tales, yet you allow players to trade with each other and keep it a secret? These are items, among OTHER things you've allowed players to trade. Three items, once a month. This is despicable behavior by DB, keeping this secret among the few.



Comments

  • GooseyGoosey ✭✭
    edited May 15
    Removed the chat text.
  • I've got to say that this seems wrong. I earned all gear the hard way and I don't want to see some semi-secret trading deal give some noob the stuff I had to work for.
  • TullyManTullyMan ✭✭
    Hmm...not to mention that all those are luck crafts, so lots of Black and Blue Peerless and Flawless gems tend to get spent heavily in getting peerless items and seals for particular Tales.

    Mr. Horse would say 'No Sir, I don't Like it.'

    jvieqd0v7g8p.png

    I suppose this is something the folks at DB do need to clarify to the player base. Is it officially sanctioned?
  • TullyManTullyMan ✭✭
    It occurs to me that if this does end up being a sanctioned global transaction on the part of DB (as opposed to a brief number of exceptions to the rule which have been exploited by a few players or groups of), then the whole purpose of the Great Hall needs to be rethought.

    I don't mind having to pay more in Keepsakes for a peerless craft if the craft is guaranteed to be peerless as opposed to legendary with a chance of meatballs peerless.

    If the luck element is there to determine which peerless item/seal I can get then I might also be ok with that.

    It would reduce the bloat of items players have for tales, which is the driving force for these 'not entirely licit' trades (which is from players who have too many of one item for one tale but none of another of the same tale, and thus have surpluses that they can trade (though really they should be selling them in the shop like the rest of us, but can't blame them for being entrepreneurial).

    But again, any such speculation/gossip/fabrication would be greatly reduced if not eliminated when Disruptor Beam provides the player base with the clarification.
  • I agree DB needs to speak clearly on this issue.

    Why have players been spending real money, gold, keepsakes, gems, etc. to fill in missing pieces of Tales gear sets if customer support has (allegedly) been allowing other players to trade Tales items?

    Players have spent a lot of resources on gamble packs, crafting, etc. to fill in those pieces. The randomness of Tales gear acquisition means you can easily wind up with six of one piece and zero of another - I know I've been there, multiple times.

    It would have been much better if you could craft specific pieces to fill in those gear slots. But, of course, you can't...so we've instead needed to expend lots of extra resources to fill in those last slots.

    To learn through public forums and chats that some players have been gaining an advantage through backroom trading is pretty disheartening.

    I knew something was going on when I started getting ravens the last few Tales from people offering to trade Tales gear. At first I assumed it was just spammers, but if this really has been happening I think DB owes players who obtained gear the way the system was designed some refunds on extra resources expended to fill in those pieces, not to mention an apology.
  • GooseyGoosey ✭✭
    Quoting a piece of TullyMan - "...as opposed to legendary with a chance of (meatballs) peerless."
    Pretty much...

  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    Wait what?
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    edited May 15
    Seriously are you guys trolling or is this actually a thing? For *Vegan Poutine* sake this can’t actually be a thing.

    Re-Edit: and why exactly are they trading it across accounts? It would be bad enough if they were allowing trading one tales gear for a different tale one the same account, but they even went further and made it cross account trading.

    @Goosey don’t keep quite now, what’s the “OTHER” things? secret back room trades sound like the kinds of things alts were made to take advantage off.
  • GooseyGoosey ✭✭
    edited May 15
    Seriously. NOT trolling. Extremely upset. By message to DB only to make it happen. :'( :'( :'(
  • TullyManTullyMan ✭✭
    edited May 15
    This is a reported CS response to a Player's request for one such trade (screenshot from the post on FB. As the player posted it there, I'm assuming they are ok with it being shared):

    Image removed. As per our Community Guidelines posting private exchanges with Player Support is not allowed.


  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    The *Vegan Poutine*, so people can seal *Vegan Poutine* up and transfer it. Oh yeah exclude the dragons and evolved items but transfer *Vegan Poutine* anyways despite pointing out the fact the game has no trading option (a.k.a doesn’t allow trading).

