EVE Search - Make BPOs and BPCs distinguishable

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Make BPOs and BPCs distinguishable

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 29 post(s)
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.08 16:16:00 - [91] The reason I say that because while that would be a simple and easy 'fix', they obviously have not done it for some reason. --
Aran Aldamar	Posted - 2008.06.08 16:22:00 - [92] Originally by: CCP Lingorm This means that to add this field to the inventory return we would need to do an addition join to the differential data table to look up this field for EVERY item in the inventory regardless of whether or not this is a blueprint of not. Oh noes1!! A join! You aren't serious are you? I can see resisting a database structure change, but resisting adding a join to a query is pretty laughable. Why not just add a new item type? You have Blueprint now, just add Blueprint Copy. Sure, new set of icons to download. Not a big deal. At least it would be really obvious which BPs are copies. The S&I interface is awful. No search, resets every time. I can't tell you how many times I've gone through the exact same set of selections to get a manufacturing job started.
Aran Aldamar	Posted - 2008.06.08 16:32:00 - [93] Originally by: Draygo Korvan The reason I say that because while that would be a simple and easy 'fix', they obviously have not done it for some reason. I suspect that 1% of the suggestions they get are simple and easy. 10's of thousands of players who will all complain loudly if something gets broken. Still, this seems pretty small compared to say, faction warfare, which no one I know is excited about. The issue here is that not enough people have complained about this. Squeaky wheel!
Femaref Armageddon Day	Posted - 2008.06.10 23:09:00 - [94] Originally by: Aran Aldamar Originally by: CCP Lingorm This means that to add this field to the inventory return we would need to do an addition join to the differential data table to look up this field for EVERY item in the inventory regardless of whether or not this is a blueprint of not. Oh noes1!! A join! You aren't serious are you? I can see resisting a database structure change, but resisting adding a join to a query is pretty laughable. Why not just add a new item type? You have Blueprint now, just add Blueprint Copy. Sure, new set of icons to download. Not a big deal. At least it would be really obvious which BPs are copies. The S&I interface is awful. No search, resets every time. I can't tell you how many times I've gone through the exact same set of selections to get a manufacturing job started. A join on a table that contains millions of entries. I don't want to be the hamster responseable for it...
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 18:45:00 - [95] Lingorm has been very good at communicating with us so far. I'm waiting to see his response to posts made after his last one. I'm interested in what he sees the potential problems might be to the new set of suggestions (besides "it's a lot of work"). --

CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.12 10:26:00 - [96] Originally by: Draygo Korvan flag (bool? [locked/unlocked?]), contraband (list probably?), singleton (bool?), quantity (int?). Researched BPO's/BPC's will always have a quantity of 1 right? What does singleton mean? Does it mean an item that is unpackaged? All researched BPO's BPC's are 'unpackaged', so couldn't you use the quantity field to store what type of BPO/BPC it is, if it is researched (and thus unstackable) Essentially Researched BPO = Singleton 1, Quantity 2 (UI knows its only 1 item however) BPC = Singleton 1, Quantity 1 Unresearched BPO = Singleton 0, Quantity X Sure it would take a bit of rewriting of the inventory code, and probably a lot of testing but in the end it would be worth it. Singleton means that it is 'unpackages and hence can have different dogma attributes from its type dogma values. A Singleton ALWAYS has a quantity of 1, but quantity of 1 does not mean an item is a singleton (singleton is a bit/bool field). We could do this but that means adding special code to the inventory system and teh UI system which is not idea. I will note the idea down and mention it, but I don't think it will go anywhere. Nice idea though. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.


CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.12 10:28:00 - [97] Originally by: Chi Quan let me get this straight here a bit: 1) researched bpos and bpcs have a unique id (the aforementioned itemID i persume?) 2) itemID is sent every time the inventory is requested by the client, along with typeID if both statements are correct, is it possible to give bpos an odd number in itemID and pcs an even one and that let the client do the differentiation? We can not control what itemID is given to an item. ItemID's are recycled and it is a function that is called to fetch a free itemID for use. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.


CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.12 10:36:00 - [98] Originally by: Jason Edwards I know this idea might be kind of annoying... but why not just make it so when you "copy" the blueprint. It's actually creating a new type of item in of itself. So that it can essentially have at least a different picture just as any other items have different pictures. Or a sort of O or C in the top right corner like others have proposed? I just figure have a completely new item created is doable because invention creates a completely new item. I thought I had explained that this is not doable as the Raven (for example) can not have 2 associated Blueprints that produce it (this is a limitation that we would like to change but other things are higher on the backlog). So there would be no way to link the BPC version of a Raven Blueprint to the Raven item. We have fixed this limitation in other parts of the code it has just not be refactored back into this part of the code yet. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.


CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.12 10:41:00 - [99] Originally by: Aran Aldamar Originally by: CCP Lingorm This means that to add this field to the inventory return we would need to do an addition join to the differential data table to look up this field for EVERY item in the inventory regardless of whether or not this is a blueprint of not. Oh noes1!! A join! You aren't serious are you? I can see resisting a database structure change, but resisting adding a join to a query is pretty laughable. Why not just add a new item type? You have Blueprint now, just add Blueprint Copy. Sure, new set of icons to download. Not a big deal. At least it would be really obvious which BPs are copies. The S&I interface is awful. No search, resets every time. I can't tell you how many times I've gone through the exact same set of selections to get a manufacturing job started. Not a "Join" because by default a Join is an "Inner Left Join", which means that if the item in the left table (inventory) does not have an entry in the right table (dogma attribs) then it will not be included in the result table. What we actually need is and "Outer Left Join" which is All entries in the left table (inventory) and if they have the appropriate Dogma attribute then also include the stuff from the Right table, if they do not have the attributes then put in either NULL or some specified value. While this may actually seem like less work because of the way indexes work it is acutally more work to do an outer join than it is to do an inner join. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.


CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.12 10:47:00 - [100] Hope that answers all the questions and brings this thread upto date with a wall of black and blue. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.


Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.12 21:30:00 - [101] Edited by: Draygo Korvan on 12/06/2008 21:30:43 Originally by: CCP Lingorm Singleton means that it is 'unpackages and hence can have different dogma attributes from its type dogma values. A Singleton ALWAYS has a quantity of 1, but quantity of 1 does not mean an item is a singleton (singleton is a bit/bool field). We could do this but that means adding special code to the inventory system and teh UI system which is not idea. I will note the idea down and mention it, but I don't think it will go anywhere. Nice idea though. I look forward to what they have to say about it. Yea it would obviously require some UI changes such that singleton 1 is always treated as a single item regardless what the quantity value is, so you can use the quantity value to determine if its a BPO or BPC. Thanks for your input, I look forward to any further information that might come out of this. --
Lenus Daragio coracao ardente	Posted - 2008.06.12 22:54:00 - [102] Originally by: CCP Lingorm I thought I had explained that this is not doable as the Raven (for example) can not have 2 associated Blueprints that produce it (this is a limitation that we would like to change but other things are higher on the backlog). So there would be no way to link the BPC version of a Raven Blueprint to the Raven item. We have fixed this limitation in other parts of the code it has just not be refactored back into this part of the code yet. I'd say we have to wait until this is done, since really BPCs and BPOs should be two different items, and not the same. I base this on the item value, a BPO is worth tons more than a BPC, and people obviously know that. Also, players refer to BPCs and BPOs as if they were entirely two different items. Making them different items should really become more of a priority here, since it reflects both the players and the devs view on how this works. This would also probably prove useful when programming future expansions, etc, or special items that can be used to produce other items.
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:35:00 - [103] Just let us tag things after the fact clientside, that'll clear up a good portion of the problems.
Raven Timoshenko Flying While Intoxicated The Threshold	Posted - 2008.06.14 02:28:00 - [104] Originally by: Danton Marcellus Just let us tag things after the fact clientside, that'll clear up a good portion of the problems. hmmm, you know this would be a good compromise, we can "star" objects like in say GMail, or apply tags, client side. What would be needed however is an export / import function for the client cache so we can take it with us to another PC if need be.
Sophie Malaster Equitus Nosferatum Praetorians	Posted - 2008.06.16 12:13:00 - [105] Much easy, in the past the blue prints was blue or cuttlefish, at color. Well, the BPO blue, the BPC cuttlefish. Easy.
Arthor Dark N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.06.18 19:02:00 - [106] Is there any reason why we can't control / shift select a group of blueprints from the S&I Blueprint window so as to move them around or contract them all at once? I find myself having to contract one blueprint at a time otherwise.
Talaan Stardrifter	Posted - 2008.06.20 16:01:00 - [107] Originally by: CCP Lingorm ... I thought I had explained that this is not doable as the Raven (for example) can not have 2 associated Blueprints that produce it (this is a limitation that we would like to change but other things are higher on the backlog). So there would be no way to link the BPC version of a Raven Blueprint to the Raven item. We have fixed this limitation in other parts of the code it has just not be refactored back into this part of the code yet. Sounds like a double-linked list when only a single-link is necessary. How I read this is that the Blueprint knows what it builds, and the item knows what builds it. correct? I'm guessing it's to do with finding the reprocessing values? I can understand how this could take some time to unravel. IF we were to take up the two-item-type technique, would it not be possible for the 'BPC' type to reference the 'BPO' type using a Dogma attribute? It's after midnight here and I'm headed for bed. I'll extrapolate this idea onto paper tomorrow and come back with what I've got.
Falcyon G-Man Industries	Posted - 2008.06.20 16:53:00 - [108] Edited by: Falcyon on 20/06/2008 16:56:01 I hear what you're saying about the current structure, in that no item can have two BPs associated with it. Still, is there a possibility that BPCs could technically not exist? They could be separate types of items in the database that simply make reference to their BPO parents for all their functions, making them psuedo-items or wrappers or some such. I'm not sure how your DB works, but I'm just throwing it out there. --------------------------------------------- Thread on idea for Ship/Module Customization, Depreciation, and Towing
Slanty McGarglefist University of Caille	Posted - 2008.06.20 19:34:00 - [109] Edited by: Slanty McGarglefist on 20/06/2008 19:36:34 Posted here by request from Matthew; Wait! So you're telling me that its impossible to add three letters before the name of the Blueprint like; BPC Raven BPO Heavy Neutron Blaster BPO Arbitrator BPC Large EMP Smartbomb Etc and so on!?!!? or just make it part of the name. _______________________ __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Wrangler No Doh!
procurement specialist	Posted - 2008.06.20 21:29:00 - [110] yes because the bpc and bpo cannot both be used to make the item. therefore the bpc or bpo would be incapable of making said item. pick one.

Lord Fitz Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.21 02:42:00 - [111] Originally by: Arthor Dark Is there any reason why we can't control / shift select a group of blueprints from the S&I Blueprint window so as to move them around or contract them all at once? I find myself having to contract one blueprint at a time otherwise. This. This is what we need. Something that means that people don't have to use the items window to move things around (though deliver to from the S&I window works, it still feels like a workaround). It would mean that the attributes are already fetched here, and is merely more functionality.

CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.22 17:03:00 - [112] Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist Edited by: Slanty McGarglefist on 20/06/2008 19:36:34 Posted here by request from Matthew; Wait! So you're telling me that its impossible to add three letters before the name of the Blueprint like; BPC Raven BPO Heavy Neutron Blaster BPO Arbitrator BPC Large EMP Smartbomb Etc and so on!?!!? or just make it part of the name. _______________________ Yes it is not possible to add 3 letters, cos the 'Name' of the item is contained in the type information not in the inventory system. An inventory item can not have a unique name, ships get round this because they are a 'location' in EVE, this means that they can contain other things (modules, cargo, pilots) and thus have an entry in the Locations tables which allows them to have a unique name rather than the Type name. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.


CCP Lingorm C C P	Posted - 2008.06.22 17:04:00 - [113] Originally by: Arthor Dark Is there any reason why we can't control / shift select a group of blueprints from the S&I Blueprint window so as to move them around or contract them all at once? I find myself having to contract one blueprint at a time otherwise. This has been added to the list of changes for the UI group to look into. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader Originally by: Lord Fitz Eve is to WoW as Wow is to an 8 player game of Unreal Tournament.

Kuroshiro	Posted - 2008.06.22 18:49:00 - [114] How hard would it be to give personal hangars 'division' tabs like corp hangars? That could go a long way towards solving some of the 'BPC/BPO' distinguishing and 'make containers searchable' requests less necessary.
Falcyon G-Man Industries	Posted - 2008.06.22 18:58:00 - [115] Originally by: CCP Lingorm ships get round this because they are a 'location' in EVE, this means that they can contain other things (modules, cargo, pilots) and thus have an entry in the Locations tables which allows them to have a unique name rather than the Type name. Would it be possible to make BPs Locations, then? It could be a first step towards customizable BPs. :) --------------------------------------------- Thread on idea for Ship/Module Customization, Depreciation, and Towing
Jiggardin	Posted - 2008.06.23 18:39:00 - [116] [stupid on] probably a stupid answer but: get some Sun V890 with enough ram and oracle RAC. you wont have performance issues anymore. i know you use mssql, maybe that is the real problem. [/stupid off] i am quite sure that ccp looks into those issue. since the db is normalized, its really hard to implement something like that. at least not without raising the load on the servers. i have no idea of ms products, but are there features in mssql to route special queries onto another machine? -jigga
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:47:00 - [117] Originally by: CCP Lingorm Originally by: Draygo Korvan All researched BPO's BPC's are 'unpackaged', so couldn't you use the quantity field to store what type of BPO/BPC it is, if it is researched (and thus unstackable) Essentially Researched BPO = Singleton 1, Quantity 2 (UI knows its only 1 item however) BPC = Singleton 1, Quantity 1 Unresearched BPO = Singleton 0, Quantity X (BPC's are always singleton 1, due to the blueprint copy metadata) We could do this but that means adding special code to the inventory system and the UI system which is not (a bad?) idea. I will note the idea down and mention it, but I don't think it will go anywhere. Nice idea though. Did it go anywhere? --
Falcyon G-Man Industries	Posted - 2008.06.23 23:39:00 - [118] Edited by: Falcyon on 23/06/2008 23:39:52 That's not a bad idea at all, I would think. A little snippet of code with an IF-ELSE and you've got discernible icons. Still kind of a hack, but it works, right? No harm done. --------------------------------------------- Thread on idea for Ship/Module Customization, Depreciation, and Towing
Fallorn GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.24 03:40:00 - [119] CCP Lingorm's the best for actually explaining stuff so we understand the game better. Sig removed. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] with a link to your signature. - Elmo Pug
Icome4u Interstellar Planetary KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 03:14:00 - [120] Originally by: CCP Lingorm The database is heavily 'normalised' (a method of removing duplicate data) this means that the marker for BPO/BPC is not actually in the Inventory table, it is a table that stores specific differential data. This means that to add this field to the inventory return we would need to do an addition join to the differential data table to look up this field for EVERY item in the inventory regardless of whether or not this is a blueprint of not. Trust me if we could do it I would love it ... but from a DB point of view the extra load is not wanted for the amount of gain. A good workaround is to actually use the S&I interface and then use the Blueprints and Corp blueprints tabs on there, they have a different query that does include this information as the query is filtered to blueprints only. It will also show the ME and PE values in the columns on these views. Their you go guys, directly from a Dev why EVE fails (and lags)! ~~~ My posts are just that, MINE. They do not represent my Corp or Alliance.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: 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.