Thank you for the response.
Ok, I understand the priority list. You did say difficult at this time, so that leads me to believe its schedule more than ability that is deterrent to implementation. I can understand that.
But there has to be a way to help this cause for the people that want to play blue more. Here is an idea:
In the blue menu the devs have already implemented a classification system for blue mage spells. Much of it is a repeat of information that can be found on the spell description itself. I personally never utilize the "Type"classification system that is already in place. I am able to read the spell description and get all the info that I need without it (type, strong to which type monster, magic based, physical etc.). Lets change that classification from a system define classification to a user defined classification. This section seems to be (Is) implemented in reverse of the newly implemented "setequip" feature. I am saying reverse the links and allow the user to define those links to the spell and then the user could just sort spells utilizing the structure that's already there. Of course we would like to rename the fields but generic labels will do. This will not be brand new implementation as the space is there, the structure is already there, privileges have to change, the linking has to be reversed, user right have to given, etc. The current structure will reduce dev time and actually allow the change to be implemented, tested and release within a release cycle. I know the devs are using flexible architecture so much of this will be copy/paste with respect to linking and rights since it is basically the same sub system frame as the "equipset system" with different settings. If we could save the settings like you save macro settings then there would be very little impact on the server side, besides user initiated saves.
So timing maybe bad, yes I can understand that, but this shouldn't be a big implementation based of the fact that basic structure it is being leveraged in reverse by the "equipset" subsystem. Its is difficult to see this taking a mountain of time to provide.
How do we get this on the "to-do" list?
I don't know who in there right mind would "like" that response appreciate it "yes", like it "No!"


Reply With Quote




