Windows

[Sicofonte]

...if the window is big enough then maybe people could see pointing, arriving, leaving, hitting, whispering...

And what about the door? Is big enough?

The main reason for people asking for windows is the visibility issue, isn't it?

We don't need windows for that, we have open doors.


Anyways...

I will make windows with bars (just iron or bronze) and wood or reed (or something similar) for an inner shutter (the closing option).
Only crowbar can break it, and it should require more time to accomplish it.

But if we are going to use wood for a shutter... shouldn't doord require wood also?
Maybe the doors in the stone buildings are made of stone...


And glass is fragile. Let it be fragile. If you are afraid of someone breaking your expensive glass window... don't make it.
Glass only breakable by sledgehammers would be another unnecessary WEIRD characteristic of Cantr making trouble for the learning curve.

[SekoETC]

It's gonna be a big business if annoyed newspawns will go about breaking every window in town. Any heavy (and blunt?) object should do but if people break glass with their bare hands, that would make them bleed. I saw this in MythBusters, if a person jumps through a window then they would have such deep cuts on them that they couldn't continue like nothing happened.

[T-shirt]

You are making things far too complicated. The suggestion is that awareness from inside a building can be like the awareness from a vehicle. A window, open door or broken down wall could be used to tell the difference from a closed building from which you can't see anything outside.

Whether or not windows can be broken or things can be shoved through them is irrelevant for this suggestion. You can't push something on a bike, unless you have the key. You can't push something into a building, unless you have the key. No matter that a bike does not have walls to logically prevent you from meddling with a bike.

The argument that this suggestion cannot be accepted or rejected, because no staff member has time to work on implementing it, is a false argument. Either this is a good suggestion and should be accepted, or it is a wrong suggestion and should be rejected. If this suggestion is still unclear and needs more information, it is right to be neither rejected nor accepted, but I think most details have been discussed.

[Sicofonte]

You are making things far too complicated

-nods-

You can't push something on a [locked] bike, unless you have the key

-again-

The argument that this suggestion cannot be accepted or rejected, because no staff member has time to work on implementing it, is a false argument

-and again-

I would say that the real argument for not accepting nor rejecting this is that the chair and vicechair of ProgD don't see this as a clear improment, and have no time for thinking of the possible drawbacks. So they leave this for future consideration.

[fuschyou]

Look all I want is the ability for a person inside a building to be able to have a conversation with a person outside of a building by having a window. If a person wants it to be an open door to be able to allow a person to communicate with the outside that's fine too. But it gets quite boring working inside of a building and I would like people to be able to have the option of being able to build a window (or open a door) to communicate with the outside. That is it. That is my suggestion. If you all want to go into further details that's fine, do it. But this is my suggestion, anything added onto that is not my suggestion.

Now please tell me the drawbacks of that. Don't make every building come equipped with a window, make a window be a feature that a person must build. I don't see any drawbacks to this. All I see are drawbacks to people being stuck inside a building NOT able to communicate with the outside world.

And if you want to know the need for the window feature, just look at the stats of people inside a building compared to outside. I bet the number of people outside far outnumbers the number of people inside and I bet a major reason why is because being inside a building is BORING.

[Sicofonte]

Programming-side drawbacks.

For future consideration.

[T-shirt]

What are Programming-side drawbacks?

And what is for future consideration?

I don't understand what you mean at all with your reply.

[Sicofonte]

Programming-side drawbacks are those that can arise from the programming point of view. For example, the increase of lag, due to more events for more characters, or more processing for the calculations of who can see what, or the extra programming work due to relations among other pieces of code.

For future consideration. I was repeating me (and Seko, and Chris): Those drawbacks will be properly considered in the future, there are hundreds of suggestions already waiting for acceptance or rejection.

[Arlequin]

It isn't so complex.

Just a 'talkable to' object which must have one side at the exterior.

At the People screen, you would see a separate section for windows, with their controls to watch through and talk to.

Then, some sort of lighting object would be required to allow other people see people and objects through the window. That would be nice for business buildings, allowing to expose their goodies but keeping them under key.

[Sicofonte]

That would be and intercom

Window should "work" without any operation. I mean, anyone talks publicly outside, and people inside can hear it.

And that "should" happen in any building with the door open.


Another drawback: players that moan about noise. "If I builded up this house was 'cause I want some peace! and I don't want too close the door". Then only windows allows hearing what is happening outside. But it will require programming and will bring some extra processing. While that part, the programming and its implications, is not studied by the ProgD, no acceptance or rejection (if not, I guess it would be accepted long time ago).

[T-shirt]

What a nonsense. There are already buildings from which you can hear what's happening outside; they are called docked watercraft and vehicles. I buildings could be changed into these vehicles (but without giving them the ability to travel or undock), windows will be created. If those buildings, once fitted with windows, can 'transform' between building and landlocked vehicle from within, windows can be opened and shuttered.

What makes this suggestion too complicated for the programming department to be able to be considered?

[Sicofonte]

T-shirt, try to think.

I buildings could be changed into these vehicles (but without giving them the ability to travel or undock), windows will be created

We know.

Perhaps it could be coded so that adding the window converts the building to a land-locked vehicle (like all of those dinghies and longboats built in forests before the bug was fixed.)

But it will need programming anyways, and anything that need programming MUST BE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED.

If the programmers DO NOT HAVE TIME to look into the current code, design the new one, and evaluate the possible drawbacks, they DO NOT HAVE TIME to accept or reject this.

What makes this suggestion too complicated for the programming department to be able to be considered?

Not to "consider" in a slight form, but to CONSIDER CAREFULLY.
What? The lack of time.


T-shirt, apply for the ProgD department.

[T-shirt]

Sicofonte, you are saying this is a good suggestion. And it can be accepted. But implementation of this suggestion could be postponed a long time, because the programmers are very busy. Also noted should be that the implication of this suggestion have not been thoroughly researched, therefore this suggestion might become rejected when probable drawbacks are discovered.

I still don't see why this good suggestion still needs to be suggested and cannot be accepted. The only reasons it might eventually become rejected is a programming technical one - even though the suggestion itself will remain acceptable.

[Sicofonte]

I agree.

I would move it to accepted, but I won't do it without express consent of Chris or Jos (the vicechair and chair of the ProgD).

The suggestion of windows has been around for a very long time - as have many other suggestions. There is no need to bump it. No immediate decision will be made.

About the drawbacks of just changing buildings into locked vehicles for the window implementation:

What? so a window will stop a smelter being built then?

So programming is needed anyways. No inmediate solution (if not, this would be accepted and implemented long time ago).

[Chris Johnson]

Programming resources are a very big consideration in accepting any suggestion - they are not irrelevant but are a very important criterion in deciding whether or not a suggestion is moved to the accepted suggestions forum. There are plenty of good ideas in the suggestion forum but its unlikely they will be accepted until, amongst other things, ProgD have the resources to implement them.

Windows are a good idea - but there will be no short to medium term implementation of them.

I am however moving this suggestion to the accepted suggestions forum as a stimulus for ProgD and RD to discuss longer term implementation.