Talk:Patch 4.1.0 (undocumented changes)

Authentication frame

I doubt whether the change of the login procedure with the Authenticator (Patch_4.1.0_(undocumented_changes)#Possible_bugs) is a bug. It now shows the same behaviour as when you log into the forums or on Battle.net. First you must type the e-mail address and your password. When these are correct the Authenticator frame is shown if you have an Authenticator attached to your Battle.net account. It is the case with Battle.net and the forums, and since this patch it is also the case now with the WoW Client. Hans Kamp (talk) 04:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It's a bug because Blizzard said so. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

That behavior also already existed in 4.0.6. If you loaded the game for the very first time, the authenticator box would not be there. If you then logged in with an authenticator and checked the "Remember My Account" box, the authenticator box would be added directly to the login page for all subsequent login attempts. -Valana (talk) 06:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

That behavior has always been the case, yes. In 4.1.0, however, the authenticator box is ALWAYS absent until you enter your password and login. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 07:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your point being? I was providing more information as to why it's clearly a bug, since the 4.1.0 behavior is not something new that suddenly matches everything else. -Valana (talk) 07:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I misunderstood. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 07:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

...And now they've gone back on that and said it was an intentional change. Blah. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 04:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Cooking & Fishing daily

Right now it says "The new Cooking and Fishing dailies in Darnassus, Ironforge, Thunder Bluff and Undercity are exclusive with the ones in Orgrimmar and Stormwind and each other, respectively. You can only complete one Cooking and one Fishing daily a day." This is simply not true. I have verified personally that you can complete the Dalaran and Shattrath cooking and fishing dailies in addition to one (and only one) from the capital cities. But every time I try to put in that clarification, it gets reverted by Nathanyel. Nathanyel, I get what you're saying that "the BC and WotLK are not related" but the current line is totally misleading. What's wrong with fixing it to be explicit? Bregdark (talk) 19:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Dalaran and Shattrah dailies are outdated content which doesn't give any current reward, especially it doesn't give any skill increase. So at the moment you can only complete one current fishing/cooking daily. The way it's currently in this article is more explicit than what Blizzard's patch notes are (which are giving unfulfilled hopes), but is still somewhat misleading because it doesn't explicitly tell people that they can forget their hopes that the new dailies in IF/DS/TB/UC are additionally doable skill-increasing dailies. Mars85 (talk)

The Dalaran and Shattrath dailies aren't relevant content anymore, and haven't been for months/years. Besides, they never were exclusive with the Orgrimmar and Stormwind ones. Lastly, the statement may be misleading if taken completely out of context, but that's what context is for, and it's already set by the preceding sentence. -Valana (talk) 19:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the current version, "You can only complete one racial city Cooking and Fishing daily per day." is too confusing. It's like it's trying to say the BC/Wrath dailies aren't included in this exclusion by not mentioning them at all. I don't understand why stating the old dailies are still exclusive with the new ones is a problem, relevant content or not. Dr. Cheis (talk) 03:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Dr. Cheis. In particular, the Dalaran fishing daily is VERY relevant -- it offers the same guild XP and guild rep that the Cata fishing dailies do, and can drop the rare fishing rods and pet and other rewards of interest to level 85 characters. I'd rather we took out the sentence entirely than be as misleading as we are currently. Bregdark (talk) 21:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Removal of /transform Theories

• Worgen characters can no longer change from one form to another using /transform, and the CanTransform() API call has been removed for reasons unknown.

I have a confession to make. I was the one who made this happen. In theory, anyway! Here's what happened:

Prior to Patch 4.0.6, there was no way to see what your human side would look like if you got a haircut because, as a worgen in human form, you couldn't use the Barbershop chairs. However, if you sat down in worgen form and used /transform, you could alter your hair style on your human side just fine! With one exception. If you tried to scroll through the hair styles and hit the loop point -- the point in which it goes from the first to the last or the last to the first hair style -- the game would crash. Period. This didn't happen in worgen form, but would always happen in human form.

With the addition of a "human styles" window to the Barbershop GUI in Patch 4.0.6, this method of changing your hair style was outdated. However, it could still be used, and still caused the game client to crash. Then lo and behold, Patch 4.1.0 completely removed the ability to use the /transform command and even went as far as to remove the API call so Addons wouldn't be able to use the routine!

And that's why I think they removed that command and API call. No more barbershop transformations. Moreover, since people are forced to use [Two Forms] now, people can't transform while stealthed, eating, sitting, or on a number of other occasions. Which, in retrospect, might be the actual reason they removed that ability... But still, I can't help but think it's more than a coincidence. User:Doc Lithius/realsig 15:17, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Open All (Bank) Bags change

• The open all bags bind no longer works with bank bags.

Yes and no. When you initially open the bank, all your inventory bags open with the bankframe. a subsequent "open all bags" action is required to then open all the bank bags as well. This sequence also holds if all bags are closed while the bankframe is open.
no bags → inventory bags → inventory & bank bags
(speculation: this sequence may be being maintained in a state variable somewhere within the containerframe code, possibly even updateContainerFrameAnchors, which handles the columnization of bag containerframes, but until I can figure out how to get my client to dump the latest FrameXML, I really do not know what is causing this admittedly different and strange behaviour.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Corwin MacGregor (talk · contr).

Are you sure this wasn't some addon doing this for you? I'd have to check it, but I remember that Shift+B did not open the bank bags for me. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 08:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not running any mods, and I'm experiencing the same behavior as Corwin. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 08:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

EU login servers busy >_< Well, in dubio pro re ~ Nathanyel (talk) 08:56, 6 May 2011 (UTC)