• 0

    posted a message on Sound Fix?
    I have to be honest with you, I don't like the way Mozz's works. It basically sets console values, over and over, on every frame redraw. It's quite the resource drain from what I saw. It'd probably be good though if he rewrote it to only fire when it needs to fire. As it stands though, it reminds me of my old SiMiHiOi, which I abandoned for the same reason.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Lilarcor.
    An emoting weapon is sort of what it is. However, instead of just using emotes, it actually uses sound files. So as you're wandering around, much like in Baldur's Gate or Morrowind, the sword actually just randomly mutters away to itself.

    So in Morrowind, you'll be exploring the mountains near Vivec or something and suddenly ...

    "You know, I did some killing with you and I did some, well, with others before you so it brings the thought to mind and I wonder, where does all this wildlife keep coming from? I kill and I kill and I kill but it just keeps coming back, a swords work is never done!"

    ... or one of the other many voice clips he has, that or he'll start singing or playing ...mood music. It's all very silly.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Sound Fix?
    I did. Yet none of them were to my satisfaction, which is why they haven't gained the noteriety they could have.

    It's easy to do though, here's what you'd have to have the Addon perform:

    o Add a SwitchFix watch (check Visor).

    o When Switch happens, have SwitchFix toggle the music/sound off, then on.

    What'll happen is that whenever the sound is turned off and on, it actually fixes the music issues. It'll disable any looping music until the next time it loops but this is actually a good thing because you won't get deafened by the megaphonerific volumes that might slip through in the half a second before they're corrected.

    I'm not up to making this, not really. If anyone else wants to do it though, I'd be happy to help them.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Lilarcor.
    It's a blast. I'm really tempted to make it myself but with my time constraints lately and my inability to test, I think I'd just botch it. It'd be so easy to do though, especially with things like Unit_Combat to help out.

    I've never played Morrowind through without Lilarcor because it's so damned entertaining and it just adds a unique feel to the game to have a mindlessly nattering sword by one's side.

    That and I never get tired of his half-drunk, passive singing. "lub lub lub ...makes th'worl' go roun'."

    It'd be really funny to inflict that on the Warcraft community though. I do feel I should warn you however, Lilarcor is hilariously obnoxious and he has more of the gift of the gab than I do. It's just something you'll either find funny or you won't.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Lilarcor.
    This isn't a request for me but it's the kind of thing I'd make (and might make, if the fancy takes me) if I were still coding, I figured I'd toss the idea out to the crowd.

    Lilarcor of Morrowind

    This is basically Lilarcor but it's a variant for Morrowind, it talks a lot, it's bloody hilarious and since I once again took up poking Morrowind recently, I rediscovered it and the realization dawned on me that yes, I could turn this into a Warcraft Addon.

    What I'm thinking is the Addon would do a few things, firstly it would only work when a double-handed sword is equipped. Secondly it would override the name of the sword and name it appropriately (this option could be toggled, of course).

    Finally, it would add the random voices and stuff. These would be easy to do with Warcraft's events, I'd recommend trying it in Morrowind first though to find out which sounds happen where. There are a lot of random sounds that can be triggered off timers or random events, there are also combat sounds, levelling-up stuffs and a number of others.

    There are also sounds for when Lilarcor evolves. These could be played when the player upgrades to a sword that's suitably more powerful than the sword they previously had (and won't play again until another such upgrade happens).

    Even with all this, it'd still be a relatively simple and absolutely hilarious Addon to make. Of course, it'd be a good idea to make sure it can be toggled off because I can't imagine all people would be as patient or easily amused as I am and people might spend too much time laughing at Lilarcor instead of paying attention in an instance. And so on.

    Anyway, there you go, idea of the day and all that.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Ads Filters
    That's actually a very good point, I wouldn't condone a nazi-strict system either yet I do think the AH needs some balancing. So the point comes down to how to make both ideas work, what would be a happy medium? I originally thought that perhaps a special type of bind that allowed you to transfer between all characters on an account might do it but no, even that's a little too tight for my tastes. After a period of thought, it came to me. SecondLife, actually having a decent economy, has the answer. What we'd do is set it so that it can be freely given or traded but it can't be put up on the AH. Instead of a bind flag, it'd be more like an anti-AH flag. So if an item has already been on the AH once, it can't go there again.

    I see problems with this, what of stacks? I am having trouble trying to rationalize a solution here and I can't really think of one that'd make everyone happy. Perhaps what we could have are bound stacks, in other words, stacks which can't be combined with other stacks. So if you have a stack of gold bars which you've mined and a stack you've bought off the AH, you couldn't toss them together. That's one solution but it's far from perfect as I'm sure you'll agree. So what's the solution?

    I have an idea but it's a bit complicated. Firstly, any trades that include an anti-AH flagged items would be noted as so, there'd be an alert in the window, mousing over the items would reveal in the tooltip which items or which parts of a stack are anti-AH. So if someone trades you 10 gold bars and 3 of those have that flag, it'd show that 3 of those bars can't be sold on the AH. What would happen then, if you tried to sell those bars on the AH, the AH would only accept 7 and shun the other 3 automatically.

    The AH would also notify the person it's doing this of course. Either via just a warning or a popup informing them and asking them if they really do want to split that stack.

    I'm sure more ingenious people with better ideas can come up with solutions that're even more suitable than these but I think what we have here might be the start at least towards fixing the community, not that Blizzard would ever listen (of course) but hey, it's fun to talk about these things because if they were implemented, they probably would solve a hell of a lot of the problems today. Just imagine how this would stunt the efforts of farmers without harming anyone else.

    --- Edit ---

    Oh and of course, only items after the patch would be introduced to this flag. So if you already had a mixed stack in your bag, it would be as if you mined them yourself but all other items from that point would use the flag. This would be in fairness to the people who'd used the old system so they couldn't get the cold shoulder by not knowing better (no alert) in a previous trade.
    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Ads Filters
    This is true, it's still not City of Heroes/Villains (what could be?) in economy but of the those systems out there that rely heavily on cash, it is one of the better ones, no argument there. There's just a lot of room for improvement, is all. I think the Robin Hoods out there really need to organize under one banner, watch the market for high-priced things and purposefully try to strike down those elements and make them less profitable.

    You know the one thing I always wished that wasn't possible though? AH-buy-bind. Basically, anything bought from the AH can't be resold on the AH. The reason for this is because even though many people make an effort to lower AH prices at the moment, there's always going to be some money-grubber (usually of the farmer category) who'll take large items in bulk and put them up at double their prices. A lot of people might hate me for a suggestion like that but I really think it'd do a lot to fix the economy, especially with people working to fix it from the inside too.

    I didn't want to turn this into a discussion of the AH and economy though and divagate wildly from the main topic. It's just that I've had these things on my mind for a while and since I'm no longer playing, I'm in no place to make official suggestions. The very least I can do is inspire people to help create a more fair AH, though.
    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Ads Filters
    Good on you, Kael.

    One of the things I disliked about Warcraft was how frankly screwed over the economy was. Farmers would sell gold in large quantities, this would up prices on the AH, then the farmers would place desirable items on the AH for large amounts of money. Basically one would end up paying back the farmers with the money they bought from them, meaning that said farmers had a monopoly and the only way to survive would be to buy from them. Those of us that wouldn't had to stick it out with lower-end stuff or drops. That's just the way it works.

    I've never supported that simply because I've seen what it does to the AH. In fact, on the servers I was on, a Guild of mine was actually devoted to bringing down AH averages (because most people use an Addon to measure that stuff anyway). We'd put resources and drops we didn't want up on there at lower prices and y'know what? It worked. Over a time, our Guild actually did lower the cost curve for certain types of resources and even items. We kept close tabs on this, it was our pride.

    For that reason alone I'd be kind of against gold-farming and I'm glad to see that this isn't something that Ace or you (Kael) supports. Three cheers for that, says I. One day we might see an end to this farming and people like my Guild can lay down their Robin Hood hats once and for all.
    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Experimental: AceOptions
    I think that's because the one-size-fits-all ethos doesn't really suit a great deal of Addons, there are also Addons out there that really probably shouldn't have a GUI because they're too technical in the first place and a GUI is something of a promise towards ease of use if you get my meaning and where I'm coming from, basically. By offering a GUI, it seems like something the end-user would want.

    Back in the early days of Visor, there was always talk of "The Visor Remote", which was discussed to have the same options that the Visor GUI has now. Tain did a damned fine job on realizing that vision. Further, another possibility is that there are also Addons which are purely GUI and have very little going on in the chat-commaned end. Addons like Emo for example.

    However, for the mainstream Addons where the command-line is understandable, I think that it would be handy to perhaps have a uniforming GUI system for that. So that those who choose to change their options graphically instead of via the ChatFrame can do so via a handy sort of graphical wallet, containing all of the Addons which support it.

    Just as a quick idea paragraph, it'd be nice if there was the option for a link button. For example, the Visor link in the wallet could toggle VisorGUI instead of opening the Visor page. That'd be a nice touch and it would provide a level of uniforming within the wallet that the end-user would probably enjoy, I suspect it's for this reason (uniforming) that Cosmos is popular, at least with the end-user crowd.

    As for making it an AceGUI element, my only worry there is that some authors might not want to make an extra "class" out of it, when instead it could just be extra values within the standard chat options table, that would seem to be far more enticing because then that authors could uniform their code in the same way without having to produce duplicate code.

    I can't speak for myself anymore since I don't code but I'm just pointing out things as they occur to me.

    I definitely think that for the end-user audience, there's going to be a lot of good in this and if we can uniform it so that it's going to be easy to adapt for with a lot of the current Addons then it'll make the integration easier. The way Ace has worked through its updates is by cleanly integrating new ideas into the core template. Not nessescarily Ace but the template we use to design our Addons. If we can show that it'll take a minimum of faffing around to get in place, then perhaps a lot more authors would feel less nervous in setting it up.

    This brings me to another version. You could have a "lite" version and a full version. Basically the lite version would be just the things that people have suggested adding to the chat tables. Wherein it grabs values from the desc and the option to fill in things. However, for those who wanted to go the extra mile, they could use the AceGUI version and customize their page a lot more. In this way, a person could start out with the lite version and then slowly build their way up to the more advanced AceGUI variant.

    Perhaps via the AceGUI variant they could actually put AceGUI tricks to practice, positioning their options or at least setting up a visual order for things.

    Anyway, that's just my rambling and thoughts, I've seen a lot of good ideas here and what I'm thinking is perhaps that the best end result is a culmination rather than a selection. Two pence inserted then and away I go.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Experimental: AceOptions
    There's something I don't understand about this approach so consider this an idea. Why are we actually making a get-set call at all? The coder will already have handled all this so it seems like it's becoming a double-standard (don't count me out as a naysayer just yet, I'm going somewhere with this).

    What I'm thinking is that the setting could be handled by the function because the slash-commands won't be any different from the GUI. For example, let's say I have a scale option and I want that to be in the GUI, all the GUI has to do is render the options then pass to the method, so we'd realistically only need ...

       {
          option  = "scale",
          desc    = "This option will set the scale of frame X.",
          method  = "SetScale",
          gmethod = "Slider",
          value   = "1-20-0.5"
       }
    

    So what is that crazyness?

    I'll go over them each individually because that'll illuminate my idea better and it'll hopefully show the practicality of what I have in mind. Of course, I might be missing something vital which might make this a bad idea but ideas are meant to be shared so bare with me.

    option: This would be the option as shown in the GUI as Steve mentioned. Basically it would str-upper the first letter and leave it at that.

    desc: This would be the tooltip description you'd get when you moused-over the option, thus keeping congruency with the slash-command system.

    method: Here's where it starts to get a little complicated, this is what the final value is passed to once the GUI has handled the command, much as if the player had typed it.

    gmethod: This is the GUI method that will be used, basically it takes the value the player gives from the GUI and feeds that value through to method.

    value: This would be the basic resources the gmethod would need to work with, what it is is min, max and step. So basically the GUI now has everything it needs to render the option and process the result through to method.

    Value could also be a function if you want it to be alterable on the fly. As for gmethod, this would be like AceGUI, it would call a global menu function which would handle the rendering.

    So when a person opens the menu, these tables are parsed and each instance of gmethod is handled similarly to the way the chat-commands are parsed. Until the menu is actually called to open (and thusly built), none of this needs to be dealt with. Thanks to that, there would be no overhead that I could see and the menu could lie dormant until it's called for.

    I may be completely missing something here but ... that's my idea.

    --- Edit ---

    I realized how completely insane it would be to offer a max-scale of 100, even in an example. So I've put a little extra added sanity in there, for the good of us all.

    --- A little more on my ideas ... ---

    Okay, I've been thinking about how this would build and it's really quite simple, basically it would dynamically build a list of 'pages' much like AceCommander works by parsing the command tree, it wouldn't even need to be in the Ace core for that reason alone, it could be its own Addon.

    What happens is that once the AceOptions UI is called for, it'll parse the tree of every Addon and first grab the name and the desc of the Addon itself, the name it will use for the title of a page, the desc it will use for a little text at the top for decoration, thus mimicking the way the chat-command works.

    It would then look for gmethod in each option table, if gmethod didn't exist it would ignore that table because in this way, we can separate a function (such as those in Lunchbox) from an option. Only those with gmethod get parsed. So basically, it uses the method in gmethod and the value to setup one of the options there and continues to do this until the page is drawn.

    The page then has its own methos which store values which link to the method value that was found in the option table, so on altering the slider, the value is sent back to SetScale and it behaves as if the user had typed in the value themself, basically just giving a cue in the ChatFrame.

    The reason I said that value could use a function is because we could put a currentval in there. Let's say that the value for Slider accepted four values, separated by hyphons. Let's say they were; "current-min-max-step". Now then, what we could do if we wanted a static solution is not include current. That'd just be min-max-step. So "1-20-0.5".

    However, if we used a function there instead, we could build the string sending the current var along with it. For example, we could do something along the lines of a get("scale") call followed by .."-min-max-step" which would build the string. Forgive me if I'm overthinking this here.

    The visual appearance would probably be similar to Cosmos but cleaner, with the names of the Addons down the side, which would be clickable and each of those would lead to a page of options built by the gmethod and value variables.

    Perhaps the idea of having a function build in the current value is a bit too complicated and you'll want a second value for that, say something like ...

    value = "1-10-0.5",
    status = self:Get("scale")

    Then again, that might just be needless extra code because in the end, it would only be combining status with value so I'll leave that up to you guys to decide.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on AceKreacher (another idea)
    Actually, I think I see what you're saying now.

    Okay, backup what I'm about to say here if I'm right. Are you saying that you're not designing a one-shot Addon? What I mean is, your Addon targets only, it doesn't actually target then attack/shoot? If that's the case then I agree with you, the chance that people would be inclined to use it for unfair advantages is greatly lessened (usually, the people of that ilk are both lazy and not too bright, they don't put the parts together well).

    If it's only a targeter then I agree with you. I thought you were designing a one-key target-and-attack system.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on AceKreacher (another idea)
    Exactly.

    See, that's my point. When I created KeyMinder, I didn't really get why it would be unethical either, I just shrugged off the claims as absurd (some of them actually were but not all of them).

    Now the thing is, your Kreacher Addon can be setup to target totems and pet-names in PvP, yeah? That means that if a person knows a Hunter's pet's name before they head into PvP, that pet will pretty much have a constant target trained on them. The same is true for totems.

    I'm not saying you would do this but some fool will and they'll ruin it for everyone. That's the nature of PvP you see, there's always some idiot who'll abuse something nifty and ruin something good and benign for everyone.

    I'm just pointing that out.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on [request]bar addon
    Yup, I have a version with most of those fixes in there, I think. I'll just go and toss that up on my server ...

    http://mastaile.mine.nu/Card_Bars/Card_BarsRWithFixes.zip

    If I'm missing any of the fixes, let me know.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on AceKreacher (another idea)
    I think the reason this hasn't been taken up is because there's a strong sense of ethics within the Ace community and the usage of this would be morally dubious at best. This isn't something that would really be used in a benign way by the userbase of Warcraft, most of them are going to be abuse every exploit and every advantage in any way they can (which is pretty much what killed wall-walking, yay for PvP).

    You have to understand then that from that viewpoint, I can't imagine any of the authors would want that stigmata attached to them. I know that evilsmoo, the dude who made that isn't very popular with Shamans and nor could he or anyone who uses that be considered a good player. I honestly think that largely the whole totem-killing schtick is considered crass.

    Now understand that I'm not saying that you would use it in a morally dubious way, I want to stress that first of all. You might only use it in PvE and not hurt anyone by doing so. Yet you can't speak for all the people who would use such an Addon simply to lord over people in PvP with unfair, cheap advantages. Never underestimate how the PvP griefer can ruin things for everyone. If I were still coding, that'd be my reason for not doing it too. It's just not something that's strictly benign.

    After all, I got the same hell when I created KeyMinder, it was for purely benign reasons but people just didn't get that. They couldn't see my motivations for creating it, all they could see was griefers getting an unfair advantage over them. At the time I really didn't understand why I was getting such flack for it but seeing the PvP focused road Warcraft is heading down (which is one of the reasons I left), now I do and I feel bad for it.

    When looking at a project like this, you can't just consider how you would use it but you must also consider how a griefer would use it and if griefers did use it (even hypothetically) how bad the karma would be for you, public relations would go straight down the crapper.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on [request]bar addon
    I'm still fond of Card_Bars as an end user solution, the thing is that not everyone is going to be the same kind of person. Some people go to the toilet, tear off a piece of the bog roll, scrunch and rub away, others fold carefully and go for a perfectly perpendicular wipe. To each their own.

    Things like Card_Bars are great because it's very little code to handle a lot of buttons for people that don't entirely get it. What'd be really awesome though is if someone built a Visor end-user system for actually creating bars. Something that had say, a GUI with a number of buttons that lead to wizards.

    So you'd start off with create bar. You'd specify how many rows and columns the bar would have, then you'd specify the scale, the alpha and so on. Then once the wizard was complete, you'd click Finish. The wizard would then pass that information along to Visor and poomf, magic bar.

    You could also have a number of drag frames ready made within the wizard, say, 20 wouldn't hurt. Then you could unlock all visible bars that've been created by the wizard and drag them around. This would occur by making the drag button the parent frame and then childing everything off of that with Visor.

    The GUI would also contain a destroy system, basically it would be a list of bars, like "Bar 1: 2x8.", "Bar 2: 3x3" and so on. You'd click one of those and then click destroy. What would happen is that Visor:DeleteFrame() would be fed with all the information nessescary to get rid of the frame. The user would then be notified they'd need to ReloadUI.

    That way, a player can setup their bars and either have that globally or they could set up sets of bars per-class or even per-character and have a way to quickly get rid of bars they don't need anymore. By using a simple GUI system as I've suggested, we can save on resources because Visor would do all the grunt work.

    It'd build off the power of Visor so there wouldn't be a lot of work involved. All a person would have to do is A) make the GUI and B) figure out what information to tell Visor. I can't imagine it'd be that hard though. If I weren't officially gone and done with this, I might give it a shot.

    The thing is, what I've described is basically what Card_Bars does, the only bonus that Card_Bars would really have over this is that Card_Bars doesn't need to ReloadUI. As for the pet bar and the bonus action-buttons, just add the options to scale/alpha them from the UI, attach drag buttons to them and call it done.

    Food for thought, anyway.
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.