Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
103
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:58:17 -
[1] - Quote
My Idea is pretty straight forward: 1. Change all BPCs names to include research level and and their state as a copy 2. remove the amount-of-run attribute 3. Make them stackable and give us the ability to take apart stacks like with usual items
For example: "Brutix Blueprint" could be called: "Brutix Blueprint Copy (10/20)"
What is the current state? Blueprints and copies are an integral part of eve online. Masses of them are used/produced every single second. Yet handling copies is an enormous pain. Right now I can make myself 50 Brutix BPCs (each a 10 run) in a single month. That means I will have 50 items in my hangar just from that. If I'd make them single runs, I'd have 500 unique items in my hangar. Due to the hardlimit of 1000 unique items only 2 copy slots can completly clog up my inventory. And this is with the rather big/expensive battlecruiser BPCs. For smaller Blueprints like modules and frigates this gets MUCH MUCH worse. Also if you want to use all 11 copy slots or multiple characters or just buy many blueprints from contracts this gets utterly ridiculous.
What are the advantages of my proposed change? a) BPCs with the same research level can be stacked indefinetly and only take up a single slot. It will not clog up your inventory anymore to have a lot of BPCs there. b) The load-times of viewing/contracting vast amounts of items/BPC are very long. This would be significantly reduced. c) It would be much easier to view the actual amount of BPCs in a contract, without the need to actually count them by hand. d) Right now ppl prefer to make small-run BPCs, as these are easier to spread to your research slots. After this change people could just take a stack and use up as many BPCs as they want for each slot. e) To view the research level in your hangar right now you have to "show-info" on each single one. It would be much easier to get the information out of the name. f) You are able to tell apart BPOs and BPCs without looking at what shade of blue it is.
What are the disadvantages of my proposed change? a) The BPCs dont have the same name as the BPOs anymore (which could be a good thing?) b) The names will get longer c) Eve might lose some (imho unneeded) complexitiy d) people dislike change
I'm looking for people to bring up possible further aspects of this I might have missed, constructive critique and people that agree/disagree. Feel free to post your opinions. |
Lothros Andastar
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
331
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 11:10:19 -
[2] - Quote
Legacy Code says no |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
103
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 11:12:20 -
[3] - Quote
I added that to the disadvantages.
I also added a secondary improvement that shouldn't be a problem with their code.
But do you agree it would be a good change if they implement it? |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3176
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 12:57:14 -
[4] - Quote
Stacking isn't happening.
Merging the runs of several BPCs into a single BPC would probably be feasible, not really sure if there are any unintended consequences there, though.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
159
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 18:29:15 -
[5] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Stacking isn't happening.
Merging the runs of several BPCs into a single BPC would probably be feasible, not really sure if there are any unintended consequences there, though.
to build on this... it wouldn't even have to be the same level of improvement.
It would just take the worst of each of the ME and TE. And use that for the new BPC (that would have the sum of the number of runs). |
Shallanna Yassavi
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
550
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 22:30:39 -
[6] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Stacking isn't happening.
Merging the runs of several BPCs into a single BPC would probably be feasible, not really sure if there are any unintended consequences there, though. Tech II stuff becomes a *lot* less tedious to make. With tech most 2 small BPCs, you can "have to" start a new batch every 4 hours or so to saturate an indy toon. If you're making, say, light drones, that becomes 3 hours on a station. If you're using a citadel, that gets even shorter. If we could string BPC together, we could make T2 build jobs run for a week or more.
T2 invention can be thrown in for up to a month if your tech 1 BPC has enough runs and you have the materials.
A signature :o
|
Cade Windstalker
1572
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 23:14:06 -
[7] - Quote
So, first off, this would require adding an item entry to the database for every possible combination of TE and ME. Since there are 21 and 11 different numerical values for that respectively that's 231 items for what currently takes one item, and there are BPs for *everything* so the poor database just got a massive amount of additional data added to it that it has to deal with.
Combine that with the legacy code that needs to be sifted through for this to work and it would basically be easier to leave things exactly as they are and modify the existing system to accommodate stacking of BPCs, which is roughly equivalent ripping a 200 year old tree out down to the roots and then trying to replant it...
So yeah, in short I don't think you actually appreciate how massive the weight on the "disadvantages" side of the scale is here. |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
116
|
Posted - 2017.06.17 19:57:13 -
[8] - Quote
Hmmm now that you mention it, this would indeed add a lot more unique items to eve, whcih might be problematic. They could stil give us the ability to split and combine BPCs/runs. That would already solve the major issues. |
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
3961
|
Posted - 2017.06.17 20:24:50 -
[9] - Quote
Splitting and combining bpc's of the same material and speed level is the best chance of this happening. But i don't know if its even possible.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Do Little
Virgin Plc Evictus.
1310
|
Posted - 2017.06.17 20:45:18 -
[10] - Quote
I made a mistake a while back and ended up with 300 1 run BPCs instead of 1 300 run BPC. Boy would I love to be able to merge runs of identical BPCs!
I don't expect this to happen, it will let people overcome slot limitations and make more stuff - the last thing Eve needs is increased production!
Use containers to sort your blueprints.
A special T2 or T3 container that could hold other containers is an idea I would support. That would make life a whole lot easier and shouldn't mess with the database too badly. |
|
Matthias Ancaladron
Wrath of Angels Solitaire.
361
|
Posted - 2017.06.18 14:01:52 -
[11] - Quote
This is a sub issue of a larger issue.
Why the F**K can't we make our own hangar tabs. Corp can rent space and make corp hangar tabs.
Hangar > right click > create new tab > type in blueprints A small folder tab appears as a small task bar beneath the main station services taskbars that contains ships, agents, offices, hangar.
Really the entire station services tab need to be completely redesigned. It wastes so much space. Its a very simply qol change and we could finally get rid of stupid F***ING station containers that I can't repackage for two weeks. |
Matthias Khenakhtre
Wrath of Angels Solitaire.
397
|
Posted - 2017.06.18 14:01:52 -
[12] - Quote
This is a sub issue of a larger issue.
Why the F**K can't we make our own hangar tabs. Corp can rent space and make corp hangar tabs.
Hangar > right click > create new tab > type in blueprints A small folder tab appears as a small task bar beneath the main station services taskbars that contains ships, agents, offices, hangar.
Really the entire station services tab need to be completely redesigned. It wastes so much space. Its a very simply qol change and we could finally get rid of stupid F***ING station containers that I can't repackage for two weeks. |
Matthias Ancaladron
Wrath of Angels Solitaire.
361
|
Posted - 2017.06.18 14:09:11 -
[13] - Quote
Do Little wrote:I made a mistake a while back and ended up with 300 1 run BPCs instead of 1 300 run BPC. Boy would I love to be able to merge runs of identical BPCs!
I don't expect this to happen, it will let people overcome slot limitations and make more stuff - the last thing Eve needs is increased production!
Use containers to sort your blueprints.
A special T2 or T3 container that could hold other containers is an idea I would support. That would make life a whole lot easier and shouldn't mess with the database too badly. Please no more containers. Redesigning station services and offering the option to create your own sub hangars is what needs to happen.
I said it in another thread but it's incredibly redundant being forced to buy item and put in your hangar to hold items you put in your hangar because I simply can't organize my hangar. Having a t2 or t3 container would be an item to out in my hangar that hold other items in my hangar that holds items in my hangars. I don't mean this in a provocative or insulting way but I want to roll up a nosepaper and smack you on the nose with it and say BAD, NO for suggesting more station containers lol. Station containers need to go. |
Matthias Khenakhtre
Wrath of Angels Solitaire.
397
|
Posted - 2017.06.18 14:09:11 -
[14] - Quote
Do Little wrote:I made a mistake a while back and ended up with 300 1 run BPCs instead of 1 300 run BPC. Boy would I love to be able to merge runs of identical BPCs!
I don't expect this to happen, it will let people overcome slot limitations and make more stuff - the last thing Eve needs is increased production!
Use containers to sort your blueprints.
A special T2 or T3 container that could hold other containers is an idea I would support. That would make life a whole lot easier and shouldn't mess with the database too badly. Please no more containers. Redesigning station services and offering the option to create your own sub hangars is what needs to happen.
I said it in another thread but it's incredibly redundant being forced to buy item and put in your hangar to hold items you put in your hangar because I simply can't organize my hangar. Having a t2 or t3 container would be an item to out in my hangar that hold other items in my hangar that holds items in my hangars. I don't mean this in a provocative or insulting way but I want to roll up a nosepaper and smack you on the nose with it and say BAD, NO for suggesting more station containers lol. Station containers need to go. |
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
123
|
Posted - 2017.06.23 21:54:59 -
[15] - Quote
1. Install Station Container in hangar 2. Rename to, "Blueprints" 3. Put all your blueprints in it
Problem solved. |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
116
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 19:11:16 -
[16] - Quote
Do Little wrote:I made a mistake a while back and ended up with 300 1 run BPCs instead of 1 300 run BPC. Boy would I love to be able to merge runs of identical BPCs!
I don't expect this to happen, it will let people overcome slot limitations and make more stuff - the last thing Eve needs is increased production!
Use containers to sort your blueprints.
A special T2 or T3 container that could hold other containers is an idea I would support. That would make life a whole lot easier and shouldn't mess with the database too badly.
How could this be used to overcome slot limitations? Bascily any BPO is an infinite run BPC. I don't see BPOs overcoming slot limitations. Having hundreds of the same BPC type is just plain annoying.
Marcus Binchiette wrote:1. Install Station Container in hangar 2. Rename to, "Blueprints" 3. Put all your blueprints in it
Problem solved.
If all BPCs would fit into a single container without ruining the clear view, we wouldn't have any problem with this.
Easy solotion: 1. "Stack all" can combine all BPCs of the same research level to a massive run BPC 2. Rightlich on a multiple run BPCs offers the "split runs" option
done! (: |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6735
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 19:37:11 -
[17] - Quote
Marcus Binchiette wrote:1. Install Station Container in hangar 2. Rename to, "Blueprints" 3. Put all your blueprints in it
Problem solved.
Or any container really. That is what I do. I have by BPO can, my BPC can, the can for raw materials, etc.
Oh, and use the search function....
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Cade Windstalker
1579
|
Posted - 2017.06.27 20:01:26 -
[18] - Quote
Combining runs of otherwise identical BPCs is probably the most likely way this could be resolved, since adjusting run count on a BPC is already possible. The trick is actually implementing it and making sure there's no way to get low-quality BPCs to turn into higher quality ones. |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
118
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 08:26:21 -
[19] - Quote
So what's CCP's take on this? Would we be allowed to combine and split runs? |
Cade Windstalker
1583
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 12:55:13 -
[20] - Quote
Destriouth Hollow wrote:So what's CCP's take on this? Would we be allowed to combine and split runs?
You're not going to get an official response to a question like this. They'll either implement it or they won't.
You could always put the idea of combining run counts into the Little Things thread on the New Forums. Make sure you use correct formatting though! |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3445
|
Posted - 2017.06.29 15:35:14 -
[21] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Combining runs of otherwise identical BPCs is probably the most likely way this could be resolved, since adjusting run count on a BPC is already possible. The trick is actually implementing it and making sure there's no way to get low-quality BPCs to turn into higher quality ones.
Just make the process always go to the lowest of each ME and TE. |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
118
|
Posted - 2017.07.07 10:04:26 -
[22] - Quote
What new forums? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |