| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Taedrin
Gallente
Royal Hiigaran Navy
   |
Posted - 2008.02.16 13:49:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Zensu Kai
Seriously, lets try to shed some light on the subject...
Objective:
To reduce clutter in the Eve universe by deleting unused/unwated Containers, Drones, Fighters, Shuttles and other objects as deemed necessary by the developers. Precise and full extent of eradication to be determined on a case-by-case basis, mood and mindset succumbing to the desires of said developers, naturally.
Posit:
- Every object in Eve is a placeholder, programmed with characteristics and attributes, that are then abstracted and re-used in other objects.
- Object attributes can be queried, filtered by attribute, quantity, and so forth, using simple or complex SQL calls.
- Object characteristics as perceived by the playerbase can be modified through programming laid elsewhere in the game.
Solution:
1.) For each object type we want to cull from the database, define list of objects to be deleted and process them:
_PSUEDO_CODE-LOOP_START_
tableObjectType = objectType[i];
sqlStatement = DELETE FROM tableObjectType
WHERE expiryDays > days AND exemptFlag != TRUE
sqlProcessQuery();
i++;
_PSUEDO_CODE-LOOP_START_
2.) Update any related tables or transaction indexes as necessary
3.) Optimize database during downtime and/or during cull period. (First of month)
It's really that easy. Sure, it is merely psuedo code here, but the idea is to use the power of SQL to find objects matching the expiration period, and that are exempt from culling. It's a simple select with a flag on those objects. Nothing magical.
The problem here becomes, where do you assign "exemptFlag = TRUE", and what conditions need to be met to warrant the setting of this flag? The very fact that GSCs anchored near a POS will be preserved indicates that it isn't hard to exempt a GSC for destruction. The problem here is determining which cans can stay, and which ones can't. How do you allow the GY to stay without allowing can art/spamming/other things CCP DOESN'T want?
|
Zensu Kai
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 14:05:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Taedrin
The problem here becomes, where do you assign "exemptFlag = TRUE", and what conditions need to be met to warrant the setting of this flag? The very fact that GSCs anchored near a POS will be preserved indicates that it isn't hard to exempt a GSC for destruction. The problem here is determining which cans can stay, and which ones can't. How do you allow the GY to stay without allowing can art/spamming/other things CCP DOESN'T want?
Objects deemed worthy as marked by ISD and Developers? We already know there are advanced menu(s) (ergo menu items) available to ISD Members and Developers when in the game.
Since the precedent has been set that the Molea Graveyard is newsworthy, it is not hard to imagine giving the Molea Gravekeeper a special ability to mark cans exempt as deemed necessary.
It's a real-life pragmatism control that allows this role play aspect to succeed.
Granted, there should be some oversight, but it is not necessary to micro-manage player run content too much. This special ability might even be expanded to allow other special areas in the game to come about, such as Ship Junkyards, Monuments to Factions/Alliances, Services in Space, and so forth.
So much of the groundwork for giving the players tools has already been laid. This is merely an extension of the sandbox idea, and one that obviously shows merit as represented by the many forum posts on the subject.
|
Strak Yogorn
Amarr
Mind Warpers
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 15:17:00 -
[63]
no thanks.. performance are more important ...
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 15:31:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Azker Khamarr
There was a news item about it not too long ago, I doubt it's going anywhere.
A news item is the kiss of death on any player created content.... (alliance P for example)
SKUNK
|
Revan Halendon
Minmatar
Nebula Rasa Holdings
Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 16:02:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Matalino
There is a simple way to keep the GY. If all the people who are signing this petition took one day of the month to tend their own little patch, it will remain forever.
If people don't care enough to help maintain it, then it is fitting that it should fade into the past.
So if you want to keep it, put in a little effort.
Well said.
|
Azia Burgi
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 16:25:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Revan Halendon
Originally by: Matalino
There is a simple way to keep the GY. If all the people who are signing this petition took one day of the month to tend their own little patch, it will remain forever.
If people don't care enough to help maintain it, then it is fitting that it should fade into the past.
So if you want to keep it, put in a little effort.
Well said.
While it sounds a good idea it means i would have to divulge the passwords for the cans and at that point i wouldn't be able to guarantee the safety of the interred remains or the accuracy of the cemetery database.
Azia Burgi
http://azia.geekandproud.co.uk
BP Profit Calculator
EVE Cemetery |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 17:01:00 -
[67]
signed and for the eve gate
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Ashley Dinova
Midnight Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 18:04:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Ashley Dinova on 16/02/2008 18:04:58
Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Originally by: Ashley Dinova
Its would be a damn shame to lose something like the GY 
If they really want to remove cans to reduce lag, why don't they go take a look at most Empire Roid Belts.
Lots of yellow cans to remove there.
Don't remove the graveyard and the hard work of Azia Burgi, which is btw, awsome 
Instead, remove all unused cans from the belts. That itself must reduce quite a bit of lag already.
Just my 2ISK 
WTS clue.
Can't wait to see all the can spam/art/whatever removed from game.
Thanks for the 'clue' 
For what it was, I hope it was a free one.
30days is too long...
|
Ombey
Obsidian Inc.
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 20:31:00 -
[69]
/signed.
Please, CCP, try and work out a way of keeping the cemetery!
--
2d EveMaps
|
sableye
principle of motion
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 21:02:00 -
[70]
I hope it goes to be honest
Join The Fight With Promo Today
View The North Star! |
Shintai
Gallente
IonTech Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.02.16 21:18:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Shintai on 16/02/2008 21:19:18
Even tho its nice and such. I do not think its the right way.
We simply NEED to get rid of the cans.
I would initially suggest just using hacking skill so people could steal the cans. ofcourse the cementary would be in danger aswell. But right now there is maybe a million cans in space. Most are placed maybe 2 years ago or more. Some when owners long gone, or purpose gone. Left in mining belts and such. I am sure the ice and ore miners in high sec will love to get rid of these cans. And I am sure just as many will love to get rid of the "join my *******s corp" "or my epeen is biggest" cans along the gates and stations.
They might eb able to peace the system it is in. But that would leave open complains for whoever would wish to make one at another place.
Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry |
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 11:08:00 -
[72]
An excellent example of player generated content, and it should be preserved in some way.
/signed
___
"If you can't debate using logic & fact, and at least recognise other people's point of view, don't waste time posting on forums. It only makes you look like a teenage idiot." |
Erunamane
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 11:54:00 -
[73]
Probably the best example of a community thing in MMORPGs that really MODIFIES the world according to the players' dedication to the game.
/Signed
|
|
CCP Prism X
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:02:00 -
[74]
Out of curiosity:
What is it, exactly, in my dev blog that makes people think that we're removing the graveyard?
We provide ways to maintain it. It just requires a community effort now and/or ISK.
I understand this is player generated content that *could* vanish with this feature. But it *could* also be a way to bring the community closer together around it. In my opinion, player made lore should not be maintained by the hand of go that is CCP but rather by the players themselves.
Think about it. Why don't you guys group together and help Azia with being undertakers rather than expect exceptions from us? You know we can't grant them as it will look as Dev favouritism to someone, and we just can't have that.
~ Prism X
EvE Database Developer
Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006 |
|
Andrue
Amarr
Federation Of Space Loonies
Culture Shock Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:21:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth
An excellent example of player generated content, and it should be preserved in some way.
/signed
If the players want to keep it they should work for it. This may be a strange concept to some of you but as you get older you'll begin to realise that it's a very common principal.
--
(Sarcastic mission running veteran)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
Nidus
Caldari
The JORG Corporation
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:35:00 -
[76]
Now, I have never been to this graveyard, nor do I know its exact location, but wouldn't this problem be solved by having the graveyard outside a (high sec) PoS?
If it's already at a moon it shouldn't be too hard to set up, and even if it's not the work required to move the corpses should be worth it if the graveyard is of any value at all. |
Grunt Futtoks
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:36:00 -
[77]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Out of curiosity:
What is it, exactly, in my dev blog that makes people think that we're removing the graveyard?
We provide ways to maintain it. It just requires a community effort now and/or ISK.
Dude give me the ability to shoot cans if I wardec a corp and I'll f-ing finish off this bloody debate. |
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:41:00 -
[78]
Having thought about it more, and properly read the dev blog, Prism makes a good point, in that it could be maintained, however Azia also makes a good point about the security of the graveyard.
Short of running a volunteer corp that maintains the graveyard, keeps it secure, and all that entails, keeping it might be infeasible. It would be a real shame to lose it though. A monthly anchoring charge as mentioned in the blog as a future possibility would turn the entire thing into a financial problem, with grave maintenance fees etc.
On the one hand, it'd be a fascinating project mirroring real life body disposal and interment issues, on the other, hard to convince people to pay for interring their remains or indeed those they came across randomly. Hmm.
___
"If you can't debate using logic & fact, and at least recognise other people's point of view, don't waste time posting on forums. It only makes you look like a teenage idiot." |
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:46:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth
An excellent example of player generated content, and it should be preserved in some way.
/signed
If the players want to keep it they should work for it. This may be a strange concept to some of you but as you get older you'll begin to realise that it's a very common principal.
And what age do you think I am, oh holier-than-thou sarcastic one? Indeed if anything the only reason I pause in wanting to work to keep it is my own limited time due to real life commitments because I'm not a teenage kid, meaning I have commitments in EVE to keep already. Kindly keep your sarcasm and bitterness to yourself - there are people here trying to enjoy the game and get something out of it still. Oddly enough Prism managed to say what you did, but politely and without flaming, and if you read my reply to his post, you'll see I can manage a polite debate. You clearly cannot.
___
"If you can't debate using logic & fact, and at least recognise other people's point of view, don't waste time posting on forums. It only makes you look like a teenage idiot." |
Spoon Thumb
Caldari
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:07:00 -
[80]
I seem to remember Azia saying there was already a backlog of some several hundred corpses people had donated, and ultimately should be something done for fun not "hard work because you have to"
Maintaining a POS is already hard work and not really fun imo, just a means to an end. Add on top of that constantly hauling corpses and anchoring new cans can get tiresome pretty fast and make what started as a cool idea into a trudge through endless repeat of the same mechanical operation
Khaldari
khanidpublic: RP channel for Kingdom loyalists
Recruiting |
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:11:00 -
[81]
Can we have wrecks and cans back on the scanner?
The things we're expected to give up so that Huge Veteran Alliance "A" can attack Huge Veteran Alliance "B" are frankly getting out of hand.
Can you find your extra speed from elsewhere please?
|
Cyberman Mastermind
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:18:00 -
[82]
I intend to visit that graveyard some time, so of course I would like to see it preserved.
However, I think the only way it'll survive is by re-inventing it. The current form is bound to die, sooner or later.
If possible, CCP should create a less lag-creating item that can be used for this purpose. No idea how that could work, of course.
However, neither having a staff of gravekeepers "maintaining" them, nor relocating to (inside?) a POS are viable solutions, IMO.
The former is bound to be abused(especially in Eve), while the latter likely makes it less visually pleasing.
(I might be wrong about the latter - but I suppose it'll be a crowd of cans on top of another, crammed inside the POS shield.)
@Prism X: No offense, but your devblog and subsequent posts in the comments thread seem to be rather hostile, with regard to can art/cemetery.
I got the impression you'd prefer to delete them all today instead of having to wait or giving an option to keep... |
|
CCP Prism X
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:21:00 -
[83]
Right, would you please not insult the work I've put into this with comments such as:
'The things we're expected to give up so that Huge Veteran Alliance "A" can attack Huge Veteran Alliance "B" are frankly getting out of hand.'
I don't think it's too much to ask that you read my blog and have a minimal understanding of what it said before you make a casual observation implying I play favourites.
Summary: This benefits everyone equally!
~ Prism X
EvE Database Developer
Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006 |
|
Shintai
Gallente
IonTech Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:41:00 -
[84]
En, I think many people forget the larger concept in both MMOs and social real world matters. Maybe people dont think much beyond their own influence.
Sometimes you need to do something less popular for a few, to make it better for the majority.
Items left in space is simply at insane level. There are anchored dead towers, rookie ships and cans. Towers blocking moons, sure we could declare war. And there is a lagfest without its equal in ice and astroid belts. And outside stations.
Everyone is busy nagging about lag here and there. But whenever there is a solution to cleanup and help the overall performance and playability. Then people cry over 1 item.
If the maintenaince gets too much on the graveyard. Then thats just how it will be. If its not, then great. It will continue.
Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry |
Frug
True Foundation
R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:42:00 -
[85]
When I warp to a belt, and it takes twice as long to load up, because it has to display 500 stupid junk containers nobody uses...
Or when I warp around and have to look at people's idiotic can advertisements for corporations which have probably been dead for a year...
I'm not a large alliance attacking a large alliance. I'm a carebear flying around on my own. And I want the cans gone.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - -
If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO
BOOO!! - Ductoris
Neat look what I found - Kreul
Hey, my marbles |
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:46:00 -
[86]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Summary: This benefits everyone equally!
Not really it doesn't.
Empire grief got heavy nerfed removing wrecks and cans, it made focussing effort at least twice as hard.
Removing so called "junk" will make mission probing a lot harder, since probers use that "junk" to gain warpable locations to find mission runners.
So your idea will gain (immeasurable) speed improvements 'for all' at a significant cost to Empire griefsters, YET AGAIN.
So your summary was true, it benefits everybody equally. But it stuffs certain groups tremendously, while having no effect on other groups, and massive benefits for others.
Empire griefsters are getting boned yet again, and there appears to be no realistic end to it.
|
Korotani
Caldari
Darkwater Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:53:00 -
[87]
Forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm suggesting this idea without any knowledge of POSs, nor the graveyard.
Couldn't we buy a ton of starbase charters and create a POS in the graveyard? Didn't the Devblog say that it won't erase cans around a POS?
We could hold services every sunday to commemmorate the dead, and scream as we all realise it's 11.00GMT.
|
Bodwad
Gallente
British Federation
Sleepless Knights Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:58:00 -
[88]
You could create a new cargo container type called 'Coffin' and only allow one corpse in it. In fact this may allow them to create more efficient code for dealing with the large number of containers in any one area. On down time and installation of the patch they could write a program to convert all the 'containers with corpses' into 'Coffins with a corpse". It would only need to be done once and coffins would have to be made available in the local system station. NPC made.
It takes a bit of code but allows another graveyard to be spawned elsewhere in the distant future. Maybe even have a small text field for a final comment :oP 
|
Jowen Datloran
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 14:00:00 -
[89]
Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 18/02/2008 14:01:55
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Summary: This benefits everyone equally!
Ok, I'm tired of hearing that line now.
I have played EVE for years. Traveling around the cluster on my own doing stuff sometimes on my own, sometimes in small groups.
I have RARELY experienced any lag problems, except when I go to Jita on Sundays. 99% of the time I have no noticeable performance issues.
And you are telling me now that I should trade the major sign of game persistency for even less noticeable performance issues? Crap deal I say.
Just another kick in the teeth to the small guy, who has committed the dreadful sin of being more creative with the limited tools he has available than the game developers.
----------------
Mr. Science & Trade Institute |
Shanur
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 14:01:00 -
[90]
Having done my fair share of mining, i too know that this isn't just something that squeezes a little bit more performance out of the servers so that the large alliances can debate if 300 v 300 is a noticable improvement over 200 v 200 in terms of percieved immersion. The main issue this change addresses is indeed the outrageous number of anchored cans in just about any 0.8 (yes, many of these date back to when you could still anchor cans there) to 0.5 sec asteroid belt that has a dockable station in system or 1 jump away. And i would welcome that purge with great enthousiasm.
That said, i think some allowances should be made for clusters of owned cans that serve a specific purpose and where the owner is willing to do some maintenance, but might not be able to do the amount of it that a graveyard of hundreds of cans would require. How about a compromise?
Once all the cans that belong to no longer existing corps, inactive players and other non functioning entities have been purged, there should be plenty of database space for a couple of player maintained container structures. Some could be can art(which i see no problem with as long as it isn't on a grid that normal traffic has to load), some could be deep space stashes/rally points and some could be player content like the GY. As i understand it, the problem was never the database load, but the loading issues when a player actually entered the grid and had to be able to see the "junk". Since up to my knowledge a grid is only loaded if you actively fly to it, and not when you simply warp trough it, this presents the following solution:
Add a deployable that allows for a player to reset the maintenance timers of all anchored deployables he can access with one touch. Call it the deep space stash marker or something like that. Allow it only to deploy in areas that are devoid of fixed celestials (especially gates, stations acceleration gates, moons, planets and of course asteroid field beacons). This way it can only be set up inside a safespot that people would have to actively seek out if they want to visit the cluster of cans. Give this marker when deployed an action that attempts to "interract with" all cans within a given radius(100 Km or so), thus resetting their decay timer. Allow the person activating it to supply a single password that will be attempted on any password protected secured containers. Any container with a different password will not be interracted with.
Few players will object to visiting their stash or artwork once a month to toggle a single marker. However having do do the same for dozens or hundreds of cans each month is tedious labor. I think offering them the means to simplify such maintenance provided they move their stuff where ordinary passers by won't be bothered by it is a fair compromise.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |