Ending cosmetic item extortion

[Sevenless]

And the suggestions aren't to make hat trading impossible, it's just to put them on the same level as the stone axes and anvils you're clearly gaining through hat extortion. You'll still be able to walk up to their claim and say 'give us your hat or we'll siege and kill you', you just won't be able to force people to make really dumb choices with real-money implications under strong pressure anymore..

I'm glad someone's giving my argument a fair representation. This is one heck of a powder keg topic for sure.

[Kaios]

I'm glad someone's giving my argument a fair representation. This is one heck of a powder keg topic for sure.

Tokens are a much larger issue than hats which is why I mentioned that. The only good reason for the developers to continue to allow the trading of hats is because it offers greater incentive for players to purchase them from the shop, but I believe they can find a better way of handling trades in this regard so that there is less of an overall impact on the in-game side of the matter.

Trust me when I say that I hate those losers as much (if not more) than you do and I would love to see them get punished for the stupid shenanigans they pull or be removed from the game entirely but to me the hat thing seems easily resolvable in comparison to purging tokens. At the very least, the greatest offenders should have all of their hats removed or returned back to their original owners and they should be barred from ever being able to trade or receive a hat again.

[Sevenless]

I'm glad someone's giving my argument a fair representation. This is one heck of a powder keg topic for sure.

Tokens are a much larger issue than hats which is why I mentioned that. The only good reason for the developers to continue to allow the trading of hats is because it offers greater incentive for players to purchase them from the shop, but I believe they can find a better way of handling trades in this regard so that there is less of an overall impact on the in-game side of the matter.

Trust me when I say that I hate those losers as much (if not more) than you do and I would love to see them get punished for the stupid shenanigans they pull or be removed from the game entirely but to me the hat thing seems easily resolvable in comparison to purging tokens. At the very least, the greatest offenders should have all of their hats removed or returned back to their original owners and they should be barred from ever being able to trade or receive a hat again.

I feel like the token discussion and this discussion aren't quite the same though. Hat or Die is a negative service, they are being paid to not do something. Token trades are, *mostly*, positive services where both sides are benefiting.

You can help/fix Hat or Die without removing token trading, early on at least (like W8 or 9?) jorb mentioned that tokens are the majority of their income. Even if I'm not 100% a fan of how token trading impacts the game, game's gotta make money imo.

(My main issue with tokens is that they last between worlds. If tokens were "this world only", I think the impacts would be massively reduced. You can implement this with a new token type in the store without deleting the old tokens that already exist)

[Kaios]

If they can't ask for hats, what are they going to ask for instead? Hat or die is only unique in the sense that these are cosmetic items being looted, but it's not like this behaviour is uncommon to the game altogether.

[Sevenless]

If they can't ask for hats, what are they going to ask for instead? Hat or die is only unique in the sense that these are cosmetic items being looted, but it's not like this behaviour is uncommon to the game altogether.

Nothing, they'll KO the unexpecting player who probably won't die because KO mechanics make it highly unlikely they'll die unless meaningfully wounded.

But beyond that, I just want to "keep the game in the game" when it comes to conflict/extortion. I'm not white knighting that pvpers shouldn't ever down or kill randoms. I advocate for mechanics that allow that interaction without completely just pushing newbies/casuals out of the game, but I don't think or want random pvp to stop entirely.

I was behind the idea of what realms are supposed to do: Engage pvpers in fighting mostly each other, and raiding each other's peasants instead of their neighbours. Realms just didn't manage to work that way sadly :/

[Kaios]

I'm in agreement with you, I just wouldn't underestimate how much people like money and as I'm sure you are well aware the main reason behind this is for the money involved.

[Sevenless]

I'm in agreement with you, I just wouldn't underestimate how much people like money and as I'm sure you are well aware the main reason behind this is for the money involved.

Sure, but I think the main reason we don't see rampant "token or die" is due to the suggestions I'm making for hats existing effectively. You have to go to safety to get the token (vast majority of the time), and you have time to think about it.

Extortion will still happen, but people will have space to think about it and make a proper decision. That should reduce it significantly.

[Kaios]

Well okay, but I will add that I think this issue is so easy to resolve that if the devs had even the slightest care about it they would have resolved it a long time ago.

[Sevenless]

Well okay, but I will add that I think this issue is so easy to resolve that if the devs had even the slightest care about it they would have resolved it a long time ago.

And for my part, I'll agree that RMT as a whole is an unfortunate reality of modern games that I'm not fond of. I did much prefer the olden days where it was rare enough that I didn't need to hear about it constantly.

[Kaios]

And for my part, I'll agree that RMT as a whole is an unfortunate reality of modern games that I'm not fond of. I did much prefer the olden days where it was rare enough that I didn't need to hear about it constantly.

Yeah I also prefer it. I know there are some people that like to say things such as "Haven had RMT back then anyways" which is true but it was most certainly not to this extent and prevalence.