| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Solbright altalt
   |
Posted - 2008.02.15 21:31:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Solbright altalt on 15/02/2008 21:32:09
Please make this a high-sec function only. If this is applied to 0.0 stashes then there is going to be a lot of ****ed-off players.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 04:25:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: CCP Prism X
Favouring those who prefer mass fleet battle by relieving redundant IO thrashing from the server cache services? Get serious. Improving server performance is what I'm payed to do. You'll find it will benefit everyone equally.
How about starting by only deanchoring. And add in the ability to scan for secure cans. Then see how fast the unused stashes stay in space for before getting too trigger happy on the delete button.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 07:57:00 -
[3]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Why delete rather than unlock and allow others to scoop them up?
It defeats the idea of the whole thing. We want to get rid of them, not just flip a bit in the database.
Anchorable structures and unanchored cans?
Anchorable structures are not trash. We're not going to nuke any Starbases you've not visited in the last 30 days. Unanchored cans will be considered junk at the next downtime and promptly deleted.
A better one for me to reply to ...
Both these concerns would be addressed if the anchored cans only became unanchored after the timeout of inactivity. No need for auto-deletion at all.
The unanchored items are all collectible by scavengers. As many have already said, this is a done thing even now. With auto-deanchoring in place, scavenging would only increase. I fail to see how this "defeats" the intent of your efforts.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 20:51:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Abrazzar
As for people asking for unanchoring, yeah, right, I can almost see them frothing on their keyboards at the prospect of all the thousands and thousands of cans around free for their taking. While greed is a viable motivator in Eve, it shouldn't be supported in such a metagaming manner.
What!? Why not? And how is this a metagaming idea at all? I mean it's all pretty clear cut and within realistic comparison even.
Some pilots builds them, some pilots buy and deploy them, some pilots leave them abandoned, and some pilots salvage and sell/reprocess them again. Maybe even getting some loot from them.
There is plenty of warning about the change and if you don't want someone else to loot your abandoned cans then it's a simple case of running back and taking them down yourself.
It seems quite neat to me that this could be a mini-profession. I have a few cans around, not many, but I can see myself going back and checking those locations just to see how many cans are still there a couple of months after such a change just for curiosity.
BTW, The big problem I have with Prism's planned change is it will wipe out many a deep space stash. Some of which will be very expensive.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 10:03:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Matthew
Ammo dumps that are actively being used will be unaffected.
Until a can is missed. Then poof! If this burden is placed on the player then maybe the pilot and/or corp needs an "secured assets" list to track all the refreshing that will be needed.
Quote:
What it will get rid of is the large number of stores laid down by players and alliances that either no longer exist, or have no intention of going back to that part of space again.
You might be surprised how fast those would be cleaned up with just deanchoring in place instead of the planned deletion.
At the very least, start with the less destructive approach before going all-out lethal.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 19:27:00 -
[6]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
However, the idea is kinda awesome the way I see it. After the initial 4 years of trash is gone and people are used to the idea I'm all for reviewing it. We're talking no promises, of course, and the future at best. But having cans un-anchor and thus making them blow-up able and looted is fine by me. Currently it would defeat the purpose but I'm not eternally set in stone (Unless I get a reason to, then you're damned for all time).
Anything to reduce brittleness is a bonus in my books.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 09:02:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Par'Gellen
The only time I ever went to New Eden it was a lag infested disaster hole littered with so much junk it boggled the mind.
You are very mistaken if you think a sea of cans will cause notable lag for you.
The client can't handle the simple task of managing that many objects at once is all that you are experiencing. Nothing that a bit of recoding wouldn't fix.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 12:06:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Matthew
Originally by: Solbright altalt
Until a can is missed. Then poof! If this burden is placed on the player then maybe the pilot and/or corp needs an "secured assets" list to track all the refreshing that will be needed
If you're actively using it, you won't "miss" it. If you've gone more than 30 days without needing it, I wouldn't consider that to be an active stash.
Hmmm. Insert recursion here ...
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 20:55:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ashlee Darksky
Originally by: Solbright altalt
The client can't handle the simple task of managing that many objects at once is all that you are experiencing. Nothing that a bit of recoding wouldn't fix.
.... Again.. As the dev said multiply this by thousands of ships and multiple jumps and containers - the cache gets wrecked pretty quickly. Therefore it must be refreshed from the SQL servers, meaning lag (for everyone). blah blah blah
That would be all well and good if lag became noticeable when doing that but it don't. Prism X is talking about the whole of Eve, not just one lone pilot and a bunch of cans.
What you are really seeing when warping into a mass of cans is the client having trouble managing the large change in visible objects. It freezes the display while it sorts itself out. Stutter is a better name so as to not confuse it with real lag.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 10:38:00 -
[10]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
But having cans un-anchor and thus making them blow-up able and looted is fine by me. Currently it would defeat the purpose but I'm not eternally set in stone (Unless I get a reason to, then you're damned for all time).
Here's a reason - all those items have been paid for already. Deleting them at all is, in effect, removing some of a the static wealth of Eve.
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 18:30:00 -
[11]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
On top of explaining why I will not make this free loot for everyone I did also mention that I'm quite open to revising the idea once the ancient junk is gone and open.
Converting to free loot was only a secondary effect from my pov. Managing the timeout is my main concern.
Can't blame me for trying. :P
|
Solbright altalt
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 03:56:00 -
[12]
or
3) Can't understand why people are so *****y about a bit of fluff on the display. And would like the changes to be less detrimental to casual use of cans.
|
| |
|