Merchant Archive
Thread: What is the official reason for not increasing stack sizes to 1000k and crates to 100 items?
Sigrun
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:31 am
#14
Mkappus wrote:
Cafa,
Do you disagree that you having a house full of steel gives you an advantage over someone starting the game? If they can limit the amount of resources you can have they limit the amount of an advantage you can have.
Right now you could have a 15million units of resouces in a small house. Going to 150million sounds pretty exhorbinant to me.
For an arhcitect I don't think it is much of an issue. Folks can get MAX BER relatively easily with resources that come and go. But for a weaponsmith, what if they could hoard a plumbum iron that spawns with the best stats ever, and nothing equivalent spawns for 1 year? If resource stacks are 100k they have to make a decision about how much they can keep to the detriment of other resources and resouce variety. If it was 1000k they would have to make that decision.
That's ridiculous. My playing the game since beta give me a MUCH bigger advantage over a crafter than the few million units of resources I have stashed away.
Maybe they should server-wipe every 2-3 months to keep us all level too?
Oh, and wipe the player's memory, while you're at it. Wouldn't want THAT unfair advantage either...
M-Oldie
Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:50 am
#15
Ryche_Mykola wrote:
I read a post about this a while back and TH responded to it:
Crate Sizes - Its a bug, we were never meant to run schematics of 1000.
These kind of quotes are just funny to me. It's not a bug if the tool allows a schematic size of 1000. They just picked the number arbitrarily (sp?), and never THOUGHT anyone would actually do it. Then when people did, they say it is a bug?
LMAO
I hear this all the time with the 90% kinetic comp armor too. Bug? nope, they just didn't have any foresight when creating this game. Why wouldn't they assume that over the course of time people wouldn't be able to make this kind of stuff... Any of these Devs ever play Diablo II on Battle.net?
Gavvot
Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:31 pm
#16
M-Oldie wrote:
Ryche_Mykola wrote:I read a post about this a while back and TH responded to it:Crate Sizes - Its a bug, we were never meant to run schematics of 1000.These kind of quotes are just funny to me. It's not a bug if the tool allows a schematic size of 1000. They just picked the number arbitrarily (sp?), and never THOUGHT anyone would actually do it. Then when people did, they say it is a bug?LMAOI hear this all the time with the 90% kinetic comp armor too. Bug? nope, they just didn't have any foresight when creating this game. Why wouldn't they assume that over the course of time people wouldn't be able to make this kind of stuff... Any of these Devs ever play Diablo II on Battle.net?
It was a bug.
The slider on the window only allowed 100 but manualy typing would allow 1000, because a mistake was made in the programming of the typing way of setting the number.
After, they modified the window so it's start with 1000 and not 100 like it was before and the slider go up to 1000.
But they were nice doing that, they could have done the oposite and actually fix the bug.
PadreBook
Tue Aug 10, 2004 3:53 pm
#17
DocSavag wrote:
I don't know what the official reason for not doing it is but I'll tell you that resources take up relatively little database because they aren't customizable and I've been told by a developer that changing the stack size wouldn't help the database as much as the average person might assume. That isnt' to say there aren't other reasons.
As always thinking like a Developer. You sure you aren't Keldarin in disguise? We want to know why they don't allow us THE PLAYERS to have stacks of 1000k and crates of 100/1000. This would help the database in a very OBVIOUS way (well to normal players), which is that instead of having to keep a lot of individual stacks of 100k of the same resource, we could consolidate them into 1-2 stacks of 1000k. Since this is apparently NOT clear to you, that means LESS entries in the database.
As for the common irrational arguement that players will just get dozens of stacks of 1000k of the same resource, sorry that isn't possible. For example there is a resource called Amoukide that I used for my crafting, and made everything with it. This was the best polysteel copper for a long time and the second best conductivity metal for a long time. When it spawn I mined it, I had everyone I could get in my guild to mine it, and every free contract miner mine it for me--I wasn't cheap either. Plus, I have inherited multiple stores of it from three people, one with 1 account, one with 2 accounts and one with 4 accounts that were all heavy duty miners (the last being an early +20 armorsmith). And I stopped production of materials a couple of months ago. So how much of that amoukide do I have, hmmm, 2 million maybe, definitely not over 3 million. So think about that!
Padre Book
Still saying I told you so
JZeus-Sarono
Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:13 pm
#18
Humm why cant we have crate size of 1000?
thats an idea, i can do 3 nice crates and 3 resource stacks into a factory for a 1k run of adv comp segs. lots nicer then then 30 crates lol
one thing im glad for is armor layers are 100 count crates, odd though, PSG's are only 20.. not 25 go figure, Segments are 50... how much easyer it could be to make everything 100 count crates.
I can see there point for 1mill count resource stacks... why not 200k? 500k? humm?humm? yes, uhumhumhumhum.
200k stacks would solve big isues
500k even better.
How hard could the code be to change item limits to a 2 or 5 insted of 1?, there data space would double or more by changeing such an easy line of code. /shrug
AtPlay
Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:54 pm
#19
Keltrien wrote:
Has anyone seen anything official beyond "We're not going to do it"?
Hows this?
Thunderheart wrote:
Architect
Can you, and WILL you change Resource Stack size (currently set at 100k) to allow for up to a million units to be combined into a single stack, and Crated Components stack size be increased across the board to allow for a minimum of 100 per crate? If so, can we be given a "target" publish/mini-publish date for this? Upon doing this will this then help open the doors to reworking the storage capacities of certain structures?
No, we will not change the resource stack size. It should be mentioned that manufacturing runs of 1000 items happened because of a UI bug early on. The slider only went up to 100 items, but players soon found out they could type in 1000 units on the manufacturing schematic. We haven’t fixed this bug because we know players will consider it a big nerf, so we have hedged against doing this for the time being. There have been discussions and debates (and posts) in the past contrary to this position, but it was ultimately decided that is not going to change. The team will be meeting to see what is possible on the technology side and what is healthy for the game on the design side.
And then this:
Thunderheart wrote:
RotorofCorRng wrote:
Okay, you said No.
Why not?
Would the database not benefit from this?
It would actually, but the economy would suffer. Don't think of it in terms of how many items you can make as a player, but rather, how many items all players can make. With only a few thousand players per server, any player can manufacture enough several thousand items, thus making enough items for eveyone on a server. This creates a situation where the players who are part of the most efficient crafting PA's can saturate a market all by themselves and completely squeeze out most other crafters. If you couple this with that same crafter's ability to get the best possible resources at any given time, it is very easy for a a clever crafter to get the best materials and saturate the market with the best items and make it too difficult for anyone else to try and sell their goods.
Morwen
Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:08 pm
#20
Gavvot wrote:
Resource take the same space as is for the players in inventory and house.
But as size in database, it doesn't take alot of space.
A link to the owner, a link to the resource type and a quantity.
That's all, 3 fields. Maybe a couple more for techincal reason.
Much less database storage need than for anything else.
It'll take up fewer bytes but it's still an additional record that is indexed and must be searched.
Keltrien
Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:40 pm
#21
AtPlay wrote:
Keltrien wrote:
Has anyone seen anything official beyond "We're not going to do it"?
Hows this?
Thunderheart wrote:
Architect
Can you, and WILL you change Resource Stack size (currently set at 100k) to allow for up to a million units to be combined into a single stack, and Crated Components stack size be increased across the board to allow for a minimum of 100 per crate? If so, can we be given a "target" publish/mini-publish date for this? Upon doing this will this then help open the doors to reworking the storage capacities of certain structures?
No, we will not change the resource stack size. It should be mentioned that manufacturing runs of 1000 items happened because of a UI bug early on. The slider only went up to 100 items, but players soon found out they could type in 1000 units on the manufacturing schematic. We haven’t fixed this bug because we know players will consider it a big nerf, so we have hedged against doing this for the time being. There have been discussions and debates (and posts) in the past contrary to this position, but it was ultimately decided that is not going to change. The team will be meeting to see what is possible on the technology side and what is healthy for the game on the design side.
And then this:
Thunderheart wrote:
RotorofCorRng wrote:
Okay, you said No.
Why not?
Would the database not benefit from this?
It would actually, but the economy would suffer. Don't think of it in terms of how many items you can make as a player, but rather, how many items all players can make. With only a few thousand players per server, any player can manufacture enough several thousand items, thus making enough items for eveyone on a server. This creates a situation where the players who are part of the most efficient crafting PA's can saturate a market all by themselves and completely squeeze out most other crafters. If you couple this with that same crafter's ability to get the best possible resources at any given time, it is very easy for a a clever crafter to get the best materials and saturate the market with the best items and make it too difficult for anyone else to try and sell their goods.
Does he play this game?
If that happened, it wouldn't be one person controlling one market. If they tried to do that, A- they wouldn't get the entire server to shop at their store, and B- there would be tons of other players who could do the exact same thing. They'd be stuck with a glut of inventory.
Stupid Devs.
StarladySWG
Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:52 pm
#22
They claim it was to "prevent hoarding". Keeping stack sizes small will have no effect on hoarding. If someone wants to save something, they will, by whatever means possible. Second or third accounts if necesssary. The only effect of keeping stack sizes small is to clog up the databases.
Cafa
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:18 pm
#23
Mkappus wrote:
Cafa,
Do you disagree that you having a house full of steel gives you an advantage over someone starting the game? If they can limit the amount of resources you can have they limit the amount of an advantage you can have.
Right now you could have a 15million units of resouces in a small house. Going to 150million sounds pretty exhorbinant to me.
For an arhcitect I don't think it is much of an issue. Folks can get MAX BER relatively easily with resources that come and go. But for a weaponsmith, what if they could hoard a plumbum iron that spawns with the best stats ever, and nothing equivalent spawns for 1 year? If resource stacks are 100k they have to make a decision about how much they can keep to the detriment of other resources and resouce variety. If it was 1000k they would have to make that decision.
I'm always gonna have more storage on demand. I simply but need to pull out a game card, reactivate one of the 26 accounts from people that have quit the game (and given me their character info), and plant 5 small houses on demand.
Nothing is going to stop me from having storage as long as I can activate an account for $30 a card. Considering I see the PvP crowd spend hundreds of real dollars on credits and jedi being purchased on ebay for thousands of dollars I'm actually getting a pretty good value on 10 lots for $30 and what I do is legal. I make 6 figures in RL and this is the entertainment I choose. For the moment, money is not an issue to me.
They would have MORE crafters if it was easier for them to organize their materials. Making it easier for crafters to organize their materials would promote the community. You've pretty much established that you want it to be harder to be a crafter than I do, so I guess we agree to disagree.
Fivo Asia
Whrlwnd13
Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:32 pm
#24
As for one Weaponsmith controlling the market on a single spawn of plumbumthats insane.
Where were the other 500 or so weaponsmiths, crafters&minerswhen this spawned?
This oneWS must be very powerful to be able to orchestrate a mass strip mining operation that would require hundreds of lots of mining installations over a 7-9 day period without anyone noticing.
Then somehow after this feat,he's going to manage to get every player on the server into his shop and there will be no market for the smiths that make the same weapon a few points lower in damage.
Get serious. If something good spawns every WS that knows his resources will be on it.
I've missed a the first few days of some good spawns in the past due to not having lots available and i've always mangaged to find myself a nice spot with a good concentration. Not being in a powerful guild has not affected the quality of the weapons that I can produce (due to lack or qualityof resources).
Even the novice WS that surveys AFK for a few hours can grab himself enough of this plumbum to make some awesome weapons when he hits master.
(And on a side note if the plumbumb would spawn more often with good stats then it wouldn't be such a game breaking resource)
As said in many previous posts in this thread. If someone wants to hoard resources they will. container size wont matter in that regard. If i run out of room i'm going to start storing my resources with friends, have someone drop a house for me or open a second account (I don't make six figures but another $15 a month won't break me). Last thing I'm going to do is get rid of a quality resource cause i don't have room to store it.
The rationale that has been used to justify the lack of storage in this game is beyond absurd.
Increase the resource stack sizes (500k stacks would be nice)
Increase the crate size (100 would be nice) allow crates to restack.
Allow loot items with same serial number and stats to stack.
Enable vendors to sell items directly out of crates or out of the resource stacks
Allow vendors to sell neutral colored tailored & armor items and allow the purchaserto color them prior to retreiving the item.
Give Crafters and Merchants storage facilities so they don't have to have a city of storage houses, store items on vendors, or engage in cross server lot trades.
These are all ideas suggested on these boards tolighten the server load. How many of them have the devs tried???
Message Edited by Whrlwnd13 on 08-11-2004 02:33 AM
Cafa
Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:06 am
#25
baje wrote:
lets not rub salt in kelts wounds shall we and say good bye to one hell of a party....so long groove fest...good bye cruel world.
kelt you and I both know the official reason for this is to screw you for doing what they could never do...have a fun party in game. no one came to there little shindigs and all went to yours...so they decided to f you and all those that had fun.
So there is your official reason #2342
#2343
to bend over the next guy
#2344
to bend over the next guys mom
you get my point
Baj'e
ROFLMAO! 
Fivo Asia
Dvnce
Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:29 am
#26
Mkappus wrote:
Cafa,
Do you disagree that you having a house full of steel gives you an advantage over someone starting the game? If they can limit the amount of resources you can have they limit the amount of an advantage you can have.
actually people are looking at this the wrong way.... One hourding will happen regardless.... via lot swaps or other means it is tooo easy to work around hoarding limits... I have played for almost a year now... I have collected 1700 units of items.. most resources... I have 11 (2 or 3 lot)structures up to hold all these items.. If these limits were to increase.. I could condense all these items into the two banks that my two accounts have... I could run 2 factories for my business.. I could then have a house... and a workshop that I could have actually decorated with more than a station and backpacks.. so now.. Ihave 4 buildings from 11.. Sure Ill fill up 2 of those 4 buildings.. with stuff it took me a year.. ( hardcore mining and buying millions of units of resources a week..) to obtain.. but for me to get back up to 11.. it would take me 5 and a half years.... So ..honestly... how is that a real advantage...? ( 1 years stuff.. in 2 bank acounts ( 100 items each + 1 workshop 100 items... Plus new furniture that is 300 items... a year )
Also.. What hurts the new crafters is not the fact that I can have all these resources... It is the fact that I have the resources to find a place to put them.. via renting lots.. and buying resources instead of mining.. to use those lots for storage too... I win because I have to means to operate within these limits....
So increase .. sure a few people will take advanatage of it.. ( but they already do now ) but it will even the playing field for more people than it will hurt......