Updated 2/19/2014 Anti-RMT Self-Found Tags for ALL Leagues in All Windows + SF Maps (other details)

"

Cehasha wrote:

The interest of a self-found league is mainly the increases in drop rate which would allow self-found players to beat high-level maps as traders do. I am not so far in the game yet, but this is apparently currently abnormally difficult if not downright impossible. In which way your tag could solve this problem? It is probable that I did not understand your idea very well because I am a tired non-english speaker, but as far as I understand it, this is simply some sort of cosmetic effect.

I would say you don't understand the idea. English not being your native language does not help matters. With that in mind, translate the below in every possible way you can so you can understand it. It comes from the OP itself.

Self-Found League vs. Self-Found Tags:

The idea of SFL = Self-Found yet begs for RNG & drop rate changes to find and craft items easier, among others issues with it stated within the longer version of why I am against a SFL.

I don't want to be spoonfed an easier game.

The idea of SF Tags = Self-Found while keeping everything the way it is throughout all leagues, including RNG and drop rates, yet trading is not recommended for SF-tagged players since they can lose their SF Tag.

Note: Trading not being recommended for SF-tagged players does not mean the same thing as Trade being restricted for SF-tagged players. SF-tagged players can trade when they want, sure! but the penalty to that is they lose their SF Tag.

P.S. It's not a cosmetic effect, far from it, and I will not go into more excess explanation on how and why it's not a cosmetic effect.

That's quite absurd to say the least toward the idea with more depth to it than that.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

Your argument is moot, one reason being HC tags being on SC characters doesn't work.

Please, a little bit of imagination.

You could show /deaths next to each char, so that 0-deaths chars would be clearly visible.
But then what to do when 0-death char groups with 1+-deaths chars and they carry him?
Technically, 0-death char still 0-death but it is obviously not the same.

This is why HC is separate league.
This is why SF must be separate league.

Once you accept non-SF stuff in any way directly or indirectly you're tainted.

It appears to me that you want to play SF but with your friends who are more relaxed about trading. If this is true, well, tough shit.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

Otherwise, if SF-tagged players want to be literal about it they can simply play alone and get whatever items drop only for them. Having it to where only SF-tagged items drop for SF-tagged players in battle would require a lot of unnecessary developer time, which is why I didn't mention it in my idea.

And it doesn't work because now you have to believe my _word_ that I didn't group with non-SF chars.

Imagine HC didn't exist but some players would delete their chars when they die?
It wouldn't work because you have to take someone else's _word_.
But it works because HC people are dumped into separate league.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

> If you want to giveaway some white low-level 5L you're not going to use to new player,
how does that makes you non-SF?

"Whether you're giving something away or not, if your items are SF-tagged, players who are not SF-tagged cannot pick them up. The only way to get rid of SF tags on SF-tagged gear is if a SF-tagged player place SF-tagged gear in the Trade Window, thereby immediately getting rid of all SF tags on those items.

THEN you can give those items away.

This is error-prone.

I want to give something away and I place it and I make it green automatically and
other player makes it green before I realize mistake and, poof,
my hard earned tag is gone but I'm still SF because I didn't gain anything from the transaction.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

I got this idea ironed out quite well,

oh no you don't, see cracks a.k.a grouping with non-SF-tagged players

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

and I will always have answers.

like religious clerics, yeah

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

Self-Found League vs. Self-Found Tags:

The idea of SFL = Self-Found yet begs for RNG & drop rate changes to find and craft items easier, among others issues with it stated within the longer version of why I am against a SFL.

I don't want to be spoonfed an easier game.

We want a drop rate capable to be a relatively viable alternative to the trading system and accept to pay the price of never be able to trade anything with anyone. I do not know how it could make the game easier, quite the contrary. And if it is the case, they are many other means to enhance the game difficulty. By the way, grinding is not difficult, it is tedious, which is not the same thing.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

The idea of SF Tags = Self-Found while keeping everything the way it is throughout all leagues, including RNG and drop rates, yet trading is not recommended for SF-tagged players since they can lose their SF Tag.

