EVE Search - BPO vs. BPC images (make them look different)

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

BPO vs. BPC images (make them look different)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Aspira Amador Angelou Economic Group	Posted - 2008.02.24 19:55:00 - [1] Edited by: Aspira Amador on 24/02/2008 19:55:48 I did a search and found a post of this nature several years ago, but did not see any real resolution, so I thought I would bring it up again. Quite simply, there is no way without infoing all of my blueprints to tell what is a BPO and what is a BPC, and lets be honest, there should be an easier way. Either a different picture, or a different description line. I mean contracts can tell you when something is a copy, why can't my inventory? This would save a lot of time, and I am sure a few queries to the server for all that info. Aspira Amador
Vitelius Decorum Inc	Posted - 2008.02.25 11:17:00 - [2] Agreed. A simple "C" letter on the image or something would make it a lot better. I can't see why this hasn't been implemented already. ---
Abrazzar	Posted - 2008.02.25 11:53:00 - [3] Short version: The BPO and BPC are the same item. The game engine does not support having different icons for the same item. A solution for this issue may be implemented EvEntually. -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.02.26 21:28:00 - [4] It's been asked for since the dawn of time. Devs say it's just not possible to change the coding of every existing print. I'm fine with that, just add the possibility for us to tag prints after the fact. Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav! Also Known As
BloodHair	Posted - 2008.02.27 03:08:00 - [5] Signed, make these images different. Why don't you add a symbol over the images, intead of changing the whole image? I mean, something like that "Tech II" small tag over the tech II items.
Cyxopyc Wolfram Brotherhood	Posted - 2008.02.27 10:02:00 - [6] Doesn't seem that hard to me. Make a new item for originals with a somewhat different icon (for blue/green color blind people) but green icon color. Import data from a query for 'blueprint original'. Run a string of search and replace commands for all BPOs not overwriting fields for ME, PE or any other field that might be changed by players... Wahlaa... Consider adding fields to the blueprint icon that display that blueprint's ME, PE and runs remaining? Yes, I'm asking too much. Also consider fixing how some modules display the wrong size in icon mode. It's been that way forever. I really do like EVE but they seem to leave the little things undone. == Support fixing the EVE UI
Tasko Pal Heron Corporation	Posted - 2008.02.27 12:28:00 - [7] How about a watermark "COPY" or "C" over the top of the BP image. How hard can that be?
Captain Agemman Minmatar Legio Ultra	Posted - 2008.02.27 14:49:00 - [8] It's been discussed to death already. With the current database item attribute design, the only way to achieve it is to read in the full blueprint attributes before rendering the image. Which means, a full background "show info" on everyblueprint in your hangar every time you open it. The benefits (less problems due to carelessness) don't outweight the performance this would require. Hardly a pressing matter.
Nova Fox	Posted - 2008.02.27 14:54:00 - [9] didnt they say this was impossible?
Joshua Foiritain Gallente Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2008.02.27 15:06:00 - [10] Edited by: Joshua Foiritain on 27/02/2008 15:07:02 Originally by: Cyxopyc Doesn't seem that hard to me. Make a new item for originals with a somewhat different icon (for blue/green color blind people) but green icon color. Import data from a query for 'blueprint original'. Run a string of search and replace commands for all BPOs not overwriting fields for ME, PE or any other field that might be changed by players... Wahlaa... Technically theyd need to update stations, pos labs, rorquals, some menus, the market/sub groups, contracts and possibly 1 or 2 things i forgot as well. While its a lot of work it would definitely be worth the effort. Originally by: Nova Fox didnt they say this was impossible? Nothing is impossible, its just a lot of work and theres always the risk of **** getting screwed up and/or bugged. -----

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2008.02.27 22:05:00 - [11] The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it and see if each blueprint is a copy or not then somehow override the type icon once that is processed before the client loads the hangar and has to wait for the results to be returned. As you can see if you use the science and industry > blueprints UI. We do show the original/copy attributes where we can and perhaps is more pertinent.

Fredrick Engelberg	Posted - 2008.02.27 23:10:00 - [12] Edited by: Fredrick Engelberg on 27/02/2008 23:11:26 Edited by: Fredrick Engelberg on 27/02/2008 23:11:11 Originally by: CCP Chronotis The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it and see if each blueprint is a copy or not then somehow override the type icon once that is processed before the client loads the hangar and has to wait for the results to be returned. As you can see if you use the science and industry > blueprints UI. We do show the original/copy attributes where we can and perhaps is more pertinent. Could a compromise be reached? The items must have their own unique serial, or they couldn't have ME/PE and copy attributes. Why not just have the client cache the serials and remember which ones are copies when it displays the icons? Then you only have to do a DB query once per item per user - which we're doing already, but by hand.
WardogX Minmatar Outkasts	Posted - 2008.02.27 23:26:00 - [13] Edited by: WardogX on 27/02/2008 23:27:11 Originally by: CCP Chronotis The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it and see if each blueprint is a copy or not then somehow override the type icon once that is processed before the client loads the hangar and has to wait for the results to be returned. As you can see if you use the science and industry > blueprints UI. We do show the original/copy attributes where we can and perhaps is more pertinent. Here is a possible idea. Why not from this point forward have all copies come out with a new " - Copy" moniker appended to the end of the title name (example "Damage Control Blueprint - Copy". Then its as simple as applying the right graphic to the title name. All current copies would remain unchanged graphically. All Bpo's would always remain unchanged graphically. Eventually the current BPc's will slowly phase themselves out... in mean time people can easily enjoy the benefits of spotting a BPC vs a BPO out of their own new copy runs. Let the public know old graphics still exist on old bpc's. Let them know to be sure to still inspect the bpo/bpc before buying/trading to be 100% sure. After all, thats not different the way it is now... it just allows things to slowly change without having to do database heavy item checking. Rig Ship Repackage Solution
KiiLLa Red Raiders Russian Coalition.	Posted - 2008.02.28 02:44:00 - [14] Originally by: CCP Chronotis The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it and see if each blueprint is a copy or not then somehow override the type icon once that is processed before the client loads the hangar and has to wait for the results to be returned. As you can see if you use the science and industry > blueprints UI. We do show the original/copy attributes where we can and perhaps is more pertinent. Doesnt sound very solid, if you ask me. Why not tell BPO from BPC the same way you tell that arbalest cruise launcher from a thorn rocket or an exotic dancer from scrap metal? Those are all different item classes, why not make BPCs and BPOs different item classes as well instead of just giveing both of em an extra parameter? The way i see it, of you make em different classes you will actually [i]optimize[i] the code, since the research levels on the BPC and the "licence runs remaining" parameters on the BPO will become redundant. Less parameters = less database calls = less leaking traffic. Did i miss anything? <sig>{string not found}</sig>
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2008.02.28 10:23:00 - [15] Originally by: CCP Chronotis The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it ... Perhaps you need additional typeIDs. Clearly the client is making an icon decision based solely on the TypeID when the record set is examined to populate the container for the GUI. If an "Apoc Copy" had its own typeID, then the client can make the icon decision with out an additional query. Granted this would take a rewrite in the sub that creates copies in the first place, but it can be worked around, with existing architecture. The effort to do so isn't huge but likely not worth the time. If reduction in queries is the real goal, then stopping the market details windows from updating on a transaction event would be more worth while. The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
NightKhaos Gallente Khaos Wielders	Posted - 2008.02.28 10:29:00 - [16] Originally by: KiiLLa Originally by: CCP Chronotis The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it and see if each blueprint is a copy or not then somehow override the type icon once that is processed before the client loads the hangar and has to wait for the results to be returned. As you can see if you use the science and industry > blueprints UI. We do show the original/copy attributes where we can and perhaps is more pertinent. Doesnt sound very solid, if you ask me. Why not tell BPO from BPC the same way you tell that arbalest cruise launcher from a thorn rocket or an exotic dancer from scrap metal? Those are all different item classes, why not make BPCs and BPOs different item classes as well instead of just giveing both of em an extra parameter? The way i see it, of you make em different classes you will actually [i]optimize[i] the code, since the research levels on the BPC and the "licence runs remaining" parameters on the BPO will become redundant. Less parameters = less database calls = less leaking traffic. Did i miss anything? Actually the research levels on the copy will NOT become redundant. Remember the research levels on the BPO are transfered to the BPC upon copy. Reshape EVE for the future! Sell the 0.0 gates to player owned corps, and encourage an open ended universe.
Nova Fox	Posted - 2008.02.28 11:28:00 - [17] Im all for the new Item IDs being made to make a white colored copy with blued items. This would double the number of blueprints but it may handel better than calling up a check to see if its a real copy or not.
Tmarte Caldari BODA-BOOM	Posted - 2008.02.28 15:56:00 - [18] Originally by: CCP Chronotis The problem is the performance hit as we need to make a database call for each and every blueprint in every persons hangar when they open it and see if each blueprint is a copy or not then somehow override the type icon once that is processed before the client loads the hangar and has to wait for the results to be returned. As you can see if you use the science and industry > blueprints UI. We do show the original/copy attributes where we can and perhaps is more pertinent. Forgive me for asking, but is this taking place client side or server side? If it was server side then I can see why 40k people would definitely be a massive performance hit on the server, but if it's client side, then I doubt most people who have dual and quad cores nowadays would even notice a slight hitch.
KiiLLa Red Raiders Russian Coalition.	Posted - 2008.02.28 15:58:00 - [19] Originally by: NightKhaos Actually the research levels on the copy will NOT become redundant. Remember the research levels on the BPO are transfered to the BPC upon copy. True, my bad. But that's only a minor flaw. You do still agree that this will decrease DB calls, dont you? The "req to research" values will definitely become redundant at least since noone will need that info on a copy, that's still less data transferred. <sig>{string not found}</sig> Boost tractors?

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.