Weaponsmith Archive
Thread: Thunderheart, would these two simple fixes solve SOE's database problems? No flame, a sincere idea.
Quandry
Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:21 am
#14
/agree Id also like to see resorces stored in crafting station hoppers not count to items in the house. Only resorces can go in there and it would make us able to actualy decorate the house...wow novil concept hehe
SeaRaptor
Wed Mar 10, 2004 8:08 am
#15
/applause
A better idea I've not heard. TH, this deserves some serious discussion on y'alls end. It solves your problem and ours (lack of adequate storage space).
Soar
Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:20 pm
#16
Now this is a good idea thats needs some attention from the developers.
-Soar
-Soar
kolos42
Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:30 pm
#17
Im really tired...and there were alot of numbers there to try and follow...but what I got from it was bigger crates equals more space on the server...
Im having a really hard time finding a downside to that...
So...yeah, why not, Im all for it!
Loric
Wanderhome
kraytlover
Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:15 pm
#19
A very good idea. Logically this would be very easy to alter (change the max numbers for the object types) but of course I have no idea how they coded the game so who knows. Regardless, IMHO it behoves SOE to find programming ways to address their game issues rather than more and more limits on players ability to enjoy the game.
*Aspiring weaponsmith enjoying his decorated home for as long as he can before all the limits on having fun force him to gut it*
CoriStonerie
Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:19 pm
#20
And it would be nice if a backpack or bag inside a house only counted as one item, heck, i'd even be happy if a full one counted as 10, it would still make storing things a whole lot easier.
And all these extra houses we have as storage have to be hurting the database as well...of couse, all hese suggestions actually make logical sense, which means we all know they're gonna be ignored. ;-)
And all these extra houses we have as storage have to be hurting the database as well...of couse, all hese suggestions actually make logical sense, which means we all know they're gonna be ignored. ;-)
IceMonkey05
Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:30 pm
#21
The only problem I would see with it would be a way to create a helluva lot more space in our inventory. If they made the 1000 crate cartes count the same as 40, or the same as 20 depending on how it works now, this would just be aweosme.
Skedoozy
Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:47 pm
#22
Thats why it should only work for Components and Resourcesreally. Allowing a player to carry 1000 Powerups at once is a bit much. But components and resources have no use other than to make things, so having them stack wont give anyone an unfair advantage.
Vorp
Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:33 am
#23
this all sounds good to me.
1mil limit on resources
1k on comps
100onfinished product
Hell if vendors could draw weapons from crates when it is getting sold then we can have that 150 item limitbecause it wont hurt us.We will be able to have all weapons on vendor (as display) and then when someone buys it. Vendor will instead sell him weapon that in vendors storage instead.
Now we just need to talk DEVs into this
Gravitas
Thu Mar 11, 2004 6:58 am
#24
definitely sounds like a good idea
Schematic allows you to make 1000 items,so if you run it all in one go, why not just have the 1 crate of 1000 items, rather than 40 crates of 25 items - I thought the whole point of databases was that you only needed to enter a variable once, seems like under the current system the variable (item) gets entered 40 times - once for each crate.
And having mutiple stacks of the same resource is equally as daft.
Zhoed
Arnwald
Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:34 am
#25
Hello,
your idea is just awesome... I had the same long ago, but you are the one who psted it
Ok but we don't know how they coded the database, maybe they implemented a cap in the fields so you can't stockpile as much as it would be.
Anyway it is true we should have 1000 items crates (or more) as we are now able to split crates. For the old crates we should be able to merge them, provided they have the same serial.
An other way could be to merge similar resources with different stats. For example you merge 900 conductivity copper with 200 conductivity copper and you get a new copper between 900 and 200 conductivity. You should need a special tool or factory to do so an you should be able to experiment the result either. Would improve the fun of crafting a lot and lower database load too.
Last step is to implementwarehouses as storage. Actually we are using houses and dropping bags in them. Each house and each bag takes one room. The idea is to make a modular warehouse. You can drop items in your warehouse and sort them, but you can't drop bags in them. You warehouse start with level 1has 75 room and takes 1 slot. When you need more room, just buy a new extension from your Architect, insert it in you warehouseand voila you have 75 more room and one slot less. Even we need to be able to remove extension to free slots.
Deewe
Eliss
Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:20 am
#26
*TWO THUMBS UP* for this post.
I can't stand the multiple crates of components... It's hard when you have old handlers and new handlers and telling which crates are old, new, etc. I must have about 5 differnent types of handlers... 1 for Cannons (not my very best stuff), 1 from before Good Ditanium Spawned., 1 from before good Ostrine Spawn...and a final set that has the best of all my resources.
I'm often fumbling and grumbling when trying to decide which stack to use and how many left in that stack, etc.
I can't stand that crates don't restack.
Secondly about resource stacks caping at 100K .. WHY? Why not use 1.2M when it gets past the 999K mark, or 2.3B when it gets past the 999M mark. (I can't see anyone mining that much unless you are a Heavy mining operation with a hundred mines on the same resource.)
Hell I might be able to actually put a CHAIR! in my house after that.