|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
230
   |
Posted - 2013.06.05 17:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sounds to me like a semantic quibble that just doesn't matter.
You extend and it's consumed, ok, no problem, you wanted it anyway.
Whichever the queue order, the total time would be the same.
Sounds to me the only actual issue is that the message differs from PLEX in EVE. Simple fix, really, change the message to simply say "this action will consume the new booster and extend your time by X".
As to different booster values, even that doesn't matter TOO much (sometimes you'd want the faster rate right now, sometimes you don't care). From a programming perspective, it feels like it would be a nightmare to let you rearrange the queue order for these boosters like you can the queue order in eve. Probably best to set the higher-multiplier to start immediately and expend the other later, but then you have to write code to compare boosters (and to do it right you have to write code to compare the values of all queued boosters and arrange them accordingly, as opposed to simply pausing the old and starting the new, which is so much more simple to write code for.)
(Sorry for any lack of clarity in what i wrote, using a tablet at the moment, and i'm sick as a dog). |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
230
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 18:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bob Amarrley wrote:Driftward wrote:low genius wrote:EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote:I'm not sure if this has already been mentioned because the forum search is broken for me (I can't even find my own posts?) but here goes:
I decided to buy a passive booster or two to help make up for the 1.5million SP I lost with that glitch that happened when DUST went live on Tranquility server (I never got the reimbursement). My first one is running out today, in about two hours. There is an option to "extend" it with another passive booster, so I thought "Sure, okay, sounds good."
But the game is telling me that if I "extend" the booster, the NEW booster will be used immediately and the old one is queued behind it. What exactly is the reason for this? It makes much more sense for the new booster to be queued behind the old one.
This isn't a major issue (at all), but it should be common sense. Right? different boosters have different multipliers. ^^^Ummmm, read the OP? And if you did, how is that comment helpful? Which by the way I agree with. Use up the old one completely and then activate the new one to maintain a constant passive booster. Would seem like common sense to me. I think what he means is that if you buy a booster with a better multiplier (omega), you probably want it to work right away. This makes sense to me. I would be more annoyed by having to wait for my omega booster to start working than I am by a weird queue of almost-finished boosters.
With that, though, now they have to implement code for a max queue length. It seems trivial, but all tnose little things add up.
Gah, times like this i wish all code were open source so i could look and see how it was implemented, so i can see if it was writtento be expandable, or if it was quick-and-dirty.
The real complication is the different multipliers; if there were only different durations it would be so easy to just add time with standard functions, but adding different multipliers complicates the code massively. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
230
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 19:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote:Geirskoegul wrote:Sounds to me like a semantic quibble that just doesn't matter.
You extend and it's consumed, ok, no problem, you wanted it anyway.
Whichever the queue order, the total time would be the same.
Sounds to me the only actual issue is that the message differs from PLEX in EVE. Simple fix, really, change the message to simply say "this action will consume the new booster and extend your time by X".
As to different booster values, even that doesn't matter TOO much (sometimes you'd want the faster rate right now, sometimes you don't care). From a programming perspective, it feels like it would be a nightmare to let you rearrange the queue order for these boosters like you can the queue order in eve. Probably best to set the higher-multiplier to start immediately and expend the other later, but then you have to write code to compare boosters (and to do it right you have to write code to compare the values of all queued boosters and arrange them accordingly, as opposed to simply pausing the old and starting the new, which is so much more simple to write code for.)
(Sorry for any lack of clarity in what i wrote, using a tablet at the moment, and i'm sick as a dog). Yes I know the time is the same. And I already said it's not a real issue in any sense. It's just a little odd. I'm not really pushing for the addition of rearranging queue orders and the like, I just think it makes more sense to queue the booster behind the old one. The Omega booster is/was a limited time sale and so I'm not too concerned about that. You're taking something that is really simple and trying to make it overly complicated, under the guise that 1) I want my limited time double booster now! Not two hours from now! (ok) 2) It's fine that the old booster goes last because the time is the same (although you'll just wind up with an ugly queue of boosters that only last a few hours each) 3) That CCP couldn't also just simply give us the option of starting the new booster now or queuing it behind the old one (with a 2 booster max of 1 active 1 queued) It's a simple issue. We don't need to start writing a bunch of code internally comparing booster values and all. And again, it's just a minor quirk that feels odd. (and the people who would work on something like this aren't the people who are going to be balancing weapons and such so inb4 those arguments)
You misunderstand me. Given the option would require coding that has questionale ROI. Like I said in my OP, I think the real complaint stems from the wording of the message. I'll admit that what i'm about to say is not an excuse for it, but the fact is that these type of odd wording issues are common. You can find modules that say bonus to capacitor recharge rate in the description and have -15% capacitor recharge time on the attributes tab. It stems from localization issues, and simple inconsistency in logic (how people read one thing in a vacuum vs the description of what it should do next to the WAY it achieves that).
Honestly, the best solution i can think of, from the perspective of programming it, making it logical, etc., would be to make the base booster exactly like a PLEX: it simply adds for X time, and when you extend, it just changes the expiration, no concept of "items that wear after turned on", just a straight-up timer. For the ones with a bigger boost (e.g. omegas) make a new slot (99% od the code can be copied and pasted, and the UI work would take less than an hour), and so instead of buying an omega for 200% boost instead of 150%, you buy the booster for 150%, and there'x another slot and boost that adds another 50%.
It would be so much easier to code, and consolidate with what we have, while making the core booster work just like PLEX with the unambiguous message of "you added x days, your account now expires on [date + x]
Sorry if that was a bit rambling, been drinking. I hope what i mean was clear, but will be happy to offer clarification when i'm sober if you message me. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
230
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 19:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote:Making the booster work like a PLEX is no issue to me, but I have a feeling it's one of those things where the Devs, again, are going to say "We don't have to follow EVE!!"
It'd make more sense than the current queuing system at least.
I have NEVER seen anyone with authority say something like that ("this isn'teve,"this doesn'thave tobe like eve). I only see these arguments coming frim the Call of Halo crowd. For that matter, even for Star Citizen I only see the "this isn't eve" and other anti-eve comments coming from those that really justwant a sci-fi themed World ofWarcraft, instead of an actual good online game.
Same disclaimer as before: please excuse the typos, i'm on my wtablet, sick, and have been drinking, heh |
|
|
| |
|