The Ability to sell Custom Packages/Kits in Stores

Discussion in 'The Suggestion Box' started by Czarina_Julie, Oct 11, 2015.


(Please read the post below for voting) Ability to sell custom packages/kits in your Stores

Good Idea, let's do this! 5 vote(s) 83.3%
Umm? Not sure. 0 vote(s) 0.0%
Nah, I like the additional steps and don't want automation. 1 vote(s) 16.7%
  1. First off, I apologize if this has already been brought up but when I searched the Forum I couldn't find any mention.

    I would like to suggest the ability for players to create a custom kit/package to sell within their stores. For example:
    1. A player could place an iron helmet, chest plate, leggings, boots, sword, bow, 64 arrows, pickaxe, axe, shovel into a chest (or any other kit/package they want to put together).
    2. Then the player puts a [Preview] sign on the front of the chest (so others can see the items).
    3. Another sign over the chest (as players currently do) that states the quantity of packages (1 most of the times) and the price.
    4. When a buyer clicks the chest they get all items in the package.

    It should be fairly simple to do within the code (Java) by adding a new item ID. This would only need to be 1 item ID regardless of different packages and would show up in the players Rupee history as a generic named item such as "Package sold."

    The [Preview] sign logic/code already exists along with the store (selling) sign logic. A simple condition statement to not allow a buy (e.g. : 32) for "Package" items could be done so that "Packages" can only be sold by the store, not purchased by the store (which would be a coding nightmare to do).

    Currently the players only have the option to auction a package deal or create one in the shop with some type of notification (e.g. "If you want this package contact SluggoDaClown"). After the [selling] player has been contacted or the winning bid won, the [selling] player adds/changes the sign to an [Access] sign for the winner or player that purchased the package. This suggestion would automate the processes of both of these options.
    Hope to see other comments and support of this enhancement (in the next sprint or build :) )
  2. +1

    Although the poll's 'no' option seems a bit biased.
    PenguinDJ likes this.
  3. I see no harm in adding this +1
  4. Umm? Not sure. :)
  5. "I like additional steps"
    "I don't like automation"

    Just seems a bit of an unfair poll.
  6. Lets not get caught up about the poll :) +1
    BlinkyBinky likes this.
  7. Sorry xHaro_Der, It was done in jest.

    I tried to edit but I can't edit the poll
  8. You're making assumptions based on a player's opinion of this suggestion and putting it in a poll - not a very good thing to do. :)