Just read a post on qhcf that I think is fairly true, both from my experiences as a goodie and as an evil.

Lowbie good chars often end up with lots of gear that must have been requested, in practice, but they aren't able to request it.

Request was not supposed to be used to pass on gear to lowbies bit this happens a lot.

At what point will anything be done to address this?

Could I suggest that when an item is requested it gets a flag that means it can only be used by that character or those who killed them?

Alternatively give characters a small number of requests per death they suffer, so that using request for another comes at a cost?

I've played four Fortress characters in the past 24 months. On not one of them has what you described happened directly, nor have I done it. As an example of what HAS happened to me, a group of heros took my newbie ass to Kuo Toa lair and showed me the trapped party there, thinking I'd be able to ask for some things but found I was too low for them. I came away empty handed but with motivation to level and a place to regear.

I definitely put things in the chest if I find an upgrade two days or a week later without any guilt for it, from what Baer has said below I'm not seeing a problem with that. Specific to low level decked out characters - I had a 50 damroll at level 20 recently, not because of any impropriety but because when the character who had these things deleted, he put them in the chest before going. I've also received defiance and bal'talon(below level 40)this way though neither would fall under this request complaint.

That said for most part I see low level imperials decked out pretty often as well. I think this reflects more the lower player base to item availability than misconduct on anyone's part.

or be sac'd by the requester

**edit, by that I mean the requester should physically return it and give it to the mob

I know when I've been to kuo toa to get something specific, I have picked up the odd extra to give out, in the past.

I have also been handed stuff that apparently was gained in the same way.

You can tell me it doesn't go on, but I know it does. Putting in an "ownership" flag wouldn't hurt anyone if it doesn't go on.

As far as parity goes, I know the same works both ways, but it is less common with evil and more to the point, the request helpfile tells you not to request stuff for others.

I can't help wonder if there are "gaps" in the data checks. (e.g. maybe stuff shoved in pit doesn't get checked, or stuff carried for more than x hours doesn't get checked?). Both of these things are still possible where items are requested and then passed along.

I have, for example, had heartseeker on a paladin of mine because of all the muters that kept paralyzing me. When I saw a character it was more suited to, I passed it on. The change I am proposing stops that so that basically you pass stuff back to the mob (or sac it) when you are done with it, and someone of higher level can request it.

If I see I request --> immediate give, I will step in and say something. Most of this stuff goes under the radar, though, unless I am actively watching one of the characters.

>Could I suggest that when an item is requested it gets a flag
>that means it can only be used by that character or those who
>killed them?

I think an ownership flag on requested items would be a good idea. I also like making a requested item rot_death. I am not a coder, though, so have no idea how much work that would be.

>Alternatively give characters a small number of requests per
>death they suffer, so that using request for another comes at
>a cost?

This also seems like a viable solution.

Due to recent complaints I did some research about the current state of things and the "problem" scenario basically is not occuring.

What I am seeing a lot of currently is this scenario:

1. Fort dude requests a piece of gear
2. Fort dude dies and the gear is looted
3. Later, the looter dies to someone else in Fort who loots it back
4. 2nd Fort guy either uses the gear or gives it away.


I don't see anything that makes sense to change at this point.

Sorry just made me think of Slim Shady for a moment.

PS I would believe this if I didn't just play Fort (well, 2 years ago, but still). I gave away a lot of pimp gear to lowbie Fort guys.

Edited to add: And yes, some of it was requested. Honestly, I never even thought about that type of stuff when I played Laesron. And honestly, it doesn't totally bother me now but at the same time, you get pissed when Fortress has numbers, out of range support, AND pimp gear. Like, could it be only 2 of 3 (specifically, healers saving people's lives who should be dead).

Sure, but a certain amount of that happens everywhere. Even my Scions get fed limit 1-2 stuff without fail.

But I also kill a lot more and get better gear that way too.

As I said, I don't mind the decked lowbie Fort dudes (because hey, PK them and lootzors) but it sucks when they are decked on top of rolling 5 deep with Hero Healer support.

If I see this happening I will point people to the help file as a warning and make a note. If it keeps happening, there are things we can do to address it.

The gray issue for me is request for some vs requested something, used it, no longer need it, probably don't even remember that you requested it in the first place, and either put it in the chest at the Fort or passed it to someone else. This I don't have a big problem with, though I can understand why others might.

On a level 16 thief that is soon-to-be Marshall? That seems pretty egregious.

It's that trickle-down effect that skews things pretty badly. Request a nice hero ring, get something better, put the requested piece in the pit for someone else...after a few days that someone else is rocking pretty hardcore.

I dunno, I admit I'm biased (not against you any) against the players who play Fort these days. Ever since Warlock went away it's just been one big self-serving hug and that snow ball gets real big, real fast.

It's one of the specific items I looked at that fell into the scenario I described.

Ironically if people who killed goods sacced this kind of stuff, this couldn't happen, but people think "if I sac this they'll just request it again" and so hold on to a good piece of gear they can't use until they die in turn.

I'll turn down the burner on my irritation pot.

It's not like goodies haven't done the same thing with evil gear.

And honestly, I don't mind if someone kills me and loots the Heartseeker back (or, in Resdrenn's case, waiting at my pit to recall so he could steal it haha). But at the same time, I'm not a big gear saccer so yeah.

I think all of that is totally fine.

It's just funny to me when a situation like that turns into someone complaining "omg someonr requested Heartseeker and gave it to a lowbie." I investigated a bunch of complaints recently and they were all some variant of that scenario.

....show it to some higher ranked dark-elves in Empire and ask them what I should do with it.

I don't mind Heartseeker unless Magus is wielding two of them and I'm a level 33 dark-elf Village App.

Now Defiance/Hummingbird Pendants on the other hand................................................................

Tiny iron dagger?

EDIT: Ok, my reading comprehension sucks. Disregard my post.

nt