[Master] Trading Between Players - Please add your comments & ideas here!

Ideas & Feature Requests
,
1069

TRADE MARKETPLACE - POST SUMMARY
Read the first 300 posts and then it got repetitive, please comment if something important is missing.

TL;DR

  • A trade marketplace is a feature players would love.
  • There would be challenges, but there are ways around all of them. Other games do it, E&P can too.
  • We don’t know what the cost:benefit ratio would be to this feature (it’s not a cheap feature add).
  • The simplest option (IMHO) is a token-based and blind system (tokens being super rare like Reset Emblems). In this way, tokens can be occasionally purchased, but are generally found in quests and chests.

OVERVIEW

CONCEPT - There are several variations, but at it’s most basic, players want a feature that allows them to trade heroes and/or items for other heroes and/or items. The number of posts in this thread alone (and there are others here and elsewhere) shows that this is a feature players would love to have! And, IMHO, it would be an awesome feature that adds more depth to an already feature rich game.

PRIMARY CONCERNS - Based on the responses shown here only (i.e. SG may have other considerations) there are four (4) big questions that need to be answered before this feature could ever be implemented:

  1. How would it effect SG’s revenue? SG is a business and needs to make a profit, and we should all be happy that they do, because it’s that profit that allows them to create new features, heroes, quests, seasons, etc.

  2. How would exploitation of the feature be avoided? Feeder accounts automatically become a concern when heroes/items can be traded between accounts. And, it’s probably more complicated than we think. Think of how many frauds are running at any time, fraudsters are tricky buggers - it’s what they do.

  3. How can the balance between free-play and pay-to-play players be maintained? Pay-to-play players will always have an advantage, but if it becomes too unbalanced, it will hurt SG badly. On the pay-to-play bell curve, SG likely earns more from small-buyers (e.g. $25-$50/mo) than big spenders. If a feature gives too great an advantage to big spenders, it will discourage the more valuable mass of small-buyers.

  4. How can it be implemented and still maintain “chance”? Whether it’s summoning/training heroes or collecting ascension items, chance is perhaps the most crucial game mechanic in E&P for multiple reasons. As a mechanic, chance:

  • Encourages Spending. If you could always get what you want, you’d only buy that.
  • Maintains Balance. If pay-players just pick what they want, it creates a wider gap between them the free-players.
  • Maintains Interest. As much as were disappointed when we get a lousy summon, the anticipation and excitement of summoning a powerful hero is part of what makes the game exciting.
  • Creates strategic decision-making. Which hero do you level first? Which hero do you ascend? Which raid do you choose? What’s your war strategy?

OVERCOMING CONCERNS

This thread has lots of great ideas about how to overcome these concerns. It would be unwieldy to create a comprehensive summary, but here’s the gist of the ideas suggested here:

  1. Protect SGs Revenue.
  • Make trades cost gems. Like additional summons, trades are expensive.
  • Increased gem requirements by hero levels.
  • Limit the number of trades.
  • When you trade for a hero, they automatically go to 1/1.
  1. Prevent Exploitation.
  • Limit the number of allowable trades (e.g. 1 trade / month or 1 trade every 5 levels).
  • Only allow trades past a certain level (e.g. Player Level 20).
  • Only allow trades within an alliance and limit the number of trades.
  • Only allow trades if the player has been in an alliance for a set time period (e.g. 90 days).
  • Create an auction house (e.g. Anyone can “bid” on a hero with other heroes and items).
  • Create a “waiver” system, whereby players have a rank based on when they last made a trade.
  • Have a “trade window” (e.g. a quest/event - this would encourage additional logins as well).
  • IP address restrictions (e.g. one account per IP - this is far too easy to manipulate).
  • Use a token based system (e.g. like summon tokens, but rare like reset emblems).
  • Create a coin based system like Atlantis (e.g. collect coins to earn trades, give up existing heroes for coins).
  • Only allow equal level trades (e.g. 4* for 4* and 1-for-1).
  • Hide who the trading partners are (to prevent cash exchanges).
  • Give heroes a gem value (better heroes require more gems).
  1. Maintain Balance
  • Limit the number of allowable trades (e.g. 1 trade / month).
  • Ensure the system that allows free-players to participate also.
  • Restrict/limit traded heroes (e.g. they have reduced abilities for a period of time).
  1. Maintain Chance
  • Limit the number of allowable trades (e.g. 1 trade / month).

ALTERNATIVE IDEAS

  • Create a hero return feature. Return heroes for epic summon tokens (e.g. 1 x 5* = 2 ESTs, or 1 x 4* / 3 x 3* = 1 EST). Forces the player to decide between re-summoning or using heroes for leveling other heroes. The benefit of this is that it would slow ascension for some players and encourage spending.
  • Create a trading post. Every item can be traded for some other better item (this is basically the Alchemy Lab).
  • Create a points system. Return heroes and items for allotted points, use those points for summons instead of trades.
  • Trade materials/heroes for gems. A slow burn option. This would cost money to develop and reduce earnings for SG.
  • Create a hero or ascension item store. This one really hurts that “chance” element and would ultimately reduce sales. Scarcity is a massive selling tool.
  • Trade heroes for their ascension items. So, you got 4 Santa’s? How about trading one of them for a Hidden Blade and Mystic Rings?

CONCLUSION (IMHO)

The feature can absolutely be created and all the concerns can be alleviated, but that’s up to SG. If it did happen, here’s what must be done.

THE MUSTS

  1. A Blind System. Any system that allows players to see who their trading with automatically creates the potential for exploitation. This means intra-alliance trading is a deal breaker. It can’t happen.
  2. A Scarce System. The very concept of a trade marketplace is counter to the game mechanic of chance; therefore, it must be a feature that can only be used scarcely.

DEAL BREAKERS

  1. Open trade market. Would kill the game. Part of the joy of life is not getting everything you want when you want it and working for it. Easy games aren’t successful (generalization).
  2. Intra Alliance Trades. Far too high a potential for abuse. Probably no way around this. The moment you know who you’re trading with, exchanges outside of E&P become a real concern.
    Everything else would be based on SG striking the right balance of playability and profit.

What did I miss? I’ll continue updating this post as new ideas come in.

4 Likes