Make it illegal to sell maps

I'm not certain I understand. Can you elaborate on your answer?
To me it feels like when you get KSed, you're the one affected by someone else's actions so you report it. If you're buying or selling maps... who's gonna report you? Both parties get what they want so there's not enough incentive it feels like. Also, all you'd get in a screenshot is a conversation between two players so what's "proof" here. I could come to a map and tell you 'Hey, I'm going to give you 20m if you use this nearest town scroll'... would that be considered buying a map? 'Hey, I'm going to give you 20m if you door my mule to Krex'. How would you be able to tell if that was actually a map being traded and not a random guy asking for a door? The outcome certainly is the same: There's a free map you can take, your mule may or may not be going to Krex and the previous map owner gets 20m. Everyone's happy lol.

 

Yeah nothing says good argumentation like accusing people of melodrama. Yet you're out here talking about entitlement, and "telling anybody what they can and can't do." Jesus Christ lmfao.

No one's comparing map selling to inflation or imbalance. I'm asking people to simply consider all of those things as issues that can and should (and in some cases, have been) be addressed in this server by the community. Are some of those issues more critical than others? Sure. Does that change the fact that some of those issues merit no consideration? Of course not. That's the point. That's all there is to it, and there's no need to read so deeply into it.

There have been multiple feedback over the years in regards to this topic, particularly with mule hogging stopper maps and mini boss maps. I agree that while reducing mapowner duration would be one that requires complex discussion, other solutions have been offered as well as implemented that are much simpler in nature. Changing channels causing loss of mapowner status being one. Having pets unable to pick up summon loot being another. Furthermore, calling 10-15m a joke highlights the exact disparity between players who have the resources built up to be able to easily afford buying a map. It may be insignificant in isolation, but it can certainly add up for newer players who are constantly playing the catch-up game in order to participate in the endgame content that defines this server. I'm not going to bother getting into the rest of the details about map and training efficiency. The whole point was that map selling is a direct result of some of the fundamental issues with the mapowner function, which players have repeatedly brought up beyond this particular thread.

Telling OP to go train somewhere else is dismissive because it implies that they haven't considered the obvious solution everyone is mentioning. That they would rather waste their time posting in these forums when like everyone has said, they could have easily just went to train at another map and lose out half an hour in training efficiency or whatever. Or I don't know, maybe we could actually tackle an issue that negatively impacts the server.

As a last point, if you think having a lot of responses in a thread is evidence of active engagement you're kidding yourself. Because you know as well as I do a significant portion of the posts in this section consists of memes and trolling. Not to say that it's necessarily wrong (or undeserved), but your point is completely off base if you genuinely believe post counts equal active engagement.

 

Can somebody who is in favor of prohibiting map selling gracefully explain how it is any different from the concept of a fast pass, owl, or vip rock? New/poor players can't/struggle to afford 'em, so they have to take the more time consuming, less expensive (free in this case) route, which still gets them the same result in the end, only at a different (slower) pace. You pay for the best convenience (least time consumption, whether that be bossing, training, farming, traveling, etc.) throughout this game, that being the optimal exp rates in this case, just like how you're valuing your time walking from say Henesys to El Nath above the 1.5m it costs to buy your way there immediately (purchasing a map instead of finding one through surfing). If it is worth it to you, or if you can afford it, it's a no brainer at times - you buy the owl, vip rock, or optimal training map, but if not, you just spend your time browsing the fm until you get it, walking until you get there, searching until a map opens up, or alternatively training at a less ideal location. Ultimately it's time consumption that is being lost for the individuals who cannot afford it, it's not accessibility that is being restricted.

@ person who mentioned it: If you need to kill skeles for a quest, you can do that at the map right before or after the traditional map, or you can surf until you find one that select time you need the etc./kills!

 

Because a map for training shouldn't be treated as a commodity while traveling is. I can choose to buy a fast pass/rock to get to places faster, it's my choice on how my time is spent. When it comes to map selling you're denying me an in-game resource that you're entitled to because you were there at the right time. If you are not utilizing the resource for its intended use (to be played on), you shouldn't be eligible to hold it ransom for a player that would. Map ownership is to stop KSING, not real estate.

 

You aren't being denied it, you just have to wait for an open one. You're mistaking being unable to access a map for having an alternative method of access. Without map selling Skeles is still going to be full and you're still going to have to hunt for an open map. The only difference is you won't have the luxury of being able to pay for a map instead of surfing for one.

 

Availability isn't applicable here. We are talking about a player having the privilege to sell a map. If a player stops training and leaves the map, they are surrendering the maps usage without treating it like a product. As I said, map ownership is a tool to stop people from stealing other maps, it isn't a tool to enforce property tax rights.

 

What are you actually trying to solve though? This doesn't provide any real benefit and only a downside in that players can no longer purchase a map from its current occupant for immediate use and instead have to surf until they find one. The demand for skele maps is still going to be just as high and new/poor players aren't going to be able to access them any differently than they currently do. They still surf for a map and have to wait for somebody else to finish to get one. The issue you should consider focusing on if your goal is to get *~everybody~* a free and immediate best map (god, fuck that shit, sorry) would be the supply of maps versus the demand in players - something Nexon combated with the mini dungeon feature.

Additionally, in response to your 'training is not a commodity' remark earlier, training at the most optimal location most definitely is, and always has been throughout the history of this game. I would agree with you if players weren't able to get maps without buying them, but that isn't the case, they just have to surf for an open one or train for a bit less EXP because it's only the top tier spot(s) that are fully occupied. This only changed upon the aforementioned release of mini dungeons.

 

The tone of your post was very dramatic, as if everyone on the thread was just browbeating OP and he needed someone to save him. I'm not sure what that has to do with entitlement or telling people what they can and can't do, you're free to be as melodramatic as you want, it just makes your argument seem emotional instead of logical. It was just a request. I even said please.

You're posturing your argument by trying to establish a congruence between the 2 issues, and also using a slippery slope fallacy.

Why do you assume not a single person gave this a consideration? Perhaps it was considered but not agreed with?

But what does losing mapowner on channel changing accomplish? The only thing I see that preventing is 1 person on 1 client hogging multiple maps, which doesn't seem to be the case, though I'm not training at Ulu so I don't know anything about that besides what I hear and read from other players. Notice how they didn't change a single thing about mapowner and nerfed summon farming by requiring you to not be afk? Because mapowner wasn't the issue. Mapowner is not the issue here either, its people. The server population is at the highest its ever been by a very large margin and people are under the impression you absolutely cannot level up remotely efficiently unless you go to 2 specific maps. You cannot regulate every single aspect of the game, that's absurd. I always draw a parallel between this and FM spot "stealing" and selling, as it is essentially the same thing. In the same vein that you're not entitled to tell someone what they can and can't do with their spot or what they sell, nor are you entitled to a good spot, you can't tell people what to do with their map and you are not entitled to train there because you think you should be. Is it scummy to hold a map hostage you aren't using? Absolutely. We have a community blacklist for that. You can publicly shame map sellers there if you wish, but making it a bannable offense is ridiculous.

You are seriously grasping at straws here. I convinced a friend who had never once played Royals before into joining ~ 2.5 weeks ago, with nearly 0 startup fund besides 20m I gave him for pots and some 100% INT gear from NPCs, and he has nearly 300m worth of raw meso and sellable items at level 86. You cannot sit there with a straight face and tell me that 10m-15m "highlights the disparity" on, once again, something that is completely optional. If you are so strapped for cash, step down from your pulpit and sell the map when you're done.

Nobody told OP to do anything, we suggested viable alternatives if he does not wish to buy/snipe a map, which OP can still do, though it doesn't seems like he wants to, hence the suggested alternatives.

Again, we arrive at a hyperbole. Where are you deriving those claims? In what frame of time are they losing this half an hour of training efficiency? I can't find an exp/hour thread for new source and am too tired atm to test it myself, but I would wager that those alternative maps aren't so far off from the top maps as people like to think. I'll see about testing tomorrow, as I'm curious now.

Nothing says good argumentation like not being bothered to come up with an argument.

I don't think that. I read nearly all the Feedback thread and participate in many of them. Sure, there are trolls and memes, but that doesn't completely invalidate all the great and thoughtful discussion going on in those threads.

 

I think you're confused, this was the condition you asked, and as I have proven (due to your lack of retort) the comparison is apples to oranges. One is a resource that makes my personal travel quicker, another is a resource being held ransom, a form of denial mind you.

Not sure where that would be applicable. You're looking for arguments that you're probably uesd to having and trying to manipulate the conversation to what you believe are favorable means for you. Your perspective is idealistic and not what I have seen, you see the power of a consumer while I see the exploitation of a game resource. There aren't players CC'ing every map going "B>MAP 25m GO GO GO". If this circumstance was a problem then people would be complaining about the buyers not the sellers. The issue people have with the sellers is that once they are done with the map, they will not relinquish it until they can sell it for additional profit. This is not a discussion about availability, I made my point pretty clear.

In fact because of this variable, maps are held longer because people see it as a means to make money, much like bidding on equipment. I think the community issue is these maps are held to be sold, rather than being used and that should be against the rules. A player can freely cc to the map and ask to buy it, whatever. But if a player is done utilizing the map and squats on it until someone pays their price, no I don't think that's appropriate and is a problem. If the problem(s) you listed were up for topic, the answer wouldn't be 'stop selling maps', but it would help the problem.

 

I'm referring to being different in the end result--time lost due to travel, or time lost due to finding a map, the outcome is identical and that is time lost. One (buying VIP rocks) is a resource that makes your travel to the training map quicker, and another (map buying) is a resource that makes your access to the training map quicker, both restricted by a paywall. Why is one acceptable while the other is not?

Idk what all that argument ramble is about or where it came from, but I'm just looking to discuss things and understand what y'all are actually looking to attain by removing map selling/how it's any different from other aspects where ease of access is restricted by a paywall. It seems like you guys are so against it, but I don't see the upside that comes from prohibiting it or how it is a beneficial restriction.

You are under the misconception that the channels are full/being occupied because of map sellers. Map sellers are a result of the excessive demand; they are not the cause of it.

The willing buyers are the 'problem' (cause) in this case. If there is no demand, there is no need for a supply and players wouldn't even try to sell the maps. People are willing to pay for the ease of access as they don't want to surf around looking until somebody leaves. You remove the sellers and now what? The 'buyer' doesn't go away, he still takes a map, only for free. What changes beyond people not having the option for immediate access to a map instead of surfing for however long it may take to find one? I'm just not following your end goal. The impact of not having map sellers isn't going to make it so that people no longer have to surf until a map finally opens up. The demand is going to be just as high, only instead of X paying for the map, X or Y will snag it up while surfing. That person who is buying the maps isn't going to not be in the hunt for a Skele map, only instead of him messaging somebody from a SMega to buy it, he's going to be surfing the channels alongside the poor/new players. It's not an impactful change in a positive way-new/poor players aren't gaining any ease of accessibility that they didn't have prior. That select map where a stubborn seller is sitting on it for ages isn't going to be the game changer as the demand is much greater than what a measly map or two for X minutes of unused occupation will have an influence on.

edit: a word

 

Tldr; Map selling isn't ethical imo, I don't believe it's a solution to the map crisis. Your example doesn't work.

It's not identical. You think because the end result is time loss that they are comparable, this is why they teach you proofs in school. Just because you found 2x2=4 doesn't mean that's the answer, even if the end answer is 4.

The goal of map selling is not to save time, it's to profit off a commodity, while VIP rocks/fast travel is a method to save time by spending money. As I said, for the third time, people don't care that people offer to buy, its the fact sellers can squat on the map until they sell. A more appropriate scenario would be that I would have to buy tickets from people who got off the orbis boat to get to back to Victoria.

You are under the belief system that you still have a choice because you can just CC until a map is open. If the maps are all taken (as you said, availability being an issue), what makes you think the dominant scenario you'll see is a person just leaving a map without selling it?

Trying to discredit my explanation because I called you out on your behavior? Classic. Maybe you can elaborate which parts are "ranting", or what you seem to not understand about my position?

No, as I've been pretty clear, the result is people train at them. Organically when someone is done training, they leave the map, or will let someone know they are leaving. Now there is a new condition that the community has created that allows the current map owner to charge a fee for them to have access to the map and them to surrender it. Ironically this point is bolded as well.

I'm going to be honest my guy, you asked me to clarify your asinine comparison, I decided to do so. If you asked for a solution to the problem, I would have given it to you in the original post. Again, as I stated previously, I have answered your question as to why they aren't comparable.

Actually if you remove map selling it would just mean players would rotate more frequently. Most maplestory players are used to training in 4 hour intervals because of the 2x coupons, they would naturally leave the map after they're done. Now we have players who are trying to take advantage of this basic supply/demand concept and causes the maps to be held on longer for specific players willing to pay for the access.

To put even more simple, there is a benefit to holding onto the map until a negotiation occurs. Take that away and you will naturally have less retention of maps and more rotations of players.

My end game goal is pretty shallow, if you took the time to read my posts which are very very clear.

A) You wanted someone to challenge your example, I provided why it doesn't work.
B) I don't agree map selling should be a thing. I believe map selling causes an increase of unnecessary retention of maps and sets a standard you have to pay a premium price for access. If you take map selling away, more players will organically leave maps when they are done with their business and naturally cause more rotations.

I have no problem with maps being filled/busy/CC surfing if the maps are being utilized for their intended purpose. Holding out to sell it to someone and saying they can't have the map unless they do so, is not not something I agree should be a thing.

You don't think a person CCing through and asking "Hey you going to be done soon?" is not the ideal situation? These players are not going to say "yeah", they are going to say "Yeah, 30m though". The problem of your logic is you never actually acknowledged why I'm against it, even though I have explained it to you.

• I never said this would help the map problem, I said it could help it with rotations but never solve it.
• I never said this would be a benefit for buyer or seller.
• I never said this was the cause of the map problem.

It's not ethical, the end. Mapowner shouldn't give you the privilege to sell maps like its your property, you're using the space and when you're done you should leave the space. Some people feel the same way about FM spots and people camping them or attempting to sell them.

 

@Rhynhardt do you think we should also make FM Spot selling a bannable offense? Or bundle shop scams? Lazy leeching? Really any of the unethical practices you see on the blacklist regularly.

Not trying to be antagonistic, just trying to pick your brain. The basis of your argument is that its unethical, which few would disagree with, and should therefore be bannable. Should this line of thinking be extended to all other unethical practices?

I still believe this is a community blacklist issue at best. I feel like if we had a proper updated exp/hour thread and people could see the hard numbers, they would realize that Ulu is not THAT much better than the next most efficient map, especially after Update 65.

 

Geez, I'd quote you guys but that's a lot of text. Anyway, here's my stance on what I got the chance to read.

Opinion | I don't like buying or selling maps. I find it very greedy on both the buyer and seller's perspectives.

Thread Replies | I agree some replies are somewhat smartass replies and not even worth reading like "There are more maps" or "There are alternative training maps?" as if OP didn't think about that already and you're enlightening him with knowledge. These replies... I say ignore 'em, as they do not lead to a healthy debate about the proposed changes which is what OP intended or at least expected, I think. They just want their likes and lulz and at the end of the day, this is a forum, and that's what happens in forums across the Internet. Nothing new to see here.

Allowing map-trades | I think buying and trading should be allowed, even if I don't like it. Nobody can sell without people to buy. I believe if you want to address this issue, make an effort to somehow discourage map buyers. As Rhynhardt said, once they are done with the map, they will not relinquish it until they can sell it for additional profit. Yeah, that's true. They are rewarded for the time it takes (and smega costs) to sell it so if they can't find any buyers, they'll leave. Complaining about it is pointless as they effectively own it, as the command (mapowner) suggests. As for the act itself, I don't see it as a real problem, its more something I dislike rather than a problem: 'I don't like that he's not training/not using his map properly (grinding). I could be grinding there, getting exp off that map but he won't let me unless I pay him' which is what I feel and the reason I don't engage in these trades. However, I repeat myself, its their map. At least for the time being. What they choose to do with it is beyond me, even if he's hogging it 24/7 by barely attacking mobs.

Tracking 'rule breakers' with the proposed changes | You can't really report map trades in any way (unless the chat log in the screenshot specifically shows a transaction taking place) as avoiding it is really easy. Without evidence, the Staff can't really punish you. I also don't expect them to go hiding in commonly traded maps in hopes of catching a suspicious conversation.
So yeah, I think in order to address a suggestion, we have to consider the viability of implementing said suggestion and once you determine it is actually possible, discuss the effect it'll have on the game or moral grounds involved with it. If it can't be tracked for punishment, people will still do it so what's all this arguing about?

That's all from me folks.

 

Unethical does not mean it should be bannable, there are gray areas which can be resolved through gameplay changes. I didn't come into the thread to offer solutions, it's not something I've thought or been really that concerned about. I saw a really bad comparison and clarified why it doesn't make sense and put my opinion that I don't agree with buying/selling maps.

 

I'm not a big fan of buying and selling maps myself, but I can see both sides of the argument.
Those that has a decent map which is in high demand sees an easy way to make 10mil. (10-15 is what I usually see them go for), and considering prices on a lot of things I'd say that's pocket change for 95% of the people that train in these maps.

What I'd rather see is an option not to be able to own newbie-friendly maps like HHG1, Ant Tunnel, or maps on maple island. But that's a rant for another day!

But for those that wish to gain higher levels fast, I get that the best map is definitely the most attractive and it can be annoying to have to fork out to some guy who's not training there but purely hogging the map until he/she (A. gets to sell it or (B. gets bored and logs off.

The game is bound to have a high influx of members now due to quarantine, and probably will so again when summer holidays approach, would it be a possibility to add more channels temporarily during these peak times or would that have the same effect on the server as creating a new world?

As long as it isn't more widespread than it is, its not really a huge issue as of right now in my opinion.

 

Why not just buff surrounding monster maps instead, making less demand for the popular maps? I don't know all the popular grind areas, but anything nearby that's less used could use the following:

• Buff exp given (self-explanatory)
  
• Buff drops (if you can't get faster exp you may as well get some money while you're grinding)
• Intra-map portals (makes getting around them more efficient without haste/TP, useful on large maps that are tedious to navigate)
• Buff the spawn rates (even if the EXP isn't as good, killing more at once means you can still get more EXP overall)

I think in general really large maps like those shouldn't be "owned". I don't mind the command showing who the current killers are to keep track of hackers, botters, etc., but large maps like that shouldn't be owned because they're too large for a player to reasonable kill by themselves. It's easy for 6 players to grind in the same map without KSing anyone. (Which is the whole point of map ownership.)

Even if you bring your mage to spam ultimates for leech in Ant Tunnel (or just show off), there's 3 areas where they can each spam without interfering with each other. In fact, it's actually better for everyone to allow multiple people to kill as it helps even out the spawn distribution. Killing too much in one area on a large map means most of the spawn will end up in parts of the map you're not in.

I've always hated that KSing here includes killing part of the map that a player isn't even close to where you are for minutes at a time while they kill somewhere else, especially when it's a large map they can't reasonably control by themselves.

 

Mini Dungeon plz