(Legendary) Armed Robbery

[Most Lee Harmless]

On a side note : I wonder why there seems ot be so much interest in developing new voodoo to attack and harm other players when there is so much out there already which can be devastating if used correctly : how about folk take the time to see what already can be done and learn that before pushing to add more and more attack methods with weaker and weaker defences against them. Soone ror later, an equal and opposite force will awaken and start demanding Legendary Mindbars, Legendary Counter curses and such like and we will all be back at square one once more.

Bear in mind, guilds, nations and players have been destroyed using whats already here : so lets not get too overboard with suggestions.

[William one eye]

First this is such a bad Idea, I did not read this carefully sorry if I overlapped someones comments, or missed something that would make this card ok.

Terrible Idea for many reasons, both of Daniks arguments are very strong, particularly the statement on the hideout.
If you allow this, what's next, a super commandeer card that can pluck ships from private marinas, or a variation of OLoD that can grab gold bar directly from someones gold smith. How how about a creature similar to a leviathan that can take a mansion down a few levels and players lose their fields and their buildings get leveled down. I could continue, but instead I will suggest another reason this is not a good card.

In a public bank, many players store money. Say you cast this on a player that has a billion dollars stored in the bank, but that player spent all of their own money investing in say their goldsmith. So zero of it belongs to the player your attack is directed at. So what player is shorted, what if their is a panic, everyone makes a run on the bank, the owner closes the bank before all the money is out. Lets say you lock up 50 random players bank accounts because caused a bank to close. Probably fine for larger players, but what if some new player has 800 k in the bank and that is 70% of their total GC.
They are in trouble, how many new players might be affected like this. Who knows.

[DezNutz]

-1 For reasons stipulated by Wolfie, Danik, and William One Eye.

[Cdv]

... I wonder why there seems to be so much interest in developing new voodoo to attack and harm other players when there is so much out there already which can be devastating if used correctly : how about folk take the time to see what already can be done and learn that before pushing to add more...

+1

[Haron]

I think too many things are too safe in the game. Nevertheless, I think this is a dangerous suggestion. If the bankers were making lots and lots of money by storing other players gold, then maybe it could work. I don't think they do, though.

And so, if such a card existed, why would any banker keep his bank open to others? That would only mean more money in the bank, which would mean a larger loss when such a card were used. So bankers would be better off using their banks only to store their own gold, not that of others. And that would be a bad thing, in my opinion.

[Grimrock Litless]

I made this to see what people would think about it, and everyone has the same thoughts, that's nice.

[Most Lee Harmless]

A bank makes no money if a player deposits coin into the bank, keeps it there for months then withdraws it : a bank makes a small fee if the player sends or receives money via 'send payment' system. A Bank can make money by charging interest on loaning out depositors funds, assuming the loan is fully repaid. However as depositors can withdraw all their funds at any time, it is not that wise to do so and so most bankers ring-fence those player funds and would only loan out their own funds. So, basically, banks dont make any real profits at all to cover any loss such as that suggested. Most will find they barely make enough interest on loans to cover losses on un-repaid ones. Making loans to new players with their high inactivity rate is a recipe for loss too : my own research showed a fail rate of over 60% on such loans.

What banks do well is to provide a safe store for funds and the means to move them in and out of your purse fast and cheaply. This is a necessary feature for high-cost investments such as hide-outs, port matters, bounties and ship-building.

Make it less safe, or subject to high losses and you will place a big brake on those features too. The big risk has been taken already on these sums of money, in the initial earning of them. A further risk arises in the spending of them, while they are in your purse plus the risk of loss in what they get spent on doing.

So, having one part of that earn, keep, spend cycle kept clear from high risk is not pandering to the big earners, it is a necessary part of the financial eco-system.