Shared Bank?

[Triiz]

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

Item linking

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

[kotton05]

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

[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.

[baakss]

FTE messages, raid bosses being immune to lifetaps, epics requiring 46+, etc, etc, etc..

Plenty of non classic changes have been implemented to curb toxicity.

[kotton05]

Forgot the 25 mob limit that saved chardok

[baakss]

On a less direct/tangible level, player behavior is far from classic because we know too much.

You open a new server or expac, we'll flock to what we know will be nerfed. In Classic, we didn't know. Certain classes are over-represented because players know they're stronger.

NToV dragons, Tormax, Statue being pulled to zonelines. Was that normal back in the day? We sure didn't do it.

Socking things we know the timers of like Lodizal. Yuck.

A faithful recreation of classic is impossible with players who too far advanced in knowledge of the game itself.

[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)

[Rygar]

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

FTE messages, raid bosses being immune to lifetaps, epics requiring 46+, etc, etc, etc..

Plenty of non classic changes have been implemented to curb toxicity.

If by plenty you mean a sprinkling, most to alleviate CSR burden / Player confusion. Sounds like you haven't researched some of the epic requirements either, cause that was classic. There were a few items that did not allow equipping until a certain level even though it wasn't listed. I believe Club of the Ice Ocean was one of them (possibly primals and Narandi's Lance too).

I do agree about the life tap immunity being cheesy now, hasn't aged well since getting out of Kunark. As I understood it this was due to Ivandyr's Hoop exploits. Could have easily added a 6 sec cast time to avoid this. All classes can do the amount of damage of a single click in 6 seconds.

I am in favor of the AoE nerf as this is a better simulation, the amount of consistency of 120+ pulls was not classic. Pathing was horrendous and there is some evidence of code in place to limit some assist calls to keep train sizes lower. I do feel 25 is a bit limiting, I hope they re-evaluate and up it to 40 or 50.

[Jimjam]

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

FTE messages, raid bosses being immune to lifetaps, epics requiring 46+, etc, etc, etc..

Plenty of non classic changes have been implemented to curb toxicity.

Curbing toxicity boils down to CSR QOL.

If you want shared bank you gotta argue for it from that perspective and just maybe it will get undisabled.

I'd love to see life taps get unnerfed. I don't think lifetap will continue to provoke the CSR issues it previously did.

[Triiz]

I've posted many times the evidence on the AOE nerf -- not classic. Plenty of evidence to support AOEing 50+ mobs was commonly done in 2001. AOE groups were even done in zones like HS and that was when most players were bad at the game and had terrible gear. I don't expect it to ever get changed back though.

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

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

Aw I wasn't aware I thought night vision among many other things was unable to be fixed due to it being a client issue.

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

Sounds like you haven't researched some of the epic requirements either, cause that was classic. There were a few items that did not allow equipping until a certain level even though it wasn't listed. I believe Club of the Ice Ocean was one of them (possibly primals and Narandi's Lance too).

I'm not sure if it was a thing by this point in Velious but I could be wrong. When it was added to P99 Nilbog said epics for only people over 46 was what the live developers intended and the P99 staff agreed. I can see why they nerfed it though.

Doesn't look like Club of the Ice Ocean had a level requirement until 2003 but Narandi's Lance requirement is classic.