mc.roleplayhub.com

players online

/Property Trade.

HedeonRP.

Level 6
What's your Minecraft Username?: HedeonRP
What's the title of your suggestion?: /Property Trade.

What's your suggestion?:
/PROPERTY TRADE.

This suggestion is one based on a command, specifically in the /property selection. This would be to implement a trading command, /property trade. This command would swap the properties of a player, charging them the base rent of the property they've purchased. IE; Player A & Player B swap Apartments, player A's is 50k, and Player B is 100k. Player A would pay the 100k base rent for Player B's Apartment, and Player B would pay 50k for Player A's apartment.

/property trade would mainly be featured in housing transactions, as stated in the example above, If someone wants to purchase a house from someone, and hand over their apartment as part of the deal, they can do so with /property trade.

This would be designed to stop apartment-sniping & housing-sniping when a transaction is going down. I'm aware myself and many others have had this anxiety in the past, when you're swapping properties with a player, "What if someone else buys it while I go disown my apartment?" or In the actual case, someone actually purchasing it in that brief moment of absence. Staff do not disown properties, so you'd have essentially lost however much you paid for said house / apartment, on top of your rent, and current home.

I'm aware that property transactions are not a massive focus of SRP, as they're not run by the server themselves, but this will provide assurance for a lot of players when making transactions with another property owner. To me, this seems like the property version of /giveto instead of dropping the item and hoping someone doesn't minge it.

How will this benefit the server and community?:
This suggestion is intended to provide a clear assurance of transactions between two players; instead of the potential risk of losing your future property; this is essentially a property version of the /giveto command, and will allow the people who paid for said house / apartment to be able to obtain it without a risk.

It will benefit the community through the confidence to purchase & sell property through players, I know many players, and myself have had thoughts similar to the stated example in my actual suggestion, and this would be able to squash the doubts, and create a sort of safety net for these transactions.

Thank you for reading this, and If you have any questions for me, please don't hesitate to ask.
 
+1

PLEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASE I'm not tryna lose 3 months worth of rent + another 250K (i'm broke go easy :( ) because i decided i liked the location of the staircase 3 houses down more than the current and got a good deal off
 
+1

I can already think about ways to abuse this command. The whole intention of this command is a +1 for me, but knowing how players inside this server operate, this command will bring loopholes that will leave a negative impact.

Problem #1:
Say a person knows they are going to be absent for a long period of time, they can just /property-trade with a more active player with the whole purpose of not losing the house. This would be a loophole in rule 3.7b of the server.

Problem #2:
Are we also considering the amount of time they have left in their property? If, by doing /property trade, you automatically give me a property within 30 days, you can already see where this issue will go. You can basically be doing /property-trade with your alt or someone else for a lesser price than the normal rent.

What if the players cannot put a price lower than the rent? / What if players cannot set the price themselves?

This kinda defeats the whole purpose of having a transaction. As a 'property owner', I would see what fits my interests the best. So if I wanna sell my house for 30 yen or 1,000,000 yen, that is up to the two parties. If there is a command that sets how I should be conducting transactions, then I wouldn't use it at all.

I had more examples, but they kinda faded away as I wrote these two. HedeonRP, if you are reading this, could you clarify those doubts for me? Cause I like where this is going, I'm just concerned with the possible abuse from the playerbase.
 
Last edited:
Neutral, leaning to -1

I can already think about ways to abuse this command. The whole intention of this command is a +1 for me, but knowing how players inside this server operate, this command will bring loopholes that will leave a negative impact.

Problem #1:
Say a person knows they are going to be absent for a long period of time, they can just /property-trade with a more active player with the whole purpose of not losing the house. This would be a loophole in rule 3.7b of the server.

Problem #2:
Are we also considering the amount of time they have left in their property? If, by doing /property trade, you automatically give me a property within 30 days, you can already see where this issue will go. You can basically be doing /property-trade with your alt or someone else for a lesser price than the normal rent.

What if the players cannot put a price lower than the rent? / What if players cannot set the price themselves?

This kinda defeats the whole purpose of having a transaction. As a 'property owner', I would see what fits my interests the best. So if I wanna sell my house for 30 yen or 1,000,000 yen, that is up to the two parties. If there is a command that sets how I should be conducting transactions, then I wouldn't use it at all.

I had more examples, but they kinda faded away as I wrote these two. HedeonRP, if you are reading this, could you clarify those doubts for me? Cause I like where this is going, I'm just concerned with the possible abuse from the playerbase.
Hi, so basically the /property trade isn't a loophole for 3.b, because it will automatically charge rent & Admins are not required, this is a player-ran command.

IE; Player A & Player B have apartments, Player B's is worth 100k, and Player A's property is worth 50k. Player A will be automatically charged the base 100k rent. Therefore it's still a transaction. It's only the same as buying and selling a property for it's base value, any other monetary value is provided outside of /property trade. Both players must be online to do so, and must accept the /property trade. Administrators will not be required to disown a property.

The second part "
What if the players cannot put a price lower than the rent? / What if players cannot set the price themselves?"

/Property trade is to trade the properties alone, to reduce the risk of someone sniping the house while you disown another property. Ie; you can /property trade, and pay the base rent, any other money must be paid outside of this command. Ie; Player A pays Player B 300,000 for their apartment & then /property trade's them, this will charge an additional 100k, as is the rent for said apartment. Property trade only charges what the rent of that home is.

The whole purpose of the command is to trade properties, not money. So it only swaps & charges you rent, not the transactional value you put onto the house, that is as you said, up to the two players to decide <3
 
+1

It'll make it easier, I don't personally see any downsides in this. Nothing is changing, just an easier way to make trades or sell your home for another.
 
Hi, so basically the /property trade isn't a loophole for 3.b, because it will automatically charge rent & Admins are not required, this is a player-ran command.

IE; Player A & Player B have apartments, Player B's is worth 100k, and Player A's property is worth 50k. Player A will be automatically charged the base 100k rent. Therefore it's still a transaction. It's only the same as buying and selling a property for it's base value, any other monetary value is provided outside of /property trade. Both players must be online to do so, and must accept the /property trade. Administrators will not be required to disown a property.

The second part "
What if the players cannot put a price lower than the rent? / What if players cannot set the price themselves?"

/Property trade is to trade the properties alone, to reduce the risk of someone sniping the house while you disown another property. Ie; you can /property trade, and pay the base rent, any other money must be paid outside of this command. Ie; Player A pays Player B 300,000 for their apartment & then /property trade's them, this will charge an additional 100k, as is the rent for said apartment. Property trade only charges what the rent of that home is.

The whole purpose of the command is to trade properties, not money. So it only swaps & charges you rent, not the transactional value you put onto the house, that is as you said, up to the two players to decide <3
I see. Yeah, after reading that, I understand the concept. I'll edit my original message to a +1 cause I also feel the pressure of people 'property-sniping' while doing a trade. Thank you for addressing my concern! <3
 
I see. Yeah, after reading that, I understand the concept. I'll edit my original message to a +1 cause I also feel the pressure of people 'property-sniping' while doing a trade. Thank you for addressing my concern! <3
No worries, I'd rather address something than let someone be confused!! I made the post, it's only right I help with concerns <3
 
Obvious +1 from me.

Transferring ownership is something that would be relatively easy to implement and much needed.
Concerns of abuse were raised earlier but I don't think those are realistic since people can still do those things without the command.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top