UberGuy

You file a petition, which is why it was suggested upthread. You can file the petition in-game or on the support website.

Not that I know of. Personally, I consider having to rest a fairly significant pause anyway. That's terribly subjective, of course, but even though resting every fight is way better than having to wait for your blue bar to recover on its own, it's still a pretty significant pause. So if I was "forced" to rest every fight, I'd still want to improve my endurance recovery.

That's a bit of a tightrope walk. The devs clearly look at things like leveling speed on a pretty highly averaged scale, and they're going to catch the time players spend standing around waiting on end recovery in their metrics on average time-to-next-level (presumably on a per-level basis). They can adjust this time either by fiddling the XP for mobs in those ranges, by fiddling with how fast we recover (or lose) endurance (and health), or by some combination of the two. It could be the case that they'd be leveling people faster than they intended in the low levels if they had both "XP smoothing" and faster recharging rest. Is that really a big deal? No idea - leveling rates by level are probably a mostly subjective target on the devs' parts.

I don't really know, but you could be right because the items sold.

The fact that you can't claim stuff in a slot that sells for a stack total over two billion is mind-boggling to me. We even warned them about that one in beta when they added the feature that prevents you from overflowing your inf. Selling, say, a whole stack of ten 250M inf items means you can't claim that stack ever.

From what I've seen, stuff in "storage" is usually only eaten by global chat server foobar when the mail is relatively recent. I'm guessing that the global chat server(s) only take periodic checkpoints, and if your mail wasn't included in the latest checkpoint, you can lose it when globals recover from a crash. I've had stuff in mails for a couple of weeks that survived known global crashes, so it's definitely not that everything in mail storage goes kaput every time globals go down. That would be ridiculously unreliable - we couldn't depend on it at all unless the other party was online and accepted all email attachments immediately.

Just send in a petition, and when wording it, try to remember that the people you're asking to get you your stuff back aren't the ones responsible for it being deleted.

Send in a petition with as much info as you have about what you lost and when. If the 1st line support person says they can't assist, ask them to escalate it. From what I'm seeing since this afternoon, they are automatically escalating it without people needing to ask for that, suggesting it's a known issue. (It seems to be standard procedure that a more senior CSR has to deal with lost items.)

No, every MMO that has such a system definitely does not delete the mails every 30 days. Packages in WOW are returned to sender.

With no disrespect intended, there's absolutely no more reason to think that would happen than there is to think the game would slow down because everyone suddenly created twice as many characters. Unlike some parts of the game, players don't do mass searches through all global emails. Having more stored emails doesn't mean more entities start roaming around in zones. People have 20+ market slots with up to 10 items in every one, and even that system lost its 60-day auto wipe for active accounts, which still only happened if you didn't use the market for 60 days.

Not storing stuff in the email system because it was unstable is perfectly reasonable, and it's really the main reason I was never in any danger of losing anything valuable due to this little undocumented feature. Clearly the devs are now telling us that they put this purge in for some stability purposes. But my point was that there's no intrinsic reason to expect that storing 20 mails per person (plus bouncebacks) would impact the system negatively.

I'm glad you aren't in charge of game development, because the way you're asking the question suggests incredible naivete.

Making a game "Fun" isn't defined by "take out everything that anyone dislikes". Other posters have talked about having barriers in games, and overcoming the barriers is what gives the games a sense of progress. With no barriers, everything is a pushover, an there's no sense of accomplishment in doing anything. Any time you create a barrier, some people will dislike it. It does not automatically follow that removing that barrier improves the game.

Objection, Your Honor. There's no evidence that endurance is "such a huge factor". That's your personal take on what's fun or not, and your personal take on how easy it is to get past the parts you don't think are fun. Again, just because you don't like them doesn't mean they're bad for the game. Yeah, if pretty much everyone can't stand the mechanic, it's an issue for sure. But there's no clear evidence that we're faced with anything like that.

Really? They can get the endurance to win solo against consecutive spawns of over-level foes big enough for a full team? That's pretty cool. It's a shame we can't do that here. Oh, you mean at level 15? Oh, well, where'd the sense of accomplishment in that be?

Yeah, it's amazing to think this game has lasted six years sucking that bad.

Yeah, but there's absolutely zero proof that changing the low-level (or any level) endurance mechanics are going to reverse that. Something like Going Rogue? I'm betting that's way more likely to be a good move.

What makes you think they haven't? It's not like they've never changed the game. They just haven't done the exact change you'd like. Maybe its because they haven't gotten around to it, but it's worth considering that maybe it's because they don't see what you dislike so much as such a big issue - especially after they've done so many things that already mitigate it.

As has been discussed in this thread, it could. Remember, not everyone hates challenges, as long as they're reasonable. Also, again, please show us where it's "an issue." Anecdotes on a forum (in either direction) aren't proof of that.

No, but what equations, formulas and some simple logic can show is how easy it is to get around the problem. The fact that ways to do that exist is provable - many of us here in the thread have done them. Math and formulas can help us quantify how much play time is involved in achieving them. We can combine those things to ask - how reasonable is it really to go on so much about how unfun something is, when means to deal with it exist and are pretty darn accessible? Is the problem really the system, or the people that won't accept the tools the system provides? Unlike a lot of the rest of my post, that's not meant to be a snarky question.

This use of the email system was discussed in beta in threads in which the devs were participating. Never was there any mention in beta that such a use was disallowed. Restrictions were put in place that seemed perfectly understandable in light of potential aims to limit the email system being a better storage mechanism than those already available. The existing email system never deleted anything ever. I have emails from Issue 2.

If the devs didn't want it used as storage, they should have said so when they had the chance, in beta, before they could possibly have considered it an in-flight exploit.

All of these factors combine in my thinking to make it perfectly reasonable to think that attachments would be preserved just as mails were.

Finally, the fact that GMs are reinstating lost items suggests that the makers and/or support staff of the game agree that this should have been documented. I'm glad they seem to have more common sense than you seem to.

I figured. If you do pass it on, though, it's certainly a start.

Slippery slope need not apply. This thread is about Mystic Fortune. No other power has ever had a prompt. Mystic Fortune has one. Addressing this needs only be solved for Mystic Fortune. Solving it does not need to imply that all buffs now need this same problem solved; though there are absolutely people asking for that, solving this one does not obligate the devs to solve the others.

Not sure if you just didn't look in the right threads, but it seems to me that a lot of us were complaining before you changed it to have no prompt, and then were cheering when you changed it to have no prompt. If anything, it seems there are new forum faces compelled to complain now that the prompt is back. (Of course my interest makes me biased - there might be new faces cheering that it's back.)

I don't understand why you can't win. Why can't it be made an optional prompt?

I just ask one thing: don't make it optional like the market prompts are right now. That's to say, they ask you if you don't want to be warned .... ever time you zone and then do the warning incurring thing again.

Yep. I was thinking this myself, but wanted confirmation that it related to self-sent mails.

Pretty interesting.

I wonder if they were supposed to be returned to sender and went into the void because they were sent to the sender. I seem to recall that eventual return to sender was something they talked about in beta.

They weren't buffed, per se, but the did have a problem with their AI fixed that had that net effect. They have gas missiles that work something like Poison Gas Trap. If you stand in the gas, it applies holds to you. If you get a few of these stacked in one spot, it can overcome melee AT mez protections. Their AI used to mean that they basically never fired these missiles, even though they were part of their powers list. Now their AI was fixed and they fire them.

I find the gas is manageable for melee ATs if they move around. I find it's seriously obnoxious for most squishies.

That's not how you handle a feature that's in beta. They knew people were going to store things in this during beta. People tested doing that during beta, and talked about it. If you consider something an exploit in beta then you take action then. You also document the proper use of the system when it goes live, including just this sort of restriction.

The idea that using the mail this way was an exploit is ludicrous.

The devs were posting in [EDIT]beta[/EDIT] threads where people were discussing using email this way. They never objected. They put in limitations that, while possibly intended to limit RMT, served nicely to keep mail from being an immensely large-scale storage facility (one attachment per mail, for example).

Finding a way to get from level 1 to level 50 in an hour is very likely a valid exploit. Being able to keep attachments forever in a system that always let you keep emails forever, when no one said otherwise even when given perfect opportunities to bring up that it wasn't designed to allow that, is not an exploit.

Please note that I have lost nothing to this. I haven't stored anything valuable in my email, and nothing I have stored has been lost. But it irritates me in the extreme to see people calling things exploits that absolutely are not.

The original email system had no shelf life limit. I've kept in-game emails for years - around five years for some of them.

As far as I know, there was no documentation that stated that the new email system had a time limit. Given that there was no time limit on the original mail system, and the fact that the new one's apparent limit doesn't seem to have been documented or even just mentioned in passing, there was no reason to believe that the new system had a time limit.

Its fine, though vaguely annoying that the new system has a time limit, but it's not fine that no one knew about it. The devs knew people immediately thought of storing things in the email system - it was openly discussed in threads about the system in which they were participating when it was in beta. That it was never brought up seems really pretty damn inexcusable.