These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Remove repacking?

Author
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#21 - 2014-11-26 05:02:35 UTC
Why? I believe if CCP is able to code or willing to change it this could just ease up some in-game life stuff.

like?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Areen Sassel
Dirac Angestun Gesept
#22 - 2014-11-26 05:12:18 UTC
Sigras wrote:
You have no idea how databases work do you? The "repackaged " status of items allows the server to treat each repackaged item as a basic object with the default values. This is why you cant repackage damaged items and why ships lose their name when you repackage and unpackage them.


Go the other way. When an item is undamaged and of a type (not a ship, etc) that can always be repackaged without consequences, it repackages any time it's placed in an item hangar. Hides most of the hassle (undamaged items can just be sold, stacked, etc) and keeps as much stuff as possible in the server-efficient state.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#23 - 2014-11-26 05:20:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Areen Sassel wrote:
Sigras wrote:
You have no idea how databases work do you? The "repackaged " status of items allows the server to treat each repackaged item as a basic object with the default values. This is why you cant repackage damaged items and why ships lose their name when you repackage and unpackage them.


Go the other way. When an item is undamaged and of a type (not a ship, etc) that can always be repackaged without consequences, it repackages any time it's placed in an item hangar. Hides most of the hassle (undamaged items can just be sold, stacked, etc) and keeps as much stuff as possible in the server-efficient state.


Or they could not. There's really no good reason to remove the option to have your stuff in an unpackaged state. In 99.9% of the time, it simply doesn't matter. It might be slightly more efficient overall if it were packed, but for your average player, it's like improving the gas mileage of your car by removing the hood ornament.


Soo..... people using the metric system. Do you use the term gas mileage or is there some metric equiv? Just total out of the blue question here, but I'm rather curious but too lazy to google it.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-11-26 11:30:45 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Areen Sassel wrote:
Sigras wrote:
You have no idea how databases work do you? The "repackaged " status of items allows the server to treat each repackaged item as a basic object with the default values. This is why you cant repackage damaged items and why ships lose their name when you repackage and unpackage them.


Go the other way. When an item is undamaged and of a type (not a ship, etc) that can always be repackaged without consequences, it repackages any time it's placed in an item hangar. Hides most of the hassle (undamaged items can just be sold, stacked, etc) and keeps as much stuff as possible in the server-efficient state.


Or they could not. There's really no good reason to remove the option to have your stuff in an unpackaged state. In 99.9% of the time, it simply doesn't matter. It might be slightly more efficient overall if it were packed, but for your average player, it's like improving the gas mileage of your car by removing the hood ornament.


Soo..... people using the metric system. Do you use the term gas mileage or is there some metric equiv? Just total out of the blue question here, but I'm rather curious but too lazy to google it.


Packaged item storage isn't about improving response times for the average player but for the server as a whole. Average player will have 1- several thousand of each item depending on what it is. Server side there are gazillions of items. Imagine if we suddenly had to store the details of each piece of ammunition instead of a reference to the standard object?

In answer to you 'gas' question here in the UK it's miles per gallon. And we use petrol and diesel, occasionally LPG and more rarely Kilowatt hours :D
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#25 - 2014-11-26 13:54:05 UTC
Amarisen Gream wrote:
Why? I believe if CCP is able to code or willing to change it this could just ease up some in-game life stuff.


Not only do I not see why this is needed I really cannot fathom how this change is supposed to "ease up some in-game life stuff". If anything this proposal would make life far more pointlessly awkward for just about everyone in New Eden.

Not supported.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

Areen Sassel
Dirac Angestun Gesept
#26 - 2014-11-26 15:51:47 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Or they could not. There's really no good reason to remove the option to have your stuff in an unpackaged state.


Imagine the corresponding opposite change; if it became necessary to unpack modules before fitting them, rather than the situation at present where that is done automatically. To unpack drones before launching them.

That would be maddening.

There's a like amount of irritation to be saved if modules go into the state where they can be sold and stacked automatically.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#27 - 2014-11-26 16:01:42 UTC
Anhenka wrote:

Soo..... people using the metric system. Do you use the term gas mileage or is there some metric equiv? Just total out of the blue question here, but I'm rather curious but too lazy to google it.



probably not much here since an American living in japan for quite a while but I I still use the term mileage but have bought gas by the liter for my car that reads km's and I use km's as a term for distance a lot. Not much help since some American terms die hard i know lol.

I do use metric for everything else which gets confusing on stateside visits. Why the US stays they way they do...no f'ing clue. Based on 10. none of the pint, quart, ounces pounds, etc crap based on fractions....life much easier.

I could ask the wife (japanese) but probably be bad to wake her up to ask an off the wall question like that lol.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#28 - 2014-11-26 16:17:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Areen Sassel wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
Or they could not. There's really no good reason to remove the option to have your stuff in an unpackaged state.


Imagine the corresponding opposite change; if it became necessary to unpack modules before fitting them, rather than the situation at present where that is done automatically. To unpack drones before launching them.

That would be maddening.

There's a like amount of irritation to be saved if modules go into the state where they can be sold and stacked automatically.


Except that as you have to unpack modules to use them, the game simply does it for you when you attempt to fit them.

You MUST unpack to fit, so there's no reason not for the game to automatically unpack and fit when you tell it to fit a mod.

But you DON'T have to have the modules in your hangar in any particular state. For those who want their modules packed, it's a simple Ctrl+A -> repack away.

I prefer having the mods in my hangar in both states. It easily shows me wha mods I placed in there since the last repack cycle.

Say I'm shuffling fits around on an apoc, looking for say... oh megapulses. Now I just removed a rach of tachs, dumping them in my hangar, but didn't like the pulses, so I look back to hangar for tachs.

There's 8 unpacked, unstacked tacks staring me in the face, easy to pick out of a hangar. Tada, convenience!

There are also times when moving mixed cargo to several locations that I will simply keep all the mods going to one place unpacked, and all the mods going somewhere else packed, without ******* around with containers.

Now the proposed auto repack is a fine idea I guess, but it needs to be an optional opt in, not an enforced absolute.
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2014-11-26 16:19:46 UTC
See non improvement for the game.

-1
Areen Sassel
Dirac Angestun Gesept
#30 - 2014-11-27 16:52:22 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
I prefer having the mods in my hangar in both states. It easily shows me wha mods I placed in there since the last repack cycle.


That hadn't occurred to me (I use containers extensively, so anything in the main item hangar is in transit), but it's a good point.
Yazzinra
Scorpion Ventures
#31 - 2014-11-27 17:40:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Yazzinra
Arctic Estidal wrote:
I think I can summarise your idea.


"I want to implement a new idea! Yeah!

But for this idea to be attractive and provide a benefit, I need a significant feature in the game to be removed. There is no reason to remove the feature, removing the feature will hurt game play, but I want my idea supported."


I think that is a good summary of the conversation you had before you posted this idea. So NO this shouldn't be supported.


Sounds like a similar conversation was had prior to the ESS being introduced.
Previous page12