Note: Trading not being recommended for SF-tagged players does not mean the same thing as Trade being restricted for SF-tagged players. SF-tagged players can trade when they want, sure! but the penalty to that is they lose their SF Tag.

P.S. It's not a cosmetic effect, far from it, and I will not go into more excess explanation on how and why it's not a cosmetic effect.

That's quite absurd to say the least toward the idea with more depth to it than that.

I think I understood the first time: this is a cosmetic effect. There are side advantages in being identified directly as a self-found player like preventing being harassed by sellers or making people who do not want group with self-found players avoid you instead of blaming you for your playing style, but those are minors. The main feature of the self-found tag is bragging about it, which has zero interest to me and I think the vast majority of people who claim a self-found league.

CCR5 wrote:
"Please, a little bit of imagination."

You could show /deaths next to each char, so that 0-deaths chars would be clearly visible.
But then what to do when 0-death char groups with 1+-deaths chars and they carry him?
Technically, 0-death char still 0-death but it is obviously not the same.

This is why HC is separate league.
This is why SF must be separate league."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"Pardon the late reply.

As if you have a better alternative to the idea of SF other than a SFL that's not happening. Yeah, you're absolutely right! I have no imagination.

And even though you were able to give explanation regarding the HC league and SC league being together, you still didn't do it in such a way where it doesn't sound ridiculous in that what you explained does not work, which is why they have to be separate leagues.

On another note, we're talking about whether or not SF tags needs to be separate from other leagues, not whether or not a SFL should be separate from other leagues. There is a difference: a SFL is a league; SF tags is a SF feature across all leagues without GGG having to make unfair changes to one league being the SFL, leaving the other leagues unchanged.

Like I said, if one league gets its RNG and drop rates changed, etc. people in the forums are going to want changes in the other leagues they play in, too. If one league gets it, so too must the other leagues, which is one of the reasons a SFL is a bad idea."

CCR5 wrote:
"Once you accept non-SF stuff in any way directly or indirectly you're tainted."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"The only way you can accept non SF items is if you forcibly trade someone OR if you forcibly put equipment on your character with a more-than-visible SF Tag on it. If you cannot get incoming Trade Requests (preventing Trade Request harassment,) how are you going to lose your SF Tag? The answer is you can't do it unless you make yourself do it.

You're reading into the idea of SF tags how you want to interpret it, not how it's written as I explained, and continue to explain.

If you're going to debate here, be a little more prepared next time."

CCR5 wrote:
"It appears to me that you want to play SF but with your friends who are more relaxed about trading. If this is true, well, tough shit."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"You don't read very well, do you? You seem to forget the OP says, "Despite my dislike of an actual Self-Found League (not because it's Self-Found,) I brought forth this idea because I know people want Self-Found in some way, shape, or form. Am I able to deliver an idea that caters to everything Self-Found (League) players want? Absolutely not! However, the general idea here is universal across ALL leagues, not just one controversial league being the Self-Found League."

I also stated in a comment to someone that I didn't disagree to the FACT the idea of a SF Tag AND a SFL doesn't add significant gameplay value to PoE, and said that just said was my opinion that thinks that whereas other people may disagree in saying otherwise.

When you say it appears I want SF or want to play SF, you're wrong! Had you read my earlier replies to others, I clearly said I wasn't a fan of SF, that I was bringing this idea to the table NOT for me, but for those who want SF in some way, shape, or form since a SFL does not seem to be happening any time soon, if ever.

Therefore, what seems is not always what is. Your assumptions add shadows to things that do not exist."

CCR5 quotes HeavyMetalGear:
"Otherwise, if SF-tagged players want to be literal about it they can simply play alone and get whatever items drop only for them. Having it to where only SF-tagged items drop for SF-tagged players in battle would require a lot of unnecessary developer time, which is why I didn't mention it in my idea."

CCR5 replied:
"And it doesn't work because now you have to believe my _word_ that I didn't group with non-SF chars.

Imagine HC didn't exist but some players would delete their chars when they die?
It wouldn't work because you have to take someone else's _word_.
But it works because HC people are dumped into separate league."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"Genius, IF players are contributing to damage output, etc. during battle when in a group with SF-tagged players and players who are not SF-tagged, everyone has the right to get whatever drops comes their way. However, those who sit around in battle and do nothing are more than likely to be kicked from a group since they would clearly be seen as item leachers.

In addition to that, if you read the OP (you have not,) it says within the NEW, IMPORTANT SF TAG NOTES, "Dropped items from bosses and normal enemies is anyone’s to grab. There is no SF-tag-only drops from bosses or normal enemies. How can items be SF-tagged if the items have not been tagged yet by players with SF tags? Bosses / enemies have no reason to drop SF-tagged items."

If enemies / bosses are not SF-tagged, tell me what sense it makes for enemies to drop SF-tagged items?"

CCR5 wrote:
"If you want to giveaway some white low-level 5L you're not going to use to new player,
how does that makes you non-SF?"

CCR5 quotes HeavyMetalGear:
"Whether you're giving something away or not, if your items are SF-tagged, players who are not SF-tagged cannot pick them up. The only way to get rid of SF tags on SF-tagged gear is if a SF-tagged player place SF-tagged gear in the Trade Window, thereby immediately getting rid of all SF tags on those items.

THEN you can give those items away."

CCR5 replied:
"This is error-prone.

I want to give something away and I place it and I make it green automatically and
other player makes it green before I realize mistake and, poof,
my hard earned tag is gone but I'm still SF because I didn't gain anything from the transaction."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"It's not error-prone. I said numerous times SF-tagged players are not restricted from trade, that if they want to trade OR give things away, including but not limited to, white items, they will have to give up their SF Tag since giving away items requires trading in some way, shape or form.

The reason drop-item trading does not work with SF-tagged players is because of the PoE game code I explain(ed) in my OP for items that become SF-tagged immediately after a SF-tagged player picks it up. This then makes it impossible for players who are not SF-tagged to use the item since they don't have a SF Tag.

What sense does it make to allow players who are not SF-tagged to wear gear or use items that have SF tags? They didn't SF the items; the player who is SF-tagged self found the items.

The only way, again, a player that's not SF-tagged can use SF-tagged itemss is if a SF-tagged player forcibly places (not drops) their SF-tagged items in the Trade Window, thereby removing all SF tags on those items. This then allows players who are not SF-tagged to use items that are no longer SF-tagged."

CCR5 quotes HeavyMetalGear:
"I got this idea ironed out quite well,"

CCR5 replied:
"oh no you don't, see cracks a.k.a grouping with non-SF-tagged players"

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"Again, it makes no sense whatsoever for enemies / bosses to drop SF-tagged gear if they are in fact not SF-tagged. Furthermore, you don't know what it would take to program enemies / bosses to drop SF-tagged gear for SF-tagged players while dropping items that are not SF-tagged for players who are not SF-tagged.

It's not only a lot of developer work, but it's completely unnecessary and makes no sense to program enemies / bosses like that, anyway. You only see a part and not a whole in the idea by seeing only what you want to see, assuming where you want to assume (is not there.)

The SF Tag idea the way I composed it is the way it is for a good reason. The sooner you figure that out, perhaps we can communicate better and ADD to the SF Tag idea (if you have any better ideas) rather than do away with it.

All you have done is protect the idea of a SFL that's not happening instead of trying to contribute to an idea that's actually flexible and fair by not BEGGING GGG to make drastic changes, including but not limited to, RNG and drop rates."

CCR5 quotes HeavyMetalGear:
"...and I will always have answers."

CCR5 replied:
"like religious clerics, yeah"

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"No, I am just able to back up my arguments by dissecting yours and you don't like that. I am the one who put the SF Tag idea on the table, not you. Therefore, it only makes sense I know more about the idea than anyone else here by explaining exactly how it works. Just because I said "I will always have answers" does not imply I know or have the answer(s) to everything. What it means is I know and have the answers regarding the idea of SF tags since I came up with it.

Conclusively, when you quote a part and not a whole of what someone actually said, it can suggest I said something else you want to believe I said when that's not what I meant.

P.S. Please stay on topic and let's not throw religious mud around in any way, shape, or form in this thread where it does not belong. If you want to make religious comparisons, references, remarks, etc., please go somewhere else and do it.

To be fair, I don't make remarks like that toward you, so don't do it to me.

Thank you."

Cehasha quotes HeavyMetalGear:

Self-Found League vs. Self-Found Tags:

"The idea of SFL = Self-Found yet begs for RNG & drop rate changes to find and craft items easier, among others issues with it stated within the longer version of why I am against a SFL.

I don't want to be spoonfed an easier game."

Cehasha wrote:
"We want a drop rate capable to be a relatively viable alternative to the trading system and accept to pay the price of never be able to trade anything with anyone. I do not know how it could make the game easier, quite the contrary. And if it is the case, they are many other means to enhance the game difficulty. By the way, grinding is not difficult, it is tedious, which is not the same thing."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"Exactly, and I heard the same story over and over. Perhaps you should consider reading my entire spoiler in the OP titled Why I am against a SFL // Why I think SF Tags are better (the longer version). It counteracts everything people (such as yourself) who are FOR a SFL says, and has said countless times before.

You SFL protestors shoot yourselves in the foot by contradicting the idea of no trading, when in fact, changing the RNG and drop rates makes items just as easy to get and in almost the same amount of time as if you were to just trade items with other players. The spoiler below proves this, and I have seen no one here in the commentaries come forth to disprove it.



Get back to me sometime when you finish reading that. Tell me it isn't so . . ."

Cehasha quotes HeavyMetalGear:
"The idea of SF Tags =[/b] Self-Found while keeping everything the way it is throughout all leagues, including RNG and drop rates, yet trading is not recommended for SF-tagged players since they can lose their SF Tag.

Note: Trading not being recommended for SF-tagged players does not mean the same thing as Trade being restricted for SF-tagged players. SF-tagged players can trade when they want, sure! but the penalty to that is they lose their SF Tag.

P.S. It's not a cosmetic effect, far from it, and I will not go into more excess explanation on how and why it's not a cosmetic effect.

That's quite absurd to say the least toward the idea with more depth to it than that."

Cehasha replied:
"I think I understood the first time: this is a cosmetic effect. There are side advantages in being identified directly as a self-found player like preventing being harassed by sellers or making people who do not want group with self-found players avoid you instead of blaming you for your playing style, but those are minors."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"And again, I still think you should read the spoiler titled Why I am against a SFL // Why I think SF Tags are better (the longer version), and get back to me sometime."

Cehasha wrote:
"The main feature of the self-found tag is bragging about it, which has zero interest to me and I think the vast majority of people who claim a self-found league."

HeavyMetalGear replied:
"This is where you're most wrong. Just because SF tags seems like some cosmetic effect to you does not mean it is a cosmetic effect for reason being you still don't understand the merit and purpose behind the SF Tag idea.

Your judgement is equivalent to looking at the SF Tag images in the OP, and nothing more.

Sure, players are going to BRAG about their SF Tag just like they do, anyway, regarding the level they are and the gear they wear! In earlier comments (pages 1 and 2) I even said I see where people (including you) are coming from when talking about bragging. However, it is not enough basis for an argument to invalidate the SF Tag idea.

The idea behind SF tags is to alleviate the 'what do I do now?' problem in PoE where people have exhausted everything in PoE, everything except getting through the game without relying on trading whatsoever. It is therefore an overgeneralizing thought to entertain that all SF-tagged players are going to be motivated to maintain their SF Tag only for the sake of stroking their e-peen arrogance.

That's not true. There are going to be a great many more players maintaining their SF Tag for reason being they actually do want to get through PoE without trading other players. They will also like SF tags because they won't be harassed or bothered by players sending Trade Requests. The third reason why players would want a SF Tag is because some would want to be recognized as a SF Tag player (yes,) but not ALL players who want to be recognized for whatever it is will BEG to be recognized.

True recognition comes when other people put you on a high pedestal for you (for their reasons,) not when someone begs for recognition by putting themselves on a high pedestal whether it's to do with their SF tags, the gear they wear, their level, ETC.

With that being said, tell me the below is not so (stated within the OP)

"Other than no trading being allowed and RNG and drop rate changes that will never happen, a SFL dumbs down to a big whoa! factor more than anything, an ego booster at best that adds no significant value to the gameplay of PoE. Maybe the opposite of that just said is the case for players who seek out the opinion(s) of other players just because they have a SF Tag, but not to me."

AH, but wait, IF you say otherwise to the above stated, you therefore AGREE the SFL is a league (more than not) solely for RNG and drop rate changes, and the idea of trading not being allowed in a SFL is just an ingenious cover-up to get GGG's developers to change the RNG and drop rate changes to make it fair (or seem fair by not allowing trading.)

I caught on to what a great many of you SFL folks were thinking about long ago, and the motive behind it. Remember, I said a great many, not everyone that's for a SFL since the minority within the majority of players for a SFL don't truly know what they are supporting.

Since I'm guessing you're from somewhere else in the world (you said English is not your native tongue,) to quote Abraham Lincoln here in the U.S., "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

The people who cannot be fooled here (including me and GGG's developers,) are those who are not for a SFL because we know SFL protesters want a SFL NOT because of no trading (that's the ingenious cover-up,) but mainly because of RNG and drop rate changes!

We may as well call the SFL the RNG-DR League.

You even admitted to it yourself.

HeavyMetalGear quotes Cehasha:
"We want a drop rate capable to be a relatively viable alternative to the trading system and accept to pay the price of never be able to trade anything with anyone. I do not know how it could make the game easier, quite the contrary."

HeavyMetalGear goes on to say:
"Yeah, a relatively viable alternative to the trading system by not trading anyone. It's clever how you carefully put your words in the order they are in.

The meaning lies within the word relatively, in this case inadvertently makes a SFL the same thing (very close to it) as a league with trading allowed. Why have trading disabled in a SFL when the RNG and drop rate changes are going to make it just as easy to get items and take close to the amount of time to get items as if you were to trade other players?

What you have here is a double-edged sword with equal sides. Trading in a SFL may as well be given an OK since RNG and drop rate changes is just the reverse of trading itself.

By correct definition, Self-Found League (or SF like Self-Found tags suggest) means NO trading, that which does not include someone's brilliant idea (sarcasm intended) to somehow include RNG and drop rate changes within its meaning to substitute for trading. That's not what defines a true SFL!

IF finding and crafting items is going to be a little hard for you without trading in a SFL (or if you have a SF Tag,) tough nuggets! Play SF how it's supposed to be played by what rightly defines SF by leaving the RNG and drop rate changes alone.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

"It's not error-prone. I said numerous times SF-tagged players are not restricted from trade, that if they want to trade OR give things away, including but not limited to, white items, they will have to give up their SF Tag since giving away items requires trading in some way, shape or form.

The bolded part does not sit well with me. As a SF player, I would think that I could drop items for others and/or initiate trades and give others items without receiving items in return and still maintain a SF tag. Why would the act of giving be able to revoke SF tags? A character is no less self-found for giving away items.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

The reason drop-item trading does not work with SF-tagged players is because of the PoE game code I explain(ed) in my OP for items that become SF-tagged immediately after a SF-tagged player picks it up. This then makes it impossible for players who are not SF-tagged to use the item since they don't have a SF Tag.

I think that the bolded line is a critical issue with your idea, HeavyMetalGear. It should not be impossible ever for non SF tagged players to use SF tagged items. The SF tag system that you describe, or a similar concept, should not have any effects on item usage for players. If you can hold an item, you can use an item. If you are holding an item that originally was held/found by a different account, then you cannot hold a SF tag. If you are not carrying any usable items or gems that were traded for or originally found by a different account, then you can display a SF tag.

What if a friend and I are running a map. I am SF tagged and my friend is not. For some reason, we are using the Free for All allocation mode. I pick up an item, identify it, and then decide that I don't want the item. So, I toss the item to the ground. Apparently, the item is now SF tagged due to me picking it up. Now, my friend grabs the item, on purpose or accident, doesn't matter. My friend cannot use the item because it was tagged by my character? Wtf? Oh, and to make this situation worse, I would have to re-pickup the item and initiate a trade with my friend, lose my SF tag, just to give the item to him or her in a form that is usable? This is ludicrous.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

What sense does it make to allow players who are not SF-tagged to wear gear or use items that have SF tags? They didn't SF the items; the player who is SF-tagged self found the items.

It makes a lot of sense. Non SF-tagged players are apparently not self-found, thus they don't mind using gear that is traded for or gifted. So, why should a non SF-tagged player not be allowed to use gear found by another player under any circumstances?

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

The only way, again, a player that's not SF-tagged can use SF-tagged itemss is if a SF-tagged player forcibly places (not drops) their SF-tagged items in the Trade Window, thereby removing all SF tags on those items. This then allows players who are not SF-tagged to use items that are no longer SF-tagged."

This is just silly, I am sorry. The only way for a SF player to get a usable item to another player is to use the trade screen to 'de-tag' an item and lose his or her SF tag? Just silly. The SF player loses his or her self-found standing due to giving an item away through the trade screen? It doesn't make sense. The person on the receiving end of the transaction should be the only one to see consequences, if any. Receiving an item that you did not find sounds like grounds for SF tag revocation, but giving away an item you did find, who cares.

Before you read the below, you said who cares if you give away items you DID find to someone else, that it should be OK, right? It makes no sense regarding players who are not SF-tagged, but partially makes sense only for other players who are SF-tagged. Therefore, if SF-tagged players drop items that are SF-tagged, a player that's SF-tagged would be allowed to pick up items from another SF-tagged player.

This then leads us to another issue in which this would be an exploit that would allow trading between one SF-tagged player to another.

The only other FIX I can think up to avoid this problem is to have PoE's game code where no one, not even other SF-tagged players, can pick up items from other SF-tagged players.



It does make sense. The SF Tag idea as I composed it is the way it is for good reason. The idea is to discourage (not restrict) trading between SF-tagged characters and non SF-tagged characters. I don't see how that's so hard to understand.

Furthermore, again, since trading is not recommended YET not restricted between SF-tagged players and players who are not SF-tagged, the two types of players can trade when they want, but the player that gets penalized (to discourage trading) is the SF-tagged player, thereby losing his/her SF Tag.

It doesn't matter if you're giving items away or not on a SF-tagged character, it's still considered handing items over / exchanging items / trading items in some way, shape, or form.

To allow the complete opposite to happen in the SF Tag idea would create a gaping exploit.

P.S. Since I'm such a silly guy, what do you propose for a better idea?

List your fixes or whatever it is you come up with from numbers 1 through [whatever number] Some of what you already pointed in your comments are things I don't agree with.

If I disagree with something, I'll let you know and tell you what's wrong with your alternative ideas.

Until then, the idea of SF tags still stands. And if you're wondering, I didn't go through every little nook and cranny in what you said not because I can't do it, but because I've done it more than enough here with other critics.

I have thought about the idea of SF tags long and hard and can come up with nothing better. Simply doing away with the idea of SF-tagged items is not the answer since just giving players SF tags like I originally stated in my OP leads to other exploits.

Hey HeavyMetalGear!

