Curse

zakaria · Jul 03, 2006, 07:04 AM // 07:04

Conclusion: majority of GW players are happy with this improvement (i'm one of them) according to A.Net statistics of what usually ppl store.

According to Gaile's Post we may have other storage improvements in future.

The update is coming...some of us doesn't like..but it's inevitable coming update.

END OF STORY..flame war has been already started in this thread.
/request to close.

TideSwayer · Jul 03, 2006, 07:09 AM // 07:09

While I think this upcoming "improvement" is a copout to the type of real storage improvements players have been asking for, I do appreciate that ANet posted detailed info about this upcoming change (for better or for better than nothing) on their site. I posted in some random thread a couple of weeks ago wishing for ANet to at least let us know what they were thinking about with the planned storage improvements that were, as Gaile always says in chats, "on the way". They at least (finally) decided to let the player base out of the dark on their line of thinking on this issue.

I hope ANet realizes this isn't going to really fix the bigger problem of storage limits, however. And IMO they still need to address (in some way) the major inconvenience when switching inventory items between multiple account characters, as we players try to compensate for this extreme lack of overall space by using mule characters. Logging in with one character, dropping into Xunlai, logging out, logging back in with another character, going to Xunlai, etc... gets really tiresome. We should be able to look at ALL our characters' inventories from the Xunlai agents, and drop-swap that way. Technically, our unused characters are waiting in a town (ie. near a Xunlai agent anyways), so it would make perfect sense.

RTSFirebat · Jul 03, 2006, 07:45 AM // 07:45

Really wish we could have a dicussion which doesn't turn into a flame war.

I've /reported the thread, sorry but if we can't act like adults and have a carm discussion about the storage update, then this should be closed.

Renegade ++RIP++ · Jul 03, 2006, 08:21 AM // 08:21

I'm quite pleased with the addition of extra storage, but what i would love even more is not having it in the storage but having some kind of covert storage for collectables (irridescent griffon wings, putrid things,etc), dyes and materials capped at 500 for materials like 100 for the rest. With this i mean if you pick up such a wing with your ele or your ranger or heck even your warrior it wouldn't clutter up your normal storage space unless that space was filled.

So in terms of what i want:

smarter version of what they are proposing with the 'storage' containing the items we pick up on different chars immdiately getting transported there. Reason for it, i have like 6 stacks of iron ingots simply because of salvaging stuff on 6 different chars. And if I had to remove it every time i could, the problem of having 1 stack on every char still wouldn't be solved. So in effect you could have an empty iron storage. If you then go and adventure with your ele and find 11 iron ingots they will go immediately to your storage. If you then go and adventure with your warrior and you happen to find again 13 iron ingots, again immediate transportation to your global storage.

That would be a smart storage, and i really really really hope the devs are setting this all up now (addition of materials storage in normal storage step 1?), but in all honesty a person can dream can't he?

cheers

Nocere Moriari · Jul 03, 2006, 08:48 AM // 08:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by zakaria

Conclusion: majority of GW players are happy with this improvement (i'm one of them) according to A.Net statistics of what usually ppl store.

According to Gaile's Post we may have other storage improvements in future.

The update is coming...some of us doesn't like..but it's inevitable coming update.

END OF STORY..flame war has been already started in this thread.
/request to close.

Agree totally, has gone from one stament from one individual to a chicken fight that in most times has nothing to do with the original subject.

/request to close.

Swinging Fists · Jul 03, 2006, 09:20 AM // 09:20

Just wanted to add my own pointless post. I will, however, refrain from flaming anyone.

/close

Hypernecrofear · Jul 03, 2006, 10:40 AM // 10:40

i smell a new title

Tingi · Jul 03, 2006, 10:50 AM // 10:50

Oke all the people going "omg this thread has to be closed its rly affecting my life!! "/Close"! is slightly strange, jst dont come into this thread.

.

Anyway, i agree with regegades post, a smarter versian of storage would be very usefull, however i dont know how much time it would take to produce this so maybe jst adding more storage space would be the quicker and easier thing to do.

Leddy · Jul 03, 2006, 10:50 AM // 10:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cash

i firmly believe that this is just a first step. if this works out (functionality-wise) for their servers, i see many new tabs coming in the future.

also, ANET is likely considering an increase to a stack size (im no genious, but i dont see how a 250 stack could be much different than a 999 stack- i know upping it to 1000 would throw things off but as long as its 3 digits it shouldnt be THAT big of a deal). its true a stack of 250 iron in storage wont cover a new armor set, but think if that stack were 999 iron?

lets all just A) be thankful we're getting SOMETHING and B) be patient and see how this plays out.

The stack size is 250 because HEX allows them to store numbers up to 255 in only two bytes (and a stack size of 255 is weird).

A stack size of 999 would require four bytes per stack.

RTSFirebat · Jul 03, 2006, 11:40 AM // 11:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leddy

The stack size is 250 because HEX allows them to store numbers up to 255 in only two bytes (and a stack size of 255 is weird).

A stack size of 999 would require four bytes per stack.

Good thinking there. But I think each stack is most likely a bit more then 2 bytes in size anyhow. Taking into account the graphic of the item stack and special rules for some items, like mini-pets which can be activated in towns or from storage.

It would be helpful if they increase the stack to 999, but I'm sure like you have pointed out there is most likely a good reason its 250.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tan Blademaster

Oke all the people going "omg this thread has to be closed its rly affecting my life!! "/Close"! is slightly strange, jst dont come into this thread.

.

I've posted in this thread before, and you may also have miss the last 2 pages of flaming and fighting. Thus the reason some of us are requesting /Closure. Not trying to just boost our postcounts.

bigwig · Jul 03, 2006, 12:06 PM // 12:06

i'm perfectly happy with freeing up about a dozen storage slots. why do some people have to be so cranky.

Gorebrex · Jul 03, 2006, 12:20 PM // 12:20

Bescause good idea+not very good implementation=complaints
An increase in stack size wouldve been much more useful, imo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTSFirebat

Good thinking there. But I think each stack is most likely a bit more then 2 bytes in size anyhow. Taking into account the graphic of the item stack and special rules for some items, like mini-pets which can be activated in towns or from storage.

I dont think the graphic figures into it. Its more likely the graphic is pulled from elsewhere, likely an icon instead of a standard picture. I also dont think the item stack size includes "special rules" for items, I think those are stored in the item's attributes.

Pro-Monk · Jul 03, 2006, 03:14 PM // 15:14

What's statistics got to do with it? Why would, or should, Anet cater to only those that store materials as opposed to increasing overall storage that everyone could have used? My main storage issues arise from multiple sets of armor, weapons, and off-hand weapons so this isn't going to do me any good at all.

I'd rather have seen something along the lines of purchasing an extra 5 slots of inventory storage for some in-game coin amount (like 20 or 50k) up to an extra 45 slots (making it equal to a mule character). As it stands now, I have to switch off armor and weapons to unused characters whenever I need to switch a build (like Fire to Air Ele).

IMO the OP hit the nail on the head. Why did Anet only cater to the material horders? They certainly weren't taking a balanced view on this one. If they did only go by stats of what most people have in storage, the minority got screwed for no apparent reason.

twicky_kid · Jul 03, 2006, 03:30 PM // 15:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gorebrex

Bescause good idea+not very good implementation=complaints
An increase in stack size wouldve been much more useful, imo.

This was implemented with great success. They built on to an existing system. No one lost anything from their original storage. No bugs or glitchs. Also optimal for their server space. The impletation was a complete success.

I would rather them do these upgrades slowely and take their time than wipe everyone's storage out. I have one of the rarest items on the game (or used to be not sure now) and I keep it in my storage because I almost accidentaly sold to the merchant. Its a sup absorption rune that has the minor skin with blue text. I found it the 2nd week of the game's release and the first rune I'd ever found.

If I had lost that and other items my storage just to make room for some common materials you can image the players reactions.

Unlike most updates this one had to no problems. Usually there is always something going wrong with their updates but not this one. I'd say that's a good job.

leprekan · Jul 03, 2006, 04:19 PM // 16:19

Blue text used to be on ALL runes. The color coding did not come till the rune trader.

sumasage · Jul 03, 2006, 04:26 PM // 16:26

i somewhat like the update. I have a feeling that if they increase inv space for all items it will probably be like 10-15 slots. Instead they increase inv space for crafing materials and you get 34 slots. I only which they would make it so that you can use those 34 slots for any materials as some of us doesnt stock up feathers but have multiple iron bulk. The bulk size to 999 would be nice too. Just my 2 cents.

Beat_Go_Stick · Jul 03, 2006, 04:30 PM // 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guildwars.com

Players who own Factions will soon be given a new form of storage through the Xunlai Agent.

Um....when do they mean this "soon" to be, btw? like end of the summer soon or like end of the week soon? Did it happen already? I haven't checked since friday afternoon....

Gorebrex · Jul 03, 2006, 04:42 PM // 16:42

Twicky, you misunderstand. The implentation of THE IDEA, not the actual changing of the game. My major points with the inventory change is:
1. Its only for Factions players.
2. I was expecting a more useful change(stack size increase to 500, for everyone). Theredve been ALOT less complaints if that had been done, as it would be much more useful to the community at large.

lyra_song · Jul 03, 2006, 04:44 PM // 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

why do some people have to be so cranky.

Because they want more and they want it last month. ^_^

Welcome to the world of customer service!!!

lol

In all seriousness.

Any storage change affects EVERY account. Its not a Holiday event where 3-4 maps are changed temporarily. Its a PERMANENT change to how items can be stored. We're talking adding to a backbone.

They CANT GORED it up because if they do, we are severely GOREDED.

Testing new additions using something menial (yes materials can be considered expendable) instead of everyone's precious armor, or perfect weapons materials is a lot safer. Consider this step 1. This is a rollback point. In case they screw up, they only ruined materials storage.

If they did 1 HUGE step where they did a massive update to fix material storage, armor storage, etc.....and then screw up....ya... GG.

-----

When they finish their testing phase, THEY BETTER apply it to prophecies owners too.

eudas · Jul 03, 2006, 04:44 PM // 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceballs

Dark Helmet: When will then be now?
Colonel Sandurz: Soon.

This random quote has been brought to you by the letter 'e'...

eudas