TW version of Void Storage

Archive of discussions that have went stale. Lots o' dust over here!
User avatar
Brennus
Posts: 533
Joined: 17 Jan 2013 05:25
Location: Argent Tournament Grounds

Re: TW version of Void Storage

#16 » Post by Brennus » 17 Nov 2016 19:14

Fastor wrote:Well, as l remember when we started transfering people from omega, they were getting their items via mail and if someone had BoE item like 264 shoulders, they would lose their bound. So to counter that they set all items from mail to be soulbound. (Devs correct me if lm wrong).

Not all items from mail, because that would break the Auction House system.
Just imagine this:
- I'm auctioning some 264 BoE item;
- No buyers found, its time expires;
- AH mails it back to me;
- Can't sell it again because it's soulbound now.



Still, as you said, people from Omega were abusing this - and devs have found a way of preventing it.
I guess I'm changing my vote.
•     Currently No longer Once again retired (now it's for real)     •
 
Image

User avatar
Doctor_J
Developer
Posts: 5827
Joined: 01 Sep 2012 19:30
Location: United Kingdom

Re: TW version of Void Storage

#17 » Post by Doctor_J » 17 Nov 2016 21:27

The problem with boes with transfers wa due to data been re-created on truewows server and due to the fact that we did not have access to full data on original server certain data was missing for example like if a boe item had become soulbound.

If void storage was to somehow be implemented all data would be on tw so we would have all data so a previously soulbounded item would not loose its binding.

User avatar
Fastor
Posts: 4031
Joined: 16 Dec 2012 17:38

Re: TW version of Void Storage

#18 » Post by Fastor » 17 Nov 2016 21:59

Brennus wrote: Not all items from mail, because that would break the Auction House system.
Naah ofc not, lm just talking about mail from Retrieving Items.
Doctor_J wrote:If void storage was to somehow be implemented all data would be on tw so we would have all data so a previously soulbounded item would not loose its binding.
DRJ you know solution the best. l think you should do it since you got whole idea of what lm thinking on.

User avatar
Doctor_J
Developer
Posts: 5827
Joined: 01 Sep 2012 19:30
Location: United Kingdom

Re: TW version of Void Storage

#19 » Post by Doctor_J » 18 Nov 2016 13:51

Fastor wrote:
Brennus wrote: Not all items from mail, because that would break the Auction House system.
Naah ofc not, lm just talking about mail from Retrieving Items.
Doctor_J wrote:If void storage was to somehow be implemented all data would be on tw so we would have all data so a previously soulbounded item would not loose its binding.
DRJ you know solution the best. l think you should do it since you got whole idea of what lm thinking on.
I am not a webdev so would have no idea about how to code this although in theory think have some ideas about this but know how db works and as previously said the only reason why those issues with boe occured was due to issues with the tool used to obtain character on source server or because of incomplete data, someone may get round to this eventually if a good proporttion of population want it and it will actuallly get used but think the devs who work on website are busy with other projects atm so dont expect anything soon (tm)

User avatar
Nyeriah

Re: TW version of Void Storage

#20 » Post by Nyeriah » 18 Nov 2016 13:59

TBF you can already use the item restore feature as a "void storage" if you keep in mind you'll need to retrieve them within 30 days and that it'll cost you 10 web points ;) It's the exact same concept that this suggestion suggests.

User avatar
Fastor
Posts: 4031
Joined: 16 Dec 2012 17:38

Re: TW version of Void Storage

#21 » Post by Fastor » 18 Nov 2016 21:40

Nyeriah wrote:TBF you can already use the item restore feature as a "void storage" if you keep in mind you'll need to retrieve them within 30 days and that it'll cost you 10 web points ;) It's the exact same concept that this suggestion suggests.
OFC and that is why l want to have this as special section since l dont want time limit that would screw people in case they forget, and also to waste VP.

That is idea why having this stuff separated.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests