Shared Bank?

[Kika Maslyaka]

Originally Posted by Triiz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think that may be part of the Titanium client. I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that the reason P99 devs couldn't edit Titanium client is because it would be outright copyright infringement but somehow the server it's self isn't or something like that. It was a direct quote from Rogean or Nilbog iirc.

Edit: That was surprisingly easy to find, was an article about catching people using third party hacks

"It's the same code, really," Rogean said. "It's a very similar setup.
We have a disadvantage compared to SOE, though, because we have no
control over the client. We cannot make any modifications to the client
itself, as that would be a copyright violation. So we aren't easily
able to put anything in that will either prevent the hacks or detect
them."
http://www.tentonhammer.com/articles...-stop-a-hacker

Actually they did fair amount of hacking since then. They just couldn't hack out the item linking.

[Rygar]

Originally Posted by Triiz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think that may be part of the Titanium client. I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that the reason P99 devs couldn't edit Titanium client is because it would be outright copyright infringement but somehow the server it's self isn't or something like that. It was a direct quote from Rogean or Nilbog iirc.

Edit: That was surprisingly easy to find, was an article about catching people using third party hacks

"It's the same code, really," Rogean said. "It's a very similar setup.
We have a disadvantage compared to SOE, though, because we have no
control over the client. We cannot make any modifications to the client
itself, as that would be a copyright violation. So we aren't easily
able to put anything in that will either prevent the hacks or detect
them."
http://www.tentonhammer.com/articles...-stop-a-hacker

This is not a result of the Titanium Client (item linking), I'm fairly certain. There is a more relative quote from Haynar saying they didn't want to disable item linking because it created a CSR burden (made trade scamming easier)

[drmccollum]

Originally Posted by Jimjam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please give examples of nerfs away from classicness. Most changes seem to be toward a more classic server.

If you are aware of non-classic elements please gather your evidence and submit them to bug reports.

As far as I am aware the greatest intentional non classic factors are for CSR quality of life. Perhaps there is a shred of hope that shared bank might be enabled to reduce item reimbursement petitions. Seems unlikely, though.


My own opinion is no to shared. I like to view my characters as separate individuals, rather than different faces of me as a player. As such I don't really see 'my wurmslayer' to move around characters as it suits me, rather it is 'my rangers wurmslayer'; if my level 40 warrior wants a wurm slayer he has to go find his own and not steal my rangers.

Most people learned to share in kindergarten.

[DoucLangur]

in theory for, but practically AGAINST because there's enough scammers already. not requiring them to dual-box or perform a trade to another player in order to transfer scammed items is just making it easier to obfuscate where a stolen item went.

I don't care about that logs can follow the item. it takes admin intervention, while if they need a helper, the circle of witnesses increases among the playerbase - OR they use an IP exemption for boxing which in theory could get them banned (I know, I know).

[Evia]

Originally Posted by Jimjam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please give examples of nerfs away from classicness. Most changes seem to be toward a more classic server.

If you are aware of non-classic elements please gather your evidence and submit them to bug reports.

As far as I am aware the greatest intentional non classic factors are for CSR quality of life. Perhaps there is a shred of hope that shared bank might be enabled to reduce item reimbursement petitions. Seems unlikely, though.


My own opinion is no to shared. I like to view my characters as separate individuals, rather than different faces of me as a player. As such I don't really see 'my wurmslayer' to move around characters as it suits me, rather it is 'my rangers wurmslayer'; if my level 40 warrior wants a wurm slayer he has to go find his own and not steal my rangers.

-nerfing aoe to 25 targets
-5 years of kunark
-forcing raid rotations
Thats all i can think of atm but there is a lot more changes that have been made that technically aren't classic.

[kotton05]

I take it y’all don’t understand that with certain UI the shared bank slots are in.

[Zipity]

Originally Posted by kotton05 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I take it y’all don’t understand that with certain UI the shared bank slots are in.

Oh really?

[Champion_Standing]

Originally Posted by Zipity [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh really?

No not really, you can get UIs that show the slots but they don't work.

[fan D]

Originally Posted by Champion_Standing [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No not really, you can get UIs that show the slots but they don't work.

wrong

you can even get UI's that show all of your bags as 10slotters. even if you equippin a 4slot tailoring bag

you can put stuff in all 10 slots, and theres a two bag spot for shared bank too

sometimes when you loot your corpse you go /ld though

[SewingMachine]

Originally Posted by fan D [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

wrong

you can even get UI's that show all of your bags as 10slotters. even if you equippin a 4slot tailoring bag

you can put stuff in all 10 slots, and theres a two bag spot for shared bank too

sometimes when you loot your corpse you go /ld though

Is there really a shared bank slot, this cant be real. This would make my life way easier.