Mordgier

NQ can fix the orders - the issue as I understand, and this is really just me talking out of my ass (hurr hurr), is that once the market terminals were all gone, the DB that stored the orders for that market lost the reference to the market. So now you have a bunch of orders tied to a market that just doesn't exist anymore. A 'replacement' market created in the game will likely have a whole different element ID meaning they would need to go through and take the old ID for market 15 and replace all the orders to the 'new' ID in the backend DB. It's work and it sucks and I'd hate to have to do it if I was in their shoes. Any and all DB changes like this are scary and error prone...

You want proof that NQ had misconfigured RDMS?! But only NQ can provide THAT proof. You know they won't. I know they won't. We all know they won't. It's not even relevant - because here's the thing. Either RDMS was not configured correctly by NQ. NQ's fault. OR RDMS is so buggy and prone to exploits that players can easily bypass it and have been for months and NQ has ignored it. NQs fault - and WAY WAY worse.

And if THAT is possible - and I am not saying it's not. What is NQ doing about all the cases where players lost their stuff and NQ just went "lol git gud at RDMS scrub"

You...you want me to provide proof that people could go into build mode? Like for real? Do you want me to prove that water is wet while I'm at it? Nobody but you disputes that multiple people could enter build mode.

What grinds my gears is that player owned markets are coming. It's only a matter of time till they do, and then an org will build a market - and sooner or later some org will setup a market and screw up their RDMS perms. We all know what NQ will say when that org complains about their market getting looted.

The market was publicly editable. This is not a disputed statement. There were multiple people who reported being able to go into build mode. They had reported it on Discord to several NQ- members. Some people had the sense to walk away from it - other did not. I don't disagree that walking away was the smart move - but I stand by stance that a construct that allows the entry into build mode is free game. Regardless of whose construct it is.

So is misconfigured RDMS an exploit or user error? Or is it only user error when we do it? But an exploit when devs do it? If Scoopy bypassed RDMS permissions, he absolutely should have been banned. He didn't. RDMS was set to allow public access. Why that was the case is not relevant. There is no scenario where pressing B to access a publicly configured structure is an exploit.

That's a lot of text to say what happened was "Player walked up to market. Player pressed B. Player tore down the market." The above are known events. You can theory craft all you want about the innerworkings of RDMS but none of that is relevant. All the player did is press B.

If the player walked up, pressed B, it's not the player using some exploit to bypass RDMS. It's RDMS not set up correctly. If RDMS is riddled with bugs that cause it to give public rights to players when it shouldn't, as unfortunate as that is, that's hardly the fault of the players - AND if that is indeed the case - what is NQ doing about all the players who lost their stuff through the exact same scenario?

This is simply false. Most RDMS theft is just people not setting RDMS permissions up correctly and allowing for public access. You know...exactly what happened here.

Just Market 15. Everything that we had listed for sale on Market 15 simply ceased to exist. We fortunately didn't just use 15, so it wasn't 'everything' - but had we listed exclusively on 15 it could have been a crippling loss.

Once again NQ fails to learn from other games. https://massivelyop.com/2015/10/03/the-game-archaeologist-the-assassination-of-lord-british/ This could have been the same epic tale - instead it's just stupid drama....

Yeah....but we all know they won't. They clearly take the easy way out. They could have easily actually banned people who dupped or abused the links - but they couldn't have been bothered to do that either.

To be fair the impact was not minimal. Impact was massive due to how the markets actually work. The looting of the terminals managed to entirely wipe out all sale and buy orders. Players lost millions. Our org lost all their sales orders on the market. They just poofed.

I think there should be punishment. It would have set a terrible precedent if there was none. I would have done it more in the spirit of the game though. Bind the player to a rez node in JC's castle dungeon for the crime against Aphelia and call it a day. An out of game EULA response based on NQ screwing up and in game mechanic that is meant to be abused doesn't feel right.

NQ has harmed their image more by their absurd response to the theft from their wide open RDMS than from suffering the RDMS theft. They're welcome to selfban for ruining their image.

Oh god - this better not be the case - I'm sinking the nearly a month to get it right now...

He should have set up his RDMS roles better...

You wouldn't have even bothered probably - you get better loot from players eh....

This coming from the guy who called the forum half retarded....

You keep calling it an exploit. Pressing B isn't an exploit.

Throw them in a dungeon in JCs castle for a week and strip them of their loot. Seriously. We'd all have had a good laugh about it and it'd would have been somewhat within the spirit of the game.

I agree with your general idea, but I'd be far more open to NQs response if they had also banned all the dupers. All the dupers got was a note asking them to self report on Sept 22 within 48 hours and delete their duped mats. What since then? If the market was looted with RDMS exploit, ok yeah a ban, but this was a misconfiguration by the devs. A ban for this while inaction on literally everything else sine beta seems heavy handed.

I would advise NQ take the time to get to know and understand the system and be cautious when making a construct or element usable by unknown players. That way when their stuff gets jacked they don't need to whine on the forums about it.

So basically - what you're saying if players screw up RDMS, it's on them, if NQ screws up RDMS, it's a violation of the EULA? Really guys? It's pretty clear when players are able to get access to other peoples constructs that they were 'not intended' to have access by the owner. Yet when it's players, that's fine. But when YOU screw up - you ban the players? Absurd.