Archived Banks

This suggestion has been archived / closed and can no longer be voted on.
Boogjangels

Boogjangels

Is beans the problem, Doctor?
Joined
May 23, 2014
Messages
154
Reaction score
315
Points
0
Age
31
Faction
Verdandil/Armaschleit
Roleplay Guilds
Archeaology Guild
So I had an idea the other day and I was wondering what the masses might think of it, here goes...

I started making this bank for my faction, purely for aesthetic reasons, and I thought, "Hm, I could probly get some practical use out of this and do something like Tyberia used to do and rent out vaults to people for money." So that was the original plan, but then for whatever reason, I started thinking about Runescape (I'm honestly not sure why that was the first thing to come to mind when I thought about banks, don't judge me)

In any case, what do you guys think of an add on to the Massivelock plugin that allows players to make bank chests? I know we already have enderchests, but cmon... those are so small. I'm talking like storage the size of a real MMO bank, somewhere you can stow away large quantities of stuff. Here's my idea so far:
  • The chests will function like the enderchests/backpack, always accessing the same inventory for each player.
  • In the MMO fashion, you should be able to add upgrades to your storage by adding "bags". Perhaps every player would start out with the default storage capacity of 1 double chest, then by paying additional fees through chat commands, they could potentially have 9, maybe more double chests of storage.
  • I have very little idea on what it takes to make a plugin a reality, so I have few ideas what we would want to do about a "navigational interface" for the bank chests. Perhaps something similar to the /tp page where you have a back and forward button at the bottom of the inventory interface?
  • These chests would have to cost a LOT, at least 2k I'm thinking. The addon chests would be purely virtual and be bought by each player individually, so maybe 100-200r each on those.
  • It may be a good idea to add a public/private function to the chests as well
So, maybe your thinking "This is all fine and dandy, but it seems like so much trouble for just a tiny little curiosity. Why even bother?" Well, let me elaborate.
  1. Less lag from chests: I can speak from personal experience that too many full chests within a given area will cause astronomical lag. It's gotten to the point that some of my faction members can't even walk into our market and residential district without suffering from frame rates of 3fps or less. This could potentially help keep items stored away in a virtual space, limiting lag!
  2. Item Safety: I can't even count how many times I've heard someone whining over how their faction disbanded and all their stuff was stolen. This could potentially end the terror of leaving the server for long amounts of time, letting players know that their possessions will be safe for as long as the server stands.
  3. Safety from MassiveRestore: I used to detest MassiveRestore so much that I honestly thought it would be the end of the server. However, I see now that I was most certainly wrong. Massive Restore is a "necessary evil", and it won't/shouldn't go away. Perhaps we can't always save the structures we've built from it's hungry jaws, but with Banks, we could easily save our items. Putting them into a virtual space makes them relatively indestructible, always there, and always available.
Now I can already hear the nashing of teeth from the looters and raiders, but let me bring up a few points. I used to be an avid looter back in the day, and I still partake in it from time to time. However, it's lost much of it's luster. Very rarely do factions with large amounts of wealth ever disband due to inactivity, and when they do, most of the members have left long ago, looting the place before before they leave. In all honesty, banks probly won't affect the looting scene all that much. Small factions will be too poor to have one so you'll always have those, and large factions either never disband or are looted from the inside.

Now, for the raiders. This idea really won't affect you guys at all, straight up. People will still have to wear their armor and other supplies to go out and fight you, they'll still carry valuables when building, hanging out, etc. In simpler words, you'll still get your kills, meaning you'll still get your loot.

So this got a lot bigger than I was originally planning, but thanks for taking the time to read it all! Let me know in the comments what you guys think, I'm interested to see what people say :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
This might be better as a separate thing from MassiveLock, as it covers aspects that I don't think work well with the plugin layout.

Maybe a MassiveBank?
 
I think this would be great so long as you could allow others to use your bank. It would allow for Regalia shops without the need for excessive chests.
 
znake1468 said:
I think this would be great so long as you could allow others to use your bank. It would allow for Regalia shops without the need for excessive chests.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Do you mean as in other players being able to use your bank chest to access their bank interfaces or other players being able to directly access YOUR bank interface? Keep in mind, there are two separate things here. We have the physical bank chest which is just the access point, and the bank interface where the items are actually stored, which is completely virtual. To access another player's bank interface, I'm not sure how you could do that without chat commands. If you could access bank interfaces through commands, this would of course make the access points useless, and the banks completely overpowered. So unless we could come up with a way to access another players bank interface from within their OWN interface, this would break the idea.
 
I do like this idea... I was thinking today, due to my ban (thank god it's not an IP ban or I'd be shitting myself right now) that if someone like me (collector) ever got a hefty ban like a month ban, all of my stuff would be gone. My storage faction would disband & reset, my Vaults faction would follow suit, and even my Darkroom storage would be lost to MassiveRestore. With a plugin that's basically an expanded EnderChest, players would be able to store vital items, such as Armor, Tools, Resources, and Rare Lore Items (guess which I'm worried about!) in what is effectively eternal security.

It could even be set up so that a special VaultChest is placed, maybe with it's own unique skin, which can be accessed by any player but only gives access to their own personal storage space. Those could then be kept in Regalia (hopefully) at least at major RP areas like the Tavern, Docks, and Sewer Entrance.
 
I'd like this so I could store my stuff and never log on again. xD
 
or we instead could do the opposite by removing enderchests & backpacks completely, halving the storage count of traditional chests and double chests, & lowering the 'required activity' before factions disband & such to one week. this way we could enforce player activity with an iron fist.

sure there'll be hell to pay in lag, but I can assure you it's a necessary evil.

if you could not tell I am joking
 
@znake1468 - If they lowered the max time before factions disband I'd probably end up losing Darkroom42, Breezehome, and Vaults... which would be bad for a lot of people xD
 
Mecharic said:
I do like this idea... I was thinking today, due to my ban (thank god it's not an IP ban or I'd be shitting myself right now) that if someone like me (collector) ever got a hefty ban like a month ban, all of my stuff would be gone. My storage faction would disband & reset, my Vaults faction would follow suit, and even my Darkroom storage would be lost to MassiveRestore. With a plugin that's basically an expanded EnderChest, players would be able to store vital items, such as Armor, Tools, Resources, and Rare Lore Items (guess which I'm worried about!) in what is effectively eternal security.

It could even be set up so that a special VaultChest is placed, maybe with it's own unique skin, which can be accessed by any player but only gives access to their own personal storage space. Those could then be kept in Regalia (hopefully) at least at major RP areas like the Tavern, Docks, and Sewer Entrance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm mostly replying to the last paragraph where you stated that you would like to see Bankchests in major rp areas. While I think this is a good idea, the bulk of the idea is to give survival players an easy and accessible storage, seeing as they deal with material goods and wealth far more frequently than roleplayers. However, as long as players can create their own Bankchests (They have to pay out the nose for them, mind you), I don't see any issues with having a few in Regalia.
 
Boogjangels said:
I'm mostly replying to the last paragraph where you stated that you would like to see Bankchests in major rp areas. While I think this is a good idea, the bulk of the idea is to give survival players an easy and accessible storage, seeing as they deal with material goods and wealth far more frequently than roleplayers. However, as long as players can create their own Bankchests (They have to pay out the nose for them, mind you), I don't see any issues with having a few in Regalia.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well I mean, you know how Regalia has Enderchests? It should also have Bankchests, at least one, so that both survival and roleplayers can access their supplies in the city as needed. Maybe also have one at each World Spawn? A player may end up being inactive for a while and not having enough to build one, but just need an access point. Eh, dunno.
 
Gabauchi said:
or we instead could do the opposite by removing enderchests & backpacks completely, halving the storage count of traditional chests and double chests, & lowering the 'required activity' before factions disband & such to one week. this way we could enforce player activity with an iron fist.

sure there'll be hell to pay in lag, but I can assure you it's a necessary evil.

if you could not tell I am joking
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I could definitely get behind removing the /backpack and enderchests, yet shortening the faction activity timer.. eh, not so much. Now that looting really isn't worth the time or effort, I would actually like the faction activity timer to be lengthened. However, for the mean time, I really think it should really just stay the same.
 