I believe that you and I have very different ideas about what a SF tag system should be like. To me, all a SF tag system should do is provide recognition to characters that are self-found (definition of self-found pending); there would be no trade or item-usage restrictions. Simply put, if all of the items that a character has equipped, including gems and flasks, and all usable (non-currency items) within the character's inventory were found by the account of that character, then that character can display a SF tag. If at any point in time the character equips or inventories a non-currency item that was originally held by another account, then the character cannot display a SF tag. However, if the character gets rid of (vendors, destroys, drops, gives away, etc.) all non-SF items that the character is holding, then that character can re-acquire its SF tag. So, I look at a SF tag as a character 'state'. A character can exist in a SF or non-SF state, and can go back and forth between the two based on player choices. Obviously, the criteria for maintaining a SF state could be different than the above mentioned.

Your SF tag ideas seem to be far more overreaching than mine. Your ideas seek to discourage trade between SF and non-SF players; they seek to reduce the free flow of items between characters, which I don't understand. I don't see why a SF tag system should have any mechanical effects on trade or item usage. I can understand that the possibility of losing a SF tag could discourage some players from trading, but to actually make trading more difficult is messing with PoE's trading foundation, which extends beyond the SF tag concept.

"

Perfect_Black wrote:

Hey HeavyMetalGear!

I believe that you and I have very different ideas about what a SF Tag System should be like. To me, all a SF Tag System should do is provide recognition to characters that are self-found (definition of self-found pending); there would be no trade or item-usage restrictions. Simply put, if all of the items that a character has equipped, including gems and flasks, and all usable (non-currency items) within the character's inventory were found by the account of that character, then that character can display a SF tag. If at any point in time the character equips or inventories a non-currency item that was originally held by another account, then the character cannot display a SF tag. However, if the character gets rid of (vendors, destroys, drops, gives away, etc.) all non-SF items that the character is holding, then that character can re-acquire its SF tag. So, I look at a SF tag as a character 'state'. A character can exist in a SF or non-SF state, and can go back and forth between the two based on player choices. Obviously, the criteria for maintaining a SF state could be different than the above mentioned.

Your SF tag ideas seem to be far more overreaching than mine. Your ideas seek to discourage trade between SF and non-SF players; they seek to reduce the free flow of items between characters, which I don't understand. I don't see why a SF Tag System should have any mechanical effects on trade or item usage. I can understand that the possibility of losing a SF tag could discourage some players from trading, but to actually make trading more difficult is messing with PoE's trading foundation, which extends beyond the SF tag concept.

The fact you say, "To me, all a SF Tag System should do is provide recognition to characters that are self-found (definition of self-found pending); there would be no trade or item-usage restrictions." Discredits everything you say. You make it sound like everyone in the entire game is going to go Self-Found when in fact there will be a great many more players wanting to trade like they usually would / like they usually do.

"

Perfect_Black wrote:

"The definition of Self-Found pending..."

Pending? Having to think up some other definition than what SF actually means proves my argument. If you got to think about it, chances are your definition won't make viable sense (whatever that is.)

There is no other definition than how I explained, that which aptly defines it. Trying to rewrite the definition of, or if you will, the laws of SF is like trying to rewrite or justify the law(s) saying if you kill a man for no plausible reason, you go to jail. Regardless, killing is killing, something one lives with and never forgets. Therefore, there is no alternative definition to SF. SF means what it means without any forgiving exceptions. IF your idea has trade exploits (I proved it does,) it does not count as SF.

The very idea of Self-Found is not to have trading be allowed whatsoever. Allowing a player to get their SF Tag back after they lose it also goes against the rules of SF, not by my rules, but by the raw definition of what true Self-Found means.

What you seem to propose is the moment a SF-tagged character puts on gear that is not SF-tagged, their SF Tag is removed. However, when your character puts on SF-tagged gear, you get your SF Tag back again.

The problem with that is players are inevitably going to start out as a SF-tagged character by default (as my OP says,) sacrifice their SF Tag temporarily to wear gear that is not SF-tagged, farm with that gear, then put on their SF-tagged gear and say, "HEY, look what I did! No trading! Tralalala." when in fact they have been leveling their character(s) all along using gear that's not SF-tagged.

What you propose makes no sense, and again, creates exploits in which the idea of an SF Tag loses all its credibility and value for what it's worth. Your idea makes it worth nothing, not even a legit mention. My idea of an SF Tag System makes it so players preserve all evidence without reasonable doubt proving they are indeed SF players, not just players doing gear switch-outs between SF-tagged gear and gear that is not SF-tagged.

Unless there is some mis-communication on my end here, my point still stands your idea of the SF Tag System is more broken than you claim mine to be.

P.S. I understand completely where you are coming from (believe me, I do) in some of what you point out, but there's too much leeway in it in which I can never agree with nor conform with your idea of a SF Tag System.

Well, maybe my ideas about SF tags would somewhat trivialize being SF. However, to hold a tag at end-game (or at any point in the game), every gem, piece of armor, weapon, flask, piece of jewelry, and every (non-currency) inventory item a character holds would have to be found by the account holder.

The tag would still communicate to others the fact that 'every item I am wearing and holding was found by me'.

Your (HeavyMetalGear's) SF tag would communicate a stronger message like 'I have never traded EVER, thus every item I have on this character was found by me'.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

You make it sound like everyone in the entire game is going to go Self-Found when in fact there will be a great many more players wanting to trade like they usually would / like they usually do.

Well, everyone should have the opportunity to go self-found, imo. Even if you have traded in the past, it should not be to late to strip away items that were not found by you and start only using items that you yourself found.

"

Pending? Having to think up some other definition than what SF actually means proves my argument. If you got to think about it, chances are your definition won't make viable sense (whatever that is.) There is no other definition than how I explained, that which aptly defines it...Therefore, there is no alternative definition to SF. SF means what it means without any forgiving exceptions. IF your idea has trade exploits (I proved it does,) it does not count as SF.

Many people think that self-found means 'never traded or accepted items from another, ever'. Other people may exclude currency items from the self-found definition, making it 'never traded or accepted usable/wearable items from another, ever', which opens the door for not exploitative currency trades. Others, including myself, may say that 'self-found should not be based on whether or not you have traded or accepted items from another, but whether or not the items you are holding right now were all found by you'.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

The very idea of Self-Found is not to have trading be allowed whatsoever. Allowing a player to get their SF Tag back after they lose it also goes against the rules of SF, not by my rules, but by the raw definition of what true Self-Found means.

Personally, I think these rules are too harsh. I would argue that my Ranger is in fact self-found because every gem, flask, armor, weapon, etc. that she uses was found by me. She does not use one item that was received in trade or that originated from another account (she has in the past though, to test a few weapons that I did not find). But with your rules, or 'raw' SF rules, my Ranger couldn't be self-found because she has used the trade window to trade away items for currency, and has accepted a few gifted items. I think that the 'raw' SF rules are too restrictive and would not make for a fun meta-game.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

The problem with that is players are inevitably going to start out as a SF-tagged character by default (as my OP says,) sacrifice their SF Tag temporarily to wear gear that is not SF-tagged, farm with that gear, then put on their SF-tagged gear and say, "HEY, look what I did! No trading! Tralalala." when in fact they have been leveling their character(s) all along using gear that's not SF-tagged.

I think the word 'inevitably' is probably too strong. A lot of players play self-found by choice already, and I don't think that this would change. However, you point out a valid possibility under my SF tag ideas. I don't view this is exploitative though. Players would still have to find end-game items for themselves to re-acquire their tags, and end-game items are the hardest to self-find.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

What you propose makes no sense, and again, creates exploits in which the idea of an SF Tag loses all its credibility and value for what it's worth. Your idea makes it worth nothing, not even a legit mention.

Ouch. Well, I disagree. My idea would create a meta-game that any player, and any character, could go for. At any point in time a player could decide that they want to go self-found. So, they would have to 20/20 gems that they find personally. They would have to find end-game items for themselves. They would have to replace any non self-found items with self-found items. It is not that trivial or meaningless to say at end-game (lvl 80+ or so) that 'every item I am wearing and holding was found by me'. To be able to plow through end-game content with that SF tag would not be meaningless, imo.

Maybe there is too much leeway with my ideas, but I prefer options and flexibility to restrictions.