1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Drags a bag of monkey wrenches ..

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Fayled Dhreams, Feb 23, 2008.

  1. comes to a posting point and grins

    [​IMG] Only gonna drop a few, feel free (as always) to take 'em or leave 'em
    Just letting you know they exist ...

    reaches in bag ...*grins* heres a little "just cute" one

    Flaming hair
    in brief:
    Between "the macro room" and "first 1to3 day supension" ...
    repeat offenders get their characters hair set on fire ...
    yep some would do it (get caught) just for the "look"
    NOT just a graphic display though (inspired by Draconi&team's burning houses)
    hair effect lasts ... like a murder count ... during ingame time
    Serves as a visual indicator that
    A) got caught and marked (now visible ingame)
    B) NOT a "fun thing" ... skill gains STOP while burning (one or all... depends on degree of "burn")
    C) Scalable to re-enforce the "not fun aspect" ...could also be used to "burn off" other skills, stats, scroll's on character [​IMG]
    D) Throw in the "char perma death" (char deletion) ...[​IMG] not likely need the "suspension" phase of "correction"[​IMG]
    drops the wrench*clink*

    reaches in bag ... [​IMG] ooooo Heres a big rusty one ...
    Likely to have a BIG effect ... if used (hasn't been, why its "rusty")
    cap on Vendor excess gp
    In brief:
    vendors were not intended to be used as "banks"(follow link above and in there)
    GP should at least count as 1 item (1million gp check) to store and manage ingame
    IF there really is too much GP ingame ... and you want to get the "extra" gp out
    Without a wipe of all gold,
    without a tax,
    without a "division"(divide all by 100, 10),
    without a "conversion"(different coin platnum, silver, etc),
    without a trade for Xgp for itemX type "drain"
    Just cap ... the amount of excess gp allowed on vendors
    drops the wrench*<font color=red>Ker-THUMP-pah-pah-paaaaa</font color=red>*

    reaches in bag ... *looks around*
    nahhh
    Two's enough for now
     
  2. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Good idea but I think I'm one of the people who would do something stupid just to have flaming hair!! Neato!!
    So, yea could backfire and promote some foolishness rather then solve it. Unless first offense was phase two where you lose skills etc. That would suck.

    The problem does not seem to be the punishment isn't hard enough, the problem is the fact they don't get caught most of the time. I dunno how many afk scriptors I have reported just to see them doing the same thing the next day.
     
  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Were all the sound effects necessary to get your point across?
     
  4. J0KING

    J0KING Guest

    Great ideas...

    and yes... all of the sound effects were necessary [​IMG]
     
  5. [​IMG] The PERCEPTION that:"the problem is the fact they don't get caught most of the time"
    the flaming hair ...SHOWS who has been caught ...unlike now ...just don't see them

    Not actually "phased at this point" (Unless first offense was phase two where )
    just a listing of "scales POSSIBLE" ...
    personally I think a mild blend of "all the most painful" ... FIRST time your hairs on fire ...
    would be a good fair place to start ...
    ie "hair is burning" = for 4 hours, no skill gain, -5 points of scroll/s eaten, -10% all other skills ...
    Second time you set your hair on fire(get caught) ...[​IMG] ... but I digress ...
    First time CAN be harsh enough to disabuse a "repeat" ..
    yes?

    @ BBQLOU
    [​IMG] HUH? I CAN'T HEAR YEEE ! SOMEDAMFOOL DROPPING STUFFS !!
     
  6. Guest

    Guest Guest

    *drags in a bag of monkies*

    *dumps them into Fayled's post*

    Nerf wrenches!

    *stealths away*
     
  7. IMO offenders must be banned at the discretion of GMs. We shouldn't "play with it". There's no rule to implement to deal with them. They don't respect rules, they are punished. No "we let you play with a shame on you label" if the offence was not important, no "we let you play with a millstone around the neck so you repent".
    Other players don't have to know anything about it simply because popular justice is not fair.
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Nerf wenches? Why? What makes them so ... oh wait, nevermind, misread that.
     
  9. awwww [​IMG] thanks!
    [​IMG]
    can I request a barrel of them?

    only the bigger ones ...
    like this?
    [​IMG]

    whoa! Coppelia breath! Breath! if you carefully READ my proposal ... I ain't playing around ... nor promoting a "kinder gentler" treatment of the busted.
    a more Visible treatment ... aye ... goes to measuring the actual effectiveness of current policies in play/effect ...
    not a lessening, not a loosening ...
    [​IMG] just an added visual option ... possibly lower some of the "ain't seen nothing done" background white noise on the forums ...
    shoot ...
    might even lower actual USE of unattended macroing ...
    m i g h t ... no garuntees ...
    [​IMG]
     
  10. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    vendors were not intended to be banks
    it is in the Knowlegebase
    Fair chance that more Scritter Scum
    than legit players ...
    are using this as a storage device ...


    [/ QUOTE ]

    As long as my vendors are stocked as needed, I check and stock them
    daily, I feel that its nobody business how much gold is in it.
     
  11. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I do hope they don't mess wif my vendors gold. It's easier for me to keep my gold there so all my characters have access to the same "bank" :/
     
  12. Jhym

    Jhym Guest

    However, I DO like heads on pikes, perhaps in a choice dungeon location.

    Flaming heads on pikes?

    Slimes named after players?

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Jhym

    Jhym Guest

    I don't see any issue with money staying on the vendors at all. It's not like it gains interest or otherwise does anything to anyone else.

    I've always considered the 'hoarding gold is bad' camp to just be jealous of those who can make money.
     
  14. [​IMG] KB
    doesn't say it is their business(though, ultimately... come on now pookie... it IS) ... KB says: ding!
    "Vendors are not intended to be used as banks. Be sure to collect your gold regularly and deposit it into your bank box."

    IF they start enforcing that design intent ... some legit players are gonna need scramble and make some choices ...
    at about 1,000,000gp per lock down ...
    do I want to keep that ophidian ration ... or ... this 1,000,000gp check ...
    some legit players are gonna need scramble and make some TOUGH choices ...
    do quite a bit of math ... 4 secure chests x 125 items each = only 500,000,000gp(1/2Billion) ...
    and, as far as I know, at this point ... that'd be only ONE vendor ...

    Scritter scum ... on the other hand ... depending on numbers of vendors ...
    [​IMG] well ... okay ... maybe its easier math for them ... (no deco choices)
    8 secure chests per Billion ...1008(8 chests 1000 chchchecks) of storage ...

    well ... all that gp on hand .. shouldn't be all that big a problem to open accounts to hold just checks ...
    oops ..
    unless he has more than a couple of vendor banks ...
    worse yet if he doesn't have a house to lock them down in on that particular shard ... if at all
    oh my ...

    oh well ... doesn't really matter ...
    just as long as they need account for one lock down, same as me ...
    EVERY player should choose what they want to collect ... gpchecks, deco, statues, swords ....
    ALL at 1 item count per ...
    [​IMG] Fair?
    yes? No?
     
  15. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Hmm I don't have a problem with the money taking a lockdown or 2
    or even 4 or 5. But what about rented vendors [​IMG] . Would the
    lockdown come out of your house or out of the rented vendors house??
     
  16. [​IMG] Thats the beauty of "it" ... keeps(can keep) the responsibility ... where it already lay.
    Your vendor, Your millios, Your lock down choice.
    1 per millio. maybe at "least" 1 more for a 125 storage container.

    JUST not so much free storage ... ON the vendor ...
    after setting an easy "margin" say... 2weeks worth of vendor pay... anything OVER that safe level
    say 1 or 2 millio ... goes into your backpack, your bank ... if you have one on that shard ... your house (carried, NOT automatic)
    No house? get a boat ...for every boat... 125 more millios can be stored (again, by HAND your millios, your problem [​IMG])

    problem?

    Jhym ... [​IMG] You CAN horde all the gp you want .. nothing in this idea is based in/on/around/near "jealousy"
    that YOU "don't see any issue with money staying on the vendors at all" ... well
    Look harder ... don't hurt yourself ... but there IS an issue with vendors being used as banks ... beyond and different from
    "legit" players being "used to" using them as banks ...
    Look harder
    or leave it ...[​IMG]
    *shrugs*
    Remains an option as originally offered.

    .
     
  17. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    IMO offenders must be banned at the discretion of GMs. We shouldn't "play with it". There's no rule to implement to deal with them. They don't respect rules, they are punished. No "we let you play with a shame on you label" if the offence was not important, no "we let you play with a millstone around the neck so you repent".
    Other players don't have to know anything about it simply because popular justice is not fair.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I pretty much agree...break rules get banned ...leave the rest of us to play as it should be. I do not think the visual aid is really needed as a way to shame them into behaving, I do not really care who is misbehaving just as long as they are dealt with.
     
  18. I like it- I always thought the character caught scripting/macroing should be forced to be deleted and the char slot forever gone. Everything in chars bank/pack and wearing all gone too.
     
  19. <blockquote><hr>

    whoa! Coppelia breath! Breath! if you carefully READ my proposal ... I ain't playing around ... nor promoting a "kinder gentler" treatment of the busted.
    a more Visible treatment ... aye ... goes to measuring the actual effectiveness of current policies in play/effect ...
    not a lessening, not a loosening ...
    [​IMG] just an added visual option ... possibly lower some of the "ain't seen nothing done" background white noise on the forums ...
    shoot ...
    might even lower actual USE of unattended macroing ...
    m i g h t ... no garuntees ...
    [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Again, I repeat, it's not player's business. They don't have to shave offender's head to be targeted by popular justice. Either it's not important (like using the F-word, that offenses only hypocrites but that is not something we really need ingame) and then other players don't have to know in order not to punish a second time without knowing the whole story, or it is important and here comes the banana. Period.

    It's not sane to show it, simply because nobody knows the whole story. That's the same reason ban decisions have not to be discussed on forum boards. Plus it encourages harrassment. Lots of players will go on crusade against any character with the very beginning of what seems to be a visible mark of RoC or ToS abuse. That's not their job, they will do it wrong and they're the psychos.
    Two wrongs don't make a right.

    And finally, it's been already said to other similar suggestion here or even in other games with the similar problem, the problem is not how to punish offenders, the problem is to catch them.
    It's just my opinion, but they'd rather use their time finding offenders rather than finding the appropriate sentence. Less show-off, more efficiency.
     
  20. Well ! [​IMG]
    I'll put you down as a "no" then ... re: burning hair.

    What about the vendor wrench?
     
  21. Basara

    Basara UO Forum Moderator
    Moderator Professional Wiki Moderator Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2003
    Messages:
    8,457
    Likes Received:
    582
    not too bad of ideas....

    (Pictures Draconi &amp; Chrissay looking at a scripter...

    "If you can Dodge a wrench, you're not unattended"

    - KTWANG!!!!!
     
  22. Kaj

    Kaj Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    970
    Likes Received:
    5
    Please do not mess with vendors, it's fine as it is.
    Especially people who run big vendor houses will be in trouble (using lockdowns for other people's vendors? Pff!). It would be a nice way to bully someone. Get a vendor in his shop and then put a whole lot of cash on it.
    I am already constantly running out of lockdowns (yes I already dropped $20 for extra storage..)!
    I wouldn't mind if only 1 char (the one that placed the vendor or accepted the contract) would be able to take gold from the vendor, though. That would limit the 'banking'.
     
  23. idea sounds good to me (granted we grandfather prior offenses&lt;---not for me, but i do have a mark for name violations TBH. this would be for fairness sake for everyone.)

    i dont mind the wrench at all. i would like to add that after seeing the reasons people use vendors to hold gold...why not bind all gold to an account? (in theory wouldn't this require similar coding to house ownership?) seems tracking gold in game would be easier if you only had to look in 10% or less of the places. (chalk the above up to a bit-o-rust i would like to see added to that wrench.)

    thumbs up fayled.

    p.s. i hate to say it...but i would enjoy one char with a head on fire just for poop's and laughs. it could make for some interesting bank humor. [​IMG]
     
  24. I agree Fayled that something should be done about folks using vendors as 'free' additional bank space, but I'm not convinced that limiting the amount of gold a vendor can hold is the best way to do so... I can see it causing lots of problems for legit shopkeeps... on the other hand, without some sort of limit there's not really anyway to stop vendors from being used this way...

    What if each placed vendor has two accounts of their own... one for money they take in (which can only be removed from the vendor) and one for paying the vendor/vendor fees, but can't hold more than a few mill, and money in this account can only be recovered by removing/firing your vendor?

    would that do it, without being too bad for regular players? too complex? too harsh? anybody got any thoughts?
     
  25. Okay ...
    Kaj ... as it is now ... the rented vendor only takes one rented vendor slot ...doesn't count AT ALL against the house storage available ..

    Wouldn't change that ... one vendor, one slot ... same same.

    its about the amount of gp available to be stored in/on the vendor ...
    that is all.

    Electrolyte
    [​IMG] yep ...thats the little rusty thumb wheel bit ... the adjustment of how wide/narrow the jaws go ...
    As stated in the KB ... the adjustment Should BE pretty tight, narrow, close fitting:
    (Vendors are not intended to be used as banks. Be sure to collect your gold regularly and deposit it into your bank box.)
    Hasn't been enforced ...
    Has become "usual" and "expected" and "comfortable" for the legit ... and they're likely to fight it on that basis and on that basis alone ...
    EASIER for their lives ...yeah? so? I see that ...

    I'm hopeing They can see what ELSE they'll be protecting ... by fighting the change ... only for their convenience ...

    Somewhere ... ingame ...

    The scritter scum are enjoying the same ... loose enforcement ... of a design parameter ...
    [​IMG] one more time:
    The scritter scum are enjoying the same ... loose enforcement ... of a design parameter ...

    I'm just suggesting a re-enforcement (preferably permanent, but, we'll see) of a design parameter ...
    Just to see what shakes out ...

    Kinda a call for all cards on the table (checks as 1perlock down)

    Not likely that this one change ... will DRIVE prices up ...
    au-contrair mon frair
    tis more likely to push prices lower ... maybe ...
    Certainly, most likely ... to squeeze some of the surplus out ...
    Definately will cause "closer attention" being paid to vendors ... fewer "recently Stocked 3-3-06" empty vendors ...

    We'll see ...
    worst that could happen if un-attended
    more rust on the wrench ...
    *shrugs*
    [​IMG]

    Oh!
    Mister E.
    BZZZT! nope ... NOT "grandfathered" ... a mark is a mark is a mark ... and they're ALL permanent .... they're ALL part of an accounts record of behavior ...
    got two marks already? NO burning hair for you! Suspension ... maybe banning ... NONE of the rule breaking behavior is "cute"
    [​IMG] maybe while under suspension, offending char is logged in ... with hair on fire ...without burning the timer off ...
    Think: effigy ... head on pike ... warning to all who see: offenders will be caught and punished ... GM enforcement is BACK ! !
    [​IMG] I'm rather surprised no-one has suggested it apply to "speeders" ... humph!
     
  26. Great Ideas, sounds good.

    Let me thow out another:

    Nerf Fayled!! Plain text only. [​IMG]
     
  27. fred252

    fred252 Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    reaches in bag ... [​IMG] ooooo Heres a big rusty one ...
    Likely to have a BIG effect ... if used (hasn't been, why its "rusty")
    cap on Vendor excess gp
    In brief:
    vendors were not intended to be used as "banks"(follow link above and in there)
    GP should at least count as 1 item (1million gp check) to store and manage ingame
    IF there really is too much GP ingame ... and you want to get the "extra" gp out
    Without a wipe of all gold,
    without a tax,
    without a "division"(divide all by 100, 10),
    without a "conversion"(different coin platnum, silver, etc),
    without a trade for Xgp for itemX type "drain"
    Just cap ... the amount of excess gp allowed on vendors
    drops the wrench*<font color=red>Ker-THUMP-pah-pah-paaaaa</font color=red>*

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Just want to go on record with a big <font color="red"> NO </font> to this part.

    I do not care about flaming hair as I do not do bad things in game.
     
  28. [​IMG]oooo Two noes at once!! had a reason ... for the burning hair ...
    How about the vendors gp ...
    seem rather passionate with that big red bolded <font color="red"> NO </font>

    any reason ... ???

    james the first
    [​IMG]
    I am the shadow that flaps in the night
    I am the punctuation that was missed
    over the sum total of your life ...
     
  29. fred252

    fred252 Guest

    It was just for emphasis. I rather like having all of my gold readily available to all of my chars.
     
  30. [​IMG] Ah!
    personal convenience ... fair enough ...

    Did you happen to read above ...(deeper in the thread)
    Why that may not be the best of "reasons"?

    ( 'bout ~~4 posts up from .here.)
     
  31. fred252

    fred252 Guest

    I was not saying no to flaming head. I meant to say that I don't care one way or another about it. It won't bother me at all if it is in the game or not.
     
  32. <blockquote><hr>

    I was not saying no to flaming head. I meant to say that I don't care one way or another about it. It won't bother me at all if it is in the game or not.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    [​IMG] Got that ... and just for clarity ... greys' and uncommitted ... I'm tabbing as NOT "all for it" and or positive reinforcement ..
    as "No" ...
    no biggy

    Now ... about the Vendors ... which was my question ...

    ^^ further up ... I gave MY reason for a yes ...
    How maybe a few WOULD vote for no ... and in THAT case ... uncommitted would count as "G'head, don't matter" ..
    ie ... as a yes.
    so, again ... did you see the part above (has the text: "what ELSE they'll be protecting" in it)

    Vendors
     
  33. fred252

    fred252 Guest

    Well, we can not cripple the whole game just to get rid of a few "scritter scum" as you call them. Not this idea alone would cripple the game. Just add up all of the scripter "nerfs" that have been posed on UHALL and it will equal a very boring.. desolate (of other players) game.
     
  34. <blockquote><hr>

    Well, we can not cripple the whole game just to get rid of a few "scritter scum" as you call them. Not this idea alone would cripple the game. Just add up all of the scripter "nerfs" that have been posed on UHALL and it will equal a very boring.. desolate (of other players) game.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    [​IMG]Hardly "crippling"
    And
    Beauty ...
    Maintains player choice ...

    Bear in mind ...
    there is that little "guideline" in place ...(KB quote above)

    1008 lockdowns/storage per Billion gp (only 1000 ... IF they want "plushy carpet")

    Instead of a system scan and investigation and possible mistakes and on and on "in process" ...

    could get it started and "moving" ... with a little login page "warning/Notice"
    *shrugs* make it big and blinking neon if you like ...
    "little" is the number of letters and words needed ... to get the idea across.

    See ... there IS this widely held impression ...
    That There IS "too much gp in game"
    for various reasons ...
    only one of which is scritters ...

    Well ... my take on all the other "solutions" ... is that they "Allow the players no choice"
    Mine: Just cap ... the amount of excess gp allowed on vendors
    Without a wipe of all gold,
    without a tax,
    without a "division"(divide all by 100, 10),
    without a "conversion"(different coin platnum, silver, etc),
    without a trade for Xgp for itemX type "drain"
    ....
    Allow the poor and rich alike ... to choose how to manage what they want to keep ...
    Just without the benefit of a "1 item count ATM" ...

    Get all the gp out where it's SUPPOSED to be ...
    Vendors will still work ... just not as "free" storage ... for mountains of gp ...
    might need to tend them more, maybe even trim some out ...

    Your case ... your "convenience" ... not really impacted ... some ... but not much really
    Your account chars can access your house's lock downs and secures ... yes?
    Well ... whats the crippling problem ?

    Give me a fer instance ... where its better for you, to keep it this way ...
    and allow the scritters the same convenience ...
    I ain't after you ... don't care what it is you want to collect ... checks or items ... still will be 1 to 1 numbers ...
    simple.

    also bear in mind ...If you knew or remember ... almost 2 years ago,
    16Trillion in gp was removed from the game
    little quick conversion ... divide by 1000
    16Billion <font color=red>lockdowns</font color=red> worth of 1 million gp checks
    Ever wonder where that was?

    I suspect it was mostly on vendors ...
    Got a hard time getting anyone to allow that theres actually as few as 100,000 active accounts

    Just for fun ... say it IS 100k
    say they are all legit
    Make it even easier ... divide 16B<font color=red>lockdowns</font color=red> by 1000 ...= 16M<font color=red>lockdowns</font color=red>
    divide 100k by 1000 ... = 100 .... right? [​IMG]

    seeing a trend? (remember that was ONLY 400 accounts said to have been banned ... and THEIR ill gotten gains removed ...
    the legit got to KEEP theirs .. STILL plenty of gp ingame)

    One more round?
    to make it even easier?
    divide 16M<font color=red>lockdowns</font color=red>by 100 ...= 160,000<font color=red>lockdowns</font color=red>
    divide 100 by 100... = 1 .... right?

    Dayum ....
    No wonder you want to keep that house as is ....


    don't worry

    Some one is bound to check my math
    [​IMG]
     
  35. [​IMG]ooo! here's a cutie
    makes a good read ...
    Lemme see if I have a wrench for that ...

    Or at least put one on order ...
    Vendor house control over rented spots ...
    Kill switch ... kicks the vendor out of house ...
    Transactions stop ...
    till a GM checks it out?
    hmmm
    *thumbs through catalog*
    W ... w... wr ... wra ....wre ...
     
  36. This was a new one on me, so let me know if it's been around a while but....

    I was working Bods at my house yesterday, when along comes the lonely vampire bat which took an instant liking to my smith. My smith went out to shake it's hand (Mr Bat not knowing my smith had his trusty ACME joy buzzer, aka EBolt) when it dropped dead at his feet. Being the frugal crafter he is, he looted Mr Bat of the 30 or so gp's it was carrying, and when he tried to drop it on one of my vendors, the vendor told him it had enough gold to operate with.

    So tell me....New? Old? First time I've had a vendor refuse gold. I always thought they were greedy little buggers. *shrug*
     
  37. Silly Seadog

    Stratics Veteran It's My Birthday

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    7
    Arrrrr, mayhaps ye cannot pay vendor when combat flagged?
     
  38. No, that's not it. I was able to drop the gold on a vendor that had more gold on it immediately after that, and it was still well within the combat timer.
     
  39. [​IMG]First time I've had a vendor refuse gold

    First time I HEARD of such[​IMG]

    Did you inquire further? (status ... have inhand ... days paid for ... how much would you like to take out ...etc)

    small loose quantities of change ... like 30 gp ... yeah ... I can see that ...


    Just don't want to hear about a wide spread "strike"...

    I can't sell you that ... I have too much wealth ... if you see my master ... tell him my back is tired ... holding all his wares
    tell him I need a break ... or...

    I'm off to none extriditable NPC Bahamas ... Buenas Aires ... Nude Riveara ... retire for life as a Wealthy NPC embezzeler ...

    [​IMG]
    uh oh!
    Just a thought ... mind ya ... JUST a musing ....
    What IF ... the NPCs ... have been keeping a second set of books !!!!!!! one for status ...

    one for the council ...
    Government sting ...
    witness protection ... shadowy figures testifying in courts ...
    forensic auditors ...

    nah ... probably not [​IMG]


    inquire further?


    (oooooo [​IMG] did i do that ?? ... [​IMG])
     
  40. Yes, I actually tried to drop the gold on 2 of the vendors before one actually took it. One of them had 150k or so on it, and was paid for about 80 days, the other had 50k on it, and was paid for 22 days. The one that accepted it had a little under 200k on it, and was paid up for 155 days.

    So you tell me?

    Should I be checking ledgers to see if they're skimming? [​IMG]
     
  41. !*whew*!
    (btw 2 ... 3 twice ... three times .... brrrr ..)
    !*whew*!
    not me

    just saying ... capping the vendors ...long time vendor woulda been the one to reject it ... short/er timers woulda taken it


    *starts un-packing duffle bag*
     
  42. Normally I can understand you, but that one I didn't get.... [​IMG]
     
  43. Connor, I assume from your story that your vendors were all yours in your house (fully owned subsidiaries of Connor Graham Enterprises) and not vendors you rented out from somewhere yes? Cause I was just thinking, maybe you can't give gold to a vendor that would pay him past the end of his current contract... not that i've ever seen that before either, but it's something to consider...
     
  44. They're all vendors in my house, owned and operated by me.
     
  45. <blockquote><hr>

    Normally I can understand you, but that one I didn't get.... [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]
    "... he is, he looted Mr Bat of the 30 or so gp's it was carrying, and when he tried to drop it on one of my vendors, the vendor told him it had enough gold to operate with."

    " ... I was able to drop the gold on a vendor that had less gold on it immediately after that, and it was still well within the combat timer. "

    First time I HEARD of such ... Did you inquire further? (status ... have inhand ... days paid for ...
    (oooooo did i do that ?? ... )

    "... I actually tried to drop the gold on 2 of the vendors before one actually took it. One of them had 150k or so on it, and was paid for about 80 days, the other had 50k on it, and was paid for 22 days. The one that accepted it had a little under 200k on it, and was paid up for 155 days."

    ??? 2 of the vendors before one actually took it ...
    One 150k on it, paid for about 80 days
    One 50k on it, paid for 22 days.
    One 200k on it, paid for 155 days

    !*whew*!
    (btw 2 ... 3 twice ... three times .... brrrr[​IMG] ..)
    !*whew*!
    not me

    [​IMG] I was relieved that, though slightly confusing on your part ... enough data was provided to clear ME(or my "cap" idea) of being the cause of the "bug" .. or glitch ... or whatever it was ...
    Your data WAS confusing, to ME ... because you said
    2 of the vendors before one actually took it ...
    THEN go on to describe 3 vendors ... ALL of whom, IF my "cap" had been silently implemented ... should have taken 30gp .... (none had an excess of 1 million ... in any way shape or form ... the cap is for Excess-held ... over-time ... in multiples of millios / months)


    EVEN if there had been a one digit displacement (factor of ten) ... the one that "would have" taken the GP ... was one of the one's that didn't (One 50k on it, paid for 22 days)
    The one that DID take the gp would have be the most likely to NOT take it ... had the MOST time and money paid for (One 200k on it, paid for 155 days)
    (saying ... capping the vendors ...long time vendor woulda been the one to reject it ... short/er timers woulda taken it)

    !*whew*! ... When I realized it was more likely a timer issue ...*starts un-packing duffle bag* .... Which I had pulled out from my "flee for the hills" emergency preparedness closet ...NOW not needing it... just as well refreshen the packing ... re-inventory the readiness of the rest ... due next week ... but ... better sooner than later.

    Get 3 equal piles of gp, (same size as from the mongbat) ...Get on your guy (same guy) ...without entering combat ... drop a fresh payment on each vendor (same vendors) ... in the same order ...should go: thank you, thank you, thank you ... IF it does ... more likely a timer ... IF not ... something else ... but NOT a vendor cap.

    * w h e w *
    better?
    [​IMG]
     
  46. Silly Seadog

    Stratics Veteran It's My Birthday

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    7
    <blockquote><hr>

    ...IF my "cap" had been silently implemented ...The one that DID take the gp would have be the most likely to NOT take it ...

    [/ QUOTE ]Arrrrr, mayhaps they did an inverse-Fayled implementation?
     
  47. <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    ...IF my "cap" had been silently implemented ...The one that DID take the gp would have be the most likely to NOT take it ...

    [/ QUOTE ]Arrrrr, mayhaps they did an inverse-Fayled implementation?

    [/ QUOTE ]
    [​IMG] nahhhh ... [​IMG]
    An inverse implementation ...
    Would be compound interest applying to holdings
    when: vendors full
    Would spill out multi digit millios checks (10s 100s)
    into an ever increasing lock-down/item-count limit global class of containers/places
    (ie&gt; banks 125+++ ... houses storage+++ ...Backpacks 125+++ ... containers items/stones+++)
    [​IMG]
     
  48. <blockquote><hr>

    They're all vendors in my house, owned and operated by me.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Curiouser and curiouser
     
  49. fred252

    fred252 Guest

    Well, there is a way around that. you can buy bods from your vendor. It will put the gold in the vendors purse.

    I have nearly 20 mil on mine and I can put as much gold as I want in it. There is an top limit of gold that a vendor can hold. I can't remember the gold cap but it is there.
     
  50. I was originally talking about 3 vendors, the 2 that refused until one (the 3rd) finally took it. After I went back and looked at the vendors, how much gold they had on them and how many days they were paid for, I realized I initially had things a little mixed up, which is why I spelled it out in the second post. Guess I could have gone back and fixed it, but didn't think about it until now.

    Anyway, the first 2 did refuse as I said, with the 3rd one accepting, even though it had more gold and was paid up for a much longer period of time. The combat timer was still in effect as I went straight from the corpse (which was about 4 steps from the house) after the kill to the vendors to drop the gold. To add another kink, the character that made the kill is also the one who's listed on the house as the owner.