Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
399
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 04:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Just a thought since its difficult to test things in whs, thus letting bugs slip through onto the live server. Why not have a system near 6-c Have static whs. You could split it up so that there's 6 systems each with static c1-c6 or have a single system with all 6 statics. This would make testing new features in wh space much easier while making the chance of bugs and detrimental features effect wspace.
I don't see any draw backs to this other then losing potential kills on live server from people thoroughly testing wh stuff.
Discuss Blue-Fire Best Fire |
hellswindstaff
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 05:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
|
|
CCP Goliath
C C P C C P Alliance
2330
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 11:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
I've had similar thoughts, interestingly enough. Been chatting to the folk that know more about distribution than I do, and there are definitely some solutions in there. Next step is working out what the right solution is in terms of cost/effort/reward balance and get it happening! CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2833
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 13:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
The lack of WHs on Sisi is due to their mechanics, only one end exists until someone visits it. as most WH start in a WH system, there is no exit in K space until someone in W space visits the WH. As there are so few people on Sisi, that does not happen much. Hence few wormholes.
How about a script that "tickles" all the wormholes, just as if someone visited them, so both ends exist? In this way Sisi would still work the same way as TQ. It would not have special code. Just the downtime maintenance would be different. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2328
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 13:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:The lack of WHs on Sisi is due to their mechanics, only one end exists until someone visits it. as most WH start in a WH system, there is no exit in K space until someone in W space visits the WH. As there are so few people on Sisi, that does not happen much. Hence few wormholes.
How about a script that "tickles" all the wormholes, just as if someone visited them, so both ends exist? In this way Sisi would still work the same way as TQ. It would not have special code. Just the downtime maintenance would be different.
As long as wormholes last 23.5hrs if left un-traveled-through (which I believe they do), this could potentially be a winning sort of idea.
|
Leon en Marland
Blue-Fire
20
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 17:09:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:The lack of WHs on Sisi is due to their mechanics, only one end exists until someone visits it. as most WH start in a WH system, there is no exit in K space until someone in W space visits the WH. As there are so few people on Sisi, that does not happen much. Hence few wormholes.
How about a script that "tickles" all the wormholes, just as if someone visited them, so both ends exist? In this way Sisi would still work the same way as TQ. It would not have special code. Just the downtime maintenance would be different. As long as wormholes last 23.5hrs if left un-traveled-through (which I believe they do), this could potentially be a winning sort of idea.
Or even just turn off WH time decay/total mass on sisi (at the risk of missing any bugs that may rely on either of those things to happen) |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
149
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 17:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
This risks masking TQ bugs when you mess with too many SiSi mechanics and make SiSi diverge from TQ, and its really not that hard to just find a suitable WH so why take this risk? The real solution is for POSs to be mirrored so you can log into your pos and actually do your test in your home. If a WH is not your home I'd say just take the hour looking for one. |
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
402
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 18:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
I understand your point about Sisi and TQ mechanics diverging leaving room for bugs to slip through, but how does making wh's more plentiful/easier to find open up holes for bugs? Maybe you're referring to the suggestion about a script tickling wh's. Then yes I think I agree with you that that is a bad method.
As for spending an hour to find a wh to test. Thats my point exactly! Anything you want to test in wh's is inherently more time consuming which means less people do it. If I want to test a combat fit I jump on sisi, use the moveme bot, fit the ship, undock, warp to combat area and commence testing. This can happen in a span of 5 minutes. If I want to test a new feature, again can do that instantly. If I want to test wh stuff I have to spend on average an hour each day of testing just to find a wh. Add more time to find the correct type of wh. My suggestion at least removes that first hurdle from testing making it much easier to test features in wh space.
This brings up another point about testing exploration in general. If we're gonna get static wh's shouldn't we also get static exploration sites? Just a thought Blue-Fire Best Fire |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2329
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 19:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
In the case of Vincent's idea, it's not really "SiSi diverging from TQ". It's simply replacing TQ's wormhole-dwellers with a script to imitate their behavior. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2834
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 20:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:In the case of Vincent's idea, it's not really "SiSi diverging from TQ". It's simply replacing TQ's wormhole-dwellers with a script to imitate their behavior. Right. The idea is to not mess with the mechanics at all, leave Sisi and TQ the same. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
436
|
Posted - 2014.07.25 06:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:In the case of Vincent's idea, it's not really "SiSi diverging from TQ". It's simply replacing TQ's wormhole-dwellers with a script to imitate their behavior.
So if there is a problem on SISI due to bug in code with regards to mechanics of spawning WH when player warps to it we will test it then how? Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
508
|
Posted - 2014.07.26 03:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
Special scripting a wh enterance from one system to each of the different types of wh shouldnt be breaking of anything. just remember that you have 5 different types of wh, and nine different wh types. - c 1-2-3-4-5-6 normal, mag, bh, rg, cat, pulse and wolf
hs-hs hs-low hs-null low-low low-null null-null
42 sigs, though id break that up into each different type of wh static from a different system. so six to a system. those wh systems wouldnt have to have any special script properties of their own . Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Amak Boma
Dragon Factory
9
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 23:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
or just for sisi turn off wormholes to be scanned and keep them to access them without probing them |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
977
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 11:56:00 -
[14] - Quote
Currently if one wishes to test the effects of changes on all classes of wormholes and all effects, we will be three releases on before we have found them all on sisi.
We should have three systems with all types opening into it that can be moved to with the command WHmoveme. (WLmove me and WNmoveme) one per sec type. Anything else just will not cut it. And most changes and mistakes will be missed.
Which is why we usually discover unintentional side effects in production, after the fact. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Amak Boma
Dragon Factory
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 18:12:00 -
[15] - Quote
WHmoveme C# where C is class like c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 etc. that would be very nice or just WHmoveme command to be moved into random wormhole but only problem if u dont have probes in ur ship - self destruct hehe |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
981
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 11:03:00 -
[16] - Quote
All three of these options will work, the last one where one can be moved to a specific wormhole would be the perfect solution. But any one of them would achieve the goal of being able to test the following 3 requirements.
Exit from c class of wormhole to the Kspace one wishes to test Movement between classes of wormholes. Effects encountered and tested.
This covers the main requirements, sisi works adequately in the main for K Space, because every gate basically is doing the same thing.
Every wormhole is between different space or class of space. So much to go wrong, just look at the recent polarisation bug, this was only discovered as people were paranoid about getting another surprise. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |