Shiroe wrote:Let's stick with the car: based on Cloudcade comments about other tradehouse quirks, my fear is that implementing your suggestion right now would be like a pit crew doing a 4-wheel swap at a red traffic light; do it wrong and at green light you drive away with a wheel bouncing off in some direction or end up with the car still in the air or have one of the pit crew's toes ran over by a car...
I'd rather them not trying tradehouse + its database complexity until they are very sure it won't make some of the laggy weekends of the past seem like smooth sailing in comparison.
I'm not trying to be too harsh here, I'm not even sure if you realize the things you say so I just want to tell you how people who actually do coding are probably interpreting a lot of your responses like this one.
#1. It seems to me that you do not understand coding, which makes one wonder why you make so many comments depicting coding as the reason for not doing things.
#2. You make CC seem really underskilled in the development department, like they're using a child coder or something.
Just a couple tidbits to know about coding, especially developmental coding for future reference:
1. In MMO / Server land the more information processed over the internet, especially commands at once, the more load the servers network connections to the database get which creates latency (lag). In general, "lag" is the backup of commands reaching the database due to network congestion. When someone for example clicks 1 item 200 times to achieve bulk buying / selling that person creates a steady flow of commands spammed into que at the server. The more people doing that the more congestion there is and the more likely one will get lag. By that implementation anything that reduces the number of network commands that needs to be sent to accomplish a task is a great thing. As a whole it is very very rare for the server side issue to be that it's processing too much data at one time within the server (I.E. too many changes). The bottleneck for servers as a whole are almost always network congestion.
2. 99% of the suggestions I've ever seen anyone make from a coding perspective have not been something coding for would be really "hard". Something like database coding is of all things not that complex. The bottleneck in coding is the actual time to code, test, and deploy vs. other objectives the development staff has to accomplish. That coupled with the bureaucracy involved because being a coder / game developer is now as much knowing business and monetization as it is building a fun and working game. I would not feel I was on a limb at all to say it's harder for them to get the "go ahead" to make such a change than it is for them to actually code it.
3. When something is broken (like when the TH was broke) it's not because it's hard to code. It's because they hit time deadlines and don't have time to properly beta test. When they take a long time to fix it's not because it's hard to fix, it's because this is a multi-platform game that's distributed through many marketplaces and has to time and coordinate the release of patches on a schedule that meets the guidelines for every platform to make sure all the players are all playing the same game. They have a development timeline to release patches but sadly they do not have a setup with every marketplace that allows for "hot fixes". So the issue is more "you get one shot, don't mess it up, but oh yeah hurry the heck up" rather than "uhhh how do I do that?".
Just food for thought. Coding isn't hard and I'm certain CC has a competent coder capable of doing just about any sort of adjustment to the game. When you say things are too hard for them to code that to a coder are known to actually be quite simple you make them sound reverent or incompetent. I don't believe ultimately that's your goal but to someone who knows this stuff that is ultimately the effect.
*Recap* If a lot of the references to complexity you make refer to things like the database screw up for the TH please consider that this was not due to complexity of the code and not really competence either. This is because of limited dev staff being given a huge block of coding that had to be done by a pre-set date on their release schedule already setup and approved with all of their platforms. With everything that had to be done and re-checked there probably wasn't time to properly test everything before the release date the most thoroughly. Once they realized the mess up it didn't take them long at all to code a fix for it but they had to wait until the next scheduled update on their deployment schedule to release the fix.
Just because a mistake happens doesn't mean that mistake was due to a lack of understanding or knowledge or due to complexity of code. Also just because something takes a long time to fix does not mean that fix was complicated or was difficult to figure out. In retrospect a massive change to the TH or item database is in many cases simpler than "I want to move this box slightly down and to the left to make room for this button". Then having that adjustment to the GUI display properly on every platform and every device at every resolution the game runs at properly without the GUI being messed up. That in itself is not as complicated as it probably just sounded, but it's easier than changing some numbers and variables by a long shot.
In the good ole days coders had to worry only about making a game that's fun and in the mmo land fair. Now coders have to be business people that take orders from other business people. It's more work to figure out if a change to a game makes sense business wise than it is to see if it makes sense code wise. Sadly, the business side has to come first no matter how much that concept is disliked as a general rule.
For example, speeding up fusions like the inn. To me this makes sense if it brings the price within reason for people to gem boost the cauldron. I however don't know how many people in the game gem boost it now, although I imagine not too many. If the number who do now is really low, it's possible this could increase the number who do so by putting more fusions in an acceptable range and cost. If however the number that do now is actually higher than one might think, there's a possibility they could lose revenue because they might not gain enough more people doing it to offset the amount the current ones spend. Their own internal numbers, if tracked, such as the average amount of gems people spend on the cauldron might lead to numbers that make sense and could possibly even define parameters in which cauldron boosting would be set (I.E. where the max amount of boosts would end you at time wise). Maybe even cause a sliding scale parameter such as it having a bigger effect on higher level fusions than lower level ones.
For a company making it's entire revenue off one game there are inherent risks with changing systems that involve monetization. One bad move on their part could result in gems being far less valuable, people purchasing them less, and if not recovered properly could cause an income variation that could put them out of business. Things like this are the real monster issue for a company like CC when dealing with issues such as game balance and economy.
It's no longer a code it and forget it world. More games released today operate this way than the old way and moving forward it's a balancing act that's very tough to maintain. When you look at mmo games their life cycle is usually determined by how long they can maintain this balance. This balance determines feasibility of most game updates first, which I assure you when the final chips are played and decisions are made to help regulate the economy with gold this is what it will boil down to. Balancing F2P currency in a way that does not adversely effect premium currency, not whether coding it will be too hard. Other than totally re-writing the mechanics of this game there's not many alterations that I think would be that hard code wise to make improvements. There are probably a lot of improvements they could make that appropriately could use gems but I'm sure they're trying to cure the whole rage over too many P2P improvements vs F2P ones right now and are changing their current focus towards gold.
FYI The new Dragonfire Potion is a very substantial item in the game in this regards. It's something that increased the potential gold revenue for every F2P player in this game. This means more and more gold supplies are going to rise so finding ways for people to spend their excess gold is going to become more crucial than ever as more people are going to have it to spend.
Mayor of Fight Club: As of 07/16/2017 Level 59.9, 409.08G Net Worth, 648 Blueprints