Accepted [Suggestion] Safe Trade

just use a chest and cmodify it?

 

Yep!

-1 on suggestion, sorry my bud!

 

https://www.ecocitycraft.com/forum/threads/better-way-to-trade.169702/


+1

 

??? What would you be improving, trade signs are good. Complicated, but gets the job done. Would it be like exchanging money for items?

 

Jobs that don't get done with trade signs:

• Enchanted items.
• Renamed items.
• Items with lore.
• Potions.

TL;DR: Everything that has NBT data in addition to an ID and meta ID because that's all the trade signs can store.

 

-1
I like this plugin and have used it before, but our method for trade is fine

 

Because heaven forbid we have any change on this server!

+1 good suggestion Freddy, I'd like to see this added.

 

OMG YES +1.
First of all @jwpwns , cmodified chests dont prevent scam. This does.
Cmodified chest -
I can ask for diamonds in exchange for a emerald. I could take the diamonds and log off without giving in my emerald.
This idea -
The trade isnt completed until both people accept. This also majorly prevents scam.
SO, less scams, less bans, and effectively, more safety.
And as @314 said, trade signs dont do enchanted items etc.
So basically, ECC has needed this, just haven't realised until now.

 

Simplistic and good, the thing i like about this is that you can do it from a distance, you dont have to invite them to your dirt shack and cmodify 2 chests just to trade something stupid when you could just /trade (player name) and be done with it.
+Support

 

I don't know if I like the idea of my items being in a sort a virtual chest rather than a physical chest or sign. What happens if you're in the middle of a trade and the server crashes? What happens to the items?

 

You get banned af

+1 tho ezer for builders to trade without complications of contracts

 

Aren't all bets off in this case? Hell, we've had circumstances where funky stuff happens with chests and inventories in the case of an actual server crash.

 

Fair enough I guess

 

+1 I just simply like it

 

who doesnt

 

+1

 

I will be looking into this.
Once tested in our testing environment we will make a final decision on whether it will be added to ECC.
We absolutely are considering this and it is already in our todo list. No promises though as it all depends on how our tests go and if we are happy with functionality.