Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
 

Fix Grouping Different Drone Types. +More

Author
#1 - 2017-05-19 08:08:41 UTC
Grouping, or creating folders, or far more basic, just a shortcut to make activating and summoning different groups of Drones for different situations, is at it's core just Cosmetics. It keeps things tidy, and reduces clicks to summon different kinda drones when you have more than 5 drones in your drone bay.

So why is it that there are limits on what kinda Drones can be grouped together? This would make sense if the limits was also on what drones you can use at the same time. That you can't group a Logi Drone and a Mining Drone because the game wouldn't let you summon and use both at the same time.

But the game DOES let you summon and use both at the same time. So when creating groups for the drones, can you not mix drone types in the same group? It makes no logical sense.

-

There is also an idea I figured to add onto Drone Management Screen. Namely picture I have 3 groups/folders with 4 drones in each. 4 Light Attack Drones, 4 Medium Attack Drones, and 4 Heavy Attack Drones. for 12 Drones total. However, I had the room for a 13th Drone. Say, an ECM drone.

Currently, you can only add the ECM Drone to 1 of the groups. My idea is the add the ability to 'Add' the ECM Drone to each of the group. To have the Groups basically being like Fits, Cosmetics and isn't until you 'Fit' a ship that it tries to pull the items out. With the Drone Management Screen, it would be the same.

You would see what all drones, fighters, and sentries in the game like with the Fitting System, with Filters for Fighter, Drone, or Sentries. Then the Type, ECM, Logi, Mining, Attacking, and whatever else. Then finally Light, Medium, and Heavy. From there you can create 'Groups' which would work like Fits in the Fitting System. When you 'Summon' that group, it will try to pull those drones from your Drone Bay, pulling out those you have, and not of those you don't. Like when fitting a ship and you only have half the items in the fit.

It's just if this did happen, I would request 3 things about it. Namely, that the 'Drone Fitting' Management could save the groups, like you can with Fits. That the Groups menu can be detached or is Auto Detached when in space, like the Drone Management Menu is now. And finally, that the 'Groups' would be saved ship to ship. This would be where the Saving Groups come in. You would be able to save and import Groups to keep things clean. So that it is NOT like with the Places/Bookmark menus where it's cluttered with hundreds if not thousands of folders and bookmarks and ends up being a mess to sort though. Just make it simple and clean.

So yeah, a fix to an illogical limitation in the game about Drones, and then an idea for a better management of drones. What you guys thing? Any improvements? Am I just being stupid and just need to learn the game better? Should I go get ganked in a Retriever by CODE?
#2 - 2017-05-19 08:46:04 UTC
You lost me at "summoning drones". WoW is that way --->

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

#3 - 2017-05-19 09:04:14 UTC
Linus Gorp wrote:
You lost me at "summoning drones". WoW is that way --->


Summon, Launch, Use, Activate, Program, Turn On, Cast, Pull/Push/****/Fart Out.

Pick whatever one you want to use, they all have the same meaning. If you can't even read something because they use a different word than you are used to, you must not read very much.
#4 - 2017-05-19 10:04:34 UTC
RainbowDashC22 Shiratori wrote:
Linus Gorp wrote:
You lost me at "summoning drones". WoW is that way --->


Summon, Launch, Use, Activate, Program, Turn On, Cast, Pull/Push/****/Fart Out.

Pick whatever one you want to use, they all have the same meaning. If you can't even read something because they use a different word than you are used to, you must not read very much.

It's not the "can't", it's the "don't want to". When someone talks about "summoning" drones in EVE, then my first thought is if I'm dealing with a space wizard here and the second one is that the rest isn't worth reading.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

#5 - 2017-05-19 10:41:12 UTC
Linus Gorp wrote:
It's not the "can't", it's the "don't want to". When someone talks about "summoning" drones in EVE, then my first thought is if I'm dealing with a space wizard here and the second one is that the rest isn't worth reading.


I see. Would you like me to fix it up for you? Hold your hand while you try to comprehend the message? Maybe make an Audio File so you won't have to waste your time reading?

Kinda says a lot about you, where you won't even look at an idea and give it some thought, simply because you only read a tiny bit before placing a label on something and choosing to ignore it instead. That kinda stereotypical thinking is in a lot of things. Racism, Sexism, Feminism, Somethingism.

I would have thought that in this section of the Forums. Where players posts features, changes, and ideas. That that kinda thinking wouldn't be around and that people would have been more open minded. Guess I was wrong. *Shrugs*
#6 - 2017-05-19 11:08:38 UTC
I read your post. Happy now?

CCP isn't going to add this because... legacy code.
Looks quite simple at first, but requires major development effort and it's not worth the effort.

In your example, just don't put the ECM drone in a group and launch it separate after you launched your group of drones.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

#7 - 2017-05-19 11:33:49 UTC  |  Edited by: RainbowDashC22 Shiratori
Linus Gorp wrote:
CCP isn't going to add this because... legacy code.



Haven't just looked up what the Legacy Code is, and the problems around it....

I just have to facepalm at the shear stupidity of the Devs from Eve Online.

One guy. ONE person created all of Eve? And NO ONE else ever worked with him and learned with him? Whats more, he created the game in such a way that people can not understand what any of his lines of coding does?

Right at the point this became an issue, they should have done everything in their power to contact him to teach them, and if that couldn't happen to dedicate all their time learning the code themselves before ever adding anything more into the game. They even admitted it in their post that they were adding code in blind and just hoping it doesn't break something and when it does they can't do anything about it.

So why are they adding in features? Why are they updating and putting more stuff in the game that could break something they don't even understand? Why not Hire someone to look through the untouchable code and play around to figure out what everything does?

Why not just rewrite the entire eve game from scratch? Sure, it would have had everyone start from scratch again, but they easily good have switched over account Data to see what items they had and money and given't all of it back.

Heck, why does this section of the Forum even exist if they can not even add in basic visual and isolated features into the game.?
#8 - 2017-05-19 11:55:38 UTC
RainbowDashC22 Shiratori wrote:
Linus Gorp wrote:
CCP isn't going to add this because... legacy code.



Haven't just looked up what the Legacy Code is, and the problems around it....

I just have to facepalm at the shear stupidity of the Devs from Eve Online.

One guy. ONE person created all of Eve? And NO ONE else ever worked with him and learned with him? Whats more, he created the game in such a way that people can not understand what any of his lines of coding does?

Right at the point this became an issue, they should have done everything in their power to contact him to teach them, and if that couldn't happen to dedicate all their time learning the code themselves before ever adding anything more into the game. They even admitted it in their post that they were adding code in blind and just hoping it doesn't break something and when it does they can't do anything about it.

So why are they adding in features? Why are they updating and putting more stuff in the game that could break something they don't even understand? Why not Hire someone to look through the untouchable code and play around to figure out what everything does?

Why not just rewrite the entire eve game from scratch? Sure, it would have had everyone start from scratch again, but they easily good have switched over account Data to see what items they had and money and given't all of it back.

Heck, why does this section of the Forum even exist if they can not even add in basic visual and isolated features into the game.?

It's obvious you have zero clue about software engineering, so take my advice. Shut up about it.

"Rewrite the game from scratch", yeah.. Let's wait 10 years until CCP is done with that rewrite.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

#9 - 2017-05-19 14:11:40 UTC
Linus Gorp wrote:
You lost me at "summoning drones". WoW is that way --->

EvE has the reputation for having a very toxic and elitist player base, I was wondering who would volunteer to be the poster child for that, thank you for stepping up to fill that role.

Ideas are important, the words chosen to express them are not as long as those words clearly relate the idea. In this case the words chosen clearly relate the idea so your objection to the term "summon" is .......... well can't say that here the ISD may take offense and I do not want to offend them or suffer their wrath.

There are several 10 year plus EvE veterans in the low sec group I have a character in, I wish I could video tape their reactions when I post up your comments about "summoning" drones, it is likely to get interesting since they have been "summoning" drones since I started playing in late 2009.

Getting back to the changes requested, OP ideas similar to yours appear on a fairly consistent basis and they are usually well received as virtually all drones pilots would like to see some variation of your idea implemented. We have some hope based on the recent changes to how carriers handle fighters so who knows what may come our way.

Oh and all that nonsense from Linus Gorp about this never happening because legacy code, yeah don't worry about that.
Over the years CCP has proven repeatedly that they can and will find ways around the legacy code issue, or simply re-write portions of it to allow for a new feature or game change. One of the most recent is the way carriers handle fighters, there are those who said that would never happen because legacy code, they were wrong and there is little doubt in my mind that Linus Gorp is wrong here. Not sure if the problem here is in convincing CCP this a good idea or the devs having time to implement the idea but either way the real problem is CCP not legacy code.

Oh and Linus Gorp, yes I do know a little about programming, based on the published average age of an EvE player I was programming computers before your were born and quite possibly before your parents were old enough to walk and talk. See I learned to program when an entire program had to be entered using puch cards. We did not even have a tape drive system to store data it was stored on wait, yep you guessed it punch cards. I was there when the original basic was released, I was there when D-Base was released. Over the years I have programmed in about a dozen flavors of BASIC not to mention multiple implementations of FORTRAN, COBOL, C, C++, C#, D-Base, R-Base, SQL and even some Python simply because I was interested. You are right none of this makes me an expert on EvE or in computer programming in general. What all of this experience does make me an expert are these.
Without access to the actual code it is impossible for you, me or anyone else to determine what is and what is not possible.

In software virtually anything is possible, so virtually all of those legacy code issues can be worked around. The real question becomes this, do the benefits to the game as a whole justify the dev resources needed to make that work around happen.
Caldari State
#10 - 2017-05-19 17:40:15 UTC
The concept you're looking for is called a metadata tag.

For example, consider you have 3 flights of drones:
- EC-300 x 5
- Warrior II x 5
- Vespa II x 5


Creating a metadata flight of drones, you would create the abstracted concept that it consists of 3 EC, 1 warrior, and 1 Vespa.

Thus when you launch that particular metaflight, it pulls 3 EC, 1 warrior, and 1 vespa from your drone bay.

If you return the drones, and choose you want to launch a different metaflight, say 5 warriors, it would simply pull 5 warriors from your drone bay.

Within the current "folder" mechanic, drones are either in one folder or another. to launch different flights as the op is describing, you must individually launch each drone.

I can absolutely create a "warrior II" group, and put all 5 Warrior IIs in, but then the previous group with the EC-300s cannot have the warrior II in it.

+1, I've often wished for the ability to use meta tagging on drone flights.
#11 - 2017-05-19 19:25:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Donnachadh wrote:
In software virtually anything is possible, so virtually all of those legacy code issues can be worked around. The real question becomes this, do the benefits to the game as a whole justify the dev resources needed to make that work around happen.
This TBH.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

#12 - 2017-05-20 09:31:27 UTC
I like this idea.

It is possible to launch different drones manually one by one or as a group when you have only those 5 in drone bay. So I don't see why shouldn't we be able to group them.
#13 - 2017-05-20 14:38:28 UTC
oh and btw legacy code or difficulty of implementation isn't argument any player should use on this forum - you are not developers and you don't know crap about it and even if its true its not upon you to use it against someone idea

If the idea is good doesnt matter its difficult to implement, its up to CCP if they do it or not and they proved the technical difficulties can be overcome if they want something.

Some players here neccessarily plays the judge and CPP dev but you are wrong. Just recently it was the case of colorblind overview for example.
#14 - 2017-05-20 19:36:22 UTC
Vokan Narkar wrote:
oh and btw legacy code or difficulty of implementation isn't argument any player should use on this forum - you are not developers and you don't know crap about it and even if its true its not upon you to use it against someone idea

If the idea is good doesnt matter its difficult to implement, its up to CCP if they do it or not and they proved the technical difficulties can be overcome if they want something.

Some players here neccessarily plays the judge and CPP dev but you are wrong. Just recently it was the case of colorblind overview for example.

I am a security software engineer and I do know what I'm talking about.

CCP isn't going to put the needed man-hours into this because it isn't worth the effort. Just like it isn't worth the effort rewriting the client to accommodate a character change option without a full logout.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

#15 - 2017-05-20 20:58:44 UTC
Linus Gorp wrote:
CCP isn't going to put the needed man-hours into this because it isn't worth the effort.


That. That right there has to be the stupidest thing I've ever read on this forum so far.

Isn't worth the effort? Are you an idiot? Every chance for them to work on figuring out the Legacy Code is worth it. If they can not learn about the Legacy Code, and how it works, then eventually they will hit a road block so big they will not be able to progress anymore.

I mean just look at the skin system. Most ships have skins now, where as before Skinned Ships were a rare and unique thing. But this new system got rid of unique skins, and every single skin is either a very basic color pallet that a 5 year old made, or a texture copied from something already in the game. Whats more, a lot of the Skins are copied to multiple ships, especially those in the same class of ship.

I'm betting they were able to add in the Skin System, but hit roadblocks with the Legacy Code and couldn't add in many unique Textures and Skins, especially many new ones added in. Which is why a lot of them are old 'Skins' or 'Designs' that were already in the game and shared with a lot of ships. There is, as far as I know, not a single unique skin for a single 1 ship and no other ship, other than skins for your pod.

As for this not being put in because it isn't worth the effort, I don't see much effort needing to be put in. The fixing groups is literally changing very few lines of codes at the most. As for the idea I added in, Most of it is visual only and not pulling up any features or minipulating any Machanics in the system except when you Launch the 'Group'.

But like I said, the Visuals and Feature would work like the Fitting System, and that is a system they has changed around over the last 2-3 years so it isn't part of the Legacy Coding, and something they have full access to the coding and know how it works. It would work more basic as instead of searching all the different equipment items and sorting them by slots. It just sorts them by Type and only the Drones, Fighters, and Sentries so a LOT less items to work with.

And with most of it being Visuals like the Simulation System, which again was not around 2-3 years ago, so it wouldn't be messing with features in the game. It would be it's own Isolated System not interacting with anything else, except the System to Launch Drones, and the Window System to make a Window for it to use. That's about it. Would literally take like, 1 guy a single day to do, a week if he's working casually on the system.

Heck, I know very little about coding, but I bet If I had access to the Fitting System Code, along with everything else like the Drone IDs, and the Launch Command, I would be able to quickly Trial and Error to figure out how the Fitting System worked, and quickly replace the Names and ID of the items with Drones. Rename the slots and folders sorting the stuff, deleting the others, and quickly have a very basic tho ugly looking system within a week. And I don't know anything about coding other than how to modify existing code and not create new coding.

If I could do that in Theory, what could a single Dev, who does have access to all the tools, codes, information, and actually knows coding, do if he saw this idea and got it Green Lighted to be worked on?
Wrecking Machine.
#16 - 2017-05-20 21:15:49 UTC
RainbowDashC22 Shiratori wrote:

Heck, I know very little about coding, but I bet If I had access to the Fitting System Code, along with everything else like the Drone IDs, and the Launch Command, I would be able to quickly Trial and Error to figure out how the Fitting System worked, and quickly replace the Names and ID of the items with Drones. Rename the slots and folders sorting the stuff, deleting the others, and quickly have a very basic tho ugly looking system within a week. And I don't know anything about coding other than how to modify existing code and not create new coding.


So, basically take the fitting simulation window code and apply it dynamically to drones in space during a fight, with custom keybindings. Yeah, that sounds easy enough. Except that's just not how any of this works.
#17 - 2017-05-20 23:18:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Vokan Narkar
Linus Gorp wrote:

I am a security software engineer and I do know what I'm talking about.

CCP isn't going to put the needed man-hours into this because it isn't worth the effort. Just like it isn't worth the effort rewriting the client to accommodate a character change option without a full logout.

And so what? you are player in this game. Who cares how much difficult the idea is to implement? If the idea is solid give it your like and move on. It's not on you to judge the idea from the technical point of view. Or are you maybe some secret EVE employer playing incognito? In that case I apologize.

EDIT: I was admin/builder of one online world based on Neverwinter Nights 1 game. And such smartasses like you were posting on my forum as well. "This idea is bad because it would be too hard to do it blah blah". I told them the same. You know nothing about the technical side of it so don;t comment on it. I really don't know what attract your sort of peoples on forums - from my own experiences you are not interested to help just to post your "expert" opinion. (Okay, we can't help developing EVE directly but still)
Rate My Ticks
#18 - 2017-05-21 02:54:59 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:

In software virtually anything is possible, so virtually all of those legacy code issues can be worked around. The real question becomes this, do the benefits to the game as a whole justify the dev resources needed to make that work around happen.

You are right, but only insofar as the fact that they're working around pos legacy code by systematically butchering out bits and pieces and recoding them as NOT-legacy code (actually adding in appropriate commenting and tags for code blocks as well) as benefits for Upwell structures. And eventually completely removing the pos code from the game. So....it's not exactly "working around" legacy code, it's writing a bypass to legacy code which when completed will excise and assume the role of the legacy code.
#19 - 2017-05-21 14:15:53 UTC
Krysenth wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:

In software virtually anything is possible, so virtually all of those legacy code issues can be worked around. The real question becomes this, do the benefits to the game as a whole justify the dev resources needed to make that work around happen.

You are right, but only insofar as the fact that they're working around pos legacy code by systematically butchering out bits and pieces and recoding them as NOT-legacy code (actually adding in appropriate commenting and tags for code blocks as well) as benefits for Upwell structures. And eventually completely removing the pos code from the game. So....it's not exactly "working around" legacy code, it's writing a bypass to legacy code which when completed will excise and assume the role of the legacy code.

I understand your point but completely replacing existing code is the ultimate work around when you come up against any form of legacy (old) code issues.

#20 - 2017-05-21 14:16:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Linus Gorp
RainbowDashC22 Shiratori wrote:
Linus Gorp wrote:
CCP isn't going to put the needed man-hours into this because it isn't worth the effort.


That. That right there has to be the stupidest thing I've ever read on this forum so far.

Isn't worth the effort? Are you an idiot? Every chance for them to work on figuring out the Legacy Code is worth it. If they can not learn about the Legacy Code, and how it works, then eventually they will hit a road block so big they will not be able to progress anymore.

I mean just look at the skin system. Most ships have skins now, where as before Skinned Ships were a rare and unique thing. But this new system got rid of unique skins, and every single skin is either a very basic color pallet that a 5 year old made, or a texture copied from something already in the game. Whats more, a lot of the Skins are copied to multiple ships, especially those in the same class of ship.

I'm betting they were able to add in the Skin System, but hit roadblocks with the Legacy Code and couldn't add in many unique Textures and Skins, especially many new ones added in. Which is why a lot of them are old 'Skins' or 'Designs' that were already in the game and shared with a lot of ships. There is, as far as I know, not a single unique skin for a single 1 ship and no other ship, other than skins for your pod.

As for this not being put in because it isn't worth the effort, I don't see much effort needing to be put in. The fixing groups is literally changing very few lines of codes at the most. As for the idea I added in, Most of it is visual only and not pulling up any features or minipulating any Machanics in the system except when you Launch the 'Group'.

But like I said, the Visuals and Feature would work like the Fitting System, and that is a system they has changed around over the last 2-3 years so it isn't part of the Legacy Coding, and something they have full access to the coding and know how it works. It would work more basic as instead of searching all the different equipment items and sorting them by slots. It just sorts them by Type and only the Drones, Fighters, and Sentries so a LOT less items to work with.

And with most of it being Visuals like the Simulation System, which again was not around 2-3 years ago, so it wouldn't be messing with features in the game. It would be it's own Isolated System not interacting with anything else, except the System to Launch Drones, and the Window System to make a Window for it to use. That's about it. Would literally take like, 1 guy a single day to do, a week if he's working casually on the system.

Heck, I know very little about coding, but I bet If I had access to the Fitting System Code, along with everything else like the Drone IDs, and the Launch Command, I would be able to quickly Trial and Error to figure out how the Fitting System worked, and quickly replace the Names and ID of the items with Drones. Rename the slots and folders sorting the stuff, deleting the others, and quickly have a very basic tho ugly looking system within a week. And I don't know anything about coding other than how to modify existing code and not create new coding.

If I could do that in Theory, what could a single Dev, who does have access to all the tools, codes, information, and actually knows coding, do if he saw this idea and got it Green Lighted to be worked on?

A wall of text just to tell the world what a clueless idiot you are.

Vokan Narkar wrote:
EDIT: I was admin/builder of one online world based on Neverwinter Nights 1 game. And such smartasses like you were posting on my forum as well. "This idea is bad because it would be too hard to do it blah blah". I told them the same. You know nothing about the technical side of it so don;t comment on it. I really don't know what attract your sort of peoples on forums - from my own experiences you are not interested to help just to post your "expert" opinion. (Okay, we can't help developing EVE directly but still)

You didn't put a sliver of thought into what the OP proposes and how much engineering time that requires, did you? Of course you didn't. Very likely you wouldn't even figure out how much time it requires, because, by your own words, you're not a software engineer.

I rather have CCP work on something remotely important than wasting a month on something as insignificant as this. There are far bigger problems than fixing the drone management window to accommodate tiny edge cases.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

Forum Jump