Bug 79: (zippyzee) - buy 3 new bags (i.e :

[Glaxono]

Re-tested the bags on NT after updates and all is good... you nailed it. Nice job zippyzee!

Here is an Idea / Extra bonus
When you want to "swap" an unequipped bag with an equipped but occupied bag, Instead of disallowing and pushing an error to chat, I would propose that if the item count in the equipped bag does not exceed the slot count on the un-equipped bag, just swap all the items from the old to the new bag! If the slot count is less, then disallow and push out the error to chat.

The bags still need to have rules applied for the various restrictions of items that go in them. Let me know when you are ready to do this and I'll preform more testing on this.

[zippyzee]

There is a bug still floating there. I saw it once during my last test but couldn't duplicate it. I will not say what it is and leave it as an open contest until I've had time to really look for it. And there's one way for someone to scheme the system to equip boe items without making them soulbound (that will get fixed).

I am probably going to make a function to condense all inventory items. Could just be a command that people could make a macro for, or could be something to add to the UI. Using the command would fill in all empty bag slots and put all the items against each other, starting in the default bag. We also have the possibility of making a "sell junk" type command to sell the vendor fodder in your bags, but I'm guessing that some might object to simplifying that chore.

I don't know how the original behavior was in Vanguard, but if you have an empty bag in one of your slots, and right-click to equip another empty bag, I had it where you would automatically swap them. However, while testing I just found that confusing, and think it works better to make the person manually drag it where they want to equip. Vanguard's system often left me confused about where things were going; I often thought something I equipped just 'vanished', and would later realize it equipped it somewhere unexpected.

In any case this system is truly handled by the server and is very customizable. The client does very little (unfortunate for my programming time needed) but that does leave options open.

Your idea is certainly possible. I will have to give it a go and see if it feels natural.

[Glaxono]

[quote="zippyzee"]There is a bug still floating there. I saw it once during my last test but couldn't duplicate it. I will not say what it is and leave it as an open contest until I've had time to really look for it. And there's one way for someone to scheme the system to equip boe items without making them soulbound (that will get fixed).[/quote]

Wow ... an open challenge! Accepted.

[Lokked]

This discussion about inventory organization through the server made me think of something:
There could be a dot command to sort inventory or sell all junk.

It's too bad VGO implemented no scripting tools for their UI. Instead, only the visual appearance can be modified by tweaking the XML.
Perhaps we can get creative with adding a single UI hotbutton in strategic locations and connecting it to a dot command to perform various operations (like bag sorting).

[zippyzee]

[quote="Lokked"]This discussion about inventory organization through the server made me think of something:
There could be a dot command to sort inventory or sell all junk.[/quote]

That's pretty much what I had imagined, at least for now.

[Lokked]

[quote="zippyzee"][quote="Lokked"]This discussion about inventory organization through the server made me think of something:
There could be a dot command to sort inventory or sell all junk.[/quote]

That's pretty much what I had imagined, at least for now.[/quote]

Oh man, sorry. I must have glazed over your middle paragraph above where you exactly stated this. I'm a little dense, sometimes.

[Moldew]

[zippyzee]

[quote="Lokked"][quote="zippyzee"][quote="Lokked"]This discussion about inventory organization through the server made me think of something:
There could be a dot command to sort inventory or sell all junk.[/quote]

That's pretty much what I had imagined, at least for now.[/quote]

Oh man, sorry. I must have glazed over your middle paragraph above where you exactly stated this. I'm a little dense, sometimes.[/quote]

I wasn't sure if you were reinforcing it or missed it but it's definitely a good sign we are thinking the same way

[Odinzz]

I split off the tombstone discussion to another thread here : viewtopic.php?f=16&t=1193