Suggestion: 5 permanent holding spots

I suggest that there be 5 permanent holding spots that summoners can use to store items that they wouldn't want to expire. Given the need for T1A and T4BC, if people are holding onto them to rank up a specific champ then it would make sense to have a function that would keep them from expiring. I think it'd be a good idea to have that and would keep hard earned items from being wasted.

Comments

Goken2345

Only one person agrees with me? Fake news! Sad!

Suskanut

I think this could be really useful but sadly don't think it will be implemented

Goken2345

Even if it was only 3 spots it’d be great. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Wolf @Kabam Vydious @TenebrousTenebrific

MisterNiceGuy

Isn't this what the regular inventory is for? So are you asking to have inventory expanded?

I was thinking that you should be able to apply resources to a champ even if you don't have everything to full rank them to the next rank.

So let's say you pull star lord. You are short on the t4cc but have alphas expiring. You could apply alphas to him now and when you finally get the t4cc you can apply that then. Or vice versa.

Seems logical tho so it won't happen lol

Vision_41

Wait till you level up or sell, upgrade, or whatnot. That's what I try to do.

Magrailothos

Nice idea; but would be better to just have inventory expanded; especially for the major catalysts.

Goken2345

MisterNiceGuy wrote: »

Isn't this what the regular inventory is for? So are you asking to have inventory expanded?

I was thinking that you should be able to apply resources to a champ even if you don't have everything to full rank them to the next rank.

So let's say you pull star lord. You are short on the t4cc but have alphas expiring. You could apply alphas to him now and when you finally get the t4cc you can apply that then. Or vice versa.

Seems logical tho so it won't happen lol

That would be great as well.

Goken2345

Magrailothos wrote: »

Nice idea; but would be better to just have inventory expanded; especially for the major catalysts.

I️ figured mine might be a bit more likely than expanding inventory

xNig

Goken2345 wrote: »

Magrailothos wrote: »

Nice idea; but would be better to just have inventory expanded; especially for the major catalysts.

I️ figured mine might be a bit more likely than expanding inventory

Nah. Expanding inventory would just be some edits to a code. Whereas implementing yours would have to have an entire new featured designed.

I_am_Groot

They just would increase spots for catalysts. It will not hurt anything and it will be a improvement in the game. Those spots are already outdated and the current (and future) catalysts requirements ask it.

dkatryl

There's no technical reason to not allow catalysts to stack far beyond the current punitive cap. It isn't like it would create more space per account. It's the same item, would have the same item #ID, it would literally be just saying if there are x1, x2, x20, etc.

Same thing with Iso. All T5b iso have the same item #ID. So instead of listing that #ID over and over and over, just have a single listing with a # of them, just like catalysts and potions/revives.

The way they are doing it is clunky and probably makes each account take up more server storage space by having to store THOUSANDS of separate iso in my stash vs a few dozen entries for each possible type with a quantity by each.

I_am_Groot

dkatryl wrote: »

There's no technical reason to not allow catalysts to stack far beyond the current punitive cap. It isn't like it would create more space per account. It's the same item, would have the same item #ID, it would literally be just saying if there are x1, x2, x20, etc.

Same thing with Iso. All T5b iso have the same item #ID. So instead of listing that #ID over and over and over, just have a single listing with a # of them, just like catalysts and potions/revives.

The way they are doing it is clunky and probably makes each account take up more server storage space by having to store THOUSANDS of separate iso in my stash vs a few dozen entries for each possible type with a quantity by each.

Very Good Point.