| Author | Negative amount of gold on item tranfer price. |
|---|
I mean, for example:
Received item(s): 'Amulet of luck' [0/24] to be returned until 22-10-09 19:40 ; for 0 battles ; (repairing allowed) from Cespues . Transaction price: "-915 Gold".
This way, it is not neccesary to send money in other transfer for the cost of the repairing service. The money would be taken at the moment of accepting the tranfer, and if not enough money from the customer, item tranfer couldnt be done. I think this would be very usefull for the smither. Thanks! |
this could easily be abused, but i like the concept
+/-1 |
| it would save a step for the customer ^^ And make things easier for the Smith too xD |
this could easily be abused, but i like the concept
How? The one transfering (who can set negative value) would be the one paying. |
How? The one transfering (who can set negative value) would be the one paying.
yes but if multis do that then the one paying won't care ;) |
| And they are doing that now, except it is the main who transfers artifacts with price on, I don't see what much difference would it makes, negative sign (-) is very noticable. |
This will again make economical imbalance due to cheaters using their mults.
Thus, -10000000000000 |
this could easily be abused,
yes but if multis do that then the one paying won't careThis will again make economical imbalance due to cheaters using their mults
I dont understand why... its worse to tranfer a sword of might with 10000 gold of value than an amulet of luck with -10000.
SoM = 29730 gold - 10000 = 19730 gold transfered hidden.
AoL = 2930 gold + 10000 = 12930 gold transfered and not so hidden. |
This will again make economical imbalance due to cheaters using their mults.
Thus, -10000000000000
LOL i love ppl with logical thinkin xDDD
+1 to idea |
This will again make economical imbalance due to cheaters using their mults.
Please, explain to me how this can be abused by multis more than normal sword of might for 1 gold or 25000 gold gift transfers.
When you put so many zeroes to -1 you should be able to explain why you think so. |
| + |
| +1 |
+1
This will again make economical imbalance due to cheaters using their mults
what as if people dont cheat with there multis anyway? |
| +1 |
Great Idea
+1 |
| +1 |
| Bump! |
| It's actually a good idea. +1 |
