EVE General Discussion

This made me laugh unexpectedly.

Here is how a general game design should roughly work (Dev can state specifics). Basically you have a Kestrel class that defines everything about the Kestrel ship, then a log is created stating locations of this ship across New Eden. If you applied wear over time, then you would have to have separate data for every Kestrel out there, you cant just copy and paste the class as you would have identically new ships for everyone.

In other words, its like everyone using a computer off of a localized server, every one has the same experience but you cant modify the server. But with wear, its like instead of a server, everyone gets their own computer that they can modify, but they arent interconnected like the server is.

Actually, I take that all back, I just realized that there are already variables stored for every ship, armor and hull HP's. These values are carried over even after docking and are permanent until you repair or repackage. So I guess that it would be easy to implement (Just a single age factor) but the only difficulty would be storing the ship when it is repackaged (Rather just being a placeholder for a Kestrel class of info).

I don't like this idea at all.

I played an online game where things degrade and the econ was jacked. Made it very hard to progress without just throwing more cash at the game.

No... Just no.

Cyboman 07

Because auto-repair drones inside and outside of your ships are constantly working to keeping your ship up and running.

They just having figured out how to make those work to repair structure and armor.

you cna do some basic reseach, i'm not gonna do it for you i don;t feel that nice. Look at the dev blogs around the time of the skin pilot program and you will get an explination on how the database works.

ok so i am nice.. sigh

Blog

"Would you like to know more?

Since this is a pilot program intended to gather data, we went ahead and started with the simplest implementation even though that might not be the actual long-term solution.

For instance, legacy technical matters prevent us from changing the skin of a ship if that ship retains its original typeID. To introduce a differently painted Rifter, we would have to create a new typeID for that Rifter, and of course it cannot be called “Rifter” since that name is already in use. So the new ship has to be called “Rifter, green edition” or something similar. And a different typeID means that it has its own market group, its own entry on the overview, etc.

Needless to say, this prototype model gets exponentially unsustainable at a larger scale. Having 24 different Rifters would mean 24 more market entries, 24 more overview entries, etc. Not very pleasant for players trying to use it or developers trying to maintain it.

And speaking of market groups, the painted ships will of course be sellable for ISK on the market and in contracts, and be tradable just like any other item in EVE. The blueprint copies will also follow the normal trading rules. This will provide even more opportunities to players who wish to obtain the painted ships using their in-game ISK currency."


there is more but i'm not THAT nice

Doesn't quite make sense. All you would need to do is add a single long integer to track an items age after unpackaging. Copy that to packaged item when it's repacked. While its fitted or active in space increase it each tick. Hardly database intensive.

Edit: before anyone says what I know they'll say - each ship already has individual stats. Take damage to hull and armor as an example. Ships are likely class objects. When a new ship is created it's likely created in the database as a class object of say Kestrel - each Kestrel object likely has members such as total HP, armour, hull, capacitor etc. if that wasn't the case then it'd be impossible to track those values as in individual values, when you logged back in your kestrel would be generic and all variables like hull cap armour reset to full.

Meaning to add a counter to track life of an object would like be as simple as adding that variable to the parent object. Pretty much one line of code.

Pretty sure that if ever CCP would ever introduce wear and tear to our ships, the prize will counter react to any RL practice.
Just imagine flying around in an old worn out battleship full of rust (sort of old Minmatar design of yesterday).
Think a lot of people would pay a handsome price to do that. I know I would.
But that will only happens if the effect would follow a sale and the transition to a new owner and if CCP will introduce wear and tear to ships like they seem to do in one of the new winter expansions.

Battle-Ravaged Hulls

Fly a couple of different Amarr ships for a month (at least one long and one short-range setup of each size of ship) and make sure to only use T2 and Faction crystals. Then switch to any different faction and neatly repackage all your Amarr ships and equipment. At that point you'll discover the "neat" "feature" of damaged crystals, and you'll probably decide that repeating that feature for every item in game would be horrendous.

You're right. The last 12 years have been awful because of this. Oh, wait...