    Just when you thought this *Vegan Poutine* couldn’t get any more ridiculous & controversial.....I see it’s always some soap opera drama with this game. Either implement the damn feature or not, don’t do secret back room *Vegan Poutine* beind the majority of players backs.
  • ShanShan admin
    This situation is being discussed and we will update you soon.
  • DutcherDutcher ✭✭✭
    Just for clarity;
    It's not 3 items once a month, that info is false.
    It's not trading. It is called gifting, which everyone knows already exists in the form of gold gifting.
    Don't worry about your keepsakes. You still need them. Someone needs to craft all the stuff they wish to give me :)
    Arya Serious? If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much!
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    Dutcher wrote: »
    It is called gifting, which everyone knows already exists in the form of gold gifting
    Dutched you know this isn’t quite the same, gold gifting is more giving a bought code for gold that the other player can redeem....it’s basically giving a gold coupon that you bought, and that’s well know because db pointed it in blog post/faqs where they talked about the iron bank. This on the other hand isn’t as well know nor ever publicly acknowledged or talked about by db...in all my years I didn’t know this was a thing, but if db had say pointed out it was a thing at some point then it would be my fault for not knowing, they haven’t (unless someone proves me wrong) so it’s their fault for not telling/sharing. At the least they should let us all know, and I’m sure some players knew and kept quite or whispered it to others in kong chat, because though I’m not there often I’ve many times seen players asked if we can give items or talked about how we should be able to give items yet not once do I recall ever seeing someone say “you can but it’s limited to 3 at a time or 3 per account, and you have to go through cs for them to do” if that had been the case all that time we wouldn’t end up discussing the pros and cons of a trading system (since that’s what the players end up making that into), we’d instead be discussing the limit placed on it an why db doesn’t just implement it as a feature instead of having us having to go through cs to get it done.

    The lack of db about this on the forums (old an new, unless I missed it) is proof that while some or even manu might have know about this they kept it within their circle of friends and or trading partners.
    It also makes the iron bank seem kind of redundant, why would I buy gold and gift it to someone (costin me real money) if I can just buy the item and gift it or better yet gift them an item I already have but have no use for (cost me in game currecncy I already have or nothing if using an item I already had).

  • Can someone please explain exactly how you give gear from one account to another?

    I'm asking for a friend.
  • DutcherDutcher ✭✭✭
    Send a ticket with the details of the item you want to gift as well as the target player's character & ID#.
    It's really not difficult nor much of a secret and pretty sure Kong players know about it.
    The alliance Kong I mean. And if they're not sharing that info in Kong chat, then well, that just tells you all you need to know about them :)
    Arya Serious? If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much!
  • DutcherDutcher ✭✭✭
    By the way, no exchanges between alts are allowed, no silver, gems, spoils, tokens or any evolved items either. Only base items (dead egg) etc. So yeah, it's still kinda the same as the Iron Bank. You may not have had to purchase the item that you're gifting with $ but it could have been bought with gold or acquired in game. Small / no difference imo.
    Arya Serious? If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much!
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    I'm asking for a friend.
    :D :D plenty of people be asking things for a friend. Ehh if I wasn’t already recently told how to do it I’d be asking for myself.
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    Something that has occurred to me, what is to stop one player from submitting a ticket using a different players Id code? (Now obviously in this instance they’d have to know what item you have and you’d most likely realize when it goes missing and contact support about it) but just in general, I never understood why the very account number we use to communicate with the support staff is also the account number we need to give out to easily friend each other.
  • edited May 16
    Dutcher wrote: »
    By the way, no exchanges between alts are allowed, no silver, gems, spoils, tokens or any evolved items either. Only base items (dead egg) etc. So yeah, it's still kinda the same as the Iron Bank. You may not have had to purchase the item that you're gifting with $ but it could have been bought with gold or acquired in game. Small / no difference imo.

    An example that was quoted suggested Tales items were being "gifted"

    Given the randomness associated with Tales item acquisition I'd say it's much more of an advantage than a gold transfer as you can't buy specific Tales items with gold. This is particularly an advantage when most of your slots are full and you only have a 1/6 chance of crafting the item you need, or a 1/2 chance of getting it plus a lot of extra extraneous fluff through a gamble pack.

    If CS has been used to fill in those missing slots it's definitely provided an advantage.
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    Ummmmm, db doesn’t disclose the names of cheaters so why would they disclose the names of people who “tricked” / asked their cs reps about giving an item to a friend...it was the reps who decided to facilitate such transfers, and those who got it done told their friends, nothing wrong there. Keep in mind that appearently they wouldn’t transfer certain items so the fact that tales gear was transferred doesn’t make the player a blamable party, they were allowed to so they did, it’s that simply..........the fact their asses kept quite about such trades rather that shouting it from the rooftops, well now that’s just messed up man, I thought we were all about sharing the knowledge and helping each other out.

    Removing the gear after the fact isn’t something I see happening nor something I really think should happen, if they decide to stop it or stop allowing trade gear we all should be informed before hand so we can all decide wether the get a little piece of the action or not before it’s gone. Besides it’s long overdue that they retire most of these tales.

    The rankings are also what they are and this likely wasn’t the only take it happened on, so there’s nothing that can be about past rankings.
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    @shan what dah, I just saw your post. That’s even more unfair, no that’s its the light for all to see you want to without warning cut off the rest of the player base from taking advantage. If you guys had a limit on it you were keeping track of the amount of items gifted and received as gifts, I don’t think it’s a stretch to think you’d also have kept track of which accounts they were sent from and received on, any abuse should have been appearent when someone gifted an item then gifted back an item to the same player who gifted them one.
  • GooseyGoosey ✭✭
    What a crock of BS. NOW, you decide to stop doing this? As if you were unaware it was going on. Way to keep playing favorites. Damned joke.
  • It is totally unfair. If this was an option before why do you end it now? If it is open to abuse, wasn't it before too? There are 2 ways of solving the problem. To return and publish all the items that returned back to their previous owners or just continue to item gifting as before with certain rules.
    By letting what happened before and just to stop gifting from now is not a fair option.
  • TullyManTullyMan ✭✭
    It's another one of those situations where no outcome would have been 100% satisfactory to 100% of the player base.

    DB cut the hosepipe off at the tap.

    Very harsh, but fair.

    No one can benefit from the situation from this point on.

    Am I happy? Meh with a side order of Bah.

    Would have been nice not to have spent 5 peerless black gems or keepsakes on the last Peerless Tales craft I ended up doing had the 'gifting' option been widely available. But at the time of the crafting I wholeheartedly believed I was playing the game in the fair spirit it was intended to be played.

    Naming and shaming isn't really an option here, as some people would have genuinely been doing it under the understanding that 'it was an accepted practice from DB' just as much as others who would have been engaging in the 'gifting' fully aware of the exploitation potential of it. (Though for a general idea of who might have been using it for full nefarious exploitative purposes, you'd need only turn to Facebook and the groups therein to see who has posted all those lovely screen shots of their interactions with the Customer Service Team.)

    Making it 'gifting' the norm would not have been the sound financial and logistic choice for DB. Making it official would have opened up the flood gates as everyone would have started engaging in this practice (which probably started as a one off 'tell no one about this' exception to the rule which was slowly corrupted to 'we do it, we just don't publicize it.'), which would have overwhelmed the already swamped and possibly understaffed CS team, as well as resulted in a revenue stream hit for DB, since there'd be less of a need for someone to buy something (particularly Tales Items, and the gems for their luck craft) if these can simply 'gifted' between players.

    The situation should have definitely been addressed when the pinky nail was infected, so to speak, rather than when the entire right arm was now gangrenous.

    DB was no doubt aware of the issue since it surfaced in FB several weeks ago (since DB do have a presence in the groups this issue arose), but for reasons of their own, decided to wait until now to proceed. This probably exacerbated the ill feeling from players who now feel they 'missed out' on the gifting fun that others had (but maybe shouldn't have had).
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    edited May 16
    Harsh but fair my *Vegan Poutine*, they cut the crap off because now more people know about it, they were all good and dandy with allowing it when they could do it for the small few they wanted to without the rest of us knowing, now that the info was out their they couldn’t deny a resquest for it from the average joe player so they cut it off......or better said claim to cut it off.

    Edit: and yeah you kind of made my point, so serveral weeks ago in fb groups that db members are a part of the “trading” eh emm gifting was publicized/arose, yet only when the info is publicized outside of those elite (yeah let’s call them that) groups that db has a presence in do they decide oh yeah we are ending the practice.
    I call total bull *Vegan Poutine*, they will continue the practice they just want to have this official we discontinued the practice response to give the average joe player when he/she resquest to have it done.
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    edited May 16
    Comment moderated. ˜Shan
  • ShanShan admin
    I am closing this thread as we have made an official statement regarding this, and the thread is starting to derail.

    I will however add the following:
    - as we stated we did have that policy, as a good-will gesture for our players. It was not a secret in any way.
    - Any policy is subject to change, if the need arises. It was the case here.
This discussion has been closed.