[News] FoF: Antsy with Anticipation

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

But we've proved to our satisfaction that using items that someone else insured can lead to flaky behavior from the insurance system. Insure your own items!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but that is simply not acceptable from professionals...which you guys are pretending to be, right?

If you have a reproducible way to make insurance come off an item...fix it directly. Attempting to hide the problem through this vendor fix is just not the right thing to do. The problem will still be there.

[/ QUOTE ]

grrrrrrrrrrrr

We don't know what the whole fix is yet, some of ya'll are really putting the cart ahead of the horse, here.

If you wanna be d*cks about something you gotta at least wait until you see the whole thing. Especially if there's something exploitable to it, they would have to wait until it was patched before talking about any details.

 

[AirmidCecht]

<blockquote><hr>

*blinks* Complaint after complaint about the insurance bug, and when we think we've found the cause, you accuse us of putting in a stealth gold sink?

I'm not sure of the exact details here - as I said, I don't have the repro steps. There are probably factors I'm missing. But we've proved to our satisfaction that using items that someone else insured can lead to flaky behavior from the insurance system. Insure your own items!

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of getting frustrated and edgy, I went with the analysis you gave us in this thread and tested it out. I am sure I may have missed steps as well but I'm trying to keep an open mind here because of those who have been hit with the insurance bug and the need to fix it.

When the solution is put on the players that may in fact actually lead to more loss of items by players not able to keep track of which character insured what....well yeah I find myself a bit flustered at your, "insure your own items!" come back.

"When frustration and intellect are juxtaposed, we find no coordination between the outcomes."

 

[utilitron]

<blockquote><hr>


grrrrrrrrrrrr

We don't know what the whole fix is yet, some of ya'll are really putting the cart ahead of the horse, here.

If you wanna be d*cks about something you gotta at least wait until you see the whole thing. Especially if there's something exploitable to it, they would have to wait until it was patched before talking about any details.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. It sounds like to be a bug with selling insured items, and may not effect other instances of insurance. Of course that is speculation, and like I stated before... we don't know the code.

The fact remains it is reproduceable, and an immediate fix is to stop the sale of insured items.

Tsk Task, you "100% sure" nay sayers... tsk tsk. -20% credibility.

 

[imported_Tina Small]

<blockquote><hr>

grrrrrrrr

I'm glad that those of you who have never experienced it have never had to endure it, and you've never seen any of your friends standing there, fresh-rez and naked with nothing to put on, wondering if they should quit for real. But geez there's clearly no alterior motive, like a gold sink, to the change Jeremy mentioned. Its not gold sink material at all, its trying to deal with something that is horrible when it happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Revenant, I don't doubt at all that there is an "insurance bug." I haven't experienced it but friends of mine have and it is indeed a situation that can cause someone to quit the game in disgust. I am just very very skeptical of this "fix." If the problem really is that the automatic renewal of insurance is pulling or attempting to pull the renewal funds from the original insurer, this "fix" is very incomplete. In addition, it will put a serious damper on folks setting up vendors in Fel.

If the automatic renewal of insurance is supposed to pull the funds from the character wearing the items, then why isn't that the fix that is being put in? That solution seems pretty gosh-darn straightforward to me and absolutely consistent with what I believe 99% of the player base already thinks is happening and therefore shouldn't cause massive problems when it is rolled out to all the unsuspecting players who don't read U.Hall. This other fix just seems....half-baked to put it politely and as a result makes me suspect there is more to it than we're being told. (The other explanation is that less coding is required to implement this change and so it's a cheaper "fix" that maybe resolves a few of the insurance bug situations, enough to be able to point to it as something that was done for the good of the game for the next 6-12 months before the complaints about the insurance bug become too unbearable for Jeremy again.)

 

[Suggestor]

<blockquote><hr>

OK, I think I have it straight now - there are a couple of factors:

- Item insurance is tied to the character that insures it. If you insure the item before you sell/trade it, when that char dies, it's your insurance that works - and you who pays for it.

- If this happens, the character wearing the item won't auto-reinsure it, even if their auto-insurance is turned on, because they never insured it in the first place.

We can repro this consistently, and believe it's the cause of the vast majority of "insurance bug" reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Jeremy

I'm sure many had already highlighted their concerns with this bug. I have some highly valuable items which I transfer between characters of the same accounts, as well as other accounts owned by me. Ideally, I hope that each of my characters would have their own items but that item is just too unique and really hard to get.

Instead of a temporary fix to vendors, can the devs fix insurance instead after having identified a possible cause? Right now, there is no way of telling who insured what items.... and having to reinsure the whole set of suit everytime is a REAL hassle.

Also, you did not explain how blessed items work. If Character A used a clothing bless deed on a hat of magi, will it remain blessed if Character B were to use it?

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

<blockquote><hr>

Revenant, I don't doubt at all that there is an "insurance bug." I haven't experienced it but friends of mine have and it is indeed a situation that can cause someone to quit the game in disgust. I am just very very skeptical of this "fix." If the problem really is that th ....___

[/ QUOTE ]

bear in mind oh wanna be programmers ...
This "vendor text" aspect ...
MAYBE the only "visible" effect of the code ...
One simple thing we can see and need deal with ...

MAYBE the only thing we see from 100,000's lines of code ...

IF as it is working out ... It IS indeed a fix for the "insurance bug" ...
which should NO longer be seen ...

I'd much rather

the one
than the other ...

logical, don'tcha think?

 

[DrDolittle]

<blockquote><hr>

OK, I think I have it straight now - there are a couple of factors:

- Item insurance is tied to the character that insures it. If you insure the item before you sell/trade it, when that char dies, it's your insurance that works - and you who pays for it.

- If this happens, the character wearing the item won't auto-reinsure it, even if their auto-insurance is turned on, because they never insured it in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]I just went back and looked at the ring I had used in my vendor experiment. Although the ring did say [insured] and remained in the character’s backpack after death, that ring is no longer marked [insured]. So, the item did not reinsure, as you have just stated.

However, the item it was no longer marked as [insured] either. I re-tested with another item and confirmed that observation. I also tested with an insured item passed via a secure container to another character on the same account and got the same results. Also, no gold was removed from the character’s account when they died.

I agree with some of the other posts that this bug may open the door to some potential abuse now that the situation is public knowledge. I’m not sure that the bug is likely to be used as a repair scam as, if someone had handed a scammer an item for repair, the scammer could just as easily keep the item rather than messing around with the bug. I can see how the bug could be abused if you were selling an item to someone who did not know about the problem.

A fix for this can not be finessed by simply removing the ability to place insured items on a vendor; it must be fixed right so that [insured] items re-insure regardless of who first insured them.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

A fix for this can not be finessed by simply removing the ability to place insured items on a vendor; it must be fixed right so that [insured] items re-insure regardless of who first insured them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Said very well !

 

[imported_Fran Fury]

I agree

 

[imported_Lord Kynd]

<blockquote><hr>

Just curious does this effect the sharing of items between characters? I , like others i know, share suits between there characters. Does this mean everytime i switch suits between them I would have to uninsure and then reinsure everything?

[/ QUOTE ]

and won't that get costly also ?
last i didn't see is us getting insurance gold back if we uninsure things. thats a problem i think also.

 

[imported_Lord Kynd]

<blockquote><hr>

OK, I think I have it straight now - there are a couple of factors:

- Item insurance is tied to the character that insures it. If you insure the item before you sell/trade it, when that char dies, it's your insurance that works - and you who pays for it.

- If this happens, the character wearing the item won't auto-reinsure it, even if their auto-insurance is turned on, because they never insured it in the first place.

We can repro this consistently, and believe it's the cause of the vast majority of "insurance bug" reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

i tried to make this happen and it wouldn't, is the 'fix' in already ?
when you insure something it takes gold from you right away, when you die it takes gold because it re-insures the item. so yes the person who insures then sells in essance does pay for the first insurance.
however my auto renew policy has ALWAYS worked... sorry and i'm using 99% of things i've boughten off a vendor or another player ALREADY insured.

i still think the new insuarnce 'holder' needs to make sure they have enough change in the bank for renew to work.

even still, just fix auto renew instead of making things harder for EVERY player needing to uninsure and reinsure stuff all the time.

 

[Suggestor]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Hi Jeremy

I'm sure many had already highlighted their concerns with this bug. I have some highly valuable items which I transfer between characters of the same accounts, as well as other accounts owned by me. Ideally, I hope that each of my characters would have their own items but that item is just too unique and really hard to get.

Instead of a temporary fix to vendors, can the devs fix insurance instead after having identified a possible cause? Right now, there is no way of telling who insured what items.... and having to reinsure the whole set of suit everytime is a REAL hassle.

Also, you did not explain how blessed items work. If Character A used a clothing bless deed on a hat of magi, will it remain blessed if Character B were to use it?

[/ QUOTE ]

They appear to just be describing the current behavior of item insurance - if you like the current behavior and nothing's ever happened to you, and prefer to pass the gear back and forth between chars, then keep doing it? Maybe the issue can't hit you when it's back and forth between the same account's chars, who knows.

I don't get why a buncha peeps are flipping out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jeremy said that "insurance is character-related, not account- or item-related". This means that there is a possibility of that issue hitting me and I do not want to wait for that to happen, just like many other players out there. Besides, I do transfer items between characters of different accounts too.

The fix is not good given that pre-insured items can be passed onto a char via means other than from a vendor. This means ppl out there are still at risk of losing their items via some means which Jeremy had mentioned can be reproduced. There is also no way for one to tell whether a particular item is previously insured by him or not.

A better and more direct fix would be as what Dr Dolittle had mentioned:

<blockquote><hr>

A fix for this can not be finessed by simply removing the ability to place insured items on a vendor; it must be fixed right so that [insured] items re-insure regardless of who first insured them.

[/ QUOTE ]

The above was what I had in mind as well when I said to "fix insurance". Perhaps I should have made myself clearer in my earlier post.

 

[imported_sbom]

<blockquote><hr>

OK, I think I have it straight now - there are a couple of factors:

- Item insurance is tied to the character that insures it. If you insure the item before you sell/trade it, when that char dies, it's your insurance that works - and you who pays for it.

- If this happens, the character wearing the item won't auto-reinsure it, even if their auto-insurance is turned on, because they never insured it in the first place.

We can repro this consistently, and believe it's the cause of the vast majority of "insurance bug" reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if you insure an item on a char, then put the item in a chest and pick it up with another one of your chars...it will say "insured", but it's not really insured (?)...if I wasn't at work, I'd go and try right ahead!

 

[HD2300]

Looks like they have been able to replicate a insurance bug. Must be some kind of weird sequence of events involving maybe vendors and/or xsharding.

 

[Stigmatas]

<blockquote><hr>

I agree

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree agree.


If I have an item that is insured on Tom, ****, or Harry, that item should stay in Tom, ****, and Harry's backpack upon death. No matter if Jane, Mary, or Linda insured it.

Fix it right EA or don't fix it at all.

The end.

 

[imported_Skrag]

<blockquote><hr>

Wow... frustration already? You've been back less than a week! I'd say the fel folks have good reason to complain. Does this mean I'll have to reinsure items that I switch out between characters? Between accounts? What if I buy it from someone via a trade window? Are we allowed to trade insured items? Ah that's right you don't have the repro steps. Prolly shouldn't have brought it up in the FoF then. Seems like EA tradition though. Insurance system is bugged? OK lets fix the vendors!

Fix the issue not the symptom!

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

 

[imported_Fran Fury]

<blockquote><hr>

OK, I think I have it straight now - there are a couple of factors:

- Item insurance is tied to the character that insures it. If you insure the item before you sell/trade it, when that char dies, it's your insurance that works - and you who pays for it.

- If this happens, the character wearing the item won't auto-reinsure it, even if their auto-insurance is turned on, because they never insured it in the first place.

We can repro this consistently, and believe it's the cause of the vast majority of "insurance bug" reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jeremy, I think it is that trade part that has so many of us worried. Personally the vendor part won't affect me as much as the trading will.

So if this bug was to only affect insured items on vendors,no big deal we can adapt easy enough to that. Inconvenient but still workable.

But if it affects traded items too..thats a whole different story. And a much bigger problem. And if it truly does affect traded items then fixing the vendors is just a tiny little band aid on a severed arm.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


the insurance 'bug' is people not insuring or having auto reinsure turned on, or not having enough gold to re-insure.

some people just need to pay closer attention to what they are doing so they don't loose stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Last night in Doom I looted someones Mace N Shield Glasses (how sweet it is!) that were insured. Either they ran out of insurance money to reinsure ... or ???

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

Last night in Doom I looted someones Mace N Shield Glasses (how sweet it is!) that were insured. Either they ran out of insurance money to reinsure ... or ???

[/ QUOTE ]

Er......

How'd you loot someone in the Tram ruleset?

 

[imported_Fran Fury]

I am guessing they looted someones glasses off of something else. Like a rotting corpse killed someone and rummaged the corpse and then RC gets killed and whoever loots that corpse gets the glasses.

btw, it was stated awhile back that the above example is not possible yet it happens frequently. Fix that bug while we are fixing bugs.



Jeremy are we getting our cocoa trees this patch?

 

[imported_Tina Small]

<blockquote><hr>

I'll have to do some more research into the underlying issue to figure out what's going on - but the goal is to prevent unexpected item loss. The gold involved doesn't have anything at all to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jeremy, the impression I've gotten from your previous posts is that an item may have more than one field associated with it that indicates if the item has been insured (e.g., a field to display the word "Insured" so it's visible on a mouse-over of the item and another field whose value is never visibly displayed to a player). Somehow processes in the game are changing the value of one of these fields so they are not consistent with each other (for example, maybe it happens in the process of moving an item from a vendor's main pack to a container in the vendor's pack).

Perhaps the process of checking your equipped items and the items you have in your backpack upon death is only checking one of these fields (possibly the field whose value is not visible to players). If that field says the item is not insured, the item is not placed back into the player's backpack and stays on their corpse.

If this is what is happening (i.e., two fields associated with the item are carrying inconsistent information and therefore the item is treated as uninsured), why can't you code something to help us identify these faultily insured items so we can un-insure them and then insure them again? Perhaps make the "Insured" label that is visible when an item is equipped or in your backpack display for the player only in another color that indicates the item isn't correctly insured? (The "warning" color wouldn't show up for someone looking at another character's paperdoll or for someone snooping another character's backpack.)

The fix you are planning for this next publish doesn't seem like it's fixing much of anything in the long run because it does nothing to correct potentially faulty insurance on thousands of items already on vendors (you haven't said that these items are going to become uninsured), and it doesn't correct potentially faulty insurance on hundreds of thousands of items in use or stored in containers. Also, if you give us the ability to identify these items, perhaps we can also help identify what processes might be causing their faulty insurance state.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

A fix for this can not be finessed by simply removing the ability to place insured items on a vendor; it must be fixed right so that [insured] items re-insure regardless of who first insured them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Said very well !

[/ QUOTE ]
/sign


Let people run shops in Fel. Fix the code or take insurance out completely.
Not everyone wants to shop in Luna. Not everyone wants to shop in Luna.

 

[Guest]

Just to clarify, existing insured items on vendors will NOT have to be uninsured.

 

[AirmidCecht]

<blockquote><hr>

Just to clarify, existing insured items on vendors will NOT have to be uninsured.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't wait for this to make sense. My only guess at this point is there is something we are missing here and are not able to be told. I hope the suggestion to make it so future insured items cannot be put on vendors or having items tagged with the name of insured person is being considered.

Insurance itself is not the problem for me, it is concern for even more players being affected by this fix than there are the bug. We have a good many players coming back to UO and I would love to keep em around. *smiles*

 

[Fluffi]

TTL.


Jeremy, I just want to get this clear....


Fluffi buys an insured item from Fred The Vendor and doesn't cancel insurance and then reinsure.
On Fluffis' first death, Fred takes the insurance hit.
The item then becomes uninsured for Fluffi, regardless of how much gold she has in the bank?
On Fluffis' next death, the item should drop to her corpse as it's uninsured for Fluffi?


This is either totally wrong, or an example of appalling coding.

If the item is supposed to drop on Fluffis' second death, as the item did not become unisured due to "auto renew insurance" not working, your statement is wrong. This has never happened to me in many years, with many characters wearing shop-bought items.

If the item might/might not drop depending on circumstances, this is poor coding, as it suggests that nothing we can do will alter the potential for an item to drop.
As items don't drop if I don't cancel/reinsure them, how can you convince me that they won't drop if I do?



For what it's worth, I have been hit by the "insurance bug". <u>Everything</u> dropped to my corpse, including:

Vendor purchased armour (which was probably pre-insured when I bought it)
Doom artifacts I earned, and insured by the wearer.
ToT major artifacts, which I earned and insured by the wearer.
Weapons I looted from monsters, and insured by the wearer.
Armour made by my own crafter, insured for the first time by the wearer.
Clothes which were CBDd' by the wearer.
Naturally blessed items like runebooks and spellbooks.


In the light of my own experiences, and after talking with others who have suffered similarly, I believe the "insurance bug" is more likely to be caused by other factors: Hitting a lag-spike as you die seems to be a prime contender, given the circumstances which surrounded many of the examples of which I am aware.


I realise that the "insurance bug" is effectively irreproducable: It's only happened to me once in countless deaths, but please don't try to tell us that it is caused by not reinsuring vendor-bought items, as the game experience of many players contradicts this.



*edited for alcohol-induced typos*

 

[imported_Hanna]

<blockquote><hr>

I went to the test center and played around with a few scenarios in the hopes of being able to help add some clarity here, dying and redying, but couldn't figure out how to reproduce it trading around insured items between characters. However I'm perfectly willing to believe there might be some quirk or step I'm missing (I didn't try deleting the character who had insured the item for example, or overloading the original insurer's backpack/bankvault).

[/ QUOTE ]Well in 6 years the bug has only hapened to me 3 times.

Item is insured by another character on my own account, item falls to corpse on death and stays insured.

However 3 times in 6 years is going to be damm hard to reproduce. And it may be like the fel bug where you have specific land areas that cause the problem where some guilds exploit that area.

 

[Olahorand]

For me it seems, that lag is a main factor in the insurance bug - which hit me 2 times, as I was still connected with ISDN.
Assumption, what could be the mechanics:
Each item is assumed as being not insured/not blessed.
If the character dies, the default container is the dead corpse and the insurance check is performed. In certain lag situations the check for blessing/insurance is hitting a timer or not answering and the item remains on the corpse.

In this context a simple solution for the game would be, to assume, that each item is blessed/insured, so the default container is the ghosts backpack and then perform the check for uninsured stuff, dropping this into the corpse after the check is done. If the check cannot be completed for a certain item or for all itmes during xxx seconds or until ressed, the items stay in the backpack, insured or not.

*Salute*
Olahorand

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

For what it's worth, I have been hit by the "insurance bug". <u>Everything</u> dropped to my corpse, including:

Vendor purchased armour (which was probably pre-insured when I bought it)
Doom artifacts I earned, and insured by the wearer.
ToT major artifacts, which I earned and insured by the wearer.
Weapons I looted from monsters, and insured by the wearer.
Armour made by my own crafter, insured for the first time by the wearer.
Clothes which were CBDd' by the wearer.
Naturally blessed items like runebooks and spellbooks.


In the light of my own experiences, and after talking with others who have suffered similarly, I believe the "insurance bug" is more likely to be caused by other factors: Hitting a lag-spike as you die seems to be a prime contender, given the circumstances which surrounded many of the examples of which I am aware.


I realise that the "insurance bug" is effectively irreproducable: It's only happened to me once in countless deaths, but please don't try to tell us that it is caused by not reinsuring vendor-bought items, as the game experience of many players contradicts this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I get the creeping hunch that once in a blue moon, the server might mix up containers at the death, or something along those lines. This would account for the identical handling of blessed vs. insured items when the big, big drops like that happen.

Hunch only, could be completely wrong.

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

For me it seems, that lag is a main factor in the insurance bug - which hit me 2 times, as I was still connected with ISDN.
Assumption, what could be the mechanics:
Each item is assumed as being not insured/not blessed.
If the character dies, the default container is the dead corpse and the insurance check is performed. In certain lag situations the check for blessing/insurance is hitting a timer or not answering and the item remains on the corpse.

In this context a simple solution for the game would be, to assume, that each item is blessed/insured, so the default container is the ghosts backpack and then perform the check for uninsured stuff, dropping this into the corpse after the check is done. If the check cannot be completed for a certain item or for all itmes during xxx seconds or until ressed, the items stay in the backpack, insured or not.

*Salute*
Olahorand

[/ QUOTE ]

In general, agreed.

 

[Arcus]

RTLPFC -

Ironically this explains the one time my char was hit with the insurance bug IIRC . I know for sure that I have bought items off of vendors that were insured and they worked properly, but I do recall one that didn't.

 

[_Uriah Heep_]

RTLFC

----------------------------------------------------------
Fluffi buys an insured item from Fred The Vendor and doesn't cancel insurance and then reinsure.
On Fluffis' first death, Fred takes the insurance hit.
The item then becomes uninsured for Fluffi, regardless of how much gold she has in the bank?
On Fluffis' next death, the item should will to her corpse as it's uninsured for Fluffi?
------------------------------------------------------------

Fred took the Insurance hit when he insured it. When you insure an item you get the message gold was taken from your bank. Fluffi's death has no bearing on Fred's bank, he paid up front. Fluffi's bank is the one taking the hit from there on, and I still can't get the insurance to drop on switched around items.
Seems to be working fine, as it has since time began. I wonder, if once again, we are fixin stuff that really ain't broke, as a way to try to patch up a problem we dont want to acknowledge? *shrugs*

Carry on gang, I'm sure we will never know the whole story, EA's secrecy on even the simplest stuff rates right up there with the Warren Commission

 

[Guest]

[quote
How'd you loot someone in the Tram ruleset?



[/ QUOTE ]

They were on the corpse of a monster. Thing is, they were insured.

 

[imported_sbom]

<blockquote><hr>

For me it seems, that lag is a main factor in the insurance bug - which hit me 2 times, as I was still connected with ISDN.
Assumption, what could be the mechanics:
Each item is assumed as being not insured/not blessed.
If the character dies, the default container is the dead corpse and the insurance check is performed. In certain lag situations the check for blessing/insurance is hitting a timer or not answering and the item remains on the corpse.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that is possible. Everything happens on the server side, and it sends you a "copy" of what's on the server. It does not matter if you lag or not, the same copy will be sent...it will only be sent later than without lag.

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

[quote
How'd you loot someone in the Tram ruleset?



[/ QUOTE ]

They were on the corpse of a monster. Thing is, they were insured.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, then you've seen the results of THE bona-fide "insurance bug"!

The item hits their corpse with a visible "insured" tag still on it. The "insured" tag is real, it's not a client cache issue, everyone can see it. In this case it then got looted by a monster.

...... how sh*tty for whoever lost the glasses, huh.

 

[Hiru]

Real Quickly... I am more interested about the Moonglow event. Can we spend a few seconds on this topic? I just wasted an hour reading through useless information trying to get information about our upcoming event. I know your precious insurance topic is somehow important where you need to carry on as it has - I (and I am sure others) am more interested in game play - mechanics of insurance is not really that interesting nor important.

I know most of you love to flame on topics such as this one... so, please allow the few of us who enjoy just playing (not interested in making it a business or learning game code) UO a few minutes of real game play information.

(I would love to discuss the event in another thread; alas Jeremy started the topic in this forum)

Thank you and flame on...

 

[Stigmatas]

<blockquote><hr>

[quote
How'd you loot someone in the Tram ruleset?



[/ QUOTE ]

They were on the corpse of a monster. Thing is, they were insured.

[/ QUOTE ]

You did give them back right? I would think someone who lost a set of M&amp;S glasses would be running around Doom spamming "I lost my f'in glasses!".

Tempting to keep yes, but players quit over this type of thing.

You did give them back right?

 

[Stigmatas]

<blockquote><hr>

Real Quickly... I am more interested about the Moonglow event. Can we spend a few seconds on this topic? I just wasted an hour reading through useless information trying to get information about our upcoming event. I know your precious insurance topic is somehow important where you need to carry on as it has - I (and I am sure others) am more interested in game play - mechanics of insurance is not really that interesting nor important.

I know most of you love to flame on topics such as this one... so, please allow the few of us who enjoy just playing (not interested in making it a business or learning game code) UO a few minutes of real game play information.

(I would love to discuss the event in another thread; alas Jeremy started the topic in this forum)

Thank you and flame on...

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, yea, precious insurance ....considering a lot of us have millions invested in our suits. Kindof a hot topic...ya know?

Don't try and downplay it with your facetious attitude. It's a very valid problem. I too would like to know about the event content, but to ignore this massive problem is just wrong.

You could have asked about it without the "tude.

 

[Hiru]

<blockquote><hr>

Don't try and downplay it with your facetious attitude

[/ QUOTE ]

True - but really... I have been playing almost 8 years now; I understand totally if there is a "bug" with insurance that it should be repaired. Although, in those 8 years I have never had items fall off me that were insured (from a vendor). I have never met anyone that has had this problem either.

If an item falls off, I can see why someone could become a disgruntled player... but common! you make it sound as though your 50m gold suit fell to the ground when you were "ganked" for mouthing off at the wrong person(s). (added) If I lost an object from being "careless" I just replaced it; lets face it... it's not the end of the world if you lose some arms or a gorget (or any piece).

I love to have fun with UO - PvP / PVM / My Community. I understand fully you are ultimately passionate about the game coding and "mysterious" INS. phantom bug... all I wanted was just some simple information about this new event which was brought up in this thread by our community coordinator.

I thank you for voicing "YOUR" opinion... remember you do not speak for the UO community as a whole - you only represent yourself.

Care Bear Power: "Flame On"

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Insure your own items!

[/ QUOTE ]

If the item is not insured for you then it shouldn't say insured when you click on it.