UOG: Demise

It appears one feature of being a "co-owner" is missing. It allows you to add people as friends, and access containers that are set for "co-owner" as intended, however the one thing that is missing is that when you co-own someone, it's supposed to count towards all of their characters on that account. For example, if I co-own a crafter on one of my alt-accounts to my house, every other character on that alt-account should be co-owned - not just the character I chose.

This is one major flaw I noticed immediately when I came from OSI - just didn't dawn on me to report it until now for some reason.

Bump

Bump

The Silvertiger wrote:Bump

I reported this About 2 years ago as a ......can we have this even though it was add after the Demise cut off point because it's just a needless pain the way it is now

Maybe it's the SA factor that is holding it up But I remember having to wait for a rune book to recharge before you could use it again and that was an SA thing that EOS added anyway

It might just be on the pile waiting to get done

Bama wrote:

The Silvertiger wrote:Bump

I reported this About 2 years ago as a ......can we have this even though it was add after the Demise cut off point because it's just a needless pain the way it is now

Maybe it's the SA factor that is holding it up But I remember having to wait for a rune book to recharge before you could use it again and that was an SA thing that EOS added anyway

It might just be on the pile waiting to get done

Tbh, I was just bumping random things to take away attention from other posts.

Vitek- wrote:It appears one feature of being a "co-owner" is missing. It allows you to add people as friends, and access containers that are set for "co-owner" as intended, however the one thing that is missing is that when you co-own someone, it's supposed to count towards all of their characters on that account. For example, if I co-own a crafter on one of my alt-accounts to my house, every other character on that alt-account should be co-owned - not just the character I chose.

This is one major flaw I noticed immediately when I came from OSI - just didn't dawn on me to report it until now for some reason.

I dont recall this being like this on OSI in the earlier days. Was this added later?

I didn't play ATL until after SA so I wouldn't have noticed due to one char slot on Siege. Seems like an oversight to me but it may be in patch notes somewhere.

It wasnt in during ML but it was added after. its more of a QoL change then anything else. it would be nice but not needed.

Bama, vitek, or loler: does it remove all the characters upon removing of one co-owner?

The obvious reason for the change is to simplify adding accounts 2,3, and 4 to the house on account 1. The question is are there any reasons not to add this? My only thought would be in the case of adding untrustworthy coowners(which you shouldn't do) it would help narrow down the list if you have multiple coowners.

There was an instance where some armor came up missing, but because I only had one character accessed to that armor and that character was logged out at the crafters event a month after the event ended, I was able to escape accusation. If my characters had all been accessed this would have been much more difficult to check. Another way to check that would have been guild roster login dates. Now that is a rare case from all points, but if things were as we want with this change I could have been accused.

I said all that to get any examples of where this could be a harmful idea instead of a great one.

@silvertiger no if any char is still co-owned the whole account would be co-owned.

Selene wrote:.

Can we get this moved to handled, deleted, or merged?