Moving crate storage [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

Sharja

09-02-2009, 01:18 PM

How fantastic we have some place to store our seasonal decorations, but when I tested it this morning upon exiting and re-entering my house everything I had placed in the moving crate was back on the floor and the crate was gone.

Valdaglerion

09-02-2009, 05:40 PM

Ok, feedback on this feature . . .Firstly the bug - it isnt working. Once you zone out of the house and come back, anything and everything placed in the crate is back on the floor. Additionally . . .<ol><li>Moving Crates still count as item count so this doesnt really help with storage. I have 4 houses used for nothing but storing holiday stuff.</li><li>This new feature doesnt create a moving crate it merely makes the items disappear and they can still be collected from teh door.</li><li>Confirmed this feature still makes the item count towards your total limit, again . . . this doesnt help</li><li>Even if they didnt count towards your limit, you wouldnt be able to put them out during the holidays unless all the holiday items are changed to be ZERO count so they would not count towards your normal decor.</li></ol>All in all this is a nice feature of being able to pick up a single item at a item and hide it from the floor but fails miserably as any form of additional storage or item management.Things that would make this infinitely more useful:<ol><li>Holiday items changed to be zero count</li><li>Ability to actually create multiple moving crates so they could be labeled</li><li>Moving crates and all items in them shoud be ZERO count, this becomes more useful for additional storage beyond holiday things.</li></ol>

Rothgar

09-02-2009, 07:18 PM

<cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, feedback on this feature . . .Firstly the bug - it isnt working. Once you zone out of the house and come back, anything and everything placed in the crate is back on the floor. Additionally . . .<ol><li>Moving Crates still count as item count so this doesnt really help with storage. I have 4 houses used for nothing but storing holiday stuff.</li><li>This new feature doesnt create a moving crate it merely makes the items disappear and they can still be collected from teh door.</li><li>Confirmed this feature still makes the item count towards your total limit, again . . . this doesnt help</li><li>Even if they didnt count towards your limit, you wouldnt be able to put them out during the holidays unless all the holiday items are changed to be ZERO count so they would not count towards your normal decor.</li></ol>All in all this is a nice feature of being able to pick up a single item at a item and hide it from the floor but fails miserably as any form of additional storage or item management.Things that would make this infinitely more useful:<ol><li>Holiday items changed to be zero count</li><li>Ability to actually create multiple moving crates so they could be labeled</li><li>Moving crates and all items in them shoud be ZERO count, this becomes more useful for additional storage beyond holiday things.</li></ol></blockquote>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but items in moving crates cannot be "zero count". Otherwise this would provide for unlimited storage of items. I'm sure everyone would find this very useful until our database chokes on the extra records and the server comes crashing to a halt. The item limits are there for two reasons. One, to limit the number of visual items that have to be rendered and proxied to your client. This can be solved by having items in a crate because they don't render.Two, to limit the actual amount of data that can be associated with a house. This is for the health of the server and database. Without limits on data, the game could quickly become unplayable because players can create an unlimited number of house items.We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.The fact that this feature "fails miserably as a form of additional storage" is actually a success in my book because that was not the intent of the feature. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Changing holiday items to be "zero count" would also circumvent both numbers "one" and "two" in my list above, so I don't see that as happening either.I'm sorry.

Katz

09-02-2009, 07:46 PM

Not being a programmer, I have no idea of the limitations or options available to you all.However, if you ever devise a way to provide storage for holiday items, appearance armor and the like I'm sure it would be very popular.Several of us discussing it said we would buy such a storage device from station cash.<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />

KerowynnKaotic

09-02-2009, 09:34 PM

<cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, feedback on this feature . . .Firstly the bug - it isnt working. Once you zone out of the house and come back, anything and everything placed in the crate is back on the floor. Additionally . . .<ol><li>Moving Crates still count as item count so this doesnt really help with storage. I have 4 houses used for nothing but storing holiday stuff.</li><li>This new feature doesnt create a moving crate it merely makes the items disappear and they can still be collected from teh door.</li><li>Confirmed this feature still makes the item count towards your total limit, again . . . this doesnt help</li><li>Even if they didnt count towards your limit, you wouldnt be able to put them out during the holidays unless all the holiday items are changed to be ZERO count so they would not count towards your normal decor.</li></ol>All in all this is a nice feature of being able to pick up a single item at a item and hide it from the floor but fails miserably as any form of additional storage or item management.Things that would make this infinitely more useful:<ol><li>Holiday items changed to be zero count</li><li>Ability to actually create multiple moving crates so they could be labeled</li><li>Moving crates and all items in them shoud be ZERO count, this becomes more useful for additional storage beyond holiday things.</li></ol></blockquote>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but items in moving crates cannot be "zero count". Otherwise this would provide for unlimited storage of items. I'm sure everyone would find this very useful until our database chokes on the extra records and the server comes crashing to a halt. The item limits are there for two reasons. One, to limit the number of visual items that have to be rendered and proxied to your client. This can be solved by having items in a crate because they don't render.Two, to limit the actual amount of data that can be associated with a house. This is for the health of the server and database. Without limits on data, the game could quickly become unplayable because players can create an unlimited number of house items.We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.The fact that this feature "fails miserably as a form of additional storage" is actually a success in my book because that was not the intent of the feature. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> Changing holiday items to be "zero count" would also circumvent both numbers "one" and "two" in my list above, so I don't see that as happening either.I'm sorry.</blockquote>How are Items in the Broker different from Items in a House? I ask this because it seems to me that when the Items are placed in the Broker system they cease to be 'an item' so to speak and exist only as link/placeholder .. at least till they are bought or pulled out.There are probably over a million 'items' up for sale on any server on any given day .. And, we can already have @ 528 items up for sale/per character.Is there any way you can merge the Broker System and our House Vaults to be similar? To where we use the same kind of storage boxes as the broker can use but for storage and decoration changes instead?If we had such a system ... could use the load/save lay-outs to remove items from the Vaults to be used in the decoration scheme? And, when they are not, they go back into the Vault (or moving crate up to our room limit).Being able to have additional storage boxes that held up to 88 (mahogany) pieces of furniture would be a good thing in itself for some of us .. being able to use that and the lay-out system would be a god-send for even more ..

Ventisly

09-03-2009, 04:32 AM

<cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but items in moving crates cannot be "zero count". Otherwise this would provide for unlimited storage of items. I'm sure everyone would find this very useful until our database chokes on the extra records and the server comes crashing to a halt. The item limits are there for two reasons. One, to limit the number of visual items that have to be rendered and proxied to your client. This can be solved by having items in a crate because they don't render.Two, to limit the actual amount of data that can be associated with a house. This is for the health of the server and database. Without limits on data, the game could quickly become unplayable because players can create an unlimited number of house items.We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.The fact that this feature "fails miserably as a form of additional storage" is actually a success in my book because that was not the intent of the feature. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> Changing holiday items to be "zero count" would also circumvent both numbers "one" and "two" in my list above, so I don't see that as happening either.I'm sorry.</blockquote>Something to consider on this issue Rothgar if database size is of concern (I'm a developer myself, so pardon my assumptions of your underlying database structures)...I know that at least on my toons, I use many of my alt's houses as storage space for thousands of specialty items that cannot be crafted on demand such as quested or live event/holiday items. The database storage requirements for something placed in a house (item ID, X, Y, Z, rotation, size, tilt?) seems like significantly more than the storage requirements for something placed in a moving crate (item ID only). If I was able to move the specialty items from my storage houses into my guild hall's moving crate (assuming it offered large storge space and didn't subtract from the guild hall's item count) it should save quite a bit of database space on your end and provide easier access on my end.It could save even more space if the storage of items in the moving crate were "combined" like the harvest depo does. So rather than storing 50 separate rows of "large glacial room divider" it could be stored (and displayed for easier inventory management) as a single row of "large glacial room divider" with an item count of 50.I imagine a lot of others are using alt houses as storage space as well that would be happy to place them in moving crates for easier access.

Powers

09-03-2009, 11:03 AM

<cite>Gaktar@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>If I was able to move the specialty items from my storage houses into my guild hall's moving crate (assuming it offered large storge space and didn't subtract from the guild hall's item count) it should save quite a bit of database space on your end and provide easier access on my end.</blockquote>It's not just disk space, though; just the number of records involved affects the time it takes to peform queries, no matter how small those records are.Powers &8^]

Valdaglerion

09-03-2009, 11:04 AM

<cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, feedback on this feature . . .Firstly the bug - it isnt working. Once you zone out of the house and come back, anything and everything placed in the crate is back on the floor. Additionally . . .<ol><li>Moving Crates still count as item count so this doesnt really help with storage. I have 4 houses used for nothing but storing holiday stuff.</li><li>This new feature doesnt create a moving crate it merely makes the items disappear and they can still be collected from teh door.</li><li>Confirmed this feature still makes the item count towards your total limit, again . . . this doesnt help</li><li>Even if they didnt count towards your limit, you wouldnt be able to put them out during the holidays unless all the holiday items are changed to be ZERO count so they would not count towards your normal decor.</li></ol>All in all this is a nice feature of being able to pick up a single item at a item and hide it from the floor but fails miserably as any form of additional storage or item management.Things that would make this infinitely more useful:<ol><li>Holiday items changed to be zero count</li><li>Ability to actually create multiple moving crates so they could be labeled</li><li>Moving crates and all items in them shoud be ZERO count, this becomes more useful for additional storage beyond holiday things.</li></ol></blockquote>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but items in moving crates cannot be "zero count". Otherwise this would provide for unlimited storage of items. I'm sure everyone would find this very useful until our database chokes on the extra records and the server comes crashing to a halt. The item limits are there for two reasons. One, to limit the number of visual items that have to be rendered and proxied to your client. This can be solved by having items in a crate because they don't render.Two, to limit the actual amount of data that can be associated with a house. This is for the health of the server and database. Without limits on data, the game could quickly become unplayable because players can create an unlimited number of house items.We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.The fact that this feature "fails miserably as a form of additional storage" is actually a success in my book because that was not the intent of the feature. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> Changing holiday items to be "zero count" would also circumvent both numbers "one" and "two" in my list above, so I don't see that as happening either.I'm sorry.</blockquote>YOu know I love you guys Rothgar. But when I see this -You can now right click individual house items and place them into a moving crate one at a time. Excellent for storing your holiday decorations!in the update notes, it eludes to an additional storage option. We can and do this already but shoving everything in an alt house and packing it. Thus using ALT1 for Frostfell, ALT2 for NoTD, etc etc.Point being, the feature allows us to hide 1 item at a time in a house but doesnt modify the item count or the way it is stored really. As a developer myself and database architect I can appreciate the limitations of certain things. Honestly, I think SOE should really consider a cleanup schedule of the game for the health of it personally.I can appreciate that SOE wants to make it easy for people to come back and play but really, not deleting toons that havent been played since 2004 is a bit much. I wonder how much health to the system could be recovered by enforcing better regulations such as . . . .(1) It takes 6 accounts to form a guild, it takes 6 acounts to keep it. If you have less than 6 active accounts on your guild roster your guild gets its charter revoked within 14-30 days. No more abusing single guilds for storage only.(2) Back rent should be due on houses. This would take coin out of the game and I dont know a banker that would let you slide on not paying your mortgage for 6 months and just paying the current month to "be current". This would also stop some of the abuse of housing. Houses not paid for 180 days would result in eviction and all items being placed for public auction by a NPC (further removal of coin from the game). Even no-trade housing items would be allowed for these auctions.(3) Deletion of toons based on level and inactivity length. Toons level 20 and under would be deleted if inactive for 90 days. Toons 21-50 deleted if inactive 180 days. 51 - 70 deleted after 180 days. 71+ deleted after 1 year.If rules like these were put in place I would wager the system would be much more efficient and healthy, in turn allowing for paying customers to benefit more because you would be able to add more storage for those toons.I know, its an unpopular statement and everyone wants to be able to store things on their alts in unpaid houses, etc. I do it as well because the system allows it. I wish I didnt have to, I would rather have my 1 toon with all her stuff available to her.Perhaps allowing a single toon to purchase multiple houses is another option? Dont know the particular architecture of the data system you guys have but this is really becoming an issue, its been going in this direction for a couple of years now. Just some thoughts anyway . .

Barx

09-03-2009, 11:11 AM

<cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>YOu know I love you guys Rothgar. But when I see this -You can now right click individual house items and place them into a moving crate one at a time. Excellent for storing your holiday decorations!in the update notes, it eludes to an additional storage option. We can and do this already but shoving everything in an alt house and packing it. Thus using ALT1 for Frostfell, ALT2 for NoTD, etc etc.Point being, the feature allows us to hide 1 item at a time in a house but doesnt modify the item count or the way it is stored really. As a developer myself and database architect I can appreciate the limitations of certain things. Honestly, I think SOE should really consider a cleanup schedule of the game for the health of it personally.I can appreciate that SOE wants to make it easy for people to come back and play but really, not deleting toons that havent been played since 2004 is a bit much. I wonder how much health to the system could be recovered by enforcing better regulations such as . . . .(1) It takes 6 accounts to form a guild, it takes 6 acounts to keep it. If you have less than 6 active accounts on your guild roster your guild gets its charter revoked within 14-30 days. No more abusing single guilds for storage only.(2) Back rent should be due on houses. This would take coin out of the game and I dont know a banker that would let you slide on not paying your mortgage for 6 months and just paying the current month to "be current". This would also stop some of the abuse of housing. Houses not paid for 180 days would result in eviction and all items being placed for public auction by a NPC (further removal of coin from the game). Even no-trade housing items would be allowed for these auctions.(3) Deletion of toons based on level and inactivity length. Toons level 20 and under would be deleted if inactive for 90 days. Toons 21-50 deleted if inactive 180 days. 51 - 70 deleted after 180 days. 71+ deleted after 1 year.If rules like these were put in place I would wager the system would be much more efficient and healthy, in turn allowing for paying customers to benefit more because you would be able to add more storage for those toons.I know, its an unpopular statement and everyone wants to be able to store things on their alts in unpaid houses, etc. I do it as well because the system allows it. I wish I didnt have to, I would rather have my 1 toon with all her stuff available to her.Perhaps allowing a single toon to purchase multiple houses is another option? Dont know the particular architecture of the data system you guys have but this is really becoming an issue, its been going in this direction for a couple of years now. Just some thoughts anyway . .</blockquote>That is a road a game either goes down from the start, or doesn't. It becomes exponentially more difficult and unwanted to implement those things into a game the longer the game has been. How would you feel if you had a guild of 2 or 3 accounts just for your family and got kicked to the curb in the name of "reducing database size?" Or if you came back after a 3 month haitus and found you couldn't get into your house until you paid several platinum?The "deleting" characters thing is somewhat different. It is acceptable to remove characters from the game after prolonged period of account inactivity, provided there is a simple way for those characters to be restored from backup. As it is now, you have to go through CS to get a character restored through backup. If there was a way to automatically request it be restored, provided it was deleted due to inactivity, then that would be more acceptable. but even then the inactivity length has to be long -- at LEAST a year for even low level alts, and for alts above 50 I'd say at least 3 years. And that is still going on the assumption that removing all of those will reduce lag an appreciable amount, despite them being 'old' records.As for the note alluding to a storage option -- it actually does. It is alluding to the fact that you can now store the items in your house out of sight, whereas before if you wanted to keep them in your house you'd have to find someplace to 'hide' them. It does not say "This will give you more storage space," which would be false.

Vonotar

09-03-2009, 11:49 AM

If we're talking about the overhead of player files, I'll say the same as I've said before.Decide a cut-off point, say 12 months of unpaid time (i.e. subscription time lapsed over six months ago, not counting 'free time' offered as part of a promotion).All characters on said account are 'character transferred' to a 'graveyard' server which has no actual zones and just stores unused characters, character will have their ID appended to the end of their name to ensure a unique reference.If the customer decides to re-activate their account they will see that their characters are currently 'suspended' and upon attempting to play them they will be prompted to select a server (and if needed a new name) for the character to be transferred to.This achieves a number of things:- Relieves the actual live servers of a lot of unneeded player information, especially regarding accounts not used since 2004-2005! Think of all those broker items (which are still in the DB regardless of whether they show on the broker for sale), house items, stats etc. Everytime you click visit on a house door or use the mailbox I suspect the DB has to sift through masses of dormant characters.- Releases a lot of character names back into the pool for new players to use, I know people should think of more unique names rather than Keith, Tommy etc, but on some servers we are at the point where you can spend half an hour trying to find an elven sounding name that hasn't already gone, that doesn't help the new player experience.- If the player comes back to the game they effectively get to re-choose what server they want to play on, considering how many people I know are waiting for the next free transfers before re-subscribing (as they don't want to pay out 7 times the transfer cost) being able to tell them that because their character has fallen dormant they can move server for free is a bonus.The only consideration I see is links to guilds, so simply have the characters appear as dormant in the guild (i.e. they appear on the guild list, with status amount and notes preserved), if the choose to come back to the same server they will be automatically relinked to the guild, if not they lose their guild membership (same as current character transfer).OK, apologies for the OT speech.As regards moving crates, I also wonder how useful a 'hide item' feature is. What I would like to see is the possibility of taking sales crates and putting them in the housing vault slots (not broker slots). In this configuration the sales crates wouldn't actually provide broker space, but instead would provide storage space alone.You would then be able to place these crates (or weapon rank/wardrobe etc) in the house as normal and then add or remove from them in exactly the same way as when they are acting as sales crates. The only difference is that you can't sell from them.Visitors will have the option to click on the item and 'peek' at what is stored inside (although they can't remove without trustee access and certainly can't buy the items).In such a way a crate could hold all the frostfell holiday items, or a wardrobe could hold all your characters spare gear. Think of the possibilities, and it's not that much worse than people using actual broker slots or just large normal strongboxes

d1anaw

09-03-2009, 12:21 PM

<cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, feedback on this feature . . .Firstly the bug - it isnt working. Once you zone out of the house and come back, anything and everything placed in the crate is back on the floor. Additionally . . .<ol><li>Moving Crates still count as item count so this doesnt really help with storage. I have 4 houses used for nothing but storing holiday stuff.</li><li>This new feature doesnt create a moving crate it merely makes the items disappear and they can still be collected from teh door.</li><li>Confirmed this feature still makes the item count towards your total limit, again . . . this doesnt help</li><li>Even if they didnt count towards your limit, you wouldnt be able to put them out during the holidays unless all the holiday items are changed to be ZERO count so they would not count towards your normal decor.</li></ol>All in all this is a nice feature of being able to pick up a single item at a item and hide it from the floor but fails miserably as any form of additional storage or item management.Things that would make this infinitely more useful:<ol><li>Holiday items changed to be zero count</li><li>Ability to actually create multiple moving crates so they could be labeled</li><li>Moving crates and all items in them shoud be ZERO count, this becomes more useful for additional storage beyond holiday things.</li></ol></blockquote>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but items in moving crates cannot be "zero count". Otherwise this would provide for unlimited storage of items. I'm sure everyone would find this very useful until our database chokes on the extra records and the server comes crashing to a halt. The item limits are there for two reasons. One, to limit the number of visual items that have to be rendered and proxied to your client. This can be solved by having items in a crate because they don't render.Two, to limit the actual amount of data that can be associated with a house. This is for the health of the server and database. Without limits on data, the game could quickly become unplayable because players can create an unlimited number of house items.We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.The fact that this feature "fails miserably as a form of additional storage" is actually a success in my book because that was not the intent of the feature. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> Changing holiday items to be "zero count" would also circumvent both numbers "one" and "two" in my list above, so I don't see that as happening either.I'm sorry.</blockquote>YOu know I love you guys Rothgar. But when I see this -You can now right click individual house items and place them into a moving crate one at a time. Excellent for storing your holiday decorations!in the update notes, it eludes to an additional storage option. We can and do this already but shoving everything in an alt house and packing it. Thus using ALT1 for Frostfell, ALT2 for NoTD, etc etc.Point being, the feature allows us to hide 1 item at a time in a house but doesnt modify the item count or the way it is stored really. As a developer myself and database architect I can appreciate the limitations of certain things. Honestly, I think SOE should really consider a cleanup schedule of the game for the health of it personally.I can appreciate that SOE wants to make it easy for people to come back and play but really, not deleting toons that havent been played since 2004 is a bit much. I wonder how much health to the system could be recovered by enforcing better regulations such as . . . .(1) It takes 6 accounts to form a guild, it takes 6 acounts to keep it. If you have less than 6 active accounts on your guild roster your guild gets its charter revoked within 14-30 days. No more abusing single guilds for storage only.(2) Back rent should be due on houses. This would take coin out of the game and I dont know a banker that would let you slide on not paying your mortgage for 6 months and just paying the current month to "be current". This would also stop some of the abuse of housing. Houses not paid for 180 days would result in eviction and all items being placed for public auction by a NPC (further removal of coin from the game). Even no-trade housing items would be allowed for these auctions.(3) Deletion of toons based on level and inactivity length. Toons level 20 and under would be deleted if inactive for 90 days. Toons 21-50 deleted if inactive 180 days. 51 - 70 deleted after 180 days. 71+ deleted after 1 year.If rules like these were put in place I would wager the system would be much more efficient and healthy, in turn allowing for paying customers to benefit more because you would be able to add more storage for those toons.I know, its an unpopular statement and everyone wants to be able to store things on their alts in unpaid houses, etc. I do it as well because the system allows it. I wish I didnt have to, I would rather have my 1 toon with all her stuff available to her.Perhaps allowing a single toon to purchase multiple houses is another option? Dont know the particular architecture of the data system you guys have but this is really becoming an issue, its been going in this direction for a couple of years now. Just some thoughts anyway . .</blockquote>Obviously, you must be a member of one of those hard core raiding mega guilds. It's BS to say that a guild has to be de-certified because it drops below a certain number. When we decided to start re-building our guild, we started with 2 of us. 2 of us who gathered the requirements together to get and design a guild hall and we worked our [Removed for Content] off to do it. We still have a very small guild, but we have built it up. And unlike a lot of the mega guilds, which are often filled with kids who have no outside responsibilities, ours is comprised entirely of older adults who have things like jobs and families and real life to deal with who may not be able to stay in the guild. So to take away everything we have worked for because we don't meet an arbitrary number is crap. I would agree that deleting accounts and characters that have been inactive for several years is reasonable. It is not reasonable to delete a guild that is active regardless how many members their are or even if it is merely storage. So what. As long as it is being actively used, and the owner is paying his/her fees, there is no reason to delete it. As for the argument that mortgage lenders don't let you go without paying your mortgage for several months in real life, do you really need a reminder that this is not real life. I also don't think there are things like trolls and fairies and the owners of the real life mortgages either.

Barx

09-03-2009, 12:23 PM

<cite>d1anaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously, you must be a member of one of those hard core raiding mega guilds. It's BS to say that a guild has to be de-certified because it drops below a certain number. When we decided to start re-building our guild, we started with 2 of us. 2 of us who gathered the requirements together to get and design a guild hall and we worked our [Removed for Content] off to do it. We still have a very small guild, but we have built it up. And unlike a lot of the mega guilds, which are often filled with kids who have no outside responsibilities, ours is comprised entirely of older adults who have things like jobs and families and real life to deal with who may not be able to stay in the guild. So to take away everything we have worked for because we don't meet an arbitrary number is crap. I would agree that deleting accounts and characters that have been inactive for several years is reasonable. It is not reasonable to delete a guild that is active regardless how many members their are or even if it is merely storage. So what. As long as it is being actively used, and the owner is paying his/her fees, there is no reason to delete it. As for the argument that mortgage lenders don't let you go without paying your mortgage for several months in real life, do you really need a reminder that this is not real life. I also don't think there are things like trolls and fairies and the owners of the real life mortgages either.</blockquote>Please don't generalize with this "hard core raiding mega guilds" stuff. One person having an opinion (that I personally disagree with anyway) has nothing to do with raid guilds whatsoever. If they said "OMG All u n00bs are laggin mah avatar killz" then by all means blast them, but please don't generalize and portray raid guilds as something that most of them are not.

Ventisly

09-03-2009, 01:16 PM

<cite>Powers wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaktar@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>If I was able to move the specialty items from my storage houses into my guild hall's moving crate (assuming it offered large storge space and didn't subtract from the guild hall's item count) it should save quite a bit of database space on your end and provide easier access on my end.</blockquote>It's not just disk space, though; just the number of records involved affects the time it takes to peform queries, no matter how small those records are.</blockquote>Both factors can have a large impact on database performance. Which might be why I suggested both the row size benefit as well as combining items that are the same into a single row of data with an item count for how many there are of that item in the moving crate. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8f7fb9dd46fb8ef86f81154a4feaada9.gif" border="0" />

Cyliena

09-03-2009, 04:29 PM

You can add sales containers with items for sale still in them into the moving crate. The items still display for sale, and it even displays it on broker as in a container that people can visit your house to buy from. You cannot move the sales display from the moving crate, you can only retrieve it, and then re-place it via the market board.

Qandor

09-03-2009, 06:07 PM

Just hard to believe that folks can have storage issues with the vast amount of storage we have available to us in EQ2. Throw some stuff away already. We already have too many sales slots as it is which can also double as storage. Why are there people still bothering to load up stuff on the broker selling for 2cp? Just toss it.

Eveningsong

09-03-2009, 07:44 PM

One thing I would really like to see with the moving crate changes is for the status reduction of items stored in the crate to count towards status reduction of the house. I recently moved and was quite annoyed to find that I needed to pull half the items out of my crate before I was ready to decorate with them just so I could pay my rent without paying a hefty status fee. Although at least with the changes I would be able to put the status items back into the crate without putting everything back, but still it seems to me that it shouldn't matter if an item is physically placed but hidden away somewhere or left in a crate. Especially as people will be making more use of the crates and the /save layout command.

Kabahl

09-04-2009, 04:53 AM

<cite>Eveningsong wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I would really like to see with the moving crate changes is for the status reduction of items stored in the crate to count towards status reduction of the house. I recently moved and was quite annoyed to find that I needed to pull half the items out of my crate before I was ready to decorate with them just so I could pay my rent without paying a hefty status fee. Although at least with the changes I would be able to put the status items back into the crate without putting everything back, but still it seems to me that it shouldn't matter if an item is physically placed but hidden away somewhere or left in a crate. Especially as people will be making more use of the crates and the /save layout command.</blockquote>Here, here! If you're going to "penalize" us by making things inside the crate count toward the total items a house can hold, at least let me pack up the really UGLY items I got from quests or furniture and items that clash but I am forced to show in my house because I need the status reduction. This would be a HELPFUL feature if I could pack up stuff in the crate, let it STILL count towards status reduction total (because it's already being counted for overal total items) and let me decorate my house more "Feng Shui" instead of the huge fuster cluck I've got in there now just to reduce status.And I STILL say, if you wanted to give us bigger houses, just let us buy the 10-room guild-size house. We won't get amenities or any other benefit, but you could just copy and paste the design as a player house and voila! Job done, people happy, let's all go out to the bar, drinks are on Brenlo! Just PLEASE leave the banana suit at home this time . . .- Charn

Sarriss

09-04-2009, 05:11 AM

Ok, here's a simply anology for thoes understanding a few things about housing space.Each server has a box, this box is only 100% big, in this box we put all the houses and housing items into it..Right now some servers have a box that is 500% full. (might be an exaggeration, I don't work there, so I dunno)This is why they won't let us get an extreme method of storage (like not having items in the moving crate count), or a 10 room house (not saying I wouldn't want one) the boxes are a little full. Who knows if the xpac sales do well, maybe they will get us a bigger box... or they may have plans to do so already, I dunno, I don't work there.(for thoes who want to know the box is calles a database, and I would not want to be the poor sap who has to manage the one used by EQ2 *shudder*)

GrunEQ

09-04-2009, 11:24 AM

I definately want the items in the moving crate status points to be included in the total count toward the housing total. I've thought about this before, but kept forgetting to do a /feedback or post. Guess now is as good as any.

Sharakari

09-04-2009, 11:44 AM

<cite>Charn@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eveningsong wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I would really like to see with the moving crate changes is for the status reduction of items stored in the crate to count towards status reduction of the house. I recently moved and was quite annoyed to find that I needed to pull half the items out of my crate before I was ready to decorate with them just so I could pay my rent without paying a hefty status fee. Although at least with the changes I would be able to put the status items back into the crate without putting everything back, but still it seems to me that it shouldn't matter if an item is physically placed but hidden away somewhere or left in a crate. Especially as people will be making more use of the crates and the /save layout command.</blockquote>Here, here! If you're going to "penalize" us by making things inside the crate count toward the total items a house can hold, at least let me pack up the really UGLY items I got from quests or furniture and items that clash but I am forced to show in my house because I need the status reduction. This would be a HELPFUL feature if I could pack up stuff in the crate, let it STILL count towards status reduction total (because it's already being counted for overal total items) and let me decorate my house more "Feng Shui" instead of the huge fuster cluck I've got in there now just to reduce status.And I STILL say, if you wanted to give us bigger houses, just let us buy the 10-room guild-size house. We won't get amenities or any other benefit, but you could just copy and paste the design as a player house and voila! Job done, people happy, let's all go out to the bar, drinks are on Brenlo! Just PLEASE leave the banana suit at home this time . . .- Charn</blockquote>Just curious.... if you can't afford the rent on your current house and are complaining about status reduction items not being provided to you throug the moving crate, how the heck are you gonna afford a guild-hall size house that requires even MORE status and doesn't even let status reduction items count!?

Valdaglerion

09-04-2009, 12:00 PM

<cite>d1anaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously, you must be a member of one of those hard core raiding mega guilds. It's BS to say that a guild has to be de-certified because it drops below a certain number. When we decided to start re-building our guild, we started with 2 of us. 2 of us who gathered the requirements together to get and design a guild hall and we worked our [Removed for Content] off to do it. We still have a very small guild, but we have built it up. And unlike a lot of the mega guilds, which are often filled with kids who have no outside responsibilities, ours is comprised entirely of older adults who have things like jobs and families and real life to deal with who may not be able to stay in the guild. So to take away everything we have worked for because we don't meet an arbitrary number is crap. I would agree that deleting accounts and characters that have been inactive for several years is reasonable. It is not reasonable to delete a guild that is active regardless how many members their are or even if it is merely storage. So what. As long as it is being actively used, and the owner is paying his/her fees, there is no reason to delete it. As for the argument that mortgage lenders don't let you go without paying your mortgage for several months in real life, do you really need a reminder that this is not real life. I also don't think there are things like trolls and fairies and the owners of the real life mortgages either.</blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.And I am by no ones attempting to de-value your contributions. Our guild was leveled in effect on the efforts of 3 dedicated players from 1-60 before we started recruiting to really grow the guild into something larger but on average have always kept at least the required 6 accounts.As for a reminder this is not real life, no doubt. . . I dont need a reminder but then why require rent at all? I mean, if its all fantasy why say you have to pay XX per week unless you dont feel like it and that would be ok to. Its called balance. If one player has house XX and pays for it every week why should another player with the same house get to use it for storage and brokering slots and not have to pay for it?

Bratface

09-04-2009, 12:29 PM

<cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.And I am by no ones attempting to de-value your contributions. Our guild was leveled in effect on the efforts of 3 dedicated players from 1-60 before we started recruiting to really grow the guild into something larger but on average have always kept at least the required 6 accounts.As for a reminder this is not real life, no doubt. . . I dont need a reminder but then why require rent at all? I mean, if its all fantasy why say you have to pay XX per week unless you dont feel like it and that would be ok to. Its called balance. If one player has house XX and pays for it every week why should another player with the same house get to use it for storage and brokering slots and not have to pay for it?</blockquote>I'd like to know who put you in charge of deciding what the purpose of a guild is for, because most guilds I know don't follow your guidelines and would be wiped from the server based on your (imagined) criteria.It takes 6 accounts to start a guild, that's it, period. You can carry on without anyone other than one lone account and still be a guild. It maye not rise to your standards but it is still a guild. Nowhere does it say that you must maintain a "required" 6 accounts, you made that up in your own mind. It is not a rule, requirement or standard, it's something you made up for reasons I cannot fathom. People come and go in this game and punishing a guild because people leave is mean-spirited at best. Stop trying to force some ill-concieved notions about what other people should be doing with their guilds, mind your own guild and don't try to force others to live by your personal "requirements".

Bratface

09-04-2009, 12:32 PM

<cite>Eveningsong wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I would really like to see with the moving crate changes is for the status reduction of items stored in the crate to count towards status reduction of the house. I recently moved and was quite annoyed to find that I needed to pull half the items out of my crate before I was ready to decorate with them just so I could pay my rent without paying a hefty status fee. Although at least with the changes I would be able to put the status items back into the crate without putting everything back, but still it seems to me that it shouldn't matter if an item is physically placed but hidden away somewhere or left in a crate. Especially as people will be making more use of the crates and the /save layout command.</blockquote>!!!I just moved to a (another) 4 Bayle house and I am spending all my time trying to place status reduction stuff so I can pay up the rent in advance, it really is sucking the fun out of the decorating process when I have to place stuff haphazardly in order to get the SR out of the way first. Would be much better and easier if it counted towards SR while in the crate.

Whilhelmina

09-04-2009, 01:43 PM

I second the idea of items in the crate counting toward the status reduction of the house. But please, if it's a database storage issue... could you do something about it ? Storing somewhere else players who don't have played since one or more years or deleting 5 years old ccount who haven't played since launch would perhaps be a good idea.

Hraz

09-04-2009, 03:13 PM

<cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote>We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.</blockquote>What about new players coming here? Oh wait! That's why The Shadow Odyssey is not available in stores anymore... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />

baore

09-04-2009, 03:42 PM

I agree. a guild can be any size what so ever. Going around and deleting guilds won't fix any database problems. It most likley will lose Sony a lot of customers.I've created a guild at the start of the game and have maintained it with 3 of us running it most of the time. The idea that we are not uber enough to have a guild, just because we are only 3 is stupid at best. I don't think that sony developers will think seriously on a minimum guild size in order to keep it open. Not that I'm for or against keeping inacitve characters, but the idea that a level 70 should be given more time of inactivity than a level 7 makes no sence. A person inactive is a person inactive.Good Hunting.I love the idea of the moving crate. And I too think that if the items inside count against your house, then you should get the benifits of status reduction items in the crate as well.

Deveryn

09-04-2009, 03:45 PM

<cite>Aketut@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote>We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.</blockquote>What about new players coming here? Oh wait! That's why The Shadow Odyssey is not available in stores anymore... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Sure. Let's ignore digital distribution, which is far more cost effective than shipping out millions of boxes which may just sit there for years and years.The individual character is the database in question, so new players have nothing to do with it. They have plenty of room to grow with those.

Sharakari

09-04-2009, 04:49 PM

<cite>Bratface wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.And I am by no ones attempting to de-value your contributions. Our guild was leveled in effect on the efforts of 3 dedicated players from 1-60 before we started recruiting to really grow the guild into something larger but on average have always kept at least the required 6 accounts.As for a reminder this is not real life, no doubt. . . I dont need a reminder but then why require rent at all? I mean, if its all fantasy why say you have to pay XX per week unless you dont feel like it and that would be ok to. Its called balance. If one player has house XX and pays for it every week why should another player with the same house get to use it for storage and brokering slots and not have to pay for it?</blockquote>I'd like to know who put you in charge of deciding what the purpose of a guild is for, because most guilds I know don't follow your guidelines and would be wiped from the server based on your (imagined) criteria.It takes 6 accounts to start a guild, that's it, period. You can carry on without anyone other than one lone account and still be a guild. It maye not rise to your standards but it is still a guild. Nowhere does it say that you must maintain a "required" 6 accounts, you made that up in your own mind. It is not a rule, requirement or standard, it's something you made up for reasons I cannot fathom. People come and go in this game and punishing a guild because people leave is mean-spirited at best. Stop trying to force some ill-concieved notions about what other people should be doing with their guilds, mind your own guild and don't try to force others to live by your personal "requirements".</blockquote>Bratface... you need to go back and read the entire context of the conversation. The "Require 6 accounts" is part of his suggestion, not anything that exists as of yet.

Kabahl

09-05-2009, 03:15 AM

<cite>Sharakari@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Charn@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eveningsong wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I would really like to see with the moving crate changes is for the status reduction of items stored in the crate to count towards status reduction of the house. I recently moved and was quite annoyed to find that I needed to pull half the items out of my crate before I was ready to decorate with them just so I could pay my rent without paying a hefty status fee. Although at least with the changes I would be able to put the status items back into the crate without putting everything back, but still it seems to me that it shouldn't matter if an item is physically placed but hidden away somewhere or left in a crate. Especially as people will be making more use of the crates and the /save layout command.</blockquote>Here, here! If you're going to "penalize" us by making things inside the crate count toward the total items a house can hold, at least let me pack up the really UGLY items I got from quests or furniture and items that clash but I am forced to show in my house because I need the status reduction. This would be a HELPFUL feature if I could pack up stuff in the crate, let it STILL count towards status reduction total (because it's already being counted for overal total items) and let me decorate my house more "Feng Shui" instead of the huge fuster cluck I've got in there now just to reduce status.And I STILL say, if you wanted to give us bigger houses, just let us buy the 10-room guild-size house. We won't get amenities or any other benefit, but you could just copy and paste the design as a player house and voila! Job done, people happy, let's all go out to the bar, drinks are on Brenlo! Just PLEASE leave the banana suit at home this time . . .- Charn</blockquote>Just curious.... if you can't afford the rent on your current house and are complaining about status reduction items not being provided to you throug the moving crate, how the heck are you gonna afford a guild-hall size house that requires even MORE status and doesn't even let status reduction items count!?</blockquote>I never said I couldn't afford the rent on my current house (I even re-read it . . . none of the words: couldn't, can't, cannot nor (and especially) the word afford are there (although I could be wrong, I tend to . . . ooh, shiny!)). The status cost for my house is zero. That's because I've got a TON of status reducing items cluttering up my house and causing me all kinds of lag while inside my house. But, because the items in the moving crate do not count towards status reduction, I'm forced to display them and have to load them all as I enter my house and cause myself a huge amount of lag. This would not be the case if I could pack up the stuff in the moving crate (I would still have to acquire the items through questing or buying them from other players) and have my house look a bit more minimalistic, while still getting the full benefit of the items actually being IN my house because they are in the moving crate (which is ALSO in my house . . . ). Heck, I'm all for stuff in the house vault ALSO counting towards the status total (but there I'm probably asking for much . . . I've NO idea how easy or difficult it would be to implement that . . .. ).In regards to the 10-room guild-hall size house. It would follow ALL the rules of current player housing. It would have the same amount of bank slots (they are complaining about database size, so we don't want to overload them) heck, I'd even settle for a similar item limit (although a bit more WOULD be nice . . . I'm thinking 100 items per room <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/908627bbe5e9f6a080977db8c365caff.gif" border="0" />), and items that provide status would count towards the reduction of the house's status cost. (And, if all goes to plan, items in the moving crate would still provide status reduction). And as far as affording the status cost even if items DIDN'T provide status reduction . . . I've got WELL over 21 million status points (and I'm sure there are alot of people out there with SIGNIFICANTLY more) . . . We've worked hard for the benefit of our respective cities; we deserve a little perk or three, don't ya think? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />- Charn

Bratface

09-05-2009, 11:12 AM

<cite>Sharakari@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bratface wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.And I am by no ones attempting to de-value your contributions. Our guild was leveled in effect on the efforts of 3 dedicated players from 1-60 before we started recruiting to really grow the guild into something larger but on average have always kept at least the required 6 accounts.As for a reminder this is not real life, no doubt. . . I dont need a reminder but then why require rent at all? I mean, if its all fantasy why say you have to pay XX per week unless you dont feel like it and that would be ok to. Its called balance. If one player has house XX and pays for it every week why should another player with the same house get to use it for storage and brokering slots and not have to pay for it?</blockquote>I'd like to know who put you in charge of deciding what the purpose of a guild is for, because most guilds I know don't follow your guidelines and would be wiped from the server based on your (imagined) criteria.It takes 6 accounts to start a guild, that's it, period. You can carry on without anyone other than one lone account and still be a guild. It maye not rise to your standards but it is still a guild. Nowhere does it say that you must maintain a "required" 6 accounts, you made that up in your own mind. It is not a rule, requirement or standard, it's something you made up for reasons I cannot fathom. People come and go in this game and punishing a guild because people leave is mean-spirited at best. Stop trying to force some ill-concieved notions about what other people should be doing with their guilds, mind your own guild and don't try to force others to live by your personal "requirements".</blockquote>Bratface... you need to go back and read the entire context of the conversation. The "Require 6 accounts" is part of his suggestion, not anything that exists as of yet.</blockquote>I have bolded the text you apparently missed. The "suggestions" are in the first paragraph, the statements are in the second, I hope you understand the difference. But in case you dont understand.... In the second paragraph they are not making any suggestion, they are stating their own expereince and actions based on a standard they see as a requirement but is not and never will be.

d1anaw

09-05-2009, 12:32 PM

<cite>Bratface wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.And I am by no ones attempting to de-value your contributions. Our guild was leveled in effect on the efforts of 3 dedicated players from 1-60 before we started recruiting to really grow the guild into something larger but on average have always kept at least the required 6 accounts.As for a reminder this is not real life, no doubt. . . I dont need a reminder but then why require rent at all? I mean, if its all fantasy why say you have to pay XX per week unless you dont feel like it and that would be ok to. Its called balance. If one player has house XX and pays for it every week why should another player with the same house get to use it for storage and brokering slots and not have to pay for it?</blockquote>I'd like to know who put you in charge of deciding what the purpose of a guild is for, because most guilds I know don't follow your guidelines and would be wiped from the server based on your (imagined) criteria.It takes 6 accounts to start a guild, that's it, period. You can carry on without anyone other than one lone account and still be a guild. It maye not rise to your standards but it is still a guild. Nowhere does it say that you must maintain a "required" 6 accounts, you made that up in your own mind. It is not a rule, requirement or standard, it's something you made up for reasons I cannot fathom. People come and go in this game and punishing a guild because people leave is mean-spirited at best. Stop trying to force some ill-concieved notions about what other people should be doing with their guilds, mind your own guild and don't try to force others to live by your personal "requirements".</blockquote>Thank you. I keep wondering why a few people seem to feel they alone have the right to decide how the game should be played. There are those who state that those who don't want to raid, or those who don't want to play in large groups shouldn't play because that's not the "right" way to play. What nonsense. I don't remember those being the terms and conditions that I signed. Yet there continues to be those who insist that their way is the only "right" way. If a guild or a player is inactive for months or even years, there is a legitimate reason to delete the guild or the name. But to just take it away because it doesn't meet some other player's "standard" of what "should" be happening is just plain crap. Sounds a little controlling too. The only people who legitimately have the right to say how the game "should" be played are those who wrote the game or own the game. IOW, those who have a real life stake in the outcome. The rest of the people for the most part are paying customers who each pay a set amount to play and they are entitled to do so in any manner within the terms of service, not within the demands of other players.

carpe_caminus

09-05-2009, 12:53 PM

One thing I'd like to see is to at least have some decorations stackable in containers. Then the house vaults actually become a decent option for storing those seasonal decorations.Rothgar, you said moving crates with unlimited storage and zero count would be a bad thing... and I agree. But why not just create a new version of the crate (a second button on your access window like "storage crate") with limited storage and a limit of one crate per house, with each item stored having an item count of 0.Obviously it would be a horrible idea to have limitless moving crates with limitless storage with all contents taking up 0 spots... the amount of data to be accounted for could be astronomical. But there are ways to give a little help with options that actually have limits.The thing that frustrates some of us is that the folks at SOE are trying so very hard to foster a community of decorators, and with every live event (unique or recurring) there are introduced more and more decorations with no room left for the folks who would put them to good use. I'm certain that something can be done to help out on that front without creating too much more of a burden on the database.

Deveryn

09-05-2009, 06:34 PM

<cite>carpe_caminus wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I'd like to see is to at least have some decorations stackable in containers. Then the house vaults actually become a decent option for storing those seasonal decorations.Rothgar, you said moving crates with unlimited storage and zero count would be a bad thing... and I agree. But why not just create a new version of the crate (a second button on your access window like "storage crate") with limited storage and a limit of one crate per house, with each item stored having an item count of 0.Obviously it would be a horrible idea to have limitless moving crates with limitless storage with all contents taking up 0 spots... the amount of data to be accounted for could be astronomical. But there are ways to give a little help with options that actually have limits.The thing that frustrates some of us is that the folks at SOE are trying so very hard to foster a community of decorators, and with every live event (unique or recurring) there are introduced more and more decorations with no room left for the folks who would put them to good use. I'm certain that something can be done to help out on that front without creating too much more of a burden on the database.</blockquote>Adding a new crate still puts the same burden on the database. Storage isn't really going to expand much further at this point, so people will just have to use the broker, where items will stack like you want them to. It works about the same as a moving crate. you just move the market board around the house. Still need storage? Make an alt in Gorowyn.

carpe_caminus

09-05-2009, 10:59 PM

<cite>Deveryn@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>carpe_caminus wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I'd like to see is to at least have some decorations stackable in containers. Then the house vaults actually become a decent option for storing those seasonal decorations.Rothgar, you said moving crates with unlimited storage and zero count would be a bad thing... and I agree. But why not just create a new version of the crate (a second button on your access window like "storage crate") with limited storage and a limit of one crate per house, with each item stored having an item count of 0.Obviously it would be a horrible idea to have limitless moving crates with limitless storage with all contents taking up 0 spots... the amount of data to be accounted for could be astronomical. But there are ways to give a little help with options that actually have limits.The thing that frustrates some of us is that the folks at SOE are trying so very hard to foster a community of decorators, and with every live event (unique or recurring) there are introduced more and more decorations with no room left for the folks who would put them to good use. I'm certain that something can be done to help out on that front without creating too much more of a burden on the database.</blockquote>Adding a new crate still puts the same burden on the database. Storage isn't really going to expand much further at this point, so people will just have to use the broker, where items will stack like you want them to. It works about the same as a moving crate. you just move the market board around the house. Still need storage? Make an alt in Gorowyn.</blockquote>The burden of a very LIMITED storage crate without item count would not put the same burden on the database as an UNLIMITED storage crate. Big difference actually.Broker does not stack furnature. It LOOKS like it does because it consolidates them into one number, but they still take up 1 spot per piece in your broker box.As for the suggestion at the end there, I have 10 alts. Most, if not all of them, have their banks full of extra crap from my main.

Eveningsong

09-06-2009, 12:50 PM

<cite>Sharakari@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Charn@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eveningsong wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I would really like to see with the moving crate changes is for the status reduction of items stored in the crate to count towards status reduction of the house. I recently moved and was quite annoyed to find that I needed to pull half the items out of my crate before I was ready to decorate with them just so I could pay my rent without paying a hefty status fee. Although at least with the changes I would be able to put the status items back into the crate without putting everything back, but still it seems to me that it shouldn't matter if an item is physically placed but hidden away somewhere or left in a crate. Especially as people will be making more use of the crates and the /save layout command.</blockquote>Here, here! If you're going to "penalize" us by making things inside the crate count toward the total items a house can hold, at least let me pack up the really UGLY items I got from quests or furniture and items that clash but I am forced to show in my house because I need the status reduction. This would be a HELPFUL feature if I could pack up stuff in the crate, let it STILL count towards status reduction total (because it's already being counted for overal total items) and let me decorate my house more "Feng Shui" instead of the huge fuster cluck I've got in there now just to reduce status.And I STILL say, if you wanted to give us bigger houses, just let us buy the 10-room guild-size house. We won't get amenities or any other benefit, but you could just copy and paste the design as a player house and voila! Job done, people happy, let's all go out to the bar, drinks are on Brenlo! Just PLEASE leave the banana suit at home this time . . .- Charn</blockquote>Just curious.... if you can't afford the rent on your current house and are complaining about status reduction items not being provided to you throug the moving crate, how the heck are you gonna afford a guild-hall size house that requires even MORE status and doesn't even let status reduction items count!?</blockquote>There's a difference between "affording" and "wasting" status points <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />. No one mentioned not being able to afford house or even a hall, but why spend more time grinding for status if you don't have to?

Deveryn

09-06-2009, 03:03 PM

<cite>carpe_caminus wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Deveryn@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>carpe_caminus wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing I'd like to see is to at least have some decorations stackable in containers. Then the house vaults actually become a decent option for storing those seasonal decorations.Rothgar, you said moving crates with unlimited storage and zero count would be a bad thing... and I agree. But why not just create a new version of the crate (a second button on your access window like "storage crate") with limited storage and a limit of one crate per house, with each item stored having an item count of 0.Obviously it would be a horrible idea to have limitless moving crates with limitless storage with all contents taking up 0 spots... the amount of data to be accounted for could be astronomical. But there are ways to give a little help with options that actually have limits.The thing that frustrates some of us is that the folks at SOE are trying so very hard to foster a community of decorators, and with every live event (unique or recurring) there are introduced more and more decorations with no room left for the folks who would put them to good use. I'm certain that something can be done to help out on that front without creating too much more of a burden on the database.</blockquote>Adding a new crate still puts the same burden on the database. Storage isn't really going to expand much further at this point, so people will just have to use the broker, where items will stack like you want them to. It works about the same as a moving crate. you just move the market board around the house. Still need storage? Make an alt in Gorowyn.</blockquote>The burden of a very LIMITED storage crate without item count would not put the same burden on the database as an UNLIMITED storage crate. Big difference actually.Broker does not stack furnature. It LOOKS like it does because it consolidates them into one number, but they still take up 1 spot per piece in your broker box.As for the suggestion at the end there, I have 10 alts. Most, if not all of them, have their banks full of extra crap from my main.</blockquote>Perhaps it's time to re-evaluate your situation there and dump some of that "crap." Learn to live within the limits of the game, instead of trying to get them to push things to a breaking point.

Valdaglerion

09-13-2009, 11:00 PM

<cite>d1anaw wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bratface wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.And I am by no ones attempting to de-value your contributions. Our guild was leveled in effect on the efforts of 3 dedicated players from 1-60 before we started recruiting to really grow the guild into something larger but on average have always kept at least the required 6 accounts.As for a reminder this is not real life, no doubt. . . I dont need a reminder but then why require rent at all? I mean, if its all fantasy why say you have to pay XX per week unless you dont feel like it and that would be ok to. Its called balance. If one player has house XX and pays for it every week why should another player with the same house get to use it for storage and brokering slots and not have to pay for it?</blockquote>I'd like to know who put you in charge of deciding what the purpose of a guild is for, because most guilds I know don't follow your guidelines and would be wiped from the server based on your (imagined) criteria.It takes 6 accounts to start a guild, that's it, period. You can carry on without anyone other than one lone account and still be a guild. It maye not rise to your standards but it is still a guild. Nowhere does it say that you must maintain a "required" 6 accounts, you made that up in your own mind. It is not a rule, requirement or standard, it's something you made up for reasons I cannot fathom. People come and go in this game and punishing a guild because people leave is mean-spirited at best. Stop trying to force some ill-concieved notions about what other people should be doing with their guilds, mind your own guild and don't try to force others to live by your personal "requirements".</blockquote>Thank you. I keep wondering why a few people seem to feel they alone have the right to decide how the game should be played. There are those who state that those who don't want to raid, or those who don't want to play in large groups shouldn't play because that's not the "right" way to play. What nonsense. I don't remember those being the terms and conditions that I signed. Yet there continues to be those who insist that their way is the only "right" way. If a guild or a player is inactive for months or even years, there is a legitimate reason to delete the guild or the name. But to just take it away because it doesn't meet some other player's "standard" of what "should" be happening is just plain crap. Sounds a little controlling too. The only people who legitimately have the right to say how the game "should" be played are those who wrote the game or own the game. IOW, those who have a real life stake in the outcome. The rest of the people for the most part are paying customers who each pay a set amount to play and they are entitled to do so in any manner within the terms of service, not within the demands of other players.</blockquote>I dont recall ever telling anyone how they should play. I dont claim that I ever said I was "in-charge". I never said it was a rule nor a requirement. The purpose of a guild is well documented throughout history, its not something I came up with when I decided to submit my opinions or comments in the context of this discussion. And SOE certainly didnt coin the term or the context either. They merely instituted some parameters for its use within its game world. The point was to question the existence of inconsistencies in requirements of game play which may be leading to the issues expressed by the dev.The point was why have one requirement without the other? Why would you need 6 accounts to open it without having a requirement of 6 to maintain it? As a database architect I need to know the longevity of data and potential amount of it to properly structure it. In looking at a population of data that says XX number of companies can exist but each must be of YY size, you know the boundaries based on the overall population. When that number can increase exponentially by a number of 5-6 you have issues. Given the other increases which have occurred since the original design of that structure, its easy to see why the storage and database issues exist.Will SOE change it now? Doubtful. As stated there are too many people that subscribe to the solo standard of play in a MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE ROLEPLAY GAME who would get upset that their guild got wiped, and honestly rightfully so. Many people I know have put a great deal of effort into leveling up their tiny guilds; however, the overall health of the game should be considered as well. Perhaps grandfathering in existing guilds and putting new requirements going forward would help alleviate future issues. Perhaps disbanding guilds if/when all accounts within the guild are inactive is another way of cleaning up existing issues.This is another whole discussion and I dont want to derail the conversation further. Suffice to say, it was a suggestion given within the context of the original discussion.

Enica

09-13-2009, 11:28 PM

Just my 2 cents here - I'm all for reducing the size of the items currently in the database. A few years back, EQ1 "cleaned house". They deleted any characters below level 10 (I think it was) that hadn't logged on for a certain amount of time. They sent out several emails to former subscribers to let everyone know this was going to take place. All you had to do if you wanted to keep those characters was log in. Sure, this was a thinly veiled attempt at getting people to resubscribe, but let's face it: if you know you're never going to come back to a game, you really don't care what said game is going to do with your characters.Anyhoo, EQ2 could maybe do something like this. Give people ample opportunity to save those characters by logging in. And if they don't... free up some space for the rest of us!Also, I can be a bit of a pack rat IRL and in game. But like other posters have stated, do some of you really need all that stuff you're hanging on to? When you list that weathered orc bone on the broker and there are already 5 pages of them and they're selling for 3c, maybe you should just vendor it or destroy it. And all the stuff in your bank that you *might* use one day, or you *think* it goes with a quest but you're not sure... yeah, that stuff. Chuck it.

Te'ana

09-14-2009, 10:30 AM

Some things to consider:Currently I store lots of seasonal stuff in broker boxes of various sorts, house vaults, bank slots, and alt houses. That is a lot of stuff in the data base that does not reflect its actual useage. I am pretty sure that many other people are doing the same thing therefore changing the way the storage system works in houses would probably not be as big a hit on the database as the devs think it would since many folks would move thier stored stuff into the house they want to display the items rather than have them scattered across Norath.Removing unused characters could be an overall positive, but... We have a rather large number of folks serving in Iraq or Afganistan that need special accomodation. I and most people here would be appalled if someone serving our country had their characters and stuff delected while unable to play EQ2 on a regular basis.

Valdaglerion

09-14-2009, 07:24 PM

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Some things to consider:Currently I store lots of seasonal stuff in broker boxes of various sorts, house vaults, bank slots, and alt houses. That is a lot of stuff in the data base that does not reflect its actual useage. I am pretty sure that many other people are doing the same thing therefore changing the way the storage system works in houses would probably not be as big a hit on the database as the devs think it would since many folks would move thier stored stuff into the house they want to display the items rather than have them scattered across Norath.Removing unused characters could be an overall positive, but... We have a rather large number of folks serving in Iraq or Afganistan that need special accomodation. I and most people here would be appalled if someone serving our country had their characters and stuff delected while unable to play EQ2 on a regular basis.</blockquote>The theory is "by increasing the storage capacity for a toon and having 7 toon spaces you effectively need to anticipate that all 7 toons will max their storage" can your system handle that? If the answer is no, you cant do it because users will max what you give them the ability to do (we see it all the time). The removal of listing fees on Live Gamer allows a plethora of garbage now to be listed. Really?? Do you need to list handcrafted food for $.25 each? Is anybody really buying that stuff? I would love to know. But I digress. . .I can also empathize with active military personnel. Doing the cleanup by active account is still, IMO, the best way to go. That said, I can empathize and sympathize with active military personnel and their deployments. Exceptions could always be made, its up to SOE to determine if one should be made.And all of this is hypothetical anyway until SOE decides to start cleaning up the database and looking at overall game performance and experience for their customers. /shrug

Sar

09-20-2009, 01:58 AM

<cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, feedback on this feature . . .Firstly the bug - it isnt working. Once you zone out of the house and come back, anything and everything placed in the crate is back on the floor. Additionally . . .<ol><li>Moving Crates still count as item count so this doesnt really help with storage. I have 4 houses used for nothing but storing holiday stuff.</li><li>This new feature doesnt create a moving crate it merely makes the items disappear and they can still be collected from teh door.</li><li>Confirmed this feature still makes the item count towards your total limit, again . . . this doesnt help</li><li>Even if they didnt count towards your limit, you wouldnt be able to put them out during the holidays unless all the holiday items are changed to be ZERO count so they would not count towards your normal decor.</li></ol>All in all this is a nice feature of being able to pick up a single item at a item and hide it from the floor but fails miserably as any form of additional storage or item management.Things that would make this infinitely more useful:<ol><li>Holiday items changed to be zero count</li><li>Ability to actually create multiple moving crates so they could be labeled</li><li>Moving crates and all items in them shoud be ZERO count, this becomes more useful for additional storage beyond holiday things.</li></ol></blockquote>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but items in moving crates cannot be "zero count". Otherwise this would provide for unlimited storage of items. I'm sure everyone would find this very useful until our database chokes on the extra records and the server comes crashing to a halt. The item limits are there for two reasons. One, to limit the number of visual items that have to be rendered and proxied to your client. This can be solved by having items in a crate because they don't render.Two, to limit the actual amount of data that can be associated with a house. This is for the health of the server and database. Without limits on data, the game could quickly become unplayable because players can create an unlimited number of house items.We're already operating close to capacity at the database level and every time we increase storage whether its guild banks, bag sizes, harvest supply depot, guild halls, item limits, etc., we risk having performance issues.The fact that this feature "fails miserably as a form of additional storage" is actually a success in my book because that was not the intent of the feature. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> Changing holiday items to be "zero count" would also circumvent both numbers "one" and "two" in my list above, so I don't see that as happening either.I'm sorry.</blockquote>Ok, so I guess that means we'll never get some kind of storage for harvests in our personal homes?

Sar

09-20-2009, 02:03 AM

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Some things to consider:Currently I store lots of seasonal stuff in broker boxes of various sorts, house vaults, bank slots, and alt houses. That is a lot of stuff in the data base that does not reflect its actual useage. I am pretty sure that many other people are doing the same thing therefore changing the way the storage system works in houses would probably not be as big a hit on the database as the devs think it would since many folks would move thier stored stuff into the house they want to display the items rather than have them scattered across Norath.Removing unused characters could be an overall positive, but... We have a rather large number of folks serving in Iraq or Afganistan that need special accomodation. I and most people here would be appalled if someone serving our country had their characters and stuff delected while unable to play EQ2 on a regular basis.</blockquote>Why not delete everything not used in the past year and just back it up somewhere else for that "in case someone comes back" thingy... that would at least clear up more room on the live servers? I am sure this has been considered but there has got to be a way to fix things... I mean there are "people" I have noticed eq2players, that created toons the first month the game came out and haven't been on since... thats kinda crazy and would rule out any deployment as most are 6-9 months long. This would also free up alot of names... does it take more database to have additional toons just for storage or more storage ability on 1 toon? I know I wouldn't have as many alts if I had more places to store and organize.

Kigneer

09-20-2009, 11:10 AM

<cite>Artemiz@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, nothing could be further from the truth. I am not in a mega guild nor a child based guild. The point being with regards to guilds - it requires 6 accounts to start one, not 2. If you dont maintain 6 accounts minimum the guild should be given a 2-4 week probation in which time to recruit replacements or lose the charter. The nature of a guild is to have people working together. In the real world this happens all the time. If you have a small business and all your employees quit you have 2 choices - hire replacements or your business will go under. If you dont meet requirements for public trading you are de-listed.</blockquote>Absolutely, totally disagree.I made my guild for someplace my alts and I can all work on a common challenging goal, and to have the amenities a GH offers -- like a harvest box -- as I grew tired of a large guild's harvest box being full, and I play to tradeskill and harvest. That's my "raiding" game. Furthermore, my character is large even without the harvesting cloak active, and the small doors in the Qeynos Bayle address houses are cumbersome. A GH doesn't have such doors, and I can be at any height and not having to deal with doors half my size to squeeze through. Also, GHs are brighter and a more cheery place to spend time in, compared to the dark brown walls and flooring of "the best" houses in Qeynos.Have made guilds in other MMOs without any restrictions but to start one (needing +5 characters to start them, and in other MMOs it can be your alts and you can have all of them out on ONE computer to do so). I left an MMO to play EQ2, but if I reinstalled that game and returned, the guild will be there (with alot of back rent due...but I could afford it, as I made serious plat in an economy that encourages high mat harvesting and selling).Also, other MMOs and MUDs won't delete their player base due to inactivity, why should Sony? They know players come and go, and with RMT items it would be a real mess if they close an account with a player holding 12+ unused item mall items.All this, I hope, will be alleviated when SoE brings online the x64 bit databases. Because the game content isn't getting smaller, and will just grow over time.