Designing a Real Guild Bank... - Page 3

Ghiest · 09/25/06, 5:15 AM

I would settle for just some decent guild tools let alone a guild banking system. Games 5+ years older than WoW have a better guild structure system, it's one of the only things that let down Warcraft imo.

But I'd prefer not hte password method rather than just a guild rank entitlement.

Grillkohle · 09/25/06, 6:35 AM

Originally Posted by Copernicus

If any guild bank features ever get implemented, I'd love to have a "Guild Repair Bot" that uses the guild's gold to repair. Would have to require a minimum guild rank to use etc to prevent abuse etc.

And while they're at it, they could tag the repair bots as Ironforge/Orgrimmar faction, for honored discount... *keeps dreaming*

Kalman · 09/25/06, 7:54 AM

Originally Posted by Daboran

Originally Posted by Malan

Heck, make it a real time transfer - if an officer is on that has sufficient rights to authorize withdrawls, he gets a pop up approval window allowing him to allow, or deny with a short comment explaining why. If allowed the item is immediately given to the player in question.

They wouldnt do this, it would break the limitation on potions/buffs. Theres a reason pots only stack in 5's.

The remote mail terminal being implemented in TBC is already breaking this limitation.

Tyvi · 12/03/06, 3:57 PM

/Rebirth

Originally Posted by Enoyls

We already have a design for guild banks and were going to get it into the Burning Crusade, but it is now scheduled to be added in a future content patch after the expansion ships.

Source: http://beta.worldofwarcraft.com/thre...eNo=4&sid=1#74

It's not much, but atleast they are aware of the problem.

PS: That is the first Bliz employee that I am aware of that signs his posts :P

Goreshot · 12/03/06, 4:42 PM

As it stands now, the <> tag is nothing more than a glorified chat room. This keeps things simple for Blizzard (low overhead), but in the long run, I think it hurts them more than it helps them (since guilds work around their lack of resources by manipulating and abusing current in-game resources like mailboxes). I agree with the sentiment that if they are going to implement something (all signs point to no), it'll be something extremely simple that no one will be happy with.

Originally Posted by Praetorian

4) For added security, the way you have to type "DELETE" to junk a blue or better, let the guildmaster set a password that has to be typed in order to access the guild bank, once per access session. (If you really want security here, make it a virtual keypad that pops up.) Now the guild is only vulnerable to betrayal from within, rather than one random officer getting keylogged.

This won't happen because Blizzard is too damn lazy to implement such a scheme just to log into the game, which would destroy all current keyloggers and potentially shut them down for good.

Tangles · 12/03/06, 4:44 PM

Originally Posted by Goreshot

As it stands now, the <> tag is nothing more than a glorified chat room. This keeps things simple for Blizzard (low overhead), but in the long run, I think it hurts them more than it helps them (since guilds work around their lack of resources by manipulating and abusing current in-game resources like mailboxes). I agree with the sentiment that if they are going to implement something (all signs point to no), it'll be something extremely simple that no one will be happy with.

Originally Posted by Praetorian

4) For added security, the way you have to type "DELETE" to junk a blue or better, let the guildmaster set a password that has to be typed in order to access the guild bank, once per access session. (If you really want security here, make it a virtual keypad that pops up.) Now the guild is only vulnerable to betrayal from within, rather than one random officer getting keylogged.

This won't happen because Blizzard is too damn lazy to implement such a scheme just to log into the game, which would destroy all current keyloggers and potentially shut them down for good.

Whats really runny is that there is a free korean 2d mmorg called Maple Story and it has the virtual keypad where you have to enter a 4 digit pin # in addition to your regular password to long on. Good stuff.

• malthrin · 12/03/06, 4:46 PM

Which signs are pointing to no? Please don't post if all you have to contribute is speculation.

ooj · 12/03/06, 5:00 PM

Originally Posted by Grillkohle

Originally Posted by Copernicus

If any guild bank features ever get implemented, I'd love to have a "Guild Repair Bot" that uses the guild's gold to repair. Would have to require a minimum guild rank to use etc to prevent abuse etc.

And while they're at it, they could tag the repair bots as Ironforge/Orgrimmar faction, for honored discount... *keeps dreaming*

And while they're at it, they could let you send all boss gold straight too this bank to fund this "Guild Repair Bot" who has faction discount! It could also sell regeants which would be limited by player so it cant be abused! maybe the next expansion.

marketa · 12/03/06, 5:03 PM

Otherwise you could simple make your own guild, get some level 1's to sign your charter, and hey presto, you have a massive amount more bank space than was intended for the average player.

Who cares. If the average player wants more bank space they can make a fake guild. Does more complexity hurt anyone? Does a fake guild hurt anyone? The current system is retarded.

Eej · 12/03/06, 5:06 PM

Originally Posted by marketa

Otherwise you could simple make your own guild, get some level 1's to sign your charter, and hey presto, you have a massive amount more bank space than was intended for the average player.

Who cares. If the average player wants more bank space they can make a fake guild. Does more complexity hurt anyone? Does a fake guild hurt anyone? The current system is retarded.

This problem is solvable by requiring that the guild bank be purchased with lots of golds. So it'd be a more expensive personal bank, but with more slots and also features that personal banks don't really need... no one's going to make their own alt guild for that.

Trashe · 12/03/06, 6:42 PM

Originally Posted by Praetorian

4) For added security, the way you have to type "DELETE" to junk a blue or better, let the guildmaster set a password that has to be typed in order to access the guild bank, once per access session. (If you really want security here, make it a virtual keypad that pops up.) Now the guild is only vulnerable to betrayal from within, rather than one random officer getting keylogged.

I don't see how a keypad for a pin code would be any less exploitable than a password. Assuming the keypad would also be coded in the same XML/scripting interface, someone could just open up the code the the keypad and write a bot that spams it with all 8999 (?) number combinations.

• Galatea · 12/03/06, 6:58 PM

Originally Posted by Trashe

Originally Posted by Praetorian

4) For added security, the way you have to type "DELETE" to junk a blue or better, let the guildmaster set a password that has to be typed in order to access the guild bank, once per access session. (If you really want security here, make it a virtual keypad that pops up.) Now the guild is only vulnerable to betrayal from within, rather than one random officer getting keylogged.

I don't see how a keypad for a pin code would be any less exploitable than a password. Assuming the keypad would also be coded in the same XML/scripting interface, someone could just open up the code the the keypad and write a bot that spams it with all 8999 (?) number combinations.

You handle that the exact same way you deal with it on any server password interaction. You limit the speed of entry. The first time is instant, then the next few are rate limited to one try a second, then it slows down to one try a minute, or locks out the person from the guild bank entirely. It is all done on the server side, so the fact it might be scriptable is not a big deal.

My big issue is with click logging. If you can key log, you can also log the position of the window, and the clicks, and calculate the window relative clicks. Since WoW internal windows are not real OS windows they could solve that by putting it at a random location, and ordering the buttons in a random order.

Sorrowheart · 12/03/06, 7:27 PM

Most of the "really secure" door locks that use keypads randomize the numbers every time you press the button enter a sequence anyways, so it might take a little bit for "Joe Random User" to get used to a keypad that changes number locations, but if they have to click it anyways, it's not as big of a deal. I do like the idea though. Anything that helps prevent against keyloggers is good.

Eugorym · 12/03/06, 7:52 PM

Originally Posted by Trashe

Originally Posted by Praetorian

4) For added security, the way you have to type "DELETE" to junk a blue or better, let the guildmaster set a password that has to be typed in order to access the guild bank, once per access session. (If you really want security here, make it a virtual keypad that pops up.) Now the guild is only vulnerable to betrayal from within, rather than one random officer getting keylogged.

I don't see how a keypad for a pin code would be any less exploitable than a password. Assuming the keypad would also be coded in the same XML/scripting interface, someone could just open up the code the the keypad and write a bot that spams it with all 8999 (?) number combinations.

That would take significant time to go through all permutations and hopefully after 4 or 5 wrong guesses it would lock out for a while.

CrazyGamer · 12/03/06, 8:27 PM

A few other things I would like to see:

Separate areas of access:
It would be nice to designate consumable access for some and armor scrap access for others. Not a big deal in any of our guilds I guess but could help with the trust issues in a recent guild and reduce the potential customer service work Blizzard would have to do by not having to give someone access to all the gold and raid materials if you want him to distribute potions before a raid.
Even better if you could assign lists for each area and items on those lists would go to their respective areas if there would be room (and otherwise to the misc. area if there would be room there).

Ignoring "unique":
This tag should have no feature on a guild bank.

Increased stacks:
It makes sense to restrict the amount of potions a player can carry. For banks though, wouldn't it be better for Blizzard to let them stack hundreds in individual slots than spread them in 40 separate slots?

Crafting:
It would be a major reduction of timesinks in guild management if crafters could use materials in the guild bank to craft items which would then appear in the guild bank. Ideally the crafting time would be removed or greatly reduced so you could swiftly convert extreme volumes of materials into the proper potions.