Architect Archive
Thread: BE issues are OUR issues
It's an interesting debate. It is still interesting on this the 5th or 6th time it has come up
I am not a programmer, but I do see both sides.
I agree with Donah that human nature says you expand to fill the space available to you. But I think that is an extreme.
I also recognise the argument that goes along the lines of 'if I had 10 x 100k, but could suddenly have 1x1million instead then I would use 9 less'. Again I think this is an extreme.
The truth must surely lie somewhere in-between. I can only speak for myself here, but I know that currently I have as an architect vast stocks of resources spread over 3 houses. In my case if these were to stack in 1 million units I would reduce my ore stacks from 70+ stacks to around 10, my copper and aluminum from 20+ to 5 or 6, my steel and iron from 20+ to around 10 and probably that would be it. So I would be saving maybe up to 100 items. Would I then fill that space with other items? Well no, I only have 3 houses because I need them to store all these resources, so I would empty 2 houses, redeed them and sell them off, putting all my stock into the one remaining. Am I typical, probably not, I am quite likely typical for a crafter in respect of having vast quantities of resources on hand, and as a crafter I don't tend to fill my space with non stackable, unique, or interesting items. Would I use my extra space to put some of these type of things in? Well possibly yes, that might be nice, but the point here is that I wouldn't go and make mself 2 new houses to store this type of thing, so if I didn't have space in my one existing house I wouldn't bother with the item.
My point, after all that rambling (sorry I am known for it
), is that I would save around 100 database 'slots', others would also save at least some slots, some would save none at all, a very few may even increase if they get the taste for rare artifacts, but overall the number of items MUST go down.
Now let me play devils advocate for this last bit. What happens then? The server I am on (BRIA) is full, like really full, but as long as no more players are allowed to register, thenthe effect of increasing stacks/crates will be to release extra database space. This WILL eventually get filled as each new publish that gives new craftable items or fixes broken things means more items in the game (how many candles are there in the game now for example), but at least some breathing space will be created in the meantime. But would SOE actually 'freeze' registrations on a galaxy if they suddenly freed up database space ? My bet is they wouldn't.
Chiming in because... well, I can 
Why stop at a million? Honestly? All we have ever gotten for answers was that we get the short end on storage cause they have DB issues. SOOOOOOOOOOOO... change it SOE. Buy more DB, programmers, or whateverOR, spend about$200 and change all factory crates to stack up to 1k and resources to stack infinately. Duh.
How many DB slots do my 3mil ofDoodlebugs Intrusive ore, and3mil of SpiferificDurralloy Steeltake up at this moment? - 60 spots on your DB. Well, technically more than that, but thats the number of place holders for just my character. Now, let say I want to make walls. Working backwards from 1k walls.... I need 10k struct mods. So, I place my ore and steel in the factory, make my struct mods... (using 2 mil of my ore and 500k of my steel) and I now have -roughly- 1 mil Ore (10 DB spots) -roughly- 2.5 mil Steel (25 DB spots) 100 crates of struct mods (100 DB spots). Which means I am using 135 DB spots, instead of 60.
So, I take my ore, my steel, and my struct mods, and I begin wall production...
Input 200k ore, 300k steel, and my 100 crates of struct mods (Seperate factories for those who noticed that I cant do this allin one factory.) and after a while I recieve my 1k of walls!! WOOT!
Lets check DB useage now, shall we?
Ore ~800k (8 spots)
Steel ~ 2.2mil (22 spots)
100 Crates of walls - (100 spots)
So... I started with using 60 DB spots. At one point I was using 135 spots. When all is said and done, I am now using 130 DB spots. YAY!!
Now, if we go unlimited stack size on materials, and 1k crate size...
3mil ore, 3 mil steel - 2 DB spots
After Struct mods are made... 1mil ore (1 spot),2.5 mil steel (1 spot) 10 crates of struct mods. For a grand total of.... /drumroll 12 DB spots. OR, 123 spots LESS than the current system.
On to walls...
After wall production... 800k of ore (1 spot) 2.2 mil of steel (1 spot) and 1 crate of walls (1 spot) for a grand total of 3 WHOLE SPOTS!! WOOT! OR, 127 spots LESS than the current system.
Hmmm... all this whining about DB size... SOE... you can solve your own problem. Just switch the code.. heck, it should only take a cpl of weeks. And all of your problems will be minimized.
I vote NO to 1 mil stack sizes for resources. I vote YES to indefinate stack sizes. Or, if you have to limit it, make it 100mil the max stack size. If anyone ever gets higher than that, up it to 500mil.... its THAT easy.
Oh, and have storage DIRECTLY reflect on lot useage... 1 lot = 75 storage period. If my structure takes 10 lots, I should get 750 units of storage. As it stands now, as long as you have teh money, it is more beneficial to drop 10 factories and get the 1k of storage space (2k if you can get the output hoppers to fill up :smileysurprised
And now I am ending my reply because... well, because I can
BoberFett wrote:
Crafting IS management. I don't see how you could see it as anything else. There's no true experimentation, you're just clicking as many bulbs as your materials will allow you. You have to MANAGE your materials, even if it doesn't involve storage. You don't want to run out of material A while you still have B left. You need to manage your factory time.
If the idea is to remove management, then they might as well just let us go to a terminal that dispenses finished products.
If you believe this then you're equating the entire life of humanity to such, too. Just because you cannot find satisfaction in crafting or creating or making other people's lives better don't throw your downer on me. Crafting is not management, it is exploration on a number of fronts.
Fivo Asia
BoberFett wrote:
Just because YOU aren't able to handle the management portion of the game, don't throw YOUR downer on me.
I handle it quite well. You are the troll pissing in our wheaties mate. Not me.
I advocate making the system better for people, reducing the database load to help server resources, making overall playability better.
You advocate making a game as burdensome as possible because of some screwed up bent on some whacked out value system.
I don't ask you to accept or do anything. You ask me not to have an opinion. Try debate class again, mate.
Fivo Asia
Cafa wrote:
BoberFett wrote:
Crafting IS management. I don't see how you could see it as anything else. There's no true experimentation, you're just clicking as many bulbs as your materials will allow you. You have to MANAGE your materials, even if it doesn't involve storage. You don't want to run out of material A while you still have B left. You need to manage your factory time.
If the idea is to remove management, then they might as well just let us go to a terminal that dispenses finished products.
If you believe this then you're equating the entire life of humanity to such, too. Just because you cannot find satisfaction in crafting or creating or making other people's lives better don't throw your downer on me. Crafting is not management, it is exploration on a number of fronts.
Fivo Asia
Your difference of opinion is sumarized by "the game sucks and why do we want to make it better".
Somehow I don't see that as debate, but what the heck, I dunno really care. Maybe the reason I responded is just amazement that someone as publicly jaded as yourself on the profession still plays it.
Fivo Asia