Why don't' you guys just implement a server-side limit of X searches a minute per acct? That'd fix the problem as well as the bans, no?
We already have this. 429 is the HTTP response code returned when you have been limited.
The handful of accounts that we have locked have been making requests regardless leading to a waste of resources on both ends.
I captured any HTTPS requests that overlay was doing - it includes POESESSID. The one thing I don't understand is how did GGG determine that it's specifically overlay? My best guess is the User-Agent, since its specifically stating that its Chrome running on Linux under X11... but there's no direct thing that just states "hello GGG trade site, this is PoE Overlay". Maybe the millions of requests from those specific individuals is using the same exact User-Agent (to hide botting activity and scapegoat Overlay? oh boy, conspiracies!)
As for testing the tool responding to 429, a very brief and uncontrolled test made Overlay actually just sit there and indefinietely display the "Searching..." box without any other requests after the initial POST to the API. After trying to price check multiple items, Overlay just flat out doesn't make an attempt. Again, the test was just a brief one using Fiddler's AutoResponder and an auto-respond 429 with a Retry-After of 5.
edit/update: I manually triggered 429 by just spamming price check on random items in a dump tab - Overlay correctly reports that you're being rate limited, though any previous price checks that succeeded in the /trade/search phase will still attempt to do the /trade/fetch request (and, as one would expect by now, fail at it). Though, it does not re-attempt any of these requests as far as I can tell.
edit2: Looked at Overlay's source for the User-Agent thing - it's randomly generated, just so happened that the run I tried it on I got X11/Linux/Chrome... Either way, the point still stands: How is GGG detecting that these API requests are coming from Overlay specifically?
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We really don't condone tools obfuscating their user agent... I'm glad to see that the author of this particular tool has removed this in their most recent update.
I believe it was hitting our API a few million times a day. The tool's author will need to look into it. I don't have any more information.
As a follow up to this:
On the 28th we got 6.7 million requests from poe-overlay in total.
6.1 million of those returned 429 (rate-limited).
5.9 million of those rate-limited requests were from 3 unique accounts.
EDIT: It's been pointed out to me that some versions of poe-overlay obfuscates it's user agent which definitely would throw the total numbers off. Obfuscating your user agent is definitely not something we condone any third party doing.
Does this mean that using the rate limit of the trade website to the fullest extent is now a bannable/lockable offence /u/Novynn ?
No, we only consider failed requests (anything in the HTTP ~400 range) when scanning for bad actors. If you're not generating millions of 429's (which is what this tool is sometimes doing) then you're fine.
" Pagan_Rage wrote: I'm having this issue as well. My Primitive Chaotic Resonators are not showing up. It seems all of my others items are listed, so odd that these are not. Please help.You need to use the ratio format as described here.
" Makobus wrote: Didn't work for me either.They all appear to be listed.https://www.pathofexile.com/trade/search/Standard/LO3dEvYFn
Some items in the same stash tab are listed, some not.
We are actively investigating this problem.
People said that maybe they just pay premium for trade servers for a month when the league starts and downgrade it after that period.
This makes sense because the issues started EXACTLY the day after 1 month into the league.
We haven't downscaled the website servers in a long time.
Don't they usually hide new items until the first ones are listed. To not spoil them for people who didn't read spoilers/data mines? At least I thought/always felt like they did this.
This is correct. However in this case since they've been announced we can probably just add it.
Will the 'HasInfluence'-condition apply for all influence types?
I.e. HasInfluence Shaper Elder (Veiled?) (Fractured?) (Synthesised?) (Corrupted?) etc.
Those aren't influences.
So, to specify an item that has no influence i do this:
ShaperItem False ElderItem False CrusaderItem False RedeemerItem False HunterItem False WarlordItem False?
There is currently no way to specify an item should have no influence.
While you are here, there is a bug with "Quest Items" class. If I put it with other classes, it doesn't work. If I use it alone, then it does. Also IIRC someone mentioned before that there was gonna be a way to define exact match rules. Is it added or will it be? Thanks!
I'm not sure on the Quest Items thing sorry.
The exact match is what the == is for and it should also be usable on item classes. It was added a little while back.
what about the opposite? to pick any item that does not have any influence can i write
HasInfluence False
It can only match the true case.
Will this also work to cover all influenses?
HasInfluence "r"
No you'll have to write them all out. Each Influence is a single match unlike the BaseType rule.