World of Warcraft Duping Bug Found
Over the course of this morning several people have sent me tidbits talking about an exploit on WoW that allows duping of items. Apparently forum posts are being removed on official channels, but there are a few places where you can learn about the exploit and see
screenshot evidence. In equally exciting news, my Rogue on Azjol-nerub is probably 2 hours away from 60 and since Blizzard will undoubtedly fix this bug soon, I'll have to finance my epic mount the old fashioned way!
in the event that thread is closed or dead: http://www.firepacket.net/wowdupe.html BTW, what happened to that "unique id" that each item had that prevented anyone from ever having two of them?
Ultima Online had this problem... a lot.
...
... ;)
It really killed the gold market, everything was incredibly inflated because people would dupe 10 million gold checks (which are what they sound like, just a marker for 10 million gold)
It's not always trackable if you move it into items... trade it away, buy stuff from stores then resell it... it's like virtual money laundering...
Though that all depends on if/how WoW tracks gold, perhaps they've made improvements over UO (as UO is rather old)
MoM++ - A Classic Expanded - [Master of Magic 1.5]
http://mompp.sourceforge.net/
Blizzard absolutely has something like this going on. When they first started cracking down on gold buyers, there were some instances where guild "treasurers" were mistakenly banned because they had insane amounts of gold they were holding for their guild.
People are going crazy over this, but I don't think it's the end of the world. I wonder if a rollback is even necessary. If a character is exploiting this for massive gain, it'll be pretty easy to catch them in the act; either their selling 15 copies of [UberPurpleSword] or they've gone from like 50 to 5000 gold in 6 hours. Those characters that get in under the radar or just exploit it for minimal gain aren't really going to hurt the economy that much. Fine, maybe some characters get a lot of gold or a lot of good items, but so what? The gold will eventually be spent one way or the other, and Soulbound ensures that eventually all the items will become worthless as well.
Everybody's too busy looking for mirrored instructions.
Here are some while they last...
Tutorial: (WoW) World of Warcraft Duping Bug and Cheat
Who knows what will happen to all this gold tomorrow?
Every server also went down for maintenance this morning
It's Tuesday. Every server goes down for maintenance from 9 AM ET to 3 PM ET every Tuesday. Your other question (about how long it'll take to fix) is valid, but the downtime here is planned, expected downtime. If it's not up by 6 PM ET tonight, then I'll start to worry.
RW
The linked screenshot is plainly edited to show multiple copies of the same item: the texturing behind each Krol Blade item line is identical and there is a cut line horizontally between each one, whereas normally the item line is transparent and the auction window texture should be seamless & varied behind the items.
This doesn't confirm the existence of the bug either way.
Additionally, Blizzard has extended their normal Tuesday maintenance to investigate the duping claims.
Live simply, that others may simply live. -Gandhi
I threw it into PS and adjusted the levels real quick to see for myself and its clearly a cut and past job. Here are my results side by side with a screenshot I took... Enjoy! http://homepage.mac.com/murdockscott/otherimages/d upeFake.jpg
Doc.
Actually, the most convincing evidence is that if you log into the game and crank up the gamma, and then crank the gamma on the linked image, you can see that in-game, the background pattern doesn't repeat (at least, not seven or eight times in the window vertically), and the long boxes for each item don't overwrite what's there before - instead, they tint it darker, so even the background inside each item box should be different.
It's clearly not that way in the linked image, so it's decidedly a fake.
That doesn't mean that the problem does or doesn't exist, though.