Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aliniel Vitissun
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 03:21:00 -
[301]
Originally by: Iog Krugar sorry, i have not read the whole thread, only the first and last page, so please ignore this post if that was already covered...
i understand the starmap as a bought temporary warp-to range shortener for fixed "permanent" objects like gates or stations, but for other, non-permanent objects they cannot work in that way.
so we are talking about replacing g2g/travel bookmarks only, right? what about deep space safespots, line/scan spots, pos hangar warp-tos, tactical bookmarks and the like? any bright ideas there?
That's right, sice safespots, scan spots, and tactical bookmarks are bookmarks being used as intended, rather than as a shortcut to an existing warp point. I'm almost certain that the majority of bookmarks in existence are those of the second breed.
As for the advantage to defense, there is a reply I'd make, and that's for the POS-operated scanners that generate remote maps. Specifically, you can anchor a POS outside the target space and scan some distance (4 or 5 jumps) into it. This is sort of like a "listening post" in the real world, or a surveillance center. Secondly, to keep people from getting maps this way, it forces the owning organization to make active patrols of regions immediately outside their controlled space in order to root out listening posts, so defense of space has a new aspect outside of the camp at chokepoints. Yes, I do tend to have a bias towards the defenders, since attackers currently can roam all over the nether regions of an alliance's space with blobs chasing them around, I'd like to see a bit less of the roaming and more of a "front" of sorts.
|
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 04:17:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Felyza
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Coran Ordus, absolute rubbish. 1000 starmaps on 1000 players needs as many rows as 1000 bookmarks on 1000 players.
Wow... You are thick in the skull aren't you? The concept behind a system starmap is it provides the access to all the major points in the system.
I would like to make a minor correction here - the main, CORE concept behind starmaps is to replace memory intensive bookmark based instas with more memory efficient starmaps. As I've mentioned before, the POS modules, ship modules, skills, professions and etc... are just excess baggage that were mentioned because they might be "cool". Whether they are "cool" or not, is (IMO, at least) irrevelant to the core concept. Meaning that one shouldn't object to the entire idea because they think a new profession/skill/module would add too much grind.
The main reason why I don't like bookmarks and am pushing the starmaps idea, is because bookmarks each have a "unique" allocation of memory for the name. It seems to me that the name is a wchar_t[100], which takes up 200 bytes alone, per bookmark. And this is also stored server side, which is WAY too much for the hundreds of thousands of bookmarks that EVE has to keep track of (I calculated that a bookmark could take up as much as 226 bytes). A starmap, since it lacks a name, would only be a handful of bytes.
Of course, there are other ways to solve the issue of the name taking up so much memory, for example using copy-on-write coding strategies, corporate bookmarks, and merely allowing warp-to-0km.
|
ThePoncho
Minmatar Solaris Extreme
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 04:42:00 -
[303]
/signed
This is an extremely great idea, may need some very slight adjustment by the CCP team but a really good idea. CCP MUST do somthing with this.
The copy like BP is a good idea, meaning they won't just be a quick money making venture.
This idea also adds more "Things to do" to the game. I cannot see negatives.
--
What you eyes can't see, you can't hit Float like a butterfly, Sting like a bee |
Nardon
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 11:49:00 -
[304]
Excellent idea. I fully support it. Yet there are a few things still open it seems.
First the afk traveling. What's the problem with it? Having people choosing a new destination every jump is absolutely tedious. Why should they not be allowed to do whatever else they want to do while traveling? Some people chat(so are on the computer anyway) others plan their business with market research etc(so are on the computer and even ingame) while others are really away from keyboard. Forcing them to watch their ship make its way through system after system doesn't really have a point, does it? So I am for autopilot integration.
That leads me to the second idea. Maybe you could bind the autopilot's accuracy to travel speed. At the moment every ship is warping with its maximum speed. Yet crashing down from 6 or 9 AU/s to a meager ~100 m/s and landing on the spot is one hell of an accomplishment. So maybe you could set the autopilot to slower travel while increasing the accuracy and vice versa. The only problem is: I can't see a reason why manual travel should be completely accurate at max speed. :/
Last thing is drm and degradation. DRM is needed for protecting the rights of the owner. When starmaps decay there is no need for DRM as every copy inherits the creation time of the original and is therefor more inaccurate. So unless you create your starmaps yourself you'd be buying it from the scout to keep an accurate one. So I'm in favor of degradation and against DRM.
|
Frash
Gallente Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 13:48:00 -
[305]
Edited by: Frash on 03/10/2006 13:55:23 Edited by: Frash on 03/10/2006 13:55:06 I like this idea!
After further thinking, a player would have bookmarks to whatever bookmarks are intended for. But also wouldn't this mean that CCP would have to create and maintain a master list of these starmaps and more specific star map points(bookmarks). These would have to be updated weekly or monthly by CCP. This just enables us(the players) to be able to scan them and then use them as you intend.
I guess for this to work CCP would have to create the starmaps and then the starmap points and hire some people to maintain them. Am I right in thinking this?
Don't like EVE-Radio.com? Try ETN.FM or Afterhoursdjs.com |
Aliniel Vitissun
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 14:44:00 -
[306]
Actually, starmap points are already stored on the system information, since technically all a starmap consists of is a "ticket" to warp to 0 on an existing permanent warp point. So the process would go something like this:
Client initiates warp, sends starmap date and intended destination Server node handling the system gets coordinate information for intended destination (which should already be in local main memory, instead of being out on the RAMSAN like a bookmark would be, so it cuts down on access time) Server node generates actual arrival point with standard 1.5km inaccuracy plus timestamp-based inaccuracy.
The entirety of a starmap's data consists of the associated system ID and a timestamp. No names, no coordinates, nothing else.
|
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 14:44:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Frash Edited by: Frash on 03/10/2006 13:55:23 Edited by: Frash on 03/10/2006 13:55:06 I like this idea!
After further thinking, a player would have bookmarks to whatever bookmarks are intended for. But also wouldn't this mean that CCP would have to create and maintain a master list of these starmaps and more specific star map points(bookmarks). These would have to be updated weekly or monthly by CCP. This just enables us(the players) to be able to scan them and then use them as you intend.
I guess for this to work CCP would have to create the starmaps and then the starmap points and hire some people to maintain them. Am I right in thinking this?
CCP shouldn't have to maintain a master list of starmaps.
The idea follows this algorithm:
if(playerHasStarmap(player, starmap) { warp(selectedObject, distance = 0km); } else { warp(selectedObject, distance = 15km); }
The starmap is merely a flag that enables warp-to-0km (or perhaps 1.5km). The actual starmap points are actually already in the game as the locations od already existing stations and stargates
|
Aliniel Vitissun
|
Posted - 2006.10.03 23:45:00 -
[308]
*bump*
|
Cailais
Amarr THE SEFRIM INSTITUTE
|
Posted - 2006.10.04 00:17:00 -
[309]
I think most people have read this now and commented if they're going to Aliniel.
www.sefrim.com - sig design - eve mail for details
|
Miithos Astrade
|
Posted - 2006.10.04 16:52:00 -
[310]
This is by far (ok the Capital ship for mining is close) the BEST idea I have EVER SEEN!
THIS SHOULD be fast-tracked into development :)
|
|
Phandros Kiel
|
Posted - 2006.10.04 17:39:00 -
[311]
Clearly the current bookmarking system leaves a lot to be desired. It's hard on server resources, it makes players grumpy when they have to copy them and neither are conducive to a good business model.
This is a very reasonable alternative.
/signed
|
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.04 17:47:00 -
[312]
Originally by: Cailais I think most people have read this now and commented if they're going to Aliniel.
The funny thing is everytime this gets bumped, more people come in and say they like the idea...
|
Vonchar
|
Posted - 2006.10.04 18:28:00 -
[313]
/signed This is the first and only REASONABLE solution to the bookmark crisis that I have seen. I think the autopilot should stay in. Autopilot is a part of the game and I don't think it should be dropped out of hand. Besides...no matter how hard you try, you just can't warp into a gate correctly if there's a warp bubble there.
CCP - Pay Attention To This Idea!!
|
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.04 23:58:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Vonchar /signed This is the first and only REASONABLE solution to the bookmark crisis that I have seen. I think the autopilot should stay in. Autopilot is a part of the game and I don't think it should be dropped out of hand. Besides...no matter how hard you try, you just can't warp into a gate correctly if there's a warp bubble there.
CCP - Pay Attention To This Idea!!
The issue against auto-pilot is in .1-.5 sec systems, where you can't drop warp bubbles. Autopilot + warp-to-0km of any kind means you are nigh invincible while traveling in a ship fitted for fast aligning, unless you run into a 0.0 gate camp.
|
Aliniel Vitissun
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 04:42:00 -
[315]
Well, since people with instas primarily are vulnerable while aligning, why not make the autopilot "less good" than you are and add a warp delay during alignment when using a starmap? That way we can cut down on the "nigh invincible bit" for AFK flying but retain full insta functionality for those warping manually.
|
Angelina Starchild
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 09:07:00 -
[316]
Nice idea. Me likes. -- |
Doomed Predator
Xoth Inc Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 19:03:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: Cailais I think most people have read this now and commented if they're going to Aliniel.
The funny thing is everytime this gets bumped, more people come in and say they like the idea...
I just hope a dev saw this post.Damn it,they have a perfectly good solution here.They should make a patch apliing just starmaps cause instas are one of the worst problems, ---------------------------------------------
The first mod to edit my sig gets a keg of beer(2 pink kegs if its done by a female) I don't like beer - Serathu Sera often mods in a dress, does that mean I can have his 2 kegs? - Cortes
|
Smart Bomb
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 20:27:00 -
[318]
I love this idea however I think every 3 months for the 500m chance would be much better, otherwise alot of people like myself that do 55+ jumps a day would be spending all their time making new starmaps and that would be quite boring.
|
Cailais
Amarr THE SEFRIM INSTITUTE
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 21:59:00 -
[319]
Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: Cailais I think most people have read this now and commented if they're going to Aliniel.
The funny thing is everytime this gets bumped, more people come in and say they like the idea...
Yeah, fine its a nice idea. Not perfect but popular with those who like to 'make stuff' and those that want '0km warps' without restriction (pretty much invulnerable everywhere then). I like it as a rough concept - I just don't agree people should just 'bump' an idea without adding real value: otherwise why shouldnt I 'bump' my ideas until I get enough "I likes" and then hold up a placard saying - here you go devs everyone likes it.
And the end of it all 'starmaps' are basically summed up as:
Player produced item that produces 0km warp to gate. A more condensed version of the insta BM - but that doesn't solve the fundamental issue:
"Today there are no drawbacks to having instabookmarks, the drawback is not having any instabookmarks" - Oveur.
C.
www.sefrim.com - sig design - eve mail for details
|
Par'Gellen
Low Grade Ore
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 02:29:00 -
[320]
Originally by: Cailais "Today there are no drawbacks to having instabookmarks, the drawback is not having any instabookmarks" - Oveur.
C.
I didn't really understand it when he said that and I still don't understand it now. The way it looks to me is he's saying that having instas needs to be fixed to have the drawback of not having instas? I'm not really good at translating what Oveur says Can someone help? ---
Starmaps - A Quality Insta Solution |
|
Aliniel Vitissun
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 04:03:00 -
[321]
This idea isn't primarily intended to fix the game mechanics effects of instant-jumps, but rather geared towards codifying their implementation to improve performance and ease of use. On the other hand, the "excess baggage" pertaining to creating the starmaps, plus the degredation and need to replace them every 3,4,5, or 6 months, does help by putting a cost on ownership of starmaps. I think that's a drawback right there.
|
Cailais
Amarr THE SEFRIM INSTITUTE
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 08:08:00 -
[322]
What Oveur was trying to say is that instabookmarks give you fast, and nearly invulnerable travel. He felt (and I agree) that this was contary to the spirit of the game. Now, he also explained that he recognised there was a 'need' amongst players to travel fast, and sometimes safely and that instabook marks provided that. His point was though that there was no disadvantage to having that ability. In simple terms if a player wants to 'instajump' he sould sacrifice something else for it (and he's asked the community to suggest what that 'something' might be).
Now the 'starmap' idea reduces the pile of bookmarks (good thing), provides a new player driven industry (good thing), but still has the same effect as instabookmarks in terms of travel and safety (bad thing).
Aliniel believes the cost of purchasing/producing a starmap is sufficient to cover Oveur's "sacrifice/disadvantage" - and I disagree.
Why? Well effectively purchasing a starmap is getting you to 'pay' for insta travel. Now even assuming that the cost of starmaps is quite high (and much of the arguments posted here suggest they wouldn't be) due to their longevity the price you are paying per insta jump is really very very small. In fact those that produce their own in theory get it for free: exactly the same as insta bookmarks.
So what are we left with? Starmaps are a complex way of 'reinventing' the instabookmark. Sure its a interesting and possibly appealing way to reinvent the instabookmark - BUT it doesn't address the core issue.
In summary let it put it another way; If I said I had a solution to the instabook mark and it was this:
"Each insta jump you make costs 100ISK".
Would it get much support? I doubt it. Now if you can come up with a suitable disadvantage to using a starmap then I'll be really interested.
C.
www.sefrim.com - sig design - eve mail for details
|
Par'Gellen
Low Grade Ore
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 13:59:00 -
[323]
Edited by: Par''Gellen on 06/10/2006 13:59:30
Originally by: Cailais What Oveur was trying to say is that instabookmarks give you fast, and nearly invulnerable travel. He felt (and I agree) that this was contary to the spirit of the game. Now, he also explained that he recognised there was a 'need' amongst players to travel fast, and sometimes safely and that instabook marks provided that. His point was though that there was no disadvantage to having that ability. In simple terms if a player wants to 'instajump' he sould sacrifice something else for it (and he's asked the community to suggest what that 'something' might be).
Now the 'starmap' idea reduces the pile of bookmarks (good thing), provides a new player driven industry (good thing), but still has the same effect as instabookmarks in terms of travel and safety (bad thing).
Aliniel believes the cost of purchasing/producing a starmap is sufficient to cover Oveur's "sacrifice/disadvantage" - and I disagree.
Why? Well effectively purchasing a starmap is getting you to 'pay' for insta travel. Now even assuming that the cost of starmaps is quite high (and much of the arguments posted here suggest they wouldn't be) due to their longevity the price you are paying per insta jump is really very very small. In fact those that produce their own in theory get it for free: exactly the same as insta bookmarks.
So what are we left with? Starmaps are a complex way of 'reinventing' the instabookmark. Sure its a interesting and possibly appealing way to reinvent the instabookmark - BUT it doesn't address the core issue.
In summary let it put it another way; If I said I had a solution to the instabook mark and it was this:
"Each insta jump you make costs 100ISK".
Would it get much support? I doubt it. Now if you can come up with a suitable disadvantage to using a starmap then I'll be really interested.
C.
Ah. I see your point. Thanks for clearing that up. However, starmaps wouldn't be the same as instas due to the fact that they would eventually need to be repurchased or reproduced. This would definitely be a drawback of time and/or isk which current instas do not have above the initial purchase or creation. Once an insta is created it stays forever at no cost. Unlike instas starmaps would need to be maintained in order to keep them viable which I think is a great way of introducing a downside to insta travel. Insta travel in dangerous areas should obviously have a higher drawback than insta travel through newb space. Starmaps provide this as well through the market (dangerous systems would cost more due to higher demand/lower supply) or direct danger (dangerous systems are well... dangerous, and creating maps in them risks your ship and pod the same as doing anything else does in those systems). Personally I don't think the downside to fast travel should be enourmous but I agree that there does need to be a downside of some kind.
Everyone is bringing up great points in this discussion (with the exception of a select few who just argue for argument's sake ) and the more I see the other viewpoints the more I love this idea. Thanks for the input Cailais! ---
Starmaps - A Quality Insta Solution |
Cailais
Amarr THE SEFRIM INSTITUTE
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 14:33:00 -
[324]
Edited by: Cailais on 06/10/2006 14:34:24 With a concept like this its very difficult to judege 'how much' a star map might cost. Now if cost is a disadvantage to insta use, who - amongst the player base - suffers that disadvantage most? I would argue the 'noobie': He/she has less isk than everyone else. So if 0.0 space is 'expensive' to get into (you need the starmap to survive) it is likely to discourage the newer / poorer player from going there.
In a sense this makes your wealth and indication of your 'level' in EVE. High 'level players (with lots of isk) play in 0.0, because they can afford insta travel. Low 'level' players don't. But EVE isnt about "levels" is it?
Who suffers the least from this disadvantage? The rich - they can afford to pay for multiple starmaps without batting an eyelid. So the rich have the greatest ability to travel fast and safely. One might imagine the age old truism here - the rich get richer, while the poor: well they just get podded.
Perhaps if having lots of 'starmaps' effected something else it could be a good system. Maybe lots of starmaps on your database reduces your targeting speed, restricts your mining capability, reduces your maximum cap, skill learning speed etc etc.
Which everway you look at it there should (I would argue) be a 'disadvantage' that is not purely based on cost and or time.
C.
www.sefrim.com - sig design - eve mail for details
|
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 15:19:00 -
[325]
Originally by: Cailais What Oveur was trying to say is that instabookmarks give you fast, and nearly invulnerable travel. He felt (and I agree) that this was contary to the spirit of the game. Now, he also explained that he recognised there was a 'need' amongst players to travel fast, and sometimes safely and that instabook marks provided that. His point was though that there was no disadvantage to having that ability. In simple terms if a player wants to 'instajump' he sould sacrifice something else for it (and he's asked the community to suggest what that 'something' might be).
Now the 'starmap' idea reduces the pile of bookmarks (good thing), provides a new player driven industry (good thing), but still has the same effect as instabookmarks in terms of travel and safety (bad thing).
Aliniel believes the cost of purchasing/producing a starmap is sufficient to cover Oveur's "sacrifice/disadvantage" - and I disagree.
The starmaps idea was not created to solve the "invulnerability" problem (I have already mentioned this, btw). It was created to handle the other problems caused by bookmarks (which you have already mentioned - the sheer number and memory cost of bookmarks). The invulnerability problem would have to be solved seperately - such as allowing certain types of warp bubbles in low sec space, or causing a delay between when you exit an insta jump and when you can initiate the jump sequence, or whatever it may be. The point of starmaps is purely to reduce the amount of space that bookmarks take up in the database.
|
Cailais
Amarr THE SEFRIM INSTITUTE
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 15:32:00 -
[326]
Edited by: Cailais on 06/10/2006 15:32:34
"The starmaps idea was not created to solve the "invulnerability" problem (I have already mentioned this, btw). It was created to handle the other problems caused by bookmarks (which you have already mentioned - the sheer number and memory cost of bookmarks). The invulnerability problem would have to be solved seperately.... "
Wouldn't it make sense that if you're going to fix BM load (including BM Instas) you solve both issues at the same time??
Afterall the sheer number of BMs is created by what? - everyone having lots of instas per chance? The two issues are implicitly linked. (edit: hence the OP title 'a quality insta solution')
C.
www.sefrim.com - sig design - eve mail for details
|
Iog Krugar
Gallente The Rising Stars
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 16:08:00 -
[327]
Edited by: Iog Krugar on 06/10/2006 16:11:43 mh, the focus of Starmaps is to reduce server load by reducing further multiplication of travel bookmarks. ppl who already have full g2g sets for everywhere they roam have no incentive to remove them. they may get starmaps on top of that for autopilot travel (which, by the way, adds no server load cause it only alters a then existing value in their chars dataset, it doesnt add one), but they surely wont remove bookmarks that allow them to non-afk insta-travel without the time based accuracy degradation. why throw something away that was meant to last forever? so this whole idea only appeals to the lazyness (or cheapness, depening on starmap-pricing vs bookmark-pricing) of newer players or older players moving to new areas.
so i was thinking "hey, lets make bookmarks degrade as well". then i spent 2 nights making scanprobe launching bookmarks in my home region and now i really hate the idea. but i'll share it anyways: lets make orbit items, well, orbit. if you'd make a solar system go the way solar systems go, bookmarks become obsolete within mere seconds (our beloved earth moves at about 30km/s around our sun). afaik the data needed for that is already in the game (ever looked at the showinfo attributes tab of a planet?). you could make them move a days worth during downtime to not add to much dynamic calculations to the game and not having to do the whole relative-speed thing properly.
basic astrological charts (read: what you got without starmaps) ofc have all the astrometrical data needed to calculate orbits within a certain margin of error, and up to date (player made) high precision starmaps help to root out the last insecurities and allow more risky warp-to stunts. there you go.
this of course completely frells up regular non-tactical bookmarks like safe- or scanspots ("ohnoes, moon incoming! warp! warp! warpalreadyyougodda..." *splat*), so there is further thinking required. but casting that problem aside for a moment, and looking at the game mechanics you could further say that ships made for traveling (read: shuttles. maybe one of each races frigates as well) usually forego targetting sensor and combat upgrades for hi-precision navigational systems, comfortable pod paddings and consumer electronics, but cutting edge combat vessels of course have crappy nav systems since their basic loadouts are meant for shortrange deployment only (blah blah). so here comes the superduper warp-to-2km starmapcalculationmodule that takes up a hislot and that for above obscure gameplay reason shuttles get for free.
--- i suposse everyone rolls around stations in pods |
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 16:38:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Iog Krugar Edited by: Iog Krugar on 06/10/2006 16:11:43 mh, the focus of Starmaps is to reduce server load by reducing further multiplication of travel bookmarks. ppl who already have full g2g sets for everywhere they roam have no incentive to remove them. they may get starmaps on top of that for autopilot travel (which, by the way, adds no server load cause it only alters a then existing value in their chars dataset, it doesnt add one), but they surely wont remove bookmarks that allow them to non-afk insta-travel without the time based accuracy degradation. why throw something away that was meant to last forever? so this whole idea only appeals to the lazyness (or cheapness, depening on starmap-pricing vs bookmark-pricing) of newer players or older players moving to new areas.
so i was thinking "hey, lets make bookmarks degrade as well". then i spent 2 nights making scanprobe launching bookmarks in my ...
This problem is caused by the fact there are only 3 ways for the bookmark problem to disappear:
(1) Forcibly remove bookmarks from player's possesion. (2) Bribe players into giving up bookmarks. (3) Alter the function of bookmarks.
If we select option (1), you either have to simply get rid of bookmarks, or iterate through the bookmarks and remove any bms that are on the same grid as a gate.
If we select option (2), we have to give players something better than bookmarks, and the only way to do that is to give them the same "invulnerability" as bookmarks, with no degredation. Warp-to-0km for everyone is the only solution that I can think of that would fall under here.
If we select option (3), we are left with the solutions such as corporate owned BMs, or removing the name of the bookmark from the server (reduces the size of the bookmark by 90%), or limit each character to a certain number of instas.
Starmaps would probably have to use option (1) - either remove all bookmarks (probably a bad idea - no safe spots), or remove all bookmarks that are close to a gate (computationally expensive, but is a one time cost given that you prevent new bookmarks from being created near gates).
Option (2) just plain wouldn't work with starmaps, since players have no incentive to abandon something that already works perfectly fine for them.
|
Permian
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 16:49:00 -
[329]
Edited by: Permian on 06/10/2006 16:50:36 The thread title is a misnomer. This isn't an insta solution. It doesn't even address Oveur's devblog, let alone meet any criteria. Starmaps have absolutely nothing to do with fixing instas from a gameplay perspective.
They attempt to solve a db issue that players shouldn't even be concerned with in the first place. If CCP needs to fix their db then let them do it. Starmaps will produce a drastic, permanent, unnecessary change in gameplay for all players on a daily basis.
And for what? Because CCP can't come up with a better solution to their db woes?
edit can't spel
Exclamation point since 5/30 |
Taedrin
Gallente Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.06 16:55:00 -
[330]
Originally by: Cailais Edited by: Cailais on 06/10/2006 15:32:34
"The starmaps idea was not created to solve the "invulnerability" problem (I have already mentioned this, btw). It was created to handle the other problems caused by bookmarks (which you have already mentioned - the sheer number and memory cost of bookmarks). The invulnerability problem would have to be solved seperately.... "
Wouldn't it make sense that if you're going to fix BM load (including BM Instas) you solve both issues at the same time??
Afterall the sheer number of BMs is created by what? - everyone having lots of instas per chance? The two issues are implicitly linked. (edit: hence the OP title 'a quality insta solution')
C.
And my next post...
Solutions which try to solve multiple problems at once usually come at a some sort of price, and have unforseen consequences.
However, having a single solution for a single problem causes a lot of code, and more code can mean more bugs. Especially in companies where Quality Assurance doesn't communicate well with the developers (something that happens more often in the larger companies).
One solution for multiple problems gives you less flexibility, and makes it harder to change the code without causing one of the problems to crop up again.
One solution for one problem can quickly turn into an incoherent mess if you arne't careful. Of course, this usually happens in large programs ANYWAYS, but the point remains.
There are advantages and disadvantages for each design philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |