I'd like stacks of 100 rather than 99, yes.
Suggestions
Make Flight Rising better by sharing your ideas!
TOPIC | Item stack to 100 instead of 99
This is a guess from someone who has only the vaguest knowledge of programming, but I think it's easier to code something to stop at 99 (the largest possible value in a two-digit-field) than to stop at 100 (an arbitrary-from-the-program's-point-of-view number in the middle of a three-digit field's range). It is entirely possible that I'm speaking complete rubbish, though.
This is a guess from someone who has only the vaguest knowledge of programming, but I think it's easier to code something to stop at 99 (the largest possible value in a two-digit-field) than to stop at 100 (an arbitrary-from-the-program's-point-of-view number in the middle of a three-digit field's range). It is entirely possible that I'm speaking complete rubbish, though.
@Tabbyclaw
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.
The fact that it was seen randomly in the past (and there isn't a note that something broke catastrophically) makes me think it's possible, just not implemented.
If it's easy, I'm for the idea. If it's going to break something catastrophically, nix it. It's not a change I desperately need, but I figured it'd be relatively easy compared to many of the suggestions here and it'd make life easier too (for me, when I'm counting my hundreds of items from coliseum loots).
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.
The fact that it was seen randomly in the past (and there isn't a note that something broke catastrophically) makes me think it's possible, just not implemented.
If it's easy, I'm for the idea. If it's going to break something catastrophically, nix it. It's not a change I desperately need, but I figured it'd be relatively easy compared to many of the suggestions here and it'd make life easier too (for me, when I'm counting my hundreds of items from coliseum loots).
@Tabbyclaw
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.
The fact that it was seen randomly in the past (and there isn't a note that something broke catastrophically) makes me think it's possible, just not implemented.
If it's easy, I'm for the idea. If it's going to break something catastrophically, nix it. It's not a change I desperately need, but I figured it'd be relatively easy compared to many of the suggestions here and it'd make life easier too (for me, when I'm counting my hundreds of items from coliseum loots).
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.
The fact that it was seen randomly in the past (and there isn't a note that something broke catastrophically) makes me think it's possible, just not implemented.
If it's easy, I'm for the idea. If it's going to break something catastrophically, nix it. It's not a change I desperately need, but I figured it'd be relatively easy compared to many of the suggestions here and it'd make life easier too (for me, when I'm counting my hundreds of items from coliseum loots).
@Tabbyclaw
I have absolutely no clue about programming, but the coli displays my 100 potions as one stack, so I guess it's not that much of a problem if they already did it in one place?
I have absolutely no clue about programming, but the coli displays my 100 potions as one stack, so I guess it's not that much of a problem if they already did it in one place?
@Tabbyclaw
I have absolutely no clue about programming, but the coli displays my 100 potions as one stack, so I guess it's not that much of a problem if they already did it in one place?
I have absolutely no clue about programming, but the coli displays my 100 potions as one stack, so I guess it's not that much of a problem if they already did it in one place?
..............
|
  
|
|
I honestly don't know why this is not already a thing. Support.
I honestly don't know why this is not already a thing. Support.
Support. Stacks of 100 just seem so much more sensible with Swip Trades asking for items in the 100a +100b format not a 99a + 1a + 99b+1b format.
Support. Stacks of 100 just seem so much more sensible with Swip Trades asking for items in the 100a +100b format not a 99a + 1a + 99b+1b format.
|
 [/center] |
support
unless it messes up how things look, like FRiv mentioned, a three digit number might not fit with the layout of the website, like when you have over 100 messages, it sticks out.
unless it messes up how things look, like FRiv mentioned, a three digit number might not fit with the layout of the website, like when you have over 100 messages, it sticks out.
support
unless it messes up how things look, like FRiv mentioned, a three digit number might not fit with the layout of the website, like when you have over 100 messages, it sticks out.
unless it messes up how things look, like FRiv mentioned, a three digit number might not fit with the layout of the website, like when you have over 100 messages, it sticks out.
visual representation of me dodging drama on these forums
support, as long as it doesn't break things on the site!
support, as long as it doesn't break things on the site!
|
|
       dont forget to eat sleep stretch take meds and HYDRATE!! ^^ |
|
[quote name="Scream" date="2014-12-28 22:41:14"]@Tabbyclaw
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.[/quote]
The nearest "interesting" number, from a computer's perspective, is 127, which is the maximum signed 1 byte number. 100 would be binary 0110 0100.
Usually 99 is used as a limit for psychological reasons. If a stack can go to 100, why not 150? Or 200? If you have to put in an arbitrary cap for a number, it makes sense to pick a number that is a maximum something just so it looks less arbitrary.
There are also layout considerations involved, a lot of systems limit to 99 because their formatting and element layouts are setup to handle 2 digit numbers.
That said, I'm definitely in support of capping at 100, just because stacks of 99 are a pain.
Scream wrote on 2014-12-28 22:41:14:
@Tabbyclaw
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.
I've done my share of programming too but I can't think of why people would stop at 99 other than it's the largest 2 digit number. Like I said originally, usually computer integers don't overflow at 100.
Usually 99 is used as a limit for psychological reasons. If a stack can go to 100, why not 150? Or 200? If you have to put in an arbitrary cap for a number, it makes sense to pick a number that is a maximum something just so it looks less arbitrary.
There are also layout considerations involved, a lot of systems limit to 99 because their formatting and element layouts are setup to handle 2 digit numbers.
That said, I'm definitely in support of capping at 100, just because stacks of 99 are a pain.