Undo Button?!?!?!

I know this has been asked for...

BUT GIVE US AN UNDO BUTTON IN THE BASE EDITOR!!!!!!!

I just spent three days reworking my base, and accidentally hit one of the infamous "Apply to Whole Base" buttons, because I was extremely tired.

It took me two hours to correct the damage done by that accidental click. (And I still didn't have everything fixed).

It can't be that hard to add an "UNDO" button to the Editor, that reverses the last thing you changed. In the event that the last thing was one of those "Apply to Base" Buttons, it would reverse the effects of that.

I don't think this is too much to ask for!

I SO agree with this...did that same thing myself not that long ago.

/signed a million times over.

I've wanted this since I started base building.

While I would LOVE an undo button, actually I would say take it a bit further. Make the base editing require a save.

My major pet peeve is having to ensure correct pathing at all times. Well, I'm a designer and when designing in CAD I often move bits I want to keep off to the side so I can just pull them back into the new position. This cannot be done in the base editor right now. I understand you don't want the base inaccessable by isolating the entrance but if the base editing was overhauled to allow for almost offline editing then it would negate the need for correct pathing at all times. You can make an error-ridden MA arc but you just can't PLAY it. Same deal.

It's really frustrating to have to have a lot more room or dismantle a big area to ensure the pathing is correct. If we could just move control top left and energy top right (for example) while we muck with the rest of it, it would be outstanding.

Then just connect it all together and save before it goes 'live'. No one in the base would be inconvenienced by rooms moving or items disappearing.

[ QUOTE ]
While I would LOVE an undo button, actually I would say take it a bit further. Make the base editing require a save.

My major pet peeve is having to ensure correct pathing at all times. Well, I'm a designer and when designing in CAD I often move bits I want to keep off to the side so I can just pull them back into the new position. This cannot be done in the base editor right now. I understand you don't want the base inaccessable by isolating the entrance but if the base editing was overhauled to allow for almost offline editing then it would negate the need for correct pathing at all times. You can make an error-ridden MA arc but you just can't PLAY it. Same deal.

It's really frustrating to have to have a lot more room or dismantle a big area to ensure the pathing is correct. If we could just move control top left and energy top right (for example) while we muck with the rest of it, it would be outstanding.

Then just connect it all together and save before it goes 'live'. No one in the base would be inconvenienced by rooms moving or items disappearing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes .. a much better idea than undo is "save changes" IMHO

[ QUOTE ]
My major pet peeve is having to ensure correct pathing at all times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not arguing with most of the rest of what you're saying, but pathing is no longer an issue for items.

The only requirement for pathing is that rooms actually be connected, and that's just so nobody's trapped.

Keep in mind that the one problem with requiring a save is when someone crashes out of the game for whatever reason - where do you save? Do you go back to the last "safe" spot and undo all the work? Do you put in temporary links? As long as *room pathing* is required, that's a non-issue. When you remove the room pathing requirement, you have to consider these things.

All things considered, requiring room pathing is less of a hassle than losing a few hours of work because just before you were going to reconnect all the rooms together, you crashed due to a power outage.

Exactly - the paths have to be correct ALL of the time. IE connected to the entrance. I can see why they do it with the current system but it isn't very user-friendly.

I hadn't considered outages but it's a fair point. So how about this: make it *exactly* like the MA. You save periodically. When you're finished, you publish.

You don't need the existing viable rules when tinkering - and saving. But they kick in when 'published'. Ease of design and security with saves.

Well, what happens when you have two people working on the base at once? Since these are not active changes to the base at the time you're making them, it could be possible, and if you've got an *offline* version (which is entirely like the MA), it's entirely likely to happen.

You and I both decide that our base is bland, boring, and badly organized. I come in first, and I'm working on it. I've put in an hour and a half. You come in a little later, and you're putting in two hours. I finish before you - having both started and finished before you - save and apply my changes. I'm happy.

What happens next? Do my changes get uploaded to your version, so you can see that what you WERE working on is no longer the most recent set? How about when you save? Do you overwrite my changes, making my work useless? Does it toss an error at you, saying your file is no longer valid, and your changes are now useless?

Please note, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'd very much like exactly what you're proposing in fact - I've also worked with a CAD program in the past, and just about anything would be easier than what we've actually got. I'm just pointing out that there are some very serious concerns that have to be addressed when looking at this sort of system, and that's at least part of the reason, most likely, that we don't have more than what we've got. Well, that, and the fact that I don't have the liveliest respect for the coders of CoX.

An Undo Button would be very helpful with base building. I know i have accidentally moved items i didnt want to, and cant put the back unless i set up the entire stacking process again. Save Button-Also a good idea. Another problem i run into...starting a big project with base building, not likeing how it is coming out, and haveing to delete every single item. whould be nice to have the option to not save the changes made from the last save. Both very good ideas; would be very helpful.

Last time I tried to edit the base while someone else was doing it, it told me that I couldn't. Has that changed recently?

If it has and now allows multiple editors then you have the same problem now, so improving the interface won't really make a difference. If the standard interface entrance interface is the same, it would still prevent multiple workings. I never suggested allowing multiple editing at the same time.

The change I suggested is how the 'back end' works. Edit not requiring obeyance of rules, ability to save - either locally or server side and then publish where it goes live and needs to obey standard (existing) base rules. It is implimented in MA so why not in base editing?

If there are more than one person responsible for base editing, really they should be communicating, if they aren't that is frankly their problem. It shouldn't impact on the rest of us who are able to communicate with our SG. There are SG messages of the day and base editing permissions. Use them.

I'd prefer a server-side save so that I could work top left and my friend could work top right (for example) at different times. Perhaps someone else could provide constructive ideas/solutions?

Everything in life has drawbacks and changes to CoX isn't any different. However, if everyone with experience of the problem constructively contributes to solutions then there is a greater possibility of improvement. We can't know all of the behind the scenes issues, but surely it's better to try and come up with ideas.

I'm sure the Devs will come across issues that need to be solved in any change of any aspect of CoX, we really don't need to do that for them do we? It's much more productive to give ideas/solutions to the best of our knowledge.

/signed.

However, barring that and the ability to save configurations (which would allow us seperate layouts or raids!), I would be happy with an "Are you sure?" prompt on the Apply to Base buttons.

That would be nice too.

By the way, I do not want a "force save" option just to get around the undo difficulties. Fix it properly.


I'd rather risk the occasional screw-up than blow away hours of work just because I forgot to save. Or because my client crashes, which it does on a regular basis.

Nah, fix the issues the right way.


I agree with some other posters -- "save a copy/restore a copy" of the entire base would be a nice thing to do, along with "revert this entire edit session", which could be implemented in exactly the same way. Then you could experiment or revert terrible screw-ups that might take hours to fix.