-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
Sqrlking
Adventurer
Thanks!
Phantasmagorian
Sage
It would be a very welcome feature...
It would be a huge amount of computing Power needed to hold any stuff in a data Store bound to the char which is logged in.
And a great gap in protection of duping.
So it will never happen.
They talked about something like house search. But look for the discussions about laggy Castle. You can imagine that this is also a hard to Code Feature.
And a great gap in protection of duping.
So it will never happen.
They talked about something like house search. But look for the discussions about laggy Castle. You can imagine that this is also a hard to Code Feature.
I do like the idea but how would it be implemented?
Items in the bank box?
Items in the house container?
Items in your backpack?
I can see maybe they can do it for items in containers in bank or a house container but I cannot see how they will be able to gather both pieces of data, pull the data from 2 different sources, as the house although linked to the Acc, the items inside , their IDS are not linked into the house if you get what I mean, you are just making an item no movable or to disappear in a magic circle, but the item and house are not one.... Its hard to explain what I am thinking, but I hope someone gets it.
Will also be a great computing power to have to categorise all items of from one acc and put it all into a database which the game can access and pull the data out.
I hope this doesnt shoot into an EC/CC thread, but I am very sure it could be done for EC, as the way its written format is more modern so that feature could prob be implemented, but somehow I see it would be near enough impossible to do on CC, due to the lack of code that holds the UI together.
Items in the bank box?
Items in the house container?
Items in your backpack?
I can see maybe they can do it for items in containers in bank or a house container but I cannot see how they will be able to gather both pieces of data, pull the data from 2 different sources, as the house although linked to the Acc, the items inside , their IDS are not linked into the house if you get what I mean, you are just making an item no movable or to disappear in a magic circle, but the item and house are not one.... Its hard to explain what I am thinking, but I hope someone gets it.
Will also be a great computing power to have to categorise all items of from one acc and put it all into a database which the game can access and pull the data out.
I hope this doesnt shoot into an EC/CC thread, but I am very sure it could be done for EC, as the way its written format is more modern so that feature could prob be implemented, but somehow I see it would be near enough impossible to do on CC, due to the lack of code that holds the UI together.
Sure, but Devs don't leverage the UI modding features when adding new features anymore. Vendor search, ingame shop and VvV gumps are perfect examples. From a UI modding point of view they are as little accessible as in the CC. Sure there are hackish workarounds to have some control over those legacy gumps, but its far from the accessibility that e.g. the ContainerWindow or the Paperdoll/StatusWindow has.
That said, if we might ever get this feature, they would pretty sure design it again as a legacy gump for both clients
Sorry, but that is fairly silly and paranoid.
ALL items in UO are stored in a database which contains what they are, where they are, hue, and a plethora of other info. An item search feature for characters/houses is just a matter of properly filtering that database and then displaying it in a useful format.
Sqrlking
Adventurer
Thoose thoughts are not going far enough.
You have to start with
Main Container belongs to account.
Who owns the item if a guy bought it from your vendor?
Synch Container where jit another guy Picks an item...
Whatever...since UO Starts we had Problems with lag, which means the item Synchronisation and the amount of data and therefore the code implementation is suboptimal. And we are talking about houses with thousands of Items.
If such stuff would be easy, why I get the message: item is not longer for sale so often? Because they have to handle it in a static way in a dynamic world.
I think they should spent Dev ressources in other projects. Even if I would like to see this feature.
Sorry for wrong capitalisation of words.
You have to start with
Main Container belongs to account.
Who owns the item if a guy bought it from your vendor?
Synch Container where jit another guy Picks an item...
Whatever...since UO Starts we had Problems with lag, which means the item Synchronisation and the amount of data and therefore the code implementation is suboptimal. And we are talking about houses with thousands of Items.
If such stuff would be easy, why I get the message: item is not longer for sale so often? Because they have to handle it in a static way in a dynamic world.
I think they should spent Dev ressources in other projects. Even if I would like to see this feature.
Sorry for wrong capitalisation of words.
All you hoarders can just clean and organize your UO houses a bit more.
... *hides behind couch*.
... *hides behind couch*.
Sqrlking
Adventurer
From the newsletter:
I'm not familiar with the stack UO uses, but as a developer, I would suggest leveraging the existing vendor search gumps and querying only items which are located in a given set of coordinates (those of my house) and also are locked down. The restriction would be that you MUST be in a house you own to search.
Of course, I'm making a TON of assumptions about the existing functionalities, and this doesn't address bank inventories. But what are forums for, if not speculating wildly about things.
3. Can we have a house search to be able to locate all the items in my house?
We sat down with Bleak and talked about this, from an engineering perspective the amount of strain it would put on the server to store all housing data is not feasible at this time.
We sat down with Bleak and talked about this, from an engineering perspective the amount of strain it would put on the server to store all housing data is not feasible at this time.
I'm not familiar with the stack UO uses, but as a developer, I would suggest leveraging the existing vendor search gumps and querying only items which are located in a given set of coordinates (those of my house) and also are locked down. The restriction would be that you MUST be in a house you own to search.
Of course, I'm making a TON of assumptions about the existing functionalities, and this doesn't address bank inventories. But what are forums for, if not speculating wildly about things.
Enziet
Journeyman
This game is some old code. C+ C++ Probably a little basic in there.... XML's.... either way you get the point. Plus the servers that we run on I'm pretty sure are toasters by today's standards. We have to run them cheap as possible or granpappy EA will notice and shut things down.
I also have a (put on tin foil hat) theory that we are actually piggy backing off of another one of EA's servers. So our allotment of data per month is actually pretty low. If we cause the BF4 servers to lag were dead!
We have to be careful with how much functionality we have
Sqrlking
Adventurer
Too funny. I read a post by the OG UO devs which mentioned the use of C, C+, and Wombat (home grown scripting language) on solaris servers. Part of me hopes when they run uptime (or the solaris equiv) they get 18 years and change as the response.This game is some old code. C+ C++ Probably a little basic in there.... XML's.... either way you get the point. Plus the servers that we run on I'm pretty sure are toasters by today's standards. We have to run them cheap as possible or granpappy EA will notice and shut things down.
I also have a (put on tin foil hat) theory that we are actually piggy backing off of another one of EA's servers. So our allotment of data per month is actually pretty low. If we cause the BF4 servers to lag were dead!
We have to be careful with how much functionality we have
From what I know we all now live on a couple of machines in the amazon cloudToo funny. I read a post by the OG UO devs which mentioned the use of C, C+, and Wombat (home grown scripting language) on solaris servers. Part of me hopes when they run uptime (or the solaris equiv) they get 18 years and change as the response.
Uptime maybe 3 years max?! More likely a week or two 