Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Bimjo
Caldari SKULLDOGS
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 07:47:00 -
[1]
I thought of saying "CCP,why can't BPO and BPC icons have a slight graphical difference?" then I thought you guys would have been on the case by now
so I can only conclude there must be a logical reason why CCP hasn't made the change ? If so enlighten me ty
|
Corporati Capitalis
Tollan Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 07:49:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Bimjo If so enlighten me
Pretty please?
|
Burchov
Lyrus Associates
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 08:28:00 -
[3]
Because in the database a BPO and BPC are the same item, only differing in the number of runs. And ofcourse, if the item is the same, the icon is the same.
|
agrajag119
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 08:42:00 -
[4]
the cited reason is a database problem. to make a different icon for BPC's would just further increase the size of the db record for items or some such. whatever the reason, adding more types of icons to the system would just increase lag.
|
Corporati Capitalis
Tollan Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 09:50:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Burchov Because in the database a BPO and BPC are the same item, only differing in the number of runs. And ofcourse, if the item is the same, the icon is the same.
But you can't put a BPO and a BPC in the same stack, so they must in fact be different entries in the database, right? So having different icons for them shouldn't put any strain on the DB, especially as the icons are rendered locally anyway.
Unless when you just look at a blueprint in your hangar/cargohold/etc., the server sends you just two values - "item = blueprint" and "item type = small shield booster I" (for example), in which case having one extra attribute to send (copy/original) would indeed increase the strain a bit.
|
Hohne
Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:35:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Corporati Capitalis
Originally by: Burchov Because in the database a BPO and BPC are the same item, only differing in the number of runs. And ofcourse, if the item is the same, the icon is the same.
But you can't put a BPO and a BPC in the same stack, so they must in fact be different entries in the database, right? So having different icons for them shouldn't put any strain on the DB, especially as the icons are rendered locally anyway.
Unless when you just look at a blueprint in your hangar/cargohold/etc., the server sends you just two values - "item = blueprint" and "item type = small shield booster I" (for example), in which case having one extra attribute to send (copy/original) would indeed increase the strain a bit.
You can't put 'unpackaged' items in the same stack, no matter what type of items they are. And any researched BPO or any BPC at all is unpackaged. You can't even stack BPCs because of this. All are 'blueprint xyz' with a number of runs + me/pe stats. So they are the same item in the database. So they both have the same icon.
I don't believe adding 2x as many items would really put that much strain on the DB, but adding coding that spits out a different itemtype from a BPO etc when copying would require some changes at the ground level that would be a fair bit of work and could have lots of unforseen effects. Basically, CCP believe the effort > reward.
Which is a real pain in the ass, but is a real reason. And yes, this issue comes up at least twice a year.
|
|
Libertina
ISD STAR Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:45:00 -
[7]
All items you have have an ID in the database, representing that item. To show you an image of said item, only that ID is needed. However, since the difference between a BPO and a BPC is in one attribute only and not in the item ID, they are essentially the same.
Now to show different images for your BPO's and BPC's, each time you'd open a hangar, can or whatever with those in them, you'd have to query the whole sets of attributes, just like it is done when you do a show info on them. Just imagine how long you'd sit and wait for a hangar with a few dozends of your BPO's/BPC's to show info on each and every item there.
Why is it so that I can see T2 and stuff, you ask? They are different items with different ID's, they don't share the same databse entry.
|
|
Hohne
Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 15:27:00 -
[8]
Yes well different icon for different attributes = quick fix, but introduces alot of extra load, guaranteed.
Giving BPCs different item ids = Possible, no more effort for the client side, but possibly alot of tough changes to make on the server side. There's already something similar in action where T1 BPCs >>> T2 BPCs with invention. So it's possible. Would be abit of a messy hack though, and a process would need to be run on the DB examining each BPC and reassigning it a new item ID.
|
Talidorn
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 15:58:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Talidorn on 16/07/2007 15:58:46 Edited by: Talidorn on 16/07/2007 15:58:20
Originally by: Libertina stuff
Ok, fine...
But if you show info on a BPO and a BPC there is a line that says ORIGINAL or COPY. That is a DB reference somewhere. If the DB knows that, couldn't the image be different for the two?
This isn't rocket science... it's DBA work. It isn't difficult.
If BPtype == ORIGINAL use icon itemnumberO else use icon itemnumberC
There quick and easy solution... hire me for sorting out C.rappy C.oded P.atches.
Talidorn
|
Alatari
Winterdawn
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 20:20:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Talidorn But if you show info on a BPO and a BPC there is a line that says ORIGINAL or COPY. That is a DB reference somewhere. If the DB knows that, couldn't the image be different for the two?
Yes, there's a database lookup, but only when you show info. For seperate icons to be displayed would involve an extra database lookup for all BPOs in that hanger/container.
This was argued over at length about a year ago.
|
|
Alatari
Winterdawn
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 20:23:00 -
[11]
Forum link
|
Matthew
Caldari BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.07.17 12:22:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Libertina All items you have have an ID in the database, representing that item. To show you an image of said item, only that ID is needed. However, since the difference between a BPO and a BPC is in one attribute only and not in the item ID, they are essentially the same.
Actually, they have different ItemID's, but the same TypeID.
There are two main tables involved here, the Items table, and the Type table.
The Type table contains all the information specific to a type. This is the table that says a Condor has a base shield capacity of 274, or that blueprint X manufactures an item of TypeID=Y.
The Items table contains all the information specific to that item. This is the table that says my condor currently has 125 shield HP left, or that blueprint X has Y runs remaining.
Which icon is displayed is specific to the Type, not the Item, so is specified in the Type table. Whether the blueprint is a copy or not is specific to the Item, so is specified in the Item table.
That is the crux of the problem - the two bits of data you need are in two different tables. While in theory it is possible to join these tables and do a simple query to retrieve both bits of information, in practice that process is far, far too computationally expensive, as verified by the dev post Alatari linked to and several similar ones I've seen in the past.
There is simply no way to get the two required bits of information out of the database in a reasonable and load-efficient manner. A cludge of spamming individual "show-info" style requests for each BP would also generate unreasonable load.
The only way to make this possible would be a signficant change in the database structure, with the wide-reaching implications that would have. This feature, frankly, simply isn't a serious enough need to warrant that. If Need for Speed or whatever requires the database to be changed anyway, then I would be all in favour of tailoring that change so that this can work too. But while it would be nice to have, it's not on it's own worth the man-years of work it would take to rip up the database to make it happen.
Originally by: Hohne Giving BPCs different item ids = Possible, no more effort for the client side, but possibly alot of tough changes to make on the server side. There's already something similar in action where T1 BPCs >>> T2 BPCs with invention. So it's possible. Would be abit of a messy hack though, and a process would need to be run on the DB examining each BPC and reassigning it a new item ID.
Unfortunately, that creates a consistency nightmare in terms of authoring - you now have 2 entries for every blueprint, which you have to make sure remain perfectly consistent. You would also have to add a new property to every BPO type specifying which BPC type should be made of it from a copy job. It opens up the possibility of oddness such as a Hulk BPO making a hulk, while the BPC makes a gatling pulse laser. Or makes a hulk but takes twice as long etc. Not to mention the possibility that putting a hulk BPO into a copy job could actually yield a bantam BPC. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Trak Cranker
Serenity Inc
|
Posted - 2007.07.17 14:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Matthew
The Type table contains all the information specific to a type. This is the table that says a Condor has a base shield capacity of 274, or that blueprint X manufactures an item of TypeID=Y.
And even that is not entirely correct. The type table will basically just say that this is a Condor of the type frigate/ship.
Then there is the TypeAttributes table that says what general attributes and values of those attributes the ship has. And these attributes are set up in AttributeTypes table, in terms of what type they are.
So just in order to get info on the general Condor or Blueprint, you would have make a join these three tables together. And when you then add the specific values for changeable attribute values, you add another join. All this will create tons of load, if people all over the galaxy suddenly has to load this info every time they have to show an icon. Instead of just showing you "here is a blueprint".
The right fix is of course, as stated before in this thread I believe, to make BPOs and BPCs two different types. That would mean that a lot of code would have to be rewritten to handle this fact, though. But it would also eliminate a lof of checks needed in the code as it is now though, I suspect. But overall that entails risk of introducing errors, so its a pros/cons descision that CCP has probably thought and decided on.
CCP has tried to meet us halfway on this in the S&I window, with the blueprints lists there, where the additional info is loaded and they can be sorted in copies and originals. Now if they would only let us select multiple blueprints there and move them at the same time...
|
Talidorn
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.18 22:32:00 -
[14]
Perhaps CCP should evaluate the total number of BPCs in game. I alone have hundreds. Why? Duh... invention.
With the number of BPCs they should generate a solution.
Here is another suggestion. When I do a list in the hangar where I keep all my bpo/c a column could show O or C. That way when I want to move some of my Cs from one place to another I could easily id them. Cuz afaik, i can't drag them from their location if I am listing them in S&I.
I'm just tired of sorting bpos and bpcs regularly. Sadly the only way I have now is to Show info for every single print that is duplicated. One of my hangars currently has over 800 prints I have to sort. :P
ok, whine mode off.
My solution is workable, just "costly" until CCP fixes the issue.
Talidorn
|
Fatsam
Madhatters Inc. M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 12:34:00 -
[15]
There maybe good reasons why there is no difference in graphic. I don't care. All I want is to make my game experience more fun and different BPO/BPC graphics would do that.
Right clicking on every BP in your hanger is not fun. Managing corp stocks I have literally thousands to sort through.
At the very least allow us to run production jobs from cans so you can partition them up once!
|
Hohne
Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 16:20:00 -
[16]
There's already a partial solution, if you look at the blueprints through the S&I window they display attribute (runs / me / pe etc). It would be GREAT if we could get a hangar view like this, or a way of moving around BPs using this view. (And maybe a default where it doesn't show your blueprints in every station in the region unless you drop down that station etc - I know that 'sort of' happens at the moment, but all too often I find myself looking at BPs in a far away station accidentally.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |