Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Red Spice
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 11:08:00 -
[1]
Advertisements containers are crap.
Some "natural" sites of EVE scapes have become as ugly as our worst earth suburb highways.
Just one example : I'd happily join any action action to pop down the horrible "R N A L"-container-ascii-art-crap-ad' outside of Gaknem / Joint Harvesting station that's hangin' there since weeks now...
Are there any adv over Iceland's volcanoes? I strongly doubt it. Adbustingly yours, ;-)
Spice - (*Red)
|
Red Spice
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 11:08:00 -
[2]
Advertisements containers are crap.
Some "natural" sites of EVE scapes have become as ugly as our worst earth suburb highways.
Just one example : I'd happily join any action action to pop down the horrible "R N A L"-container-ascii-art-crap-ad' outside of Gaknem / Joint Harvesting station that's hangin' there since weeks now...
Are there any adv over Iceland's volcanoes? I strongly doubt it. Adbustingly yours, ;-)
Spice - (*Red)
|
Alberic Nydorm
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 11:34:00 -
[3]
Yeah, its annoying, they should expire after a certain amount of time being unused (say 1 month).
|
Wet Ferret
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 11:49:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Alberic Nydorm Yeah, its annoying, they should expire after a certain amount of time being unused (say 1 month).
QFT.
Really makes no sense why they haven't done anything about secure container duration (infinite). I know they cleaned up some of the high-sec cans but they must realize that the same procedure is eventually going to be needed again if they don't change something.
|
Hmuda
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 12:00:00 -
[5]
When I made my pilgrimage to New Eden, I was really annoyed by all the "z3r0c001 wuz h3r3" and "generic corp looking for new players" containers.
So a wholehearted "/sign" for removing these mass-advertising yunkpiles.
|
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 12:15:00 -
[6]
I sincerely hope something is going to be done about containers in space, as part of their Need for Speed initiative.
It's hard to take CCP serious when they talk about streamlining and cleaning up the database, and then keep cans floating around en mass.
I know it's probably "cheaper" resource wise, to have no expiration timer that sits there eating up CPU cycles and DB calls, compared to just having them float around "unattended", but there has to be a better solution.
Let's say there are 100k ( just a number! ) cans floating around. A timer-check would introduce 100k calls at set intervals ( DT maybe? ) but after a while, that timer would result in fewer cans. This might leave them with 10k cans that people actually use.
So is 10k "timer calls" a better solution than 100k cans that need to make calls when people interact with them? Who knows...
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 12:16:00 -
[7]
/signed
City of God looks very untidy now. -- (Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
000Hunter000
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 12:22:00 -
[8]
/signed
Simple solution to the problem? if can isn't accessed or used in any form in 1 month it unanchors and can be scooped by someone else. if it hasn't been scooped within 3 months it goes 'pop'.
CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!! |
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 12:54:00 -
[9]
I've long suggested a 1 isk monthly "rent" for anchored containers, at least in 0.1+ Empire.
Most anchored containers are abandoned.
A 1 isk monthly rent could be paid by even the rawest noob with no trouble. And after one month, about 75%, maybe even 90%+ of the anchored can in Empire would pop.
If ccp is concerned about old inactive characters that stored stuff in space, they could have cans that dont pay that very first rent cycle moved to the hangar where ever the owner's clone is set. Yes, some folks will use this as a 1 time chance to move stuff, but it will only happen once. To limit it, CCP could only move cans owned by inactive accounts.
Play nice while you butcher each other.
|
Zaerlorth Maelkor
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 13:03:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Sergeant Spot I've long suggested a 1 isk monthly "rent" for anchored containers, at least in 0.1+ Empire.
Most anchored containers are abandoned.
A 1 isk monthly rent could be paid by even the rawest noob with no trouble. And after one month, about 75%, maybe even 90%+ of the anchored can in Empire would pop.
If ccp is concerned about old inactive characters that stored stuff in space, they could have cans that dont pay that very first rent cycle moved to the hangar where ever the owner's clone is set. Yes, some folks will use this as a 1 time chance to move stuff, but it will only happen once. To limit it, CCP could only move cans owned by inactive accounts.
1 isk? You got to be kidding right? a new char is created with 5000 isk. That means the can would be payed for the next 416 years. Solution would be to add a timestamp to when the can was last used. Every downtime all timestamps are checked, if the can hasn't been used in... say 3 months? Pop!
|
|
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 13:04:00 -
[11]
At least they don't show up on scanners no more -- Anything I said above is subject to the standard provision: Alts subvert it, and make it untrustworthy. |
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 18:50:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor 1 isk? You got to be kidding right? a new char is created with 5000 isk. That means the can would be payed for the next 416 years. Solution would be to add a timestamp to when the can was last used. Every downtime all timestamps are checked, if the can hasn't been used in... say 3 months? Pop!
I don't believe he's talking about a bill that is deducted automatically from you wallet, hence the comment about inactive accounts, but rather bills you would have to pay manually each month. Like those that get send to your "Bills" tab in the wallet if you rent corporation offices ect...
|
Tarminic
Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 18:53:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Pohbis I sincerely hope something is going to be done about containers in space, as part of their Need for Speed initiative.
It's hard to take CCP serious when they talk about streamlining and cleaning up the database, and then keep cans floating around en mass.
Database access times aren't causing the vast majority of lag, actually. The database can keep up fine, it's the servers that are the problem. ---------------- Tarminic - 31 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.2 |
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 18:58:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Pohbis I sincerely hope something is going to be done about containers in space, as part of their Need for Speed initiative.
It's hard to take CCP serious when they talk about streamlining and cleaning up the database, and then keep cans floating around en mass.
Database access times aren't causing the vast majority of lag, actually. The database can keep up fine, it's the servers that are the problem.
Yes and the servers are bogged down by DB access calls, since server IO bandwidth is limited. That's the reason for the Infinyband approach.
You could have 1 million CPUs and 1 million terrabyte of RAM in your server and they would still crumble under DB access calls since they have to be transfered between the two.
|
Xar Corleoni
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 19:01:00 -
[15]
/signed
kill those damn roid belt cans as well!!!!
|
Luh Windan
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 19:15:00 -
[16]
Perhaps you could put a 'recycle' bounty on them after say a month of non-use. You would need to target the can to see if it had one - so queries to the db would be limited - make 'em easy to pop so you could just sweep up a belt. I am sure that even with a fairly low bounty people would sweep them up as they found the,
|
Tarminic
Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 19:23:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Pohbis Yes and the servers are bogged down by DB access calls, since server IO bandwidth is limited. That's the reason for the Infinyband approach.
That's just the thing. The communication between the servers and the database isn't the issue. It's server processing and distributing this information out to clients (or other servers) that is slowing things down. That's what the Infiniband is designed to help with. ---------------- Tarminic - 31 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.2 |
Dr Slaughter
Rabies Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 13:02:00 -
[18]
Simple solution = container 'names' are only viewable by corp members. In the case of NPC corps, they're only viewable to the player that anchored them.
Then there's no real possibility to use them for 'advertising'
CCP this is not the nerf you are looking for...
[a image was here once but it went away] |
Tatsue Niko
Applied Eugenics
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 13:45:00 -
[19]
Signed
|
Empyre
Domestic Reform
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 15:03:00 -
[20]
couldn't you declare war on the corp that owns them and pew pew them away? i know its a pain but possibly an option. as for the cans in the belts, i don't know how many i've scooped up because no one anchored them. just go in and start going down the list in overview right clicking and Look At. if the light is flashing green, BM and warp back to scoop it up.
I <3 empire.. usually. |
|
Voodoo Mistross
Minmatar Cold-Fury Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 15:06:00 -
[21]
/signed to remove the containers or the ability to create them, limit names on containers to max of 8 letters/numbers maybe
Originally by: Katherine Marx you make a great point. people who play WOW should stay there.
|
Per Bastet
Amarr B.O.O.M Socius Tutaminis Velox
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 15:14:00 -
[22]
There is also a Giant 7Fleet in Bittanshal Outside the First Station.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |