-My suggestion is in regards to crafting in industry.
When using a Mutaplasmid to modify an existing module, the person who mutated it gets to have their crafting name added to the top of the stat rearranged module as we see in this example here from the player named “Brokara” after using a mutaplasmid on their EM Armor Hardener that I have highlighted in yellow.
I would like the ability to have an option to add a crafters name to the crafted item from industry. Like a stamp of pride, it shows excellence, quality, skill, time, cooperation, a logistics and supply chain a mile long, hard work and training to produce many items in the EvE online video game universe.
Perhaps this option is not for everyone in EvE as many of the more old school players might reject it out of the position of change, or prefer not to have their name on a crafted item for security reasons, or lore and role playing purposes, so an option in the industry screen to Stamp your finalized product with your name before delivering a job would be most excellent.
The ability is already in the game as we see from the Mutaplasmid, so the coding would involve adding an “opt in” it to all crafted items in the form of a selection switch in the industry crafting window, an example of which might look something like this. (Also it would extend the amount of information in markets by a greater amount if that data was to be included on killmails, market data ect. which, technically it doesn’t necessarily have to show up on those things like it does with a Mutaplasmid but I would probably just toss the code into a Chat GDP code monkey machine and then it would all work perfectly).
Ladies and gentleman, I present to you, the latest technological revolutionary idea in the world of EvE Online multiplayer gaming industry profession…the name stampy button.
Ok…so it might not look exactly like that…
Ok so it might not look anything like that
YEAH YEAH I get it I stink at photoshop no need to rub it in…
The point here people…look the point here is that no longer will you just be cranking out another stack of Damage Controllers, you will be producing a stack of the world famous crafter VeldsparRockGoblins crafted items, they will show up on kill mails, they will show up in the market…they will show up in the cargo hold of Caldari rockets, on Hobgoblin II’s, on wreck loot, your name will fly through the cosmos on the wings of an Atron! And if you want to remain an anonymous cog in the giant wheel, well that should be the default for anyone who doesn’t want to hit the (patent pending) name stampy button.
That concludes my presentation. if my idea is implemented, I would request a sizable number of large skill injectors (large brick, not those pint sized bags) deposited into my address at Dodixie.
Right, I realize they are only sold in contracts, what I want is a feature to add it to regular modules that you can sell on the market, it doesn’t have to change the title or name of the item to “Dark Lord Trumps Armor Repairer 1” like the mutaplasmid - It would just appear when you opened the information panel to display and display the name of the crafter if you look for it.
I do not want to change the title of the item (like with Mutaplasmids to indicate a difference in stats) I want the regular item to simply include the crafters name upon the item like so, not change the title. So it would still just be a regular Em Armor Hardener, but it will show in the info tooltip who manufactured it if they opt in.
Yeah, it wouldn’t work for the market (for the reasons people mention above.) CCP could make the contract system a bit more complete, but you wouldn’t get the same functionality you do out of the market due to the nature of the items involved.
More specifically, items on the market are stored only using their item ID, which is why they can’t have any non-standard properties.
Mutated items have to store unique values and so can’t be described universally by their item ID. Damaged items also have unique values that can’t be described universally by item ID, whether that’s damaged laser crystals, damaged hull hp, or module damage from heat. These items can’t be sold on the market with those properties, either.
“Assembling” an item is game terms is to expand an item from the characteristics described by its item ID, and to make room for the unique values it has to store to be functional in use (Current HP or the like). “Repackaging” an item is to reduce it again to just an item ID, and this can only be done if its characteristics are the standard values for an item of its type.
The market would have to be drastically changed to allow for a unique value, such as a maker’s name, to attach to each individual item, and this would increase the overhead required to run the entire market system. It can be done, but it would not be trivial to implement or operate.
If you’re OK with just selling these uniquely named items in contracts then that’s much more likely to happen than selling them on the market since the contract system accepts items in an assembled state with all their unique attributes intact. One item in game already mentions who ‘manufactured’ it, the Frozen Corpse, but you would still have to code or modify the UI for opting in and displaying the name on all the player manufactured items, and somehow attach this name generation to the industry system as a whole, which I imagine is easier said than done.
So basically, what your telling me is that it appears the code monkeys have a lot of work ahead of them?
You heard the lady code monkeys, hop to it.
Code code code and bring this into reality.
Toss it into your little Chat GPT coding A.I. thing or whatever.
First it’s line of sight is too much to code, then it’s hit boxes, then the entire physics engine is too much trouble to recode real quick, now it’s namey stampy…
Next thing you’ll telling me that my idea for a Quafe Qoffee (served piping hot fresh) advertising launch campaign needs to go on the back burner…
Damn you Triglovians…Dodixie was fine until you came along. Federation was nice and lazy.
Yes, let’s rework the entire way the market stores items because “it would be cool.” I would unironically prefer them to work on Walking in Stations again, that would probably see more player interaction.
Even if they did put in the work to implement this, the resources the market consumes on the cluster would increase by an order of magnitude. I don’t think people object to the feature so much as they recognize that it’s not very practical unless CCP thought they could handle the extra load and was planning to revamp the entire market system anyway to handle things like mutaplasmids.
Serious question, but after reading about this feature, walking in stations, how in the hell did walking in stations “fail”? Did the game code just not work out? Did the player base reject the idea of leaving the warm, wet, ooozzing pod embrace?
Why was it given up on and not just temporarily postponed, but completely abandoned?
Does that not appeal to the subscriber base in any way as an optional feature?
Did they run out of money? I understand that a Korean company, Pearl Abyss, bought and owns EvE Online, did they scrap the project in order to devote more money/time/resources to Black Desert Online?
Player housing that you could decorate and had a view out of…tons of clothing options, corporation housing and meeting halls, share holders meeting assemblies, alliance leadership VIP rooms and facilities.
The options sound endless and amazing to open up tons of fun and neat extra things to do in game. it sounds incredible to me. A chance to do some role playing in a seedy bar or gambling den, an upstanding clean room laboratory type environment, loud noisy manufacturing plant cranking out arms, or a seedy under ground booster manufacturing facility.
How the hell can such an amazingly cool feature just get thrown into the SH$% bucket?
Seriously, what am I missing here?
Walking in stations failed… because all that was delivered was “captain’s quarters” during the Incarna expansion. I don’t recall what all else was delivered, but it wasn’t much.
(edit: we did get the current character creator too… which was certainly an upgrade. But the community was expecting to be able to walk around in expansive environments and have gameplay tied to it.)
The community flipped out, and a bunch of people unsubbed. It nearly destroyed the game along with CCP.
This is the main issue with a lot of ideas. It takes a lot of work to implement and there are many back end coding issues that need to be ironed out which the community wont see the direct benefit of.
The suggestion you posted in this topic could literally take a team 6 months or longer to implement, for very little payoff. Not to mention, the feature could completely fail in it’s entirety due to working with old swiss cheese code. That’s the main reason why people are giving negative feedback.
The outrage over Incarna release was a couple different things at the same time:
Captain Quarters only – in which “the door” became the symbol of failed promises
the launch of the microstransaction store and Aurum currency – huge source of hatred, and the $60 monocle became a symbol of the company’s sudden turn to greed
The announcement that PyFa, EveMon, etc would need to pay for CRUST/API access – note that the fitting window of the time didn’t have the right nor left panes (you had to repeately right click “show info” on your own ship to see how it changed) and there was no skill planning, and there was still SP loss so EveMon and PyFa were absolutely key tools necessary to play the game.
All the above pointed towards a Head of Product and dev team completely out of touch with reality because what the people were actually wanting at that time was:
Tiericide (remember Meta 1-4 frigates? Yeah, I hated those too)
Rebalancing of battlecruisers and poor performance of rails in particular (drake meta)
Server lag issues (each missile generated in drake blob guaranteed a lag fest with only a 40v40 or 80 people in system when you also had an additional 160+ missiles zooming about).
I myself quit for about 10 years shortly after that release.