These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

i hate stacks

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#21 - 2012-06-21 17:04:29 UTC
Spliting of stacks can be made easier. The question is what type of interface do you want to have when we gain that feature and how to leave drag item, stack needs to be split, approve split fuctioning intact or improved.
Lets give some constructive feedback shell weTwisted

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
NextDarkKnight
Storm Chasers.
Pandemic Horde
#22 - 2012-06-21 17:18:22 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:


Can't be done. A BPC is by definition a singleton. A singleton is a unique item that is tracked individually. 2 BPCs with the same meta data are still considered to be apples and oranges as far as the database is concerned as they are unique, even though they look the same. Stacking removes all meta data (research, number of runs, etc) and would effectively turn it into a blank BPO.



A new Container called a "Paper Clip" needs to be created. It can only contain items that have the exact same attributes.

When the first item is moved into the Paper Clip Object it should
"Copy the attributes to the Paper Clip" so when you show info on the paper clip it can show it attributes of the BPCs it contains plus a item count.

Each additional item copied into it should check if the attributes match and if they do they can be added into the container else a error message is displayed.

Paper clips should be allowed to be put into containers.

The end user (The Player) will just see a paper clip and the item name will be "(Clipped) - Fury Heavy Missiles BPCs x100"

Show Info will display the Runs remaining for the clicked items, research, etc etc etc. since all of them are exactly the same.

I can't wait for something like this so I can manage all my extra BPCs I have.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#23 - 2012-06-21 17:20:56 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
CCP Explorer wrote:
Hershman wrote:
The whole process of repackaging, splitting and stacking is one of the most tedious and redundant inhibitors of fluent gameplay immersion. If its not damaged, why not automatically repackage? Better yet, throw out stacking/repackaging and simply create a 'damaged' label that will prevent items from being sold or automatically stacked until the item is repaired.
Assembled items ('singletons') have metadata associated with them, such as name, damage, efficiency, and can be the parent locations for other items.



This doesn't explain why bpc can't be stack. It's another painful annoying little thing when you have hundreds of bpc.

How hard it is to code change this?


Can't be done. A BPC is by definition a singleton. A singleton is a unique item that is tracked individually. 2 BPCs with the same meta data are still considered to be apples and oranges as far as the database is concerned as they are unique, even though they look the same. Stacking removes all meta data (research, number of runs, etc) and would effectively turn it into a blank BPO.

Look at it this way: an assembled item is unique. It is not just a box, it is this particular box. A stack is an item type. It is a type of box that I have X number of and I am not interested which of these boxes is any particular box. I can give the singleton box a name, it can be damaged, I can put something in the box, I can upgrade the box, etc. If I would stack it with other boxes it will need to be the exact same thing as the other boxes and thus cannot have any other parameters that those other boxes do not have.

Now, if I have 2 boxes that I both give a name, they are both unique. They may look the same and behave the same, but they are still 2 separate entities; even if I give them the same name. BPCs are like this. They are unique items that simply happen to look alike, but are not the exact same thing.



Thanks for your explanation, this makes it a lot clear for me from now on. I'll keep dealing wiz it but now I'll do it differently because I understand some "stuff".

Thx

brb
Circumstantial Evidence
#24 - 2012-06-21 17:21:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Circumstantial Evidence
Can you create the illusion of stacking BPC's for us?
How about Grouping all BPC's of the same type, a virtual container?

Edit: missed NextDarkKnight's post. +1
Hershman
Creepers Corporation
#25 - 2012-06-21 17:46:33 UTC
updated first post...



  • there should be a label that indicates "singletons" (assembled, damaged, bpc, bpo, etc.)

  • It can be simply different colored text, or a visual cue a la Tech 3 items

  • all other items (not singletons) should be automatically stacked when transferred or generated in a single location

  • an option to use the old way of stacking crap randomly just because everyones happy cuz options yo...

I play EVE every day! Follow me at http://www.twitch.tv/matthershman
Hershman
Creepers Corporation
#26 - 2012-06-21 17:56:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Hershman
Also as i mention before the organization of singletons is an issue... but not what I intended the topic to address.

However, these ideas like the 'paper clip' container are all very cool and I am open to more discussion




P.S. @ CCP Dev that may be interested in the immersion of new players to Eve... When I started playing two years ago these convoluted ladders of item structure were a deterrent of my greenhorn capsuleer experiences and caused me mucho headaches along the way. The little things add up... especially if you dont know what the heck is going on

I play EVE every day! Follow me at http://www.twitch.tv/matthershman
Noriko Satomi
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-06-21 18:34:21 UTC
Hershman wrote:
updated first post...

  • there should be a label that indicates "singletons" (assembled, damaged, bpc, bpo, etc.)

  • It can be simply different colored text, or a visual cue a la Tech 3 items
  • ...

There already is a visual difference, the absence of a quantity marker. Mark-free == singleton.

It's like asking for blank pages to contain a label saying they are blank pages.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#28 - 2012-06-21 18:46:04 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:


Can't be done. A BPC is by definition a singleton. A singleton is a unique item that is tracked individually. 2 BPCs with the same meta data are still considered to be apples and oranges as far as the database is concerned as they are unique, even though they look the same. Stacking removes all meta data (research, number of runs, etc) and would effectively turn it into a blank BPO.

........


Unless you attached the same meta data to stacks, then allow all items that are both the same item and have the same meta data to be stacked.

In other words, get rid of all the oranges in the data base. Have everything be apples, and if they are the same apples, they can be stacked.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Hershman
Creepers Corporation
#29 - 2012-06-21 19:01:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Hershman
Noriko Satomi wrote:
Hershman wrote:
updated first post...

  • there should be a label that indicates "singletons" (assembled, damaged, bpc, bpo, etc.)

  • It can be simply different colored text, or a visual cue a la Tech 3 items
  • ...

There already is a visual difference, the absence of a quantity marker. Mark-free == singleton.

It's like asking for blank pages to contain a label saying they are blank pages.


And thats like asking a 6 year old to spot the inequality in a trigonometric function. Try explaining that quantity numbers also mean its not a singleton to a brand new capsuleer. Everybody here knows that basic principle because we've learned how to 'get by' in Eve. You are spouting useless information and endorsing ignorance my friend, and it doesnt sit well for me.

Also your analogy of singletons to blank pages is bullshit. Singletons contain additional data so they are the opposite of a 'blank page.'

I play EVE every day! Follow me at http://www.twitch.tv/matthershman
Raphael Celestine
Celestine Inc.
#30 - 2012-06-21 19:29:26 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:


Can't be done. A BPC is by definition a singleton. A singleton is a unique item that is tracked individually. 2 BPCs with the same meta data are still considered to be apples and oranges as far as the database is concerned as they are unique, even though they look the same. Stacking removes all meta data (research, number of runs, etc) and would effectively turn it into a blank BPO.

........


Unless you attached the same meta data to stacks, then allow all items that are both the same item and have the same meta data to be stacked.

In other words, get rid of all the oranges in the data base. Have everything be apples, and if they are the same apples, they can be stacked.

This would almost certainly wreck their databases.

Obviously I haven't seen the source code, but I strongly suspect that the packaged, stacked items are kept in a database with all of the details of the item 'stored' by just marking down the name and number. Attaching meta-data to that would mean that every single item in every hangar in the whole game has to be stored by recording the entire property list for said item, and therefore force CCP to buy a whole pile of new servers just to hold all that new data.
Savage Angel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-06-21 20:01:56 UTC
Think of it this way:

If you have a stack of paper cups, you can treat them as a stack of identical cups. Now, if you have 6 cups in a row and pee in one, I'm guessing you would not want to treat them as identical anymore.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#32 - 2012-06-21 20:06:25 UTC
Savage Angel wrote:
Think of it this way:

If you have a stack of paper cups, you can treat them as a stack of identical cups. Now, if you have 6 cups in a row and pee in one, I'm guessing you would not want to treat them as identical anymore.

Interesting analogy...
Skogen Gump
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2012-06-21 20:37:15 UTC
NextDarkKnight wrote:



A new Container called a "Paper Clip" needs to be created. It can only contain items that have the exact same attributes.

When the first item is moved into the Paper Clip Object it should
"Copy the attributes to the Paper Clip" so when you show info on the paper clip it can show it attributes of the BPCs it contains plus a item count.

Each additional item copied into it should check if the attributes match and if they do they can be added into the container else a error message is displayed.

Paper clips should be allowed to be put into containers.

The end user (The Player) will just see a paper clip and the item name will be "(Clipped) - Fury Heavy Missiles BPCs x100"

Show Info will display the Runs remaining for the clicked items, research, etc etc etc. since all of them are exactly the same.

I can't wait for something like this so I can manage all my extra BPCs I have.


In principle this *sounds* great but from a Database perspective, it's a massive PITA.

The reason being is that the container doesn't actually exist, it's a virtual group, not a partition of data if you will.
The only way to *populate* the container is to select extensively from the database where the metadata values match and for the sake of common normalisation and the kind of data that EVE has to keep, there is likely no good index for this stuff.

That means it's exactly the kind of thing that CCP have been trying to avoid!
Anna Shoul
#34 - 2012-06-22 08:22:53 UTC
Skogen Gump wrote:
The reason being is that the container doesn't actually exist, it's a virtual group, not a partition of data if you will.
The only way to *populate* the container is to select extensively from the database where the metadata values match and for the sake of common normalisation and the kind of data that EVE has to keep, there is likely no good index for this stuff.

That means it's exactly the kind of thing that CCP have been trying to avoid!

It might be feasible to do it completely clientside, though, without altering the database workings at all, just like bookmark folders were previously clientside entities and had metadata assigned to them after being received from the server. (I'm not sure when they stopped, but I think that happened with the introduction of corporation bookmarks) Such "paper clips" would then be created and managed by the client after receiving the entire batch of item data from the server, as lists of singleton unique IDs, and it would be the client's responsibility to doublecheck if the BPCs can still be grouped under one pseudo-container paperclip.

The only serious hurdle there would be the fact that to do this sort of grouping the client would need the metadata on every BPC before grouping them, and as far as I can see, getting the metadata on a singleton item requires a separate database call which doesn't happen immediately. These would have to be done often or cached aggressively.
Hershman
Creepers Corporation
#35 - 2012-06-24 03:47:47 UTC
bump

I play EVE every day! Follow me at http://www.twitch.tv/matthershman
Shameless Avenger
Can Preachers of Kador
#36 - 2012-06-24 23:32:26 UTC
Aulx-Gao Ekanon wrote:
Hershman wrote:
(a billion jumps)

You have wone EvE.


There's a movie by The Killer8 that explains how to move around without jumping around. Unfortunately, I would get forum spanked if I provide linky. One tip tho: You might loose your implants using that system.

"This is the Ninja. He will scan you down; he will salvage your wrecks and there shall be no aggro"
CCP Explorer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#37 - 2012-06-25 00:15:23 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Explorer
Raphael Celestine wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:


Can't be done. A BPC is by definition a singleton. A singleton is a unique item that is tracked individually. 2 BPCs with the same meta data are still considered to be apples and oranges as far as the database is concerned as they are unique, even though they look the same. Stacking removes all meta data (research, number of runs, etc) and would effectively turn it into a blank BPO.

........
Unless you attached the same meta data to stacks, then allow all items that are both the same item and have the same meta data to be stacked.

In other words, get rid of all the oranges in the data base. Have everything be apples, and if they are the same apples, they can be stacked.
This would almost certainly wreck their databases.

Obviously I haven't seen the source code, but I strongly suspect that the packaged, stacked items are kept in a database with all of the details of the item 'stored' by just marking down the name and number. Attaching meta-data to that would mean that every single item in every hangar in the whole game has to be stored by recording the entire property list for said item, and therefore force CCP to buy a whole pile of new servers just to hold all that new data.
We store non-singleton items / stacks simply as the type ID and quantity and track no metadata. By definition then an item can't have quantity 0 and then we store singleton items using negative quantities: Quantity of -1 is the most common and is simply a normal singleton item, including singleton BPOs, -2 is singleton BPCs. See this dev blog for more details. All metadata associated with singleton items is stored in side-tables off the main inventory table. A lot of this DB logic is then hidden from the client and server code using views and virtual columns.

Now, this doesn't preclude the client from presenting BPs in some other manner; e.g., through some BP Manager or through views or filters in the Unified Inventory. What ideas could you guys come up with in that regard?

Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @CCP_Explorer
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
#38 - 2012-06-25 00:44:24 UTC
Read thread.

Head hurts.

Going for a lie down.

I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg

CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#39 - 2012-06-25 07:19:07 UTC
CCP Explorer wrote:
We store non-singleton items / stacks simply as the type ID and quantity and track no metadata. By definition then an item can't have quantity 0 and then we store singleton items using negative quantities: Quantity of -1 is the most common and is simply a normal singleton item, including singleton BPOs, -2 is singleton BPCs. See this dev blog for more details. All metadata associated with singleton items is stored in side-tables off the main inventory table. A lot of this DB logic is then hidden from the client and server code using views and virtual columns.

Now, this doesn't preclude the client from presenting BPs in some other manner; e.g., through some BP Manager or through views or filters in the Unified Inventory. What ideas could you guys come up with in that regard?


Would it be possible (performance-wise) to just automagically repack and stack everything that is put in the item hangar? It is quite annoying to have to do ctrl-a, repack, stack, all the time. Now that we have filters, there should be no need for the precious sorting containers

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#40 - 2012-06-25 07:30:59 UTC
Well, I just had to think of those ealry computer role playing games, early nineties, when they first introduced the keyring. This small item changed everything, keys have been clogging your inventory before to a point that it was no longer possible to find anything, and suddenly all was well aranged again.
What about some kind of keyring for BPs- just a client side virtual folder where all the BPs are shown and where you can arrange them via various filter options?

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.