Posted by MoiraGwyn on 09/30
Ok.. I will just flat out ask if anyone else feels it would be
appropriate for the limit on how many items in a room to be changed
to a greater number?
Or perhaps the amount of things you can keep in a room
can be judged on size? weight?
Likely this limit was to prevent spam or an issue with how things
were saved (?) but for those of us with housing that use this
limit simply to store our items, this can be hard. having to add
a room to your house because you have a collection
or something, rather stinks.
For those who just have a lot of strings or coupons or easter eggs
or any number of collectibles, 50 limit can seem a bit.. well, limiting.
For things like coupons/strings and such, I see it as a piece of paper
where there is no way 50 pieces of paper is going to fill a room.
So is there any other possible way to handle this issue?
You want to be able to encourage RP and collections and other things
players take pride in (all spam aside, since that is what cabinets, chests are for)
but housing costs can be abominable for collectors...
Any and all input/discussion/thoughts welcome!
-MG's player
|U6
From: Gad
Saturday, September 27 2003, 08:26PM
Well.. coming from someone who doesnt fill his alt's house as it is..
From: snicker
From:
I dont see the limit as being soemthing very hindering, and if you have
accidently wandered into Alejandro's place, no offense Ale, but I would
think that you would tend to think that 50 is a bit on the excessive side
Again, this is from someone whos alt's cottage, of two rooms will more than
likely never be seeing the 50 item limit...
The large man behind the large man
|U6
From: Archaon
Saturday, September 27 2003, 10:07PM
get a bag, put items in bag, there problem solved, bags can hold 50 items
if you can store 50 bags, thats what 2500 items, i'm sure thats more than
enough for anyone
|U6
From: Dolor
Saturday, September 27 2003, 11:27PM
Opinions about the limit aside, Archaon, that doesn't work.
The system counts each item in the bag as an item, too. I've tried.
-Dolor
|U6
From: Rubber
Sunday, September 28 2003, 09:33AM
The system is fine as is. It make sense, since it SHOULD cost
you more if you want to packrat more stuff. Its all about spaces,
more spaces = more $$$...
|U6
From: MoiraGwyn
Sunday, September 28 2003, 01:34PM
Yes but when you buy a pack of paper and it has 50 sheets in it,
do you expect that to fill your room? or to have to add a room
on to your house because you bought it?
Part of the issue is that for someone who has a collection
or even has a coupon or string hoard (no Alejandro and
I are not the only ones either) it becomes difficult.
if it was where things that were flagged with the word _string_
or _treat_in larger quantity or such maybe that would help...?
But as it stands right now in trying to maintain either RP
or a collection of any type of items (Emrysia, Alejandro, Lorenzo
and others know this issue too) you need a giant house...
Have you ever tried to maintain 100K a day rent
or even 20K a day- just to keep an RP or have a collection of something??
Please tell me there are other options....? Can containers hold more items if they
are of a certain type maybe and that can override the room limit??
That could be a viable option for some people. not everyone is just
trying to be a packrat, some people cherish their rp or
their collections of items a great deal...
|U6
From: Adamar
Tuesday, September 30 2003, 12:24AM
the "bag trick" doesn't work
the item count is 50, including the bag and everything in it
the bag /shelf / whatever just cuts down on the spam
|U6
From: MoiraGwyn
Tuesday, September 30 2003, 11:44AM
So if it isnt a matter of spam, where is there a limit?
And if there must be one, can there be leighway for coupons
and strung items perhaps...?
|U6
From: LadyAce
Tuesday, September 30 2003, 10:14PM
The limit is to some degree a matter of resources -- "large" items and
small items take up the same amount of memory on the mud machine.
We have a limit to prevent a small number of players from using a
large percentage of the resources we have available -- pushing people
to use multiple rooms to store large quantities of stuff means that we
don't have a hard limit, but it does give some practical limit to the
amount of effort that a person is willing to go to relative to the
return they expect.
I am 100% sympathetic with wanting to store more equipment, but perhaps
it makes sense to some degree where we're coming from.
The immediate response someone might have upon reading this is that
we could throw more memory/cpu into the machine. And while we're having
some discussions about how best to upgrade the machine next, that won't
change the fact that if we allow growth without limits, we'll end up
at the maximum of what the machine/CPU is capable of, again and again
-- it has to stop at some point.
I think that if we do end up with a machine upgrade, and some of the
other projects that are waiting on an upgrade are implemented without
stripping our capacity too far, that's the right time to start a
conversation about changing these limits, particularly if we found a
way to do it without permitting too much spam (such as not counting
items inside of bags...except I'm not sure that we can not-count those
without also counting items on top of furniture, which are just as
spammy as if they were lying on the ground).
Before I start a million rumors about machine upgrade, though, let me
just say that nothing has been decided, and many things need to be done
before we have a timeline for an upgrade. So please don't start asking
every imm you see when the machine will be upgraded -- at some point
it will need doing, and we have several good reasons to do it, but there
is not a timetable. We'll definitely let you know when there is :)
And before I start a million rumors that there's a promise to change
this once the machine is upgraded....there isn't a promise to be read into
this. It's just that we can't have a good solid discussion about it when
we feel we're at the practical limits of our hardware.
-LA
|U6
| 