Allow ownership of Large Magical Chests to be transferred

[Daolin 894]

Anyone buying items from the shop know how they work, not being happy with something after a purchase is not the devs faults.

 

-1 

 

Far more important bugs and such for devs to work on than something so trivial.

[Rosie 229]

Anyone buying items from the shop know how they work, not being happy with something after a purchase is not the devs faults.

 

-1 

 

Far more important bugs and such for devs to work on than something so trivial.

 

It's a simple fix. Saying there are more important bugs doesn't make this any less of an issue.

Also it wasn't bought from the shop... it was bought from a player. Anything else bought from players can have the ownership transferred - boats, wagons, carts, writs, even accounts. Why should this be any different?

[Klaa 4,872]

Meh someone buys something, they should be able to trade it at a later date. It might even encourage more moneysink purchases after someone trying it out at a lower price and lifespan.

[Rosie 229]

Meh someone buys something, they should be able to trade it at a later date. It might even encourage more moneysink purchases after someone trying it out at a lower price and lifespan.

+1 c:

[Daolin 894]

It ain't a bug, you knew it couldn't be transferred when you bought it.

Dragging resources away from bug fixes to develop such a change when it's really not that important, well that's just silly

[Wurmhole 3,650]

+1 and all good ideas are good ideas, regardless of how many bugs there are to fix.  I don't recall the OP suggesting this take priority over all other development or bug fixes   You never know when a dev is fixing other code that is similar and says "hmm, in 3 seconds, I can also add in the LMC fix". Presto.

[Klaa 4,872]

Not to mention the advantages of a team of devs, especially when they are assigned separate areas of responsibility.

[Rosie 229]

It ain't a bug, you knew it couldn't be transferred when you bought it.

Dragging resources away from bug fixes to develop such a change when it's really not that important, well that's just silly

 

Actually before I bought it we hadn't tried. I thought that loading it into a cart and unloading would transfer ownership, but it didn't. At this point I submitted a bug report since I wasn't aware of any other items this applied to and the was told to submit a suggestion as it would be a good idea and they would back me up with it. 

 

The purpose of this topic isn't to tell the devs in what order they should prioritize fixing things, it's to bring to attention the fact that this is an issue.

It's a simple fix, why is it you have such a problem with it? Is it purely because we're "enemies"? Cause if so that's the only silly thing I see here.

[Vroomfondel 1,128]

Absolutely senseless to have an item that can't be resold or transferred, as everything else can.  And to those that complain that the bug fixes should be done first, think about it for a minute.  The bugs are obviously not a simple matter to fix, else it would have been done already.  That does not make it necessary to stop fixing the little things that are easy to correct.  You are talking like nothing else should be done till all the bugs are fixed, which would mean nothing gets done for a long time.  Get some perspective, the game has to continue to evolve, even with the bugs.

[Rosie 229]

Absolutely senseless to have an item that can't be resold or transferred, as everything else can.  And to those that complain that the bug fixes should be done first, think about it for a minute.  The bugs are obviously not a simple matter to fix, else it would have been done already.  That does not make it necessary to stop fixing the little things that are easy to correct.  You are talking like nothing else should be done till all the bugs are fixed, which would mean nothing gets done for a long time.  Get some perspective, the game has to continue to evolve, even with the bugs.

 

+1 c:

[Rosie 229]

Bump

[kaidley 83]

After this watch Chaos cry cause their box's get stolen

[Rhianna 892]

+1

[Redd 4,281]

Apparently a new server is more important than simple coding like this which would make the game better.

Bump!

[Rosie 229]

After this watch Chaos cry cause their box's get stolen

 

I'm on Chaos c:

I'm suggesting an ownership -transfer-, not theft

[Rosie 229]

Bump

[Saddist 82]

So if I load a forge into a wagon, then allow my friend to unload it it becomes his forge.

Has anyone tried it with the magical chest?

[Saddist 82]

That is I the owner loads the magical chest and the new owner unloads it. Does it now belong to the new owner?

[Rosie 229]

So if I load a forge into a wagon, then allow my friend to unload it it becomes his forge.

Has anyone tried it with the magical chest?

 

 

This was the first thing I tried. It doesn't work

[Anarres 246]

+1, the current behavior sounds odd and unexpected. If someone bought it for s, how is it not okay to sell it 'for real'? This is like a permanent lending only.

 

It's a container, should behave like other containers - those that have 'owners' (and permissions) allow transfer to a new owner. Perhaps there aren't many of these chests (just guessing given the price), but even so, people come and go all the time, it's not helping to have more 'stuck' abandoned items, when they did mean to transfer them.

[Rosie 229]

bump ^^

[joedobo 1,187]

+1

[Rosie 229]

Bump

[Rosie 229]

Bump c:

[Rosie 229]

bump