These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

50 + fittings

First post
Author
zzzczyzoznzoz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#61 - 2011-10-18 00:28:51 UTC
back to the topBig smile
Alice Saki
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#62 - 2011-10-18 00:31:31 UTC
+1

FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - Currenly rebuilding gaming machine, I will Return.

zzzczyzoznzoz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#63 - 2011-10-19 00:08:34 UTC
yay for ship spining

oh dam it wont work my ship wont spin oh well at least i got the old hanger view bk

ps bump bk to top
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#64 - 2011-10-20 16:38:30 UTC
@ the original Dev that was responding here...


Let me make my point about 50 Fittings not being sufficient with this screenshot :

50 Fittings? or 1 Fitting each?


Look at the numbers of ships per fitting category, and you'll see that most only have 1 fitting - then you have 15 frigate fittings (I like my frigates) and 8 Command ship fittings and 5 T1 cruiser fittings.

I can barely fit in 1 of any other ship category, and only 2 Battlecruisers.


I would like to be able to hold multiple fittings for other ship categories, but instead I'm shoe-horned into not being able to setup options for my PVP boats.

50 seems like a big number, but it's really not that sufficient.


Where I am.

Barakkus
#65 - 2011-10-20 17:25:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Barakkus
CCP Tuxford wrote:
It makes me sort of glad that some of you at least are using this feature up to that point that 50 fittings are not enough Smile

The limit that was picked was fairly arbitrary but not the reason for having a limit was not. The fittings are stored on the DB and need to be fetched from there and moved to the client. For exactly how many we can have we have to consider two things. How big is the table actually going to get and network traffic. In addition to that we are doing some fairly poor job at loading them up (tallying up required skills for all fitted types and seeing if you meet the requirements). That however if fairly easily fixed.

The network traffic is the one that concerns me most especially as we have to consider that you can have a long description on these. So I'll ask you this simple question is there anyone that actually uses the description?


I'm kind of curious about how much information you're transmitting to the client to begin with.

Really you should only be sending enough information to fill out the list of fittings, not all of the fittings to start off with. When someone picks a fitting to look at, then transmit the entire fitting for just that one ship and store it to the cache. You won't really have to worry about the traffic at that point. 32 bytes plus maybe 4 bytes for the ID of the fitting should be sufficient and not cause any network traffic issues. Only retrieve the list once per session or expiry period (maybe 24 hours), cache it (and cache the changes that occur during the session/expiry period).

A properly indexed and partitioned table(s) should handle a few million records fairly easily without much of a delay retrieving bits of the data for a single player. You probably would want to store the list of fittings in one table and the actual detail to the fittings elsewhere since the list will get refreshed by the client more often than the actual fittings themselves.

All that extra stuff with skills you mentioned should only be done upon viewing a fitting, results cached. The cache for that information should be invalidated when skills complete training or clones are changed.

Just my 2 cents, all just speculation on how you might want to consider doing it...I have no real knowledge about how things are structured on the backend, so I could be completely wrong on how you would want to deal with your above mentioned concerns.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc

zzzczyzoznzoz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#66 - 2011-10-22 11:53:06 UTC
bk to the top coz i feel eve should have more than the verry small amount of 50 fittings , it just nowhere near enuff
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#67 - 2011-10-22 21:20:57 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I support CCP selling extra fitting slots for AUR.

(And yes, I'm being serious.)



IF they introduced a Free-to-play option aimed at new players* certainly they should leave out things like the ablityt to save fittings from the free verions (the current F2P option of using plex is not really doable for any but mega power gamer types---scamming, trading, or belining to lvl 4s and playing huge boring hours to "earn" the right to play)

BUT, the Fittings limits without isk/aurum was by far one of the most off-putting parts of the Fearless "devils advocate" presentation by the senior developer.

with hardly any qualification, he raised the notion that game convenience should be withheld as a means for inducing incrementally more convenience in scale with how much aurum paid, with the decision of whether limmting such convenience to those who pay isk instead would have been the choice in the absence of the revenue model.

The notion of Free vs Premium, and having a a package of convenience features for a flat premium fee is well tested and works in many games. The game is mostly designed with the premium in mind..

An ala carte option with the more people pay, the smoother game play is from them, and a purposeful witholding of levels of convenience from "premium players" begins to warp the very premise that their goal is to provide the most entertaining game they can with resources available to them. It sets up an uncessary and ingrained conflict of interest that creates a question before releasing any improvment "can we tier this improvement in a way to charge for it?"

Those sort of motivations create an entirely different view of customers and game design of such a clearly insidous level that they shouldn't have even been raised in a devils advocate piece looking for ways to maximize free to play revenue....or at least they didn't need to be because playing devils advocate means making the most rational argument, not making extreme and facetious proposals.


.

BLACK-STAR
#68 - 2011-10-23 08:41:18 UTC
I noticed that on the winter expansion page there is nothing mentioned about optimal local and server side fittings.

Just crossing my fingers is all.

Also my statements still stand on the front about ISK/AUR over +fittings. CCP wouldn't make it any harder on themselves to program that transaction mess. Nobody would be happy about an internal fee or tax on basics, honestly.




seany1212
Drunkendis Order
#69 - 2011-10-23 09:35:04 UTC
I've been playing nearly 4 years and I've only just noticed the description box... Is that bad? Lol
Louis deGuerre
The Dark Tribe
#70 - 2011-10-23 10:10:28 UTC
I use 50 fittings and it is very annoying to micromanage now. I can fly almost every ship in the game, of course 50 fittings is a joke.
I never use the description so just get rid of that, no problemo.
Barbelo Valentinian
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#71 - 2011-10-23 11:16:54 UTC
+1

I'd even be happy to pay AUR for unlimited fittings. I happen to have 3500 AUR in my wallet that I can't find anything imaginative or interesting enough to pay for in the NeX store, so ...
Mashie Saldana
Jamgu Initiatives
#72 - 2011-10-23 11:26:56 UTC
How about moving all personal fittings back to the local client and then move more useful things like overview settings server side?
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#73 - 2011-10-23 18:05:00 UTC


The real Irony is that they're worried about space and network traffic...


but apparently not even 70% get anywhere near the max fitting limit - but the rest of us have to suffer with less fitting space... uhm... clearly the other 70% isn't going to start mysteriously filling up the OTHER 90 fitting slits that they don't use if you raise it to 100. So there is no issue because the system isn't being saturated.

Where I am.

Tacyon
The Phayder Corporation
#74 - 2011-10-30 19:10:14 UTC
thumbs up for moving the personal fittings back to local HDD storage. This 50 limit as basically kept me from using the fittings library. I don't really use it that much any more since it got horked.

There is no "new programming" or "CCP would be giving up..X." this would be giving back what we once had.

the xml coding is very loose, has anyone tried to zip em for storage?

I periodically export mine and zip to storage. Makes it hard to "browse" them but when everyone else lost theirs in the expansion "upgrade" I just unzipped mine and whipped it out ! wait .. what ? Shocked
Mehrdad Kor-Azor
Doomheim
#75 - 2011-10-30 19:16:11 UTC
David Grogan
NerdHerd
#76 - 2011-10-30 19:21:40 UTC
as i once posted before

200 personal fittings - because we all have different shinies we like to fly for various reasons

1000 corp/alliance fittings - because corps/alliance use many different fleet doctrines

having 1000 fittings would allow for the following:

Low Sp - fits
Mid Sp - fits
High SP - fits
Capital - fits
Industrial - fits
Small Pos -fits (yes pos fittings should be saveable)
Medium Pos - fits
Large Pos - fits

Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs.

Yao Ying
Life. Universe. Everything.
Clockwork Pineapple
#77 - 2011-10-30 21:41:47 UTC
Yes, unlimited local fittings please. It's possible to fill nearly 1/4th of that list with multiple variations of a single PVE battleship between all the different hardener and drone combinations. I used to use the fitting manager pretty extensively before, but haven't really found it very useful since the limit seeing as that I can use nearly every subcap in the game and don't pick the FoTMs exclusively...

Moving the settings between multiple machines really isn't that hard when you email them to yourself or copy them to a memory stick. And it's not like the EVE settings folder is in an abysmally obscure location like it was 2 or 3 years ago.
Katabrok First
Apukaray Security
#78 - 2011-10-30 21:55:27 UTC
What I remember from when this feature was being developed was that it would be possible to access the modules on containers and on the corp hangar. Is that even going to be possible to do anytime other tha SoonTM?
Dr Mercy
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#79 - 2011-10-30 22:31:54 UTC
More please!

Make isk with PI: http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?1207-What-to-do-PI-Processor-only-planets

Y U NO
Doomheim
#80 - 2011-10-31 01:24:19 UTC
CCP - Y U NO ADD MORE!?