Mecharic said:
Well I mean, you know how Regalia has Enderchests? It should also have Bankchests, at least one, so that both survival and roleplayers can access their supplies in the city as needed. Maybe also have one at each World Spawn? A player may end up being inactive for a while and not having enough to build one, but just need an access point. Eh, dunno.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh, of course. We just can't make them too accessible, otherwise there will be no incentive to buy one, and frankly, it'll just be too easy.
 
Boogjangels said:
Oh, of course. We just can't make them too accessible, otherwise there will be no incentive to buy one, and frankly, it'll just be too easy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well wait. What are people buying? I was under the impression that you are buying the "cloud" storage and "upgrades", if you will, instead of the physical chest. If thats the case why is there no incentive to buy if there are physical chests more commonly placed in public areas?
 
znake1468 said:
Well wait. What are people buying? I was under the impression that you are buying the "cloud" storage and "upgrades", if you will, instead of the physical chest. If thats the case why is there no incentive to buy if there are physical chests more commonly placed in public areas?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No, you've got it right znake, I'm just terrible at explaining things :p

The storage it's self is basically cloud storage for minecraft items, but the physical bankchest operates as an access panel. While people can pay through chat commands to buy upgrades to their "cloud storage", I'd also like them to be able to pay out the nose to place their own personal bank chest, as an access point. Players should be able to choose whether this access point is private or public. This would be similar to, say, getting bank access in your garrison on WoW. It isn't going to break gameplay if you don't have one, but if definitely helps those that can afford to fork over the cash.

Now keep in mind that if this were to go how I envision, there would be public Bankchests (access points) available for those who can't afford to have their own within their faction, house, etc.
 
i loved RuneScape so much

Cool idea!
 
Gabauchi said:
or we instead could do the opposite by removing enderchests & backpacks completely, halving the storage count of traditional chests and double chests, & lowering the 'required activity' before factions disband & such to one week. this way we could enforce player activity with an iron fist.

sure there'll be hell to pay in lag, but I can assure you it's a necessary evil.

if you could not tell I am joking
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Quite frankly I would be quite pissed off if that happened. I mean... One week is like nothing. I mean, me and mech both got week long bans (#NoRagretz), and if that would've been in place, the largest public darkroom on the server, one of the older factions on the server, as well as both of our storages would have been lost. I don't really see how a shorter timeout would benefit the server; if anything I think it would hurt it.

As for the whole bank thing, I'm all for it.
 
Totally for this, as it makes those FPS drops become less common.

I would definitely be happy knowing my stuff is able to be accessed from different points. It definitely is a plus for those factions who have outposts on different maps, since you would be able to move lots of resources very quickly, increasing the amount of builds on maps.
I'd assume this could also make raiding a bit different, as you can store your pots and gear into the banks and then withdraw them when you need to raid, regardless of the map you're in.

For the whole Regalia bank thing, might as well put it in the actual bank in the Commerce District.

All, in all, 10/10 would use
 
65jes89 said:
Quite frankly I would be quite pissed off if that happened. I mean... One week is like nothing. I mean, me and mech both got week long bans (#NoRagretz), and if that would've been in place, the largest public darkroom on the server, one of the older factions on the server, as well as both of our storages would have been lost. I don't really see how a shorter timeout would benefit the server; if anything I think it would hurt it.

As for the whole bank thing, I'm all for it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Highlight the line at the bottom of Gabs post.
 
FireFan96 said:
Totally for this, as it makes those FPS drops become less common.

I would definitely be happy knowing my stuff is able to be accessed from different points. It definitely is a plus for those factions who have outposts on different maps, since you would be able to move lots of resources very quickly, increasing the amount of builds on maps.
I'd assume this could also make raiding a bit different, as you can store your pots and gear into the banks and then withdraw them when you need to raid, regardless of the map you're in.

For the whole Regalia bank thing, might as well put it in the actual bank in the Commerce District.

All, in all, 10/10 would use
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A public Bank in the Commerce district... that is brilliant tbh. No one uses the district, sadly, due to it's odd, "off-to-the-side" location. However, if it was the sole location for a bankchest in Regalia, people would be going there; a lot. Perhaps roleplay would even start sparking in this area due to increased traffic? We could even add upon this by not allowing players to make bankchests within regalia, forcing them to either use this one or make their own in survival. It goes without saying that this would give HUGE incentive to survival players to buy a bankchest for either them/their faction, as using the public bankchest is a bit of a chore when going back and forth between Regalia and the survival worlds. I love it!
 
Another quick little idea. I mentioned breifly the ability to add "bags" or extra storage to your bank like you can in most MMO's, but a flat price per bag just seems to easy. If we used a flat price, putting it too low would make having a large bank account nothing special and putting it too high wouldn't be fair to players who have trouble making money. So, what if the pricing was tiered?

For example, first "bag" (double chest probly) would be say, 100r. Next would be 200. Then it would be 400, 800, 1600, 3200, etc. Perhaps we wouldn't want to tier them quite so steep, but this would make getting a max bank account a true challenge, and give those who've worked for it something to be proud of.

Just an idea :p
 
As far as I know, Commerce isn't really active since there aren't any rental areas. I'm assuming it'll eventually happen, but until then it's mostly just eye candy to me. Harbor is the closest District to it, and besides the occasional Oyster event, there's not a lot of action there. I would totally be happy to see this in Commerce, just because it encourages players to go to another area besides the Golden Willow or the other inner city venues.

Would there be a cap to the amount of spaces? I think there should be a limit to the amount of bags per individual bank, as to limit the amount of things people can store. If they have more stuff, they should have more bank "accounts" to store it.

Or have it infinite. I don't mind either way. I just see infinite storage to somehow have a drawback.
 
There should definitely only be one bank account per player, and infinite space/ aka infinite bags... ehh, that's way too overpowered tbh

Perhpas a cap of 9 bags (seeing as the rows in a chest are 9 spaces long) Then, once in the account interface, the bottom row of each chest could be filled with buttons to switch between all you bags? Just a thought.
 
I don't think having one account per player is a good idea. In terms of faction storage, the Leader might want to organize accounts based on jobs, like building and raiding. They might need 5 different accounts, and then assigns members ot bank accounts based on jobs. Sure, an officer could set up an account for a specific job, but if they ever get kicked, then there goes your building account or your raiding supplies.

I agree a cap should be done. And if that cap is reached, a player should be able to create a new vault to use.

I would say have the price of a second account have higher prices, but if the first bank isn't fully expanded, it seems like a crap expense to have different specialized accounts. But at the same time, you could have 50 starter accounts for dirt cheap.

I think maybe putting a limit on the amount of accounts you can make could be done to minimize the risk, with each account having the same costs to expand. I'd go with maybe 10 at most. though IMO that is a really high number.
 
znake1468 said:
Should there be a price to maintain it? Because when i see this...

I think of players with alts circumventing it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

*cough cough* No, I wouldn't use my 4 alts to have giant ass storage in case I ever went entirely inactive and wanted to not lose all of my stuff.

Stop tying my loopholes!
 
Personally I don't think there should be a limit on bags and that there shouldn't be a cost to maintain it. Each bag should cost 25% more than the last, so 100r for the first back, 125 for the 2nd, 156r for 3, and so on. By the time you reach bag 10 you're paying over 700r PER BAG added. This would make it prohibitive for players to buy anything more than 5-6 bags (305r for bag 6) which would reduce possible lag from all the virtual storage. At the same time, it would allow players with huge ass piles of money like GetHelp to literally deconstruct an entire base, store it, and use the materials to make a new one somewhere else. Or to store all of their stuff. That seems the best of both worlds.
 
Honestly though. Why not a price to maintain?

Has anybody played the generation six pokemon games? There is an additional app you can get for your 3DS called Pokemon Bank. Its essentially a cloud storage (like this idea is). It costs a fee per year to use. If you dont pay the fee dont worry, all data is safe... however its inaccessible until the fee is paid. Like the /bp used to be if you didnt maintain your premium.

Its not like all your items are destroyed... but there needs to be a maintenance price in my opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom