1. We have a QA initiative where we work with the community more closely than ever to get your bug reports into the hands of the developers. Please use this forum for LIVE Server bug reporting. Do follow the format below, because it will help us out greatly in responding. If you do not, it's possible your bug report will be misinterpreted, or worse, lost!

    Read BEFORE submitting your first bug: Reporting Bugs… QA 101 Document
    • Disable all Lua Add-Ons by using '/lua unload' in local chat or temporarily move all files/folders out of the SotA Lua folder then restart the game.
      Ensure the issue still occurs before submitting a bug; Support staff will not debug Add-On issues
    • Search for your bug before posting in order to avoid duplicate reports.
    • Only reply to an existing thread if you have additional information for the reported bug. ALL extraneous commentary will be deleted to avoid cluttering the reports.
    • Keep your bug report short and factual.
    • There is no need to submit crash logs. Crash data we require is automatically logged.
    Bug Report Template
    1. Title:
    2. Reproduction Rate:
    3. Blocker?
    4. Details:
    5. Steps to Reproduce:
    6. User Specs:
    To get started, use /bug in-game (/devbug if on QA) to auto-create this template. It will even auto-fill some of the required information and open the browser for you. Then take the information that was just saved to your system's clipboard and paste it into a new QA forum post. Thank you bug hunters!
Dismiss Notice
This Section is READ ONLY - All Posts Are Archived

[Responded] Can look into and open all containers everywhere

Discussion in 'Release 69 Feedback Forum' started by Tailz, Aug 29, 2019.

  1. Mhtic

    Mhtic Avatar

    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada, Quebec
    Alright, I should get to work.
     
    Fionwyn Wyldemane and Tailz like this.
  2. Fetid SirDidy

    Fetid SirDidy Avatar

    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Concern is growing. Please look into this @Lord Subtleton @Chris @Sannio @wizardsmoke @Scottie @Bzus @DarkStarr @Lord British
     
  3. Alley Oop

    Alley Oop Bug Brigade – Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    8,647
    Likes Received:
    13,963
    Trophy Points:
    153
    you won't get very far, pretty sure that list's limited to ten.
     
    Mhtic, Fionwyn Wyldemane and Tailz like this.
  4. Fionwyn Wyldemane

    Fionwyn Wyldemane Avatar

    Messages:
    1,827
    Likes Received:
    5,994
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    I will reiterate - banning is not the answer and not an option that anyone at Portalarium should even offer as a possible solution. You'd have to increase the number of people we can ban as well as give us the names of every avatar so we could ban 99% them just to have the worst possible workaround to a problem created by your new permission system. Gee whiz, that makes for a nice, welcoming community and mass banning would never alienate anyone...

    Wanna shop at someone's store that has a spiffy storefront house with a vendor inside? Oops, no dice, you're banned! Wanna use the community crafting pavilion in a town that you just moved into? Ooops, no can do - you're banned! Wanna take a closer look at a home with awesome deco? Oops, fuhgeddaboutit - you're banned AND/OR the homeowner has decided to go on lock down.

    Welcome to SOTA! Now - get off my lawn!

    I rarely get upset about anything you folks throw at us because history has taught me that when the players are frantically waving to get your attention and warning, "Yo! There's an iceberg over yonder, change course", you guys generally opt to go full steam ahead cause, yanno - you can't please everyone right?

    But this takes the cake.

    **Edit - and I will add - stop putting this on the players to work out. Have the intestinal fortitude to tell us how you intend to fix it rather than "considering" privacy improvements. We had privacy in the past and if you folks played your own game you would know this.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2019
  5. Echondas

    Echondas Bug Brigade – Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    2,353
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NY
    This thread was enough to scare me into upgrading my bank slots using gold and moving most of my loot into the bank instead of storing in specific crafting chests or other containers - prolly spent like 250k gold so far - and I got 0 bank slots left and a bunch more gear to secure
     
  6. Barugon

    Barugon Avatar

    Messages:
    11,764
    Likes Received:
    18,690
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Um... why?
     
  7. Echondas

    Echondas Bug Brigade – Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    2,353
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NY
    Cuz I'm paranoid about losing something from a chest with weird permissions - not because it's worth anything - just because it would irritate me to know it got ganked.
     
  8. Hemswal The Descended

    Hemswal The Descended Avatar

    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    1,517
    Trophy Points:
    93
    @Lord Subtleton @Chris @DarkStarr @Vas Corp Por

    So, is this a precursor to having the ability to lock and trap chests?

    Are pick locks and remove traps about to be added as skills to the subterfuge tree? (Pick locks used to be a skill and was removed)
     
    CatherineRose likes this.
  9. Jason_M

    Jason_M Avatar

    Messages:
    763
    Likes Received:
    1,162
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Wouldn't that be the cat's meow :D

    It would be nice if we could have a keyring as a container in our inventory and keys of various types including a master-key for our own homes. Then we can set the lot setting to "always locked." We could interact with all our containers seemlessly with auto locking and unlocking if we have the key.
     
    DGgnome likes this.
  10. smack

    smack Avatar

    Messages:
    7,070
    Likes Received:
    15,228
    Trophy Points:
    153
    So just as with doors, why not just simply add:
    Right click container -> Lock / Unlock

    They should have implemented that before / at the same time they made the global change to how containers can be interacted with.

    And yeah, banning players on your lot just so they can't view the contents of your containers is not the right solution. That's pretty silly.
     
    Cordelayne, Ostvel, Justyn04 and 3 others like this.
  11. Duke Ezekiel Cooper

    Duke Ezekiel Cooper Avatar

    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    2,009
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Blackrock Cove (Quel)
    @Chris

    Told ya... ;)
    See the comments above.
    They speak for themselves.
     
  12. Tazar

    Tazar Bug Brigade - Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    1,592
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dallas Texas
    So - if we are to have privacy by banning people from our lots, can you at least provide a list of all players so that I can be certain that I do not miss anyone? Some way to import that would be nice too so I don't have to manually enter each on all 40+ houses...

    Really? That's what is expected of us to remedy this? I assume that the ban list isn't long enough anyway...
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2019
  13. Justyn04

    Justyn04 Avatar

    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I believe you can ban 10 people...so the suggested remedy isn't even viable. Locking my doors or banking everything seems to be the solution, and I can assure you that I have no intention of buying more bank slots to be able to accommodate all of my belongings.
     
  14. Tailz

    Tailz Avatar

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    388
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    The simple facts are, we had these privacy settings before and now they are gone. They were working just fine and did not need to be touched and now they are broken. Any and all of us having to wait any amount of time to have something fixed/given back that was taken/broken away from us is absurd.

    The look and feel that is projected by Portalarium with such incidents is extremely poor, far worse when such ridiculous suggestions are given by the devs as a work around instead of a prioritized fix. People notice and people do talk, just keep that in mind incase that has been overlooked as well.
     
    Scooby Doo and Fionwyn Wyldemane like this.
  15. Duke Ezekiel Cooper

    Duke Ezekiel Cooper Avatar

    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    2,009
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Blackrock Cove (Quel)
    @Chris
    Told ya man... ;)
    And this guy just echoed it.

    The people that were complaining about the restrictive permissions, in my opinion, did not justify wrecking the whole system that was in place.
    (They just didn't know how to use the system, which may be the case now with the majority.)

    I would suggest a comprehensive player guide be put in place by the programmer who designed this new system so we all get spun up to speed about how this permission system works, because right now from the end user perspective, it is fundamentally broken and you guys know I wouldn't be saying this publically without thoroughly looking it over.

    The only reason I can say that "maybe" the changes are necessary, is IF you guys are coming in with items to the game that will fundamentally "require" the perms in place now (IE. Gaming Tables, Ship Warfare, etc.), and if you are, I can only say again, that I hope that those new items will be announced sooner rather than later.

    If there isn't anything coming that requires this new system,
    I regrettably, but can confidently say, that this new system, has had and will have a fundamental negative impact on the game, based on the feedback.

    I hope you'll read this and know that I'm not criticizing... I'm giving you an honest assessment from player experience,
    with limited information as to "why" these changes are necessary or "how" I should implement them as the end user.
    (IE. What if I don't want "anybody" to look in a chest sitting on my lot? - An obvious security breach and banning my brother-in-law, who is a known low life snoop, isn't an option for my sister's sake.)

    Players, A valid argument for the above is if you don't want people looking in your chests,
    put the sh^t somewhere in your house and lock the door...
    - OR- Put a container in the top layer of your containers that "cant" be accessed by other players.

    Final Assessment: The developers have made the top layer of a container accessable, even by players not assigned to the lot.
    As my good buddy @Woodrow would say, "Zeke, what does that even mean?!?!"
    Well... If I crewed a ship that had firing cannons, then I could designate that the cannonballs, powder, and igniters could be grabbed by the crew in a sea battle.
    I could also display specialty items in a chest open for bids even if I'm not in the game.
    There's a lot of different reasons that this permission system is viable,
    BUT... the obvious fact of this flexibility is that the top layer of your containers are vulnerable to a certain degree.

    @Lord Subtleton, maybe add a lockout permission that will only recognize the permissions that the "container owner" designates based on the house sign perms?
    (And I'm just floating that. I don't know at this point whether to raise at stud, draw, or spit in the ocean.)

    @Chris, please log in with a character that doesn't have game editing capabilities, if you haven't already, and check these new permissions out.

    The cousins up above say it's hell on wheels.
    -Zeke

    TAGS: @Lord British @DarkStarr @Lazarus Long
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019
  16. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    2,437
    Likes Received:
    9,361
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    The 'people can move everything' issue was acknowledged and address via the override that makes it so people must have permission to TAKE something or they can't MOVE it.
    I am grateful for the fix, I think it should probably be the default, but whatever, I can work with it. I understand that having the "move but don't take" is so people can play the chess game (or similar) but not put the game pieces in their pockets.

    But unless someone's going to "put the chess game away" into a box (which I suppose, it could happen) I don't see why container permissions need be affected by this. And besides, this bug/feature only allows people to look, not take, so how would being able to see into the bag help anyway? Oh look, the chess pieces are in here, you can't have them?

    To me this does not seem like a planned feature but rather an unintended consequence of the permission change. If it was planned, it was poorly planned.

    I can not think of one, single good reason why you'd want the public to be able to look inside all your containers and not pull anything out.

    Look -and- take, sure, sharing is good - I have quite a few trusted friends who have access to all my crap. We could already do that with the old system - if anything, the new system makes this more difficult. (Scoffer, I can't steal these beetles, did you not re-add me to this lot? and other such confusions).

    If you wanted to let the public look-but-not-take in a particular container, you could already do this by making it deposit-permission-public-no taking. We do this for displays at the crafting museum of items like jewelry that can't be set out as deco. It was already possible if you took the time to set it up. With the old system, I could set every single container to "public deposit" if I wanted to let people look in there. This change was unnecessary as the functionality was already possible.
     
    Fionwyn Wyldemane and Tailz like this.
  17. Spoon

    Spoon Bug Brigade - Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    8,433
    Likes Received:
    23,679
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    Small things, like when a bug like this one happens:
    https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...se-68-lot-permissions-migration-issue.157496/
    then
    1.
    it is up to the player to notice that items they thought were safe is now gone
    2.
    if they notice then it is up to the player to report to support to try to get their stuff back
    3.
    support hasn't been manned properly for a long time

    Where if I had been in charge I would have notified all the owners of said "limited number of items that were moved" and told them that their stuff might have been compromised and they should check on it.



    Also since every time they have made some large change to the permission system (anyone remember post R31?) they have always made the "default" the wrong way around of the least secure first.
    In software when designing systems then best practice is to have the default as the most secure choice and then have the user lessen the security as a choice they make. While for new use you can instruct the user as to select which setting best suit them.
    So for instance this was 2018
    https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...eco-placements-to-kindred.114599/#post-971276
    and it still is the case today after changes.
    So after the R68 and R69 changes they removed whatever settings you thought you had and replaced those with a new default.
    What was that new default? The least secure of all and any options.
    Which means that if you were handling tenants or chapter houses or shared housing with multiple permission levels then going from R67 stuff you placed would have the most secure setting while after getting R68 (and R69) without you as the player having changed any setting or approved any changes all the settings would be the least secure on stuff you placed.
    So for me I was doing crafting, where I have a public crafting area in Lux, which is also a chapter house, so me and guildies can have chests there while also being accessible for the public, before change if I took that chest into inventory, crafted a bit, and then placed it again it would be secure - but after release when I did place the chest back it got the least secure default - which meant anyone in the guild could take it. Not that big a risk considering the guild, but I had set up things so that such things couldn't happen in case of an EVE style happening.

    Also for chapter houses that also meant that they were grandfathered into being less secure.

    For instance in my chapter houses I had placed the base stuff as "co-owner", like pavers, walls, hedges, crafting stations, expensive rares and whatnots, then I had placed crafted furniture as "trustee" like beds, tables, chests, trunks, etc, then I had placed cheap knicknacks as "kindred" like plates, mugs, plants, etc.
    That meant that I as the guild leader could move/take/use anything.
    The officers could move the furniture around but not change the base room layouts.
    While the members could move/take/place the knicknacks as they wished.

    With the permission system it was grandfathered as move rights for "kindred" for EVERYTHING. Effectively undoing hours and hours of setup to make it safe while maximizing utility. *sigh*



    Same thing as with the "return to placer" thing.
    https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...esponded-decorating-hell.157502/#post-1248146




    Which means that they don't follow the software best practice of the default in any change must be the most secure.




    You know. Small things like that.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2019
    Fionwyn Wyldemane and Tailz like this.
  18. Tailz

    Tailz Avatar

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    388
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed with recent above statements 100%!


    Let me provide a couple examples of why this bug/feature whatever it’s called is a game breaker for many players including myself.


    First, not all of us craft in a basement or want to hide when we are crafting. In general, we have been asked by Portalarium when we are in our home towns that we are visible, so that new players can see that people do exist in this game.


    Second, many of us enjoy using an open style crafting pavilion as our home and crafting center.


    Britt Mart for example, is built a certain way with crafting pavilions down the center area on purpose. We do not want to be forced to change homes where doors can be used to lock containers behind. This y the way, is not full proof either. People have lag can still lag into locked homes.


    Examples of how specifically this breaks the game for most everyone:


    First, someone can open all of your containers within an area and leave them open so that you, the owner, cannot interact with them. This is a primary game breaker for anyone and everyone.


    Second, for economic purposes such as game economy health, no one but you or who you choose, needs to know what you have and in what quantity. Since we have RMT in this game, this poses a further potential problem and threat to the economy.


    I cannot imagine this is a difficult fix, we just do not understand why it has not been fixed yet?


    I know some players who keep homes packed up in the property manager because of this issue.


    So in a sense this leads to a third example of immersion. Immersion is destroyed for many of us when we need to pack our homes up after each interaction or permanently, like myself at the moment.
     
    Scooby Doo and Fionwyn Wyldemane like this.
  19. Fionwyn Wyldemane

    Fionwyn Wyldemane Avatar

    Messages:
    1,827
    Likes Received:
    5,994
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    If you wonder why I am up in arms about this ridiculous permission change all for the sake of playing chess (?), previewing a mannequin (?) see below:

    Build Number 1035 – September 4 2:15 PM


    Updates
    • Fix for being able to “take all” from nested containers on a lot.
    I say this without being a drama llama or a chicken-little - we are one bug, one step away from the above happening again only worse.

    When the permissions system was revamped and released into live without the proper testing on QA, guess what? I had access to my tenant's stuff for "hours" before that hole was patched. Yes it was fixed, thank you Portalarium for hopping right on that. But now we have private containers that "are not private". I am by nature a patient woman, but I am completely and utterly tired of this nonsense.

    Fix - Add the "locked by default" permission on every single container so that no one can interact with it unless the permission is changed to "unlocked".
     
    Ostvel, Tiina Onir and Tailz like this.
  20. Barugon

    Barugon Avatar

    Messages:
    11,764
    Likes Received:
    18,690
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Right click, ban player. Grief tactic thwarted.
    Portalarium does not support RMT, they have merely tolerated it in